Thanks Doug: US Outsourcing 7 cities
- Thread starter FurloughUS
- Start date
tech2101
Veteran
You will never get people to vote for scope. The company knows this.
Black Magic
Veteran
- Jan 4, 2008
- 937
- 552
I doubt that, the term GUILTY is more like you are feeling..your in phx and you would vote that contract in again if needed to get your pay raise. People told you full well that this was going to happen and didn't flinch on voting yes.
I found out from Facebook. The company didn't tell me I was losing my job until Friday.
Harry Callahan
Veteran
Jester
Veteran
I am still waiting for someone to explain to me a how "scope" would have protected anyone from being furloughed due to a reduction in mainline flying into a station? As for express flying, I am not sure why anyone would automatically assume that would be within the "scope" of US FSA's, when those aircraft may not even be owned by the company, as this was the case in the smaller stations. If US FSA's were working express flights, when the company could have used contractors, then I would consider it to have been a gift. Let us not forget that the TWU with its so-called "wonderful" scope for AW FSA's still ended-up furloughing dozens of people when CMH was pulled down as a hub.
Just curious... does anyone honestly believe that the company should require to use only US FSA's for stations in which there may be only 1 mainline flight a day into the city, as I am sure that is the case with some of the European routes? So now the discussion is where would be that magic line of how many mainline flights a day into station would be acceptable as to be outside the scope? If I understand the number being mentioned, it was 28 mainline flights per week was the cut-off point, which averages to 4 mainline flights per day, which is not all that many flights per day. I believe the prior CBA was something around 56 mainline flights per week, so the contract was an improvement, and it allowed furloughed employees to keep their seniority up to four years vs. 90 days, if they did not accept a transfer. I really don't think the CBA was a bad deal, and the pay increase for West was huge.
Let me be clear, insofar that I am not minimizing the effects of those who were caught-up in the latest round of furloughs, but most of the cuts were due to a reduction in mainline flying into certain stations. I doubt the Company would have agreed to a scope clause which keeps workers in stations, but without enough flights to adequately utilitize the staff who would be standing around.
So Views Jester.
Black Magic
Veteran
- Jan 4, 2008
- 937
- 552
Jester you have a valid point. Furloughs because of downsizing a hub is just business doing its thing whether its an airline or automaker. But I'd like to know what is the story with SNA? They have 6 mainline flights a day except on sat with 5. That equals 41 mainline flights a week. Wouldn't outsourcing that station be against the contract? Is sna going to be all express now come jan? Someone in the know enlighten me.
Kev3188
Veteran
Sad, but true.
... And the cycle will continue until people collectively figure that out...
+1000
Also + 1000
Classy. Not. :angry:
2 separate issues. There is a sea of difference between someone getting furloughed due to a pull down in flight activity, and a station being closed altogether.
Yes, depending on how much total flight activity there is in a given city. If US had (has?) cross-utilization, it might be a different story.
European cities are irrelevant in this discussion.
How many stations does WN outsource the ramp?
None, if they fly to a city, they do the work. Plain and simple.
If the company cant outsource the work, they cant outsource a whole city.
If there is a reduction in flying, of course they can adjust headcount, but they wouldnt be able to outsource the work if the scope language was tighter.
It took a bankruptcy court to abrogate US from outsourcing overhaul of planes, from 1949-2005 the work was exclusive to IAM represented US Airways employees.
And the CBA only covers domestic based US Employees, they dont have to staff European stations with CBA covered employees.
Do you know US mainline employees up until the blood bath of 1992 worked the express flights and it wasnt outsourced?
None, if they fly to a city, they do the work. Plain and simple.
If the company cant outsource the work, they cant outsource a whole city.
If there is a reduction in flying, of course they can adjust headcount, but they wouldnt be able to outsource the work if the scope language was tighter.
It took a bankruptcy court to abrogate US from outsourcing overhaul of planes, from 1949-2005 the work was exclusive to IAM represented US Airways employees.
And the CBA only covers domestic based US Employees, they dont have to staff European stations with CBA covered employees.
Do you know US mainline employees up until the blood bath of 1992 worked the express flights and it wasnt outsourced?
Kev3188
Veteran
I would argue that that is actually *better* for the company, especially in a line station or focus city.
strangiatotheme
Senior
- Dec 17, 2009
- 287
- 87
I think they have to have 56 mainline weekly starting in January. Right now they just have to maintain at least 14. The 28 weekly requirement is only for certain stations not including SNA, and that takes effect on that same date as well. Someone correct me if I'm reading this wrong.
strangiatotheme
Senior
- Dec 17, 2009
- 287
- 87
Good point, but a bad comparison. There are very few, if any, WN stations that have less than 5 (or so) flights daily. Look at all the FL cities that have 1 or 2 daily flights only, those are as good as gone once WN comes in and starts optimizing their combined route network. Whether that has to do more with scheduling efficiency, labor costs, or some other metric is up for debate, however you should note that even WN has a "weekly flight minimum" so to speak that's built into their business plan. Theirs is different in that no one has jobs in those cities, because they don't want to even bother serving them.
