1AA
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 6,056
- 4,231
Cards must be signed and dated in your own hand writing. Nice try.
Teamster Organizer caught forging Authorization Cards
- Thread starter CIO
- Start date
Cards must be signed and dated in your own hand writing. Nice try.
Not saying this is happening. But let's pease you and say it is, just to satisfy you. It's still not as bad as the teamsters forging names. AMFA is not asking card signers to leave the date blank. C'mon Anomaly, is this all you got???
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #48
Here is one article,
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2005-05-17/news/0505170051_1_machinists-union-aircraft-mechanics-fraternal-association-jean-medina
Please show me where the distortion is and a link so it can be verified.
Thanks,
In Solidarity,
CIO
Dont mind him. Lets see what we agreed to at AA;
17.5% wage cut, thats a lot more than 3.9% and that was outside of BK. Our 2015 wage will still be less than our 2002 wage.
We agreed to give up the Pension,
We agreed to unlimited foreign outsourcing
We agreed to no defined limit on heavy maint outsourcing, the only lititation would be that no more than 35%, subject to exclusions, of the total maintenence spend on work covereed under the agreemnt can be outsourced. If RR backs out of TAESL they can increase that percentage "accordingly".Likely to around 50% of "work covered under this agreement". That means work on MD-80s(being retired), 757s(being retired), 767s, 777s(already outsourced) and 737s(already partially outsourced). Airbus is work we never did so its not covered under the agreement, the company did agree that AA mechanics would work all aircraft that AA flies but did not say that all work on all aircraft AA flies is covered under the agreement, so if we do line maint but outsource the Heavies they will take the position they have complied with the agreement. We used to have language that said that if we bring work not covered under the agreement in house for a period of time it becomes part of the agreement but we eliminated that language. So they could bring Airbus work in, then outsource it and it would not fall under the 35%. As new aircraft come on line the total spend (on work covered under the agreement) will shift towards Line Maintenance, meaning eventually all of the remaining Heavy Maintenance can be outsourced while still staying under the 35% cap.
In addition to that we gave up our Holidays, if we work all ten formerly recognized Holidays we net just 20 hours extra pay for the year. We used to gross 20 hours pay for each Holiday Worked.
We get a weeks less vacation at every step, starting off the first five years with just one week of Vacation.
We only get 5 sick days, the first at half pay each occurance.
We pay more out of pocket for our Medical than anyone else.
We get straight time for training before or after our shift.
We do not get reimbursed for our passports.
We have no tool allowance.
We have no contractual rules on Travel emergencies.
If we cant afford to contribute to the 401K the company contributes nothing. They admit that they estimate that 30% will contribute nothing.
We only get 10 IOD days.
We have no contractual rules on CS.
We have no DAT days.
We get 1 cent per hour for afternoon shift
We only get 1.5x after 8 hours on Field trips.
We never ever go beyonf 1.5X
The company picks the Crew Chiefs, not seniority.
Employee pays 100% of retiree medical regardless of years of service(UAL they pay between 40 and 80% depending on years of service)
There is more, but if it wasnt so sad it would be comical watching the guy in a glass house throe rocks. Everything that he is accusing UAL mechanics of doing we did, and then some. Sure we have more guys paying dues, some in our book are barely above minimum wage, but I never thought that the objective of joining a Union was to maximize the number of dues payers at the expense of everything else. Sure you dont want to lose your job but isnt that why we negotiate Seniority and Recall rights so when you become senior you will enjoy security and if you do get Rif'd you have something good to go back to? If you are going to give everything away than of what value are Seniority and recall?
If we truly believe our labor has value then we should force the company to do without that labor unless they pay a fair amount. If that means they RIF and outsource then so be it, other carriers are starting to realize that outsourcing does not provide the value they thought it did and are slowly bringing work back in house. We may never see the volume of in house work we once saw but then again they may never see the supply of qualified workers that was once available either. Reducing our compensation wont fix either of those situations.
1AA
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 6,056
- 4,231
I posted this to Bob in another thread, and deserves to be re-posted here as it serves as perfect timing and right on subject, as CIO is one of the twisters;
Hey Bob, this post made me think of something. I can see it now Bob, the Overspeeds, Realityck, CIO ect.. will all twist this around as such. Let's look down the road, say July or Aug. Let's just say, hypothetically, AMFA won the representational election at AA. Now AMFA is the new union at AA. Now fast forward to 2017, where alot of members have lost their jobs down to 6325. All the industrial unions will be blaming the crap out of AMFA for losing those jobs when in fact it was the TWU at the time the contract language was nego and agreed upon. You see, this is the exact same thing that happened at UAL. The IAM was the representational union at UAL when they too nego and agreed to the closure of maint facilities and the loss of numerous jobs. It took affect only after AMFA won an election to represent the mechanics and related, so they all twist it all up to try and make it look like it was AMFA, when AMFA is merely "forced" to take over the contract previously nego by the prior unions. I can see it now Bob...
scorpion 2
Veteran
- May 11, 2012
- 539
- 562
ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
You posted ...(AMFA)gave the Company the right to terminate the pension plan...
This is a LIE
The Union and the company were in bankruptcy negotiations at the time. UAL wanted out of the pension, but AMFA had not agreed to it. In the middle of all of this the government stepped in. The pensions at UAL were seized by the PBGC, not given up by AMFA.
http://articles.latimes.com/2005/mar/12/business/fi-united12
You posted ... agreed to foreign outsourcing and, even with all those concessions, signed on to unlimited outsourcing of heavy maintenance visits (with the exception of the three lines the IAM had saved)...
This is part LIE and part distortion.
Unlimited outsourcing of heavy maintenance was lost under the IAM, a point we have been over and over on this forum and yet you continue to LIE about it.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-0305060269may06,0,3516394.story
The IAM didn't save the 3 lines of work, those protections were negotiated under AMFA, as were the protections for our Engine Shop, our APU shop, our Landing Gear Shop, Avionics Shop, Wire harness shop, and many others
http://teamsterssfo.com/items/2005_amfa_UAL_CBA.pdf
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #56
I will research and get back with you on the UAL agreement which Amfa agreeded with and will show some wording from the contract.
Bob Have you ever represented anyone in an arbitration case? How will you ever be able to represent the TWU membership if AA should ever exceed the Farmout cap without telling a lie?
Back to original subject,
The teamsters organizer/organizers were caught forging cards. How many could be very important.
Amfa organizers were bragging on the floor years ago about having to take several days to add a date to signed cards. This was common knowledge. Amfa organizers have refused to return cards after members requested them to be returned in the past. I also rermember some of the organizers released names of people who signed cards and remember a few instances where the person was no longer employed at AA. So how were these signed?
Should the organizers now be requested to show a picture ID at AA? Seems like any cards signed at AA should be in question whether it's from the IBT, Amfa or Amp. I thought the AMP organizers turn the cards over to Amfa?
In Solidarity,
CIO
Bob Have you ever represented anyone in an arbitration case? How will you ever be able to represent the TWU membership if AA should ever exceed the Farmout cap without telling a lie?
Back to original subject,
The teamsters organizer/organizers were caught forging cards. How many could be very important.
Amfa organizers were bragging on the floor years ago about having to take several days to add a date to signed cards. This was common knowledge. Amfa organizers have refused to return cards after members requested them to be returned in the past. I also rermember some of the organizers released names of people who signed cards and remember a few instances where the person was no longer employed at AA. So how were these signed?
Should the organizers now be requested to show a picture ID at AA? Seems like any cards signed at AA should be in question whether it's from the IBT, Amfa or Amp. I thought the AMP organizers turn the cards over to Amfa?
In Solidarity,
CIO
AMFAinMIAMI
Veteran
CIO
What happened yrs ago is NOT what is going on today. The organizers at AA do have a picture ID its their company badge and airport ID. AMP was a different drive something started to appeal to the T-town boys who did not want amfa in the past since they still wanted the TWU gone. That was started since the Pilots and the F/A's did that started their own union, here at AA. I was here during AMP drives and I never was involved since I did not believe in that. I never got cards from any one at my station. I was asked to get involved but did not.
In the 15 yrs I have been at this here at AA we have had only one time that we brought the crads to the NMB, and that was almost 10 yrs ago now.
The IBT has put the names of card signers as well as organizers on the internet. The AMFA organizers of today don't do that. Do we have a list of card signers "YES" we use that so that we can keep track of who has signed and who we need to talk to about signing. Not for any other reason. So Don't get to be like Overspeed and the others here and spin Bull sh&t. You can support the TWU and that's your choice but we the AMFA organizers of today are all above board. Each station and its organizers are different, what happened in the past at your station by NON PAID guys, who supported AMFA, is unlike the IBT guys of today who have a large budget to spin and tell us the industry mechanics what ever to get us to sign a IBT card.
Unless they (IBT) file the cards its only a piece of paper, the NMB will validate the signatures and the card owner as well. So don't try to pull amfa and the organizers here at AA into your TWU scam of lies and bs. The Date and signature MUST be in the original card signers hand writting. That is the RULE, NO ONE would take the chance of having our efforts thrown out by the NMB due to fraud.
AMFA at AA in 2013
I guess you are right, should they exceed the cap the only way to fight it would be to lie. So I guess I will leave that up to you since you are so comfortable with it. I doubt an Arbitrator will buy it though. Like Jimmy Gorman used to say, people like you dont Testify, they Test-a-lie.
I doubt that will be a problem though, our wages are so low there is no need to exceed the cap.
You say that in jest I'm guessing, Overspeed Et al are the spawn of Checking it Out. He's been spinning BS back from TheMechanic.com days.
Don's getting desperate, calling in favors wherever he can, guys who are retired, guys who were voted out of office, guys who quote Hitler and even guys who beat their wives.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #60
Thirdstreethero,
I stated that AMFA had agreed to a 3.9% wage cut and you questioned it. The Letter of Agreement signed in 2005 by AMFA states “The base pay rates and other pay components (shift premiums, Hawaii differential, skill premium, and license premium) in effect as of May 1, 2004 under Schedule A of the 2003 Mechanics’ Agreement shall be reduced by 3.9% effective with the payroll period commencing closet to June 1, 2005.”
I stated that AMFA gave the Company the right to terminate its pension plan. This is what the Bankruptcy Exit Agreement says about the defined benefit pension:
“AMFA (i) waives any claim it may have (including but not limited to any claim or grievance under Letter of Agreement 02-1M of the 2003 Mechanics’ Agreement) that the termination of the United Airlines, Inc. Union Ground Employees’ Retirement Plan (the “Plan&rdquo
does or would violate the terms and conditions of the 2003 Mechanics’ Agreement or any other agreements or status quo between the parties, and (ii)shall not oppose any efforts to terminate the Plan: provided, however, that nothing in this Letter of Agreement shall be construed, deemed, or characterized by UAL or the Company as any Agreement of any form that the Plan should be terminated, or as limiting AMFA’s right to proceed against the PBGC regarding the issue of the termination date of the Plan. AMFA further agrees that, under the 2005-2009 Mechanics’ Agreement, the Company shall not be required to maintain the Plan, or provide any defined benefit pension benefits whether from a plan, including the Plan or otherwise, and may terminate the Plan without violating the 2005-2009 Mechanics’ Agreement or any other agreements or status quo between the parties.”
I stated that AMFA had signed on to language allowing for unrestricted outsourcing of heavy checks while keeping the three checks that the IAM had preserved. The Letter of Agreement states “Effective with the ratification date of the 2005-2009 Mechanics’ Agreement, the “C” Check lines of work currently performed by Company employees in house at the San Francisco Maintenance Center will not be outsourced.” AMFA also agreed that “The Company may contract out the work of heavy maintenance visits (as defined by current Company practices consistent with AOP and MOP guidelines) without restriction.” This language was originally negotiated by the IAM in the 2003 bankruptcy agreement and I have said so on this board several times. However, after criticizing the IAM for this, AMFA agreed to continue the language. You seem to believe that you are responsible only for new language that you negotiate, but a union is responsible for all of the language it agrees to, particularly when it is giving new concessions.
However, there was additional new language on outsourcing including; “The Company shall not perform any regularly scheduled heavy maintenance, with the exception of only the B 777 and 747 fleets, in a non U.S. location without the Union’s approval.” The restriction was negotiated by the IAM, the exception by AMFA. This exception was used to establish major new contracts for heavy overhaul by Chinese providers, flexibility that was referred to by the Company in our own bankruptcy proceedings. It is ironic that when it was pointed out that contracts for overhaul of hundreds of aircraft had been entered into with Chinese providers on the IBT’s watch they blamed AMFA for the language that permitted it, even though the IBT had also signed on to it six years out of bankruptcy.
Like I continue to stress, The TWU has been very successful at retaining more work in-house than any other organization that has negotiated a contract in BK. One of the #1 issues during negotiations was job security. Is the contract perfect? No. Did it meet the criteria for the membership to approve? Yes! Oh Yes!! Bob and Chuck helped negotiate this, unless of course they were at DisneyWorld.
I hope this helps clarifies any concerns,
In Solidarity,
CIO
I stated that AMFA had agreed to a 3.9% wage cut and you questioned it. The Letter of Agreement signed in 2005 by AMFA states “The base pay rates and other pay components (shift premiums, Hawaii differential, skill premium, and license premium) in effect as of May 1, 2004 under Schedule A of the 2003 Mechanics’ Agreement shall be reduced by 3.9% effective with the payroll period commencing closet to June 1, 2005.”
I stated that AMFA gave the Company the right to terminate its pension plan. This is what the Bankruptcy Exit Agreement says about the defined benefit pension:
“AMFA (i) waives any claim it may have (including but not limited to any claim or grievance under Letter of Agreement 02-1M of the 2003 Mechanics’ Agreement) that the termination of the United Airlines, Inc. Union Ground Employees’ Retirement Plan (the “Plan&rdquo
does or would violate the terms and conditions of the 2003 Mechanics’ Agreement or any other agreements or status quo between the parties, and (ii)shall not oppose any efforts to terminate the Plan: provided, however, that nothing in this Letter of Agreement shall be construed, deemed, or characterized by UAL or the Company as any Agreement of any form that the Plan should be terminated, or as limiting AMFA’s right to proceed against the PBGC regarding the issue of the termination date of the Plan. AMFA further agrees that, under the 2005-2009 Mechanics’ Agreement, the Company shall not be required to maintain the Plan, or provide any defined benefit pension benefits whether from a plan, including the Plan or otherwise, and may terminate the Plan without violating the 2005-2009 Mechanics’ Agreement or any other agreements or status quo between the parties.”I stated that AMFA had signed on to language allowing for unrestricted outsourcing of heavy checks while keeping the three checks that the IAM had preserved. The Letter of Agreement states “Effective with the ratification date of the 2005-2009 Mechanics’ Agreement, the “C” Check lines of work currently performed by Company employees in house at the San Francisco Maintenance Center will not be outsourced.” AMFA also agreed that “The Company may contract out the work of heavy maintenance visits (as defined by current Company practices consistent with AOP and MOP guidelines) without restriction.” This language was originally negotiated by the IAM in the 2003 bankruptcy agreement and I have said so on this board several times. However, after criticizing the IAM for this, AMFA agreed to continue the language. You seem to believe that you are responsible only for new language that you negotiate, but a union is responsible for all of the language it agrees to, particularly when it is giving new concessions.
However, there was additional new language on outsourcing including; “The Company shall not perform any regularly scheduled heavy maintenance, with the exception of only the B 777 and 747 fleets, in a non U.S. location without the Union’s approval.” The restriction was negotiated by the IAM, the exception by AMFA. This exception was used to establish major new contracts for heavy overhaul by Chinese providers, flexibility that was referred to by the Company in our own bankruptcy proceedings. It is ironic that when it was pointed out that contracts for overhaul of hundreds of aircraft had been entered into with Chinese providers on the IBT’s watch they blamed AMFA for the language that permitted it, even though the IBT had also signed on to it six years out of bankruptcy.
Like I continue to stress, The TWU has been very successful at retaining more work in-house than any other organization that has negotiated a contract in BK. One of the #1 issues during negotiations was job security. Is the contract perfect? No. Did it meet the criteria for the membership to approve? Yes! Oh Yes!! Bob and Chuck helped negotiate this, unless of course they were at DisneyWorld.
I hope this helps clarifies any concerns,
In Solidarity,
CIO
