Teamsters get new TA for Ramp

[The Janitor]

Teamsters Out of Bankruptcy TA < IAM in bankruptcy contract.

CO/UA is set to make 1.5 billion combined net and the teamsters can only get what the non union people have. No part time cap. Company has right to contract out all jobs just like all the rampers at Republic and PSA who were all contracted out. $21.20 hr to bring them up to the non union level. High medical cost. No overtime bypass. No double time. No increase in vacations [5 weeks]. But plenty of relief shifts and other company protections.

At this point, the IAM bankruptcy contracts are far superior than the Teamsters contract. I am not surprised. All the talk and fluff and nothing backed up. We've seen this before.

 

[Kev3188]

Do you have a link to this T/A?

 

[The Janitor]

Do you have a link to this T/A?

www.calfleetserviceteamsters.com

 

[T5towbar]

www.calfleetserviceteamsters.com

I'm not too crazy about it, but you have to look at it for what it's worth. and the OP missed a lot of things. Read the TA carefully and if you are a CO employee, compare it with the FTW Handbook.

It's a 30 month contract. (which won't happen, because we all will have to vote again for a amalgamated contract with one union.)
We got our shift differential back. (night/graveyard= 2nd/3rd shift)
10% percent thru the life of the contract.
Another floating holiday.
Grievance protection.

Sure we didn't get a whole lot, but this is a first contract of it's kind for us. Also no one is used to paying dues, so a lot of the younger or low time guys will ask how much is dues going to be monthly, and will that make up for the loss? It's close to the UA BK contract, but we don't start out with two weeks of vacation, only one. There is other issues (which I will not discuss on this board), but I know that UA people will ask for everything they lost plus more. Whether they will get it, we won't know. If they do, that will be a better template for a contract which the IBT would have to better. But I know one thing, once we vote together for either the IAM or the IBT, the contract will be a lot stronger, and will probably put us close or near the top of the industry. It's not going to be easy, but it's a lot better going into a situation where one side is represented, and the other side is not. We felt we needed to go into this merger with someone representing us instead of being stapled to the bottom of some seniority list. At least it is a start and a one year or 18 month contract. I don't look at it as a total failure for the IBT. We have to do this all over again in a matter of months............

 

[ezchkin]

T5towbar....I am a member of IAM/PCE group. We voted for the IAM in 1999. Our first contract also only took 5 months. The IAM sold us on our first ratification with the same explanation. You need a basic contract with a short duration. Our first contract was our "series 15" (a company manual). We also didn't have any improvements over what we already had. It wasn't until 2-3 yrs later that we finally negotiated a true agreement. That's when we first got overtime bypass and a few other goodies in our contract. We got very good raises and strong language. However, by the time we got it, we were walking into bankruptcy court. I think we only received a couple of paychecks (maybe 2 months at the most) before it all went south. I think we got added holidays but didn't last long enough to see them. As the IAM told us, you never get a real contract for your first. You need the basic language then you go for improvements. Good Luck!

 

[Bob Owens]

Almost sounds like the IBT worked out a deal with the IAM, "We (try and) keep the mechanics and you take the ramp". One week of vacation? Walmart does better than that.

 

[The Janitor]

T5towbar....I am a member of IAM/PCE group. We voted for the IAM in 1999. Our first contract also only took 5 months. The IAM sold us on our first ratification with the same explanation. You need a basic contract with a short duration. Our first contract was our "series 15" (a company manual). We also didn't have any improvements over what we already had. It wasn't until 2-3 yrs later that we finally negotiated a true agreement. That's when we first got overtime bypass and a few other goodies in our contract. We got very good raises and strong language. However, by the time we got it, we were walking into bankruptcy court. I think we only received a couple of paychecks (maybe 2 months at the most) before it all went south. I think we got added holidays but didn't last long enough to see them. As the IAM told us, you never get a real contract for your first. You need the basic language then you go for improvements. Good Luck!

what basic language are you talking about? The one where the company can contract out the entire ramp and everything or transfer the work, provided they are kind enough to let the ibt bid on the work? UA/CO is set to collectively make 1.5 billion and this contract is deplorable and profane. So profane that it is being used as fodder across the breakrooms at UA. The UA ramp contract is worth more even though it was gutted twice, than this IBT sellout just to get the dues.

Our IAM 'first contract' at US AIRWAYS had 10 holidays, 7 weeks vacation, overtime bypass, double time, part time cap, scope that actually protects work insted of having to bid on our own work, and that was with an airline that was struggling. The IBT contract will eventually fade out ramp work.

Why should anyone at UA/CO vote for the IBT? BTW, this contract is representive of only negotiating for 5 months, a sorta band aid contract at best.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

what basic language are you talking about? The one where the company can contract out the entire ramp and everything or transfer the work, provided they are kind enough to let the ibt bid on the work? UA/CO is set to collectively make 1.5 billion and this contract is deplorable and profane. So profane that it is being used as fodder across the breakrooms at UA. The UA ramp contract is worth more even though it was gutted twice, than this IBT sellout just to get the dues.

Our IAM 'first contract' at US AIRWAYS had 10 holidays, 7 weeks vacation, overtime bypass, double time, part time cap, scope that actually protects work insted of having to bid on our own work, and that was with an airline that was struggling. The IBT contract will eventually fade out ramp work.

Why should anyone at UA/CO vote for the IBT? BTW, this contract is representive of only negotiating for 5 months, a sorta band aid contract at best.

You hit it on the head ...... its just about the dues.

If the ibt had tried to secure an ACTUAL contract it would've taken a great deal longer, and they faced the very real likelyhood of a decert to the IAM at the finale of the merger. All that organizing money down the drain.

They secured the recoup of their organizing monies, and most likely just handed the CAL ramp to the IAM.

As a mechanic thats been "represented" by the ibt for going on 3 years, I can tell you they are better off with the IAM....much better off.

 

[ezchkin]

" One week of vacation? Walmart does better than that"

Bob, the IAM/Ramp also starts with 1 week vacation.

1. Full-time
During the first calendar year of employment, a regular fulltime employee will
accrue three and one-third (3-1/3) hours vacation for each calendar month of
active service. Thereafter, vacation accrual for each full year of active service
will be based on the employee’s length of service as determined by employee’s
Date of Employment as follows:
LENGTH OF VACATION ACCRUAL
COMPANY SERVICE Weeks Hours
0-1 Years 1 40
1 Year 2 80
9 years 3 120
16 Years 4 160
24 Years 5 200
29 Years 6 240
2. Part-time
Aregular part-time employee will accrue vacation hours based upon length of
service and the ratio of such employee’s scheduled work hours to a full-time
forty (40) hour work week. For purposes of determining a part-time employee’s
scheduled hours, the employee will be credited with the greater of scheduled
or actual hours paid, including any Authorized No Pay (ANP) time

 

[ezchkin]

Janitor,
Being I am not a ramp employee, it makes no difference to me what the CAL ramp employees feel is in their best interest. I merely was pointing out the fact that my union, IAM, also pushed for the importance of a first contract quickly. I agree if a vote goes between this IBT tentative agreement and the current IAM, well, it's a no brainer. In answer to this question,

"what basic language are you talking about? The one where the company can contract out the entire ramp and everything or transfer the work, provided they are kind enough to let the ibt bid on the work?"

This is what the IAM gave us, without a vote


http://www.iam141.org/pointsystem/pointlou.html


E. If at a later date the Company identifies a need to outsource baggage service functions at hubs and metro stations and/or public contact functions at current line stations (i.e., CSR tasks performed at the check-in counter, boarding gate or which involve baggage handling), prior to reaching a decision to affect such outsourcing, the Company will meet with the Union to discuss alternative courses of action and the Company will assess the actual benefits produced by the dependability point system when evaluating the outsourcing initiative

 

[The Janitor]

Janitor,
Being I am not a ramp employee, it makes no difference to me what the CAL ramp employees feel is in their best interest. I merely was pointing out the fact that my union, IAM, also pushed for the importance of a first contract quickly. I agree if a vote goes between this IBT tentative agreement and the current IAM, well, it's a no brainer. In answer to this question,

"what basic language are you talking about? The one where the company can contract out the entire ramp and everything or transfer the work, provided they are kind enough to let the ibt bid on the work?"

This is what the IAM gave us, without a vote


http://www.iam141.org/pointsystem/pointlou.html


E. If at a later date the Company identifies a need to outsource baggage service functions at hubs and metro stations and/or public contact functions at current line stations (i.e., CSR tasks performed at the check-in counter, boarding gate or which involve baggage handling), prior to reaching a decision to affect such outsourcing, the Company will meet with the Union to discuss alternative courses of action and the Company will assess the actual benefits produced by the dependability point system when evaluating the outsourcing initiative

i'm not an advocate of an attendance policy, nor the process of how the UA one was achieved, but the Teamsters forced other unions to have to deal with attendance policies when they became the "Father of the Attendance Policy" by signing one at Republic. You can view it online, it's twice as bad as the IAM's and also didn't protect jobs. In fact, like the scope at Continental ramp, the scope at Republic and PSA ramp under a 'current' IBT contract is disasterous. So bad, that both PSA and Republic just contracted out all Teamsters [yes, 100%] under both teamster contracts, after boosting the pay of the Teamster pilots at Repbublic. IMO, the teamsters want to phase out the ramp at Continental and their new T/A is a strong indicator of that. Whatever the case, I agree with the other poster that this is all about dues and they have to recollect their dues monies from the organizing drives. Makes no sense otherwise. Stick a fork in the IBT! They are goosed at UA now.

 

[T5towbar]

i'm not an advocate of an attendance policy, nor the process of how the UA one was achieved, but the Teamsters forced other unions to have to deal with attendance policies when they became the "Father of the Attendance Policy" by signing one at Republic. You can view it online, it's twice as bad as the IAM's and also didn't protect jobs. In fact, like the scope at Continental ramp, the scope at Republic and PSA ramp under a 'current' IBT contract is disasterous. So bad, that both PSA and Republic just contracted out all Teamsters [yes, 100%] under both teamster contracts, after boosting the pay of the Teamster pilots at Repbublic. IMO, the teamsters want to phase out the ramp at Continental and their new T/A is a strong indicator of that. Whatever the case, I agree with the other poster that this is all about dues and they have to recollect their dues monies from the organizing drives. Makes no sense otherwise. Stick a fork in the IBT! They are goosed at UA now.

This TA smells more and more fishy! I think Bob Owens is on to something........
No scope protections at all. PERIOD. I read this T/A and compared it to the UA 2005-09 BK contract, and it is much worse. Why didn't they use that contract as a starting point? Then negotiate UPWARD!!! Trying to compare contracts is like apples and oranges - no comparison! This TA is just an extension of our old FTW Handbook. Nothing changes except that we just got our shift differentiable back. That's all I see out of it. No protection for the stations - or the hubs either (ie: CLE) This contract is just to recoup the organizing money the IBT put out. They are great organizers - you can't deny that - but I see it as other posters have commented: The IAM will do the heavy lifting and I believe, and they will be the agent for both ramps in the end. I (and many others) would have voted for the IAM, but we needed SOMETHING........ The IBT will probably keep the mechanics, and will turn over the ramp to the IAM. The IAM would be better; hell our FA's got a industry LEADING contract......

IMHO, a lot of us voted for a union because we knew a merger was coming, and wanted to have some kind of protection during this process. Also new management was coming in and was going to cut and cut. Just look at what happened in the beginning of the year: They were going to outsource 9 stations in the system, but were stopped due to the merger announcement. Of course, the IBT took credit for the save, but we all know that the real reason was the timing of the merger announcement made other matters more important than the closures. But I digress.

Like I said before, I will be watching the UA negotiations with the new UA/CO. They will want back what they lost, PLUS more.
I for one won't vote to ratify this POS. Once we see what PMUA does, then the real wheeling and dealing will start.

 

[whoop whoop]

It's a fact the ibt does not care about the members or their wishes. The ibt is a business that only cares of revenue coming in. They hire representatives instead of elect them from within. David Bourne, the airline division director was not even a teamster, he was hired and cannot get recalled if he performs poorly, which by the way he has for the membership. The ibt is trying to ram this poor contract down the rampers throat, so they can start collecting on their dues. The poor excuse of, this is only our first contract is BULL. They sold themselves on how powerful they are, well, where is the power now????

 

[strfyr51]

This TA smells more and more fishy! I think Bob Owens is on to something........
No scope protections at all. PERIOD. I read this T/A and compared it to the UA 2005-09 BK contract, and it is much worse. Why didn't they use that contract as a starting point? Then negotiate UPWARD!!! Trying to compare contracts is like apples and oranges - no comparison! This TA is just an extension of our old FTW Handbook. Nothing changes except that we just got our shift differentiable back. That's all I see out of it. No protection for the stations - or the hubs either (ie: CLE) This contract is just to recoup the organizing money the IBT put out. They are great organizers - you can't deny that - but I see it as other posters have commented: The IAM will do the heavy lifting and I believe, and they will be the agent for both ramps in the end. I (and many others) would have voted for the IAM, but we needed SOMETHING........ The IBT will probably keep the mechanics, and will turn over the ramp to the IAM. The IAM would be better; hell our FA's got a industry LEADING contract......

IMHO, a lot of us voted for a union because we knew a merger was coming, and wanted to have some kind of protection during this process. Also new management was coming in and was going to cut and cut. Just look at what happened in the beginning of the year: They were going to outsource 9 stations in the system, but were stopped due to the merger announcement. Of course, the IBT took credit for the save, but we all know that the real reason was the timing of the merger announcement made other matters more important than the closures. But I digress.

Like I said before, I will be watching the UA negotiations with the new UA/CO. They will want back what they lost, PLUS more.
I for one won't vote to ratify this POS. Once we see what PMUA does, then the real wheeling and dealing will start.

****************************************************************************************************
The IAM at United might have an upper hand as they not only represent the Ramp but Customer Service as well. And they've "supposedly" done well by them. I don't believe in the IBT personally because they seem to act like they know it all and prove they don't know "Jack". I refer many times to the UPS's local 2727A because they TELL the IBT what's going on and what they want, and the IBT tells them NOTHING! The Teamster rep Clacy Griswold told me this when My group was looking for a contract. And now we realize the IBT would have sold us "Down River", as they NEVER had ANY chance of doing what they told us they COULD,or Would do, Nor were they even willing to TRY! So Credibility?? NONE!! I wish you guys well but before you sign on the "dotted line" ask yourself this. If you don't have at LEAST what the UAL ramp has in their BANKRUPTCY contract??? Why would you settle for Nothing at ALL?? (which appears to be what you really have, unless I'm mistaken, Which might be the case..) In any case Good Luck!

 

[ezchkin]

IMO, I think Bob is 100% correct. This is a 3-way trade-off. Teamsters give the IAM the ramp in exchange for hands off Mechs. The weakness shown from the IBT (in collusion with the company) ensures the company that inside (cust. svc) will be non-union. Most of UA/PCE are very unhappy with IAM but prefer to be unionized and was considering IBT. Very few CAL (inside/reservations) would ever consider a union. If the IBT had lived up to their reputaion, there would be a good chance that inside ground workers new UAL would have voted them in. Otherwise, why wouldn't the company give CAL/IBT/ramp what UAL/IAM/ramp currently have? CAL ramp will eventually get it regardless of which union. It's a wash for IBT, they continue Mechs (with a donation from IAM to recoup organize fees). A wash for IAM, they trade app. 9k PCE for CAL ramp. HMMMM, looks like a win for management (and a good share of inside/res employees) they end up 9k employees ahead for non-union. Just my 2 cents worth.