Sell-out Union

brownmech

Advanced
Aug 6, 2011
142
51
"The IBT's Airline Division leaders Clacy Griswold, Ed Gleason and Bob Fisher decided to trade away Aircraft Movement, (Towing and Taxi) to IAM Ramp Supertug crews.."

YES.......... This is just one example of how the teamsters are selling out the United Airlines
Mechanics and giving up jobs.
The teamsters have also gutted out the United Airlines contract and reworked it with weak
Scab language from continental airlines contract.
The scabsters had promised to utilize the best of both contracts from Ual and Cal and yet again their lies have been exposed as the current negotiations reveil we at United have been lied to by the Scabsters.
AA Mechanics, do not make the same mistakes UAL Mechanics did.
 
"The IBT's Airline Division leaders Clacy Griswold, Ed Gleason and Bob Fisher decided to trade away Aircraft Movement, (Towing and Taxi) to IAM Ramp Supertug crews.."

YES.......... This is just one example of how the teamsters are selling out the United Airlines
Mechanics and giving up jobs.
The teamsters have also gutted out the United Airlines contract and reworked it with weak
Scab language from continental airlines contract.
The scabsters had promised to utilize the best of both contracts from Ual and Cal and yet again their lies have been exposed as the current negotiations reveil we at United have been lied to by the Scabsters.
AA Mechanics, do not make the same mistakes UAL Mechanics did.

This accusation first came up a few weeks ago but I had not had the opportunity to learn the truth until very recently. According to both my SFO BA's, the company proposed an offer to the IBT leadership Ed, Bob, and Clacy. The offer was to trade away the aircraft movement function from mechanics to ramp in exchange for a sum of money to be distributed by the mechanics (they could not tell me the exact dollar figure). This offer was taken to the full rank and file negotiating committee who will ultimately decide whether or not to accept the offer. I was told the committee has not voted on the subject yet because they are waiting to see proposals on other economic subjects such as overall wage and benefit packages.


By the way, the movement function on behalf of the ramp was only for aircraft under TOW. Taxi would remain a mechanic function at all stations.

It was fairly simple to get a reasonable answer to this issue, I just had to find the time to do it. I would suggest you do this next time before spreading rumors.
 
How can it remain a mechanic function at all stations when UA doesnt have mechanics at all stations?
 
How can it remain a mechanic function at all stations when UA doesnt have mechanics at all stations?

"Ancillary Duties' just like how you justify IAM members assuming AMFA scope to SCAB AMFA.

Josh
 
It's (the Aircraft Movement Team) only in the sCO hubs, EWR; IAH; and CLE where there is a Move Team. It's not in the sUA hubs so why is there a problem? I didn't hear that it was coming to ORD; SFO; etc. Who said that it did or was? That work is not going back to MX on the sCO side. The toothless IAM will fight for that status quo on our side.

BTW: we on the sCO side (ramp) have always pushed out (and tow into gates) our own aircraft. That's not going to change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
This accusation first came up a few weeks ago but I had not had the opportunity to learn the truth until very recently. According to both my SFO BA's, the company proposed an offer to the IBT leadership Ed, Bob, and Clacy. The offer was to trade away the aircraft movement function from mechanics to ramp in exchange for a sum of money to be distributed by the mechanics (they could not tell me the exact dollar figure). This offer was taken to the full rank and file negotiating committee who will ultimately decide whether or not to accept the offer. I was told the committee has not voted on the subject yet because they are waiting to see proposals on other economic subjects such as overall wage and benefit packages.

Here's a quote from your post; "This offer was taken to the full rank and file negotiating committee who will ultimately decide whether or not to accept the offer."

This is what happens when you have an industrial union representing you. Leave it to the teamsters to continue to agree to job losses, loss positions and further downgrade the mechanics in this industry. You guys should have kept AMFA... Good luck, your going to need it.


By the way, the movement function on behalf of the ramp was only for aircraft under TOW. Taxi would remain a mechanic function at all stations.

It was fairly simple to get a reasonable answer to this issue, I just had to find the time to do it. I would suggest you do this next time before spreading rumors.
As per your post he is not spreading rumors. You said you investigated and was told the same from your nego leaders, the ONLY difference is that they just haven't voted on it, I repeat they, the nego leaders not the membership. They should be polling the membership to see if it should even be considered. To give up work for a sum of money is stupid, and I don't care how much money. Your one time payment of money for jobs will be gone as soon as you guys get it, the loss of jobs and positions are gone forever. Your leadership should have told them to pack sand. Yea the teamsters nego's looks like they are doing really well for the UAL guys.
 
This accusation first came up a few weeks ago but I had not had the opportunity to learn the truth until very recently. According to both my SFO BA's, the company proposed an offer to the IBT leadership Ed, Bob, and Clacy. The offer was to trade away the aircraft movement function from mechanics to ramp in exchange for a sum of money to be distributed by the mechanics (they could not tell me the exact dollar figure). This offer was taken to the full rank and file negotiating committee who will ultimately decide whether or not to accept the offer. I was told the committee has not voted on the subject yet because they are waiting to see proposals on other economic subjects such as overall wage and benefit packages.


By the way, the movement function on behalf of the ramp was only for aircraft under TOW. Taxi would remain a mechanic function at all stations.

It was fairly simple to get a reasonable answer to this issue, I just had to find the time to do it. I would suggest you do this next time before spreading rumors.

Let me get this straight, your powerful Teamsters are allowing baggage handlers to operate Goldhofers? Wow, hey lets get the IBT in at AA - so they give away some more AMT jobs. All that for an extra $350.00 per year in dues. Strike fund - my a$$.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Let me get this straight, your powerful Teamsters are allowing baggage handlers to operate Goldhofers? Wow, hey lets get the IBT in at AA - so they give away some more AMT jobs. All that for an extra $350.00 per year in dues. Strike fund - my a$$.

We have Douglas Supertugs,btw....
And the Aircraft Movement Team has been around @ sCO hubs, and it's not going anywhere.......
 
"The IBT's Airline Division leaders Clacy Griswold, Ed Gleason and Bob Fisher decided to trade away Aircraft Movement, (Towing and Taxi) to IAM Ramp Supertug crews.."

YES.......... This is just one example of how the teamsters are selling out the United Airlines
Mechanics and giving up jobs.
The teamsters have also gutted out the United Airlines contract and reworked it with weak
Scab language from continental airlines contract.
The scabsters had promised to utilize the best of both contracts from Ual and Cal and yet again their lies have been exposed as the current negotiations reveil we at United have been lied to by the Scabsters.
AA Mechanics, do not make the same mistakes UAL Mechanics did.

If the IBT allows this aircraft movement language in the MX contract, it will put an end to anyone wanting the IBT in MX. End of story! I dont want to hear anymore BS excuses, it should not even be on the table.
 
The ibt has already made the deal.

In the most recent IAM Fleet Service TA, the language appears under "Move Team"

http://contract.iam141.org/pdfs/cbafleet.pdf

While the IAM members did vote this TA down, the fact that the language was presented is testament to the teamsters agreement.
 
This accusation first came up a few weeks ago but I had not had the opportunity to learn the truth until very recently. According to both my SFO BA's, the company proposed an offer to the IBT leadership Ed, Bob, and Clacy. The offer was to trade away the aircraft movement function from mechanics to ramp in exchange for a sum of money to be distributed by the mechanics (they could not tell me the exact dollar figure). This offer was taken to the full rank and file negotiating committee who will ultimately decide whether or not to accept the offer. I was told the committee has not voted on the subject yet because they are waiting to see proposals on other economic subjects such as overall wage and benefit packages.


By the way, the movement function on behalf of the ramp was only for aircraft under TOW. Taxi would remain a mechanic function at all stations.

It was fairly simple to get a reasonable answer to this issue, I just had to find the time to do it. I would suggest you do this next time before spreading rumors.
USAirways approached the IAM at the beginning/during negotiations after the PSA Merger with a similar proposal. However the IAM was offered a 700 Man CFM-56 Jet Shop in exchange. The IAM turned it down and we lost pushbacks eventually for nothing in BK. Would have been nice to have a crystal ball. Can't tell you how many fewer Line Mechanics are needed after the fact if any.
 
USAirways approached the IAM at the beginning/during negotiations after the PSA Merger with a similar proposal. However the IAM was offered a 700 Man CFM-56 Jet Shop in exchange. The IAM turned it down and we lost pushbacks eventually for nothing in BK. Would have been nice to have a crystal ball. Can't tell you how many fewer Line Mechanics are needed after the fact if any.
Your statement is wrong.

US shut down Aeromotive and the IAM filed a grievance against US as PSA had the tooling to do the CFM-56 engines in-house and US and PI farmed out.

The case went to arbitration and the company claimed they didnt have the tooling anymore as they sold it when they shut down the engine shop. The IAM had pictures of the tooling, and Darrel Deloach was the main witness, and was on the stand for two days.

We lost the case as we couldnt prove the company still had the tooling, and come to find out years later is was across the street from Aeromotive in a warehouse.

US never offered a 700 man engine shop to do the CFMs, and we never even had 700 mechanics at Aeromotive and neither does any airline who does engines in-house.

So your post is incorrect.
 
No talks schedule the mediator has asked for both sides to review their positions, submit it to him and he will present it to the board and we shall see if the board releases the M&R at US to the 30 day cooling off period.