The CWA/IBT have begun negotitions with the company.

WeAAsles

Veteran
Oct 20, 2007
23,194
5,343
December 19th, 2014
 
Your CWA/IBT Association Negotiating Committee met this month in Dallas on December 17 and 18.
 
On Wednesday, December 17th, we met with the company and advised them in an opening statement that we were excited to be at the table with a company that is doing so well financially. We began the session by passing proposals to the company for Article 1-Purpose of Agreement, Article 8-Seniority, Article 11-Seasonal Employee Transfer, Article 16-Medical Examinations, Article 22-Probation, Article 26-System Board, Article 25-Grievance Procedure, Article 30-Health and Safety, Article 33-Union Security and Maintenance of Membership and Article 35-Amendments to this Agreement. The Company passed a response to Article 16-Medical Examinations and Article 30-Health and Safety. The Committee worked to put together counter proposals and submit new proposals for the following day.


http://american-agen...gaining-update/
 
dfw gen said:
sounds like the twu settling how many bulletin boards we need....
The reality for where we sit at the moment is twofold. First we had to wait (Good or Bad decision) for the IAM to get there own contracts before they would move forward with us. And now we are still waiting for an NMB ruling about the Association before we can start to negotiate.

Some out there do not want the Association though and would rather have a representational battle that will absolutely keep us away from negotiations even longer.

I'm just sitting back waiting and tapping my fingers while all the nonsense plays itself out. Just hope there is enough meat left on the table when we finally get to the party? 
 
WeAAsles said:
The reality for where we sit at the moment is twofold. First we had to wait (Good or Bad decision) for the IAM to get there own contracts before they would move forward with us. And now we are still waiting for an NMB ruling about the Association before we can start to negotiate.

Some out there do not want the Association though and would rather have a representational battle that will absolutely keep us away from negotiations even longer.

I'm just sitting back waiting and tapping my fingers while all the nonsense plays itself out. Just hope there is enough meat left on the table when we finally get to the party? 
 
That's a ridiculous argument, we had to wait for the IAM to get their own contracts. I guess the time the IAM had to wait for the AA unions to get their MOU's and push the merger doesn't count for anything. Does it? Aside from that, the fact that the IAM did get their CBA in order before the JCBA also affects us in a positive note. First, they took away some language that was detrimental to certain title groups and they also brought their pay rates to AA levels which helps us to gain a bigger raise in September, unless there is a JCBA. (at this rate, there won't be)
 
Using that as an excuse as to why the TWU and IAM can even sit together and prepare for the JCBA is just that....an excuse. They should be sitting together and preparing for those talks. All this time sitting around is just such a waste and we will pay for it later.
 
WeAAsles said:
The reality for where we sit at the moment is twofold. First we had to wait (Good or Bad decision) for the IAM to get there own contracts before they would move forward with us. And now we are still waiting for an NMB ruling about the Association before we can start to negotiate.

Some out there do not want the Association though and would rather have a representational battle that will absolutely keep us away from negotiations even longer.

I'm just sitting back waiting and tapping my fingers while all the nonsense plays itself out. Just hope there is enough meat left on the table when we finally get to the party? 
Why does there have to be a battle? Why cant the IAM just step aside like ALPA and the AFA did? Goes to show that those other Unions were willing to put their members interests first and face the fact they are the smaller Union and they need to bow out instead of "fighting each other". How much time would it add even if they did? They would have a limited time to get the cards signed, if they didn't get them it would be over. 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
NYer said:
 
That's a ridiculous argument, we had to wait for the IAM to get their own contracts. I guess the time the IAM had to wait for the AA unions to get their MOU's and push the merger doesn't count for anything. Does it? Aside from that, the fact that the IAM did get their CBA in order before the JCBA also affects us in a positive note. First, they took away some language that was detrimental to certain title groups and they also brought their pay rates to AA levels which helps us to gain a bigger raise in September, unless there is a JCBA. (at this rate, there won't be)
 
Using that as an excuse as to why the TWU and IAM can even sit together and prepare for the JCBA is just that....an excuse. They should be sitting together and preparing for those talks. All this time sitting around is just such a waste and we will pay for it later.
Yea they gave away any leverage they could have brought to the table by giving the company synergies for bottom of the Industry wages instead of at least "Industry average". That hurts us with the Wage Adjustment as well. They allow us to work their equipment without it counting as outsourced. Bad move. 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
NYer said:
 
That's a ridiculous argument, we had to wait for the IAM to get their own contracts. I guess the time the IAM had to wait for the AA unions to get their MOU's and push the merger doesn't count for anything. Does it? Aside from that, the fact that the IAM did get their CBA in order before the JCBA also affects us in a positive note. First, they took away some language that was detrimental to certain title groups and they also brought their pay rates to AA levels which helps us to gain a bigger raise in September, unless there is a JCBA. (at this rate, there won't be)
 
Using that as an excuse as to why the TWU and IAM can even sit together and prepare for the JCBA is just that....an excuse. They should be sitting together and preparing for those talks. All this time sitting around is just such a waste and we will pay for it later.
What in the world are you talking about? The IAM was waiting for us to get our MOU's and push for a merger to happen? Huh?

I am not knocking the IAM for what they decided to do tactically. As a matter of fact I would have more than likely done the exact same thing in their shoes. They know the people they were negotiating against and had zero trust that they would have dealt with them had they chucked section 6 in the toilet. Pointing out the reality that we were kept waiting while that played out doesn't mean I'm condemning them if that's what you're thinking.

As far as the two sides talking I'll say it again for the 100th time. Of course they should be talking. If they are though maybe they just don't want to share it on social media anymore? Can't say that I blame them.
 
Bob Owens said:
Why does there have to be a battle? Why cant the IAM just step aside like ALPA and the AFA did? Goes to show that those other Unions were willing to put their members interests first and face the fact they are the smaller Union and they need to bow out instead of "fighting each other". How much time would it add even if they did? They would have a limited time to get the cards signed, if they didn't get them it would be over. 
Yes Bob you have already conveyed very clearly what you think and what you hope can still happen.

I don't think the IAM or it's members completely agree with you though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
WeAAsles said:
Yes Bob you have already conveyed very clearly what you think and what you hope can still happen.

I don't think the IAM or it's members completely agree with you though.
Lets have a vote then.
 
Nobody ever asked any of the members. At least the IBT and CWA did that. 
 
I understand some of the US guys want to keep their IAMNPF, I have no problem with that but I want no part of it. 
 
If they put through this Association we should sue the NMB. Especially if they rule on a blackout period for a representation election. There was never a showing of interest, not even in a controlled internal vote to grant the request to put us all in an Association that would take over our contract, but collect no dues and have no treasury and not be staffed by people we elect. I for one am not interested in being split up more than we already are. At least the CWA/IBT deal was simple, East and West, the deal these guys concocted makes ZERO sense. BOS-IAM, EWR Title II IAM Title I and V TWU, PHL-IAM, DCA-IAM, RDU-TWU, None of it makes sense. The reason it was crafted that way had nothing to do with anything other than they were trying to find a way to make sure that in the end they each get the same amount of dues they are getting now and that is just plain despicable. We were being divied up like the middle east, and we see how well thats been working out. We are ending up in an organization that from the start does not even make a good effort at trying to pretend that they want to build a strong Union between all the workers at AA. They want to split us up even more than we are now. 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Bob Owens said:
Yea they gave away any leverage they could have brought to the table by giving the company synergies for bottom of the Industry wages instead of at least "Industry average". That hurts us with the Wage Adjustment as well. They allow us to work their equipment without it counting as outsourced. Bad move. 
 
So on one side of the argument is that they took time to negotiate the CBA while the TWU waited but also they should have used their supposed leverage to bring up the wage adjuster. Can't have both.
 
WeAAsles said:
What in the world are you talking about? The IAM was waiting for us to get our MOU's and push for a merger to happen? Huh?

I am not knocking the IAM for what they decided to do tactically. As a matter of fact I would have more than likely done the exact same thing in their shoes. They know the people they were negotiating against and had zero trust that they would have dealt with them had they chucked section 6 in the toilet. Pointing out the reality that we were kept waiting while that played out doesn't mean I'm condemning them if that's what you're thinking.

As far as the two sides talking I'll say it again for the 100th time. Of course they should be talking. If they are though maybe they just don't want to share it on social media anymore? Can't say that I blame them.
 
While US Airways was negotiating deals with AA unions, whom they didn't have a relationship with yet, the IAM was cast aside by the airline in their own negotiations.
 
From the Dallas News April 2012: "The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers put out word Tuesday that its members at US Airways aren’t happy about US Airways’ announcement that it has deals with American Airlines’ three unions for a possible merger."
 
"District 141 president Rich Delaney called events “insulting” and “disrespectful” since US Airways hasn’t been able to get a deal with its own unions:"
 
“It is unbelievable that the company [US Airways] would secretly negotiate with labor groups outside of their own airline, and reach contractual terms for the future, when the state of labor relations within US Airways is so uncertain.”
 
So, as you can see, we also hampered their negotiations as attention was given to the AA unions before the US Airways unions. That being the case, how can we possible even make an issue about them finishing their negotiations? We can't and we shouldn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Bob Owens said:
Lets have a vote then.
 
Nobody ever asked any of the members. At least the IBT and CWA did that. 
 
I understand some of the US guys want to keep their IAMNPF, I have no problem with that but I want no part of it. 
 
If they put through this Association we should sue the NMB. Especially if they rule on a blackout period for a representation election. There was never a showing of interest, not even in a controlled internal vote to grant the request to put us all in an Association that would take over our contract, but collect no dues and have no treasury and not be staffed by people we elect. I for one am not interested in being split up more than we already are. At least the CWA/IBT deal was simple, East and West, the deal these guys concocted makes ZERO sense. BOS-IAM, EWR Title II IAM Title I and V TWU, PHL-IAM, DCA-IAM, RDU-TWU, None of it makes sense. The reason it was crafted that way had nothing to do with anything other than they were trying to find a way to make sure that in the end they each get the same amount of dues they are getting now and that is just plain despicable. We were being divied up like the middle east, and we see how well thats been working out. We are ending up in an organization that from the start does not even make a good effort at trying to pretend that they want to build a strong Union between all the workers at AA. They want to split us up even more than we are now. 
 
If it doesn't make sense to you then they must have done something right.
 
NYer said:
 
While US Airways was negotiating deals with AA unions, whom they didn't have a relationship with yet, the IAM was cast aside by the airline in their own negotiations.
 
From the Dallas News April 2012: "The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers put out word Tuesday that its members at US Airways aren’t happy about US Airways’ announcement that it has deals with American Airlines’ three unions for a possible merger."
 
"District 141 president Rich Delaney called events “insulting” and “disrespectful” since US Airways hasn’t been able to get a deal with its own unions:"
 
“It is unbelievable that the company [US Airways] would secretly negotiate with labor groups outside of their own airline, and reach contractual terms for the future, when the state of labor relations within US Airways is so uncertain.”
 
So, as you can see, we also hampered their negotiations as attention was given to the AA unions before the US Airways unions. That being the case, how can we possible even make an issue about them finishing their negotiations? We can't and we shouldn't.
Ok you have a point and it's a good one from a particular perspective. So we BOTH have maybe hampered each others abilities here and deserve a little slap on the wrist.

One can argue that our agreeing to the terms given by their management helped them achieve the CBA that they were looking for and it can also be agreed to IMO that without the merger with US we wouldn't be facing the possibly much better JCBA to come had we remained a standalone airline.

So we each benefited and stand to benefit even more TOGETHER in the future. 
 
Bob Owens said:
Why does there have to be a battle? Why cant the IAM just step aside like ALPA and the AFA did? Goes to show that those other Unions were willing to put their members interests first and face the fact they are the smaller Union and they need to bow out instead of "fighting each other". How much time would it add even if they did? They would have a limited time to get the cards signed, if they didn't get them it would be over. 
ALPA?
 
You are a labor leader and you dont even know what union the Pilots had at US?
 
US pilots were USAPA.
 
700UW said:
ALPA?
 
You are a labor leader and you dont even know what union the Pilots had at US?
 
US pilots were USAPA.
Does it matter? The point is they stepped out.
 
It was my understanding that they still had two separate agreements that they were all ALPA but the East guys didnt like the proposed seniority integration and split to form USAPA. 
 
The question remains, if infighting over representation is so destructive why cant the IAM do what is best for Labor and just step aside like USAPA and the AFA? If they had then we would be in negotiations as well. If they go forward with this half assed plan it may be a long time, or maybe thats the objective? 
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people