The fine print

diogenes

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
2,515
0
Just did a quick run through of the fleet term sheet. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but here's how the needle has moved.
Pre concession, per the fleet agreement, the company could 'express' any location they chose. Fleet had the right to work any a/c with 69 or more seats. The limiting factor to 'expression' was the public wanted less, not more props, and ALPA's scope clause.
Now that scope clause has been removed. U can 'express' itself at will. Fleet mainline has no right to that work, not even 70 seat RJ's - the new 'express' language is in the latest agreement for a reason.
Results: In the near future, assuming survival, all stations, save hubs, focus cities, and the long distance locations (SEA, LAX, etc.) can be 'expressed' at will by U. And in the hub and focus cities, 'express' agents, not mainline, will work those flights. Has the company shared it's intentions with the union in this area? Are the savings obtained in the latest round of concessions based on X number of furloughs under this scenario?
At the end of 2003, I think we will have the same number of ALPA/AFA employees as we do now. We will have far fewer agents.
Or am I missing something?
 

Heinrich

Senior
Dec 20, 2002
338
0
Yes, there is text all over the place that US will stick to 279 jets mainline. Your text sounds like the whole company is going RJ. Or am I missing what you are saying?

It seems like the RJ's are to replace turboprops and expand service. I think.
 

sdavis29

Advanced
Nov 13, 2002
222
0
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/21/2002 4:16:55 PM diogenes wrote:

Just did a quick run through of the fleet term sheet. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but here's how the needle has moved.

Pre concession, per the fleet agreement, the company could 'express' any location they chose. Fleet had the right to work any a/c with 69 or more seats. The limiting factor to 'expression' was the public wanted less, not more props, and ALPA's scope clause.

Now that scope clause has been removed. U can 'express' itself at will. Fleet mainline has no right to that work, not even 70 seat RJ's - the new 'express' language is in the latest agreement for a reason.

Results: In the near future, assuming survival, all stations, save hubs, focus cities, and the long distance locations (SEA, LAX, etc.) can be 'expressed' at will by U. And in the hub and focus cities, 'express' agents, not mainline, will work those flights. Has the company shared it's intentions with the union in this area? Are the savings obtained in the latest round of concessions based on X number of furloughs under this scenario?

At the end of 2003, I think we will have the same number of ALPA/AFA employees as we do now. We will have far fewer agents.

Or am I missing something?
----------------
[/blockquote]
not missing anything..looks like same afa/alpa but the ramp as well as cust service could take major cuts still..both have allowed the "2" mainline flt deal..to be worked by express..cust service also has to deal with the "sar" issue which could in essence demote a good number of customer service agts...time will tell..

 

sabre

Advanced
Aug 20, 2002
161
0
PIT's ramp is pissed off. They are telling me that in their contract that even MDA can now work mainline in irregular operations (managements definition of that is a joke as mechanics know).

They also say that even though there will be 279 aircraft that that doesn't mean a thing since their contract loses mainline protections at alot of stations where these birds fly into. What I believe it means is that there will be a ton of express stations working up to 2 or 4 mainline jets but I can't remember. Won't they love being a IAM dues paying member getting commuter pay and working 737's? Not even ACA does that!
 

sdavis29

Advanced
Nov 13, 2002
222
0
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/22/2002 6:41:43 AM sabre wrote:

PIT's ramp is pissed off. They are telling me that in their contract that even MDA can now work mainline in irregular operations (managements definition of that is a joke as mechanics know).

They also say that even though there will be 279 aircraft that that doesn't mean a thing since their contract loses mainline protections at alot of stations where these birds fly into. What I believe it means is that there will be a ton of express stations working up to 2 or 4 mainline jets but I can't remember. Won't they love being a IAM dues paying member getting commuter pay and working 737's? Not even ACA does that!
----------------
[/blockquote]
2 or fewer to express cities, 4 or less in new cities, and looks like no cap on seasonal except for not to exceed a 4 month period in 1 calender year..

 
OP
D

diogenes

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
2,515
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/21/2002 9:23:09 PM Heinrich wrote:


Yes, there is text all over the place that US will stick to 279 jets mainline. Your text sounds like the whole company is going RJ. Or am I missing what you are saying?

It seems like the RJ's are to replace turboprops and expand service. I think.
----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------------------------

The 279 a/c language obviously prevents further ALPA/AFA layoffs - their headcount is a direct function of a/c numbers. That is NOT the case for CWA or IAMF or IAMM.

Two examples.

When they shut TPA mech down, the work shifted to other locations, but the headcount did NOT. Sure the TPA mechs that had the seniority bumped jr. mechs out of their locations, but those jr. mechs hit the bricks, resulting in a lower total mech headcount. The additional work was absorbed by existing headcount at the new locations.

Right now RDU is a fair sized U operation, located in the high tech mecca of the Southeast - there are major dollars in the RDU area. U can make EVERY flight into and out of RDU express, and every employee there will be express. Sure the agents with seniority can.....you get the drift. The RJ's are not just replacing props; they're replacing Boeings. Now will U RJ RDU? I don't know, but they can. And in view of the concessions we've made, I think the unions should demand upfront what hits will be made where. Additionally, the medical savings will not get fleet the $11 mil bogey number - the only place I see us approaching that figure is MASS conversions from mainline to express. Someone in the know care to break out the numbers? God knows we have paid the price for that information.

Another fine print deal - war with Iraq, no severance, bennies, nada. Now we know, sure as God made little green apples, we're going to move on Saddam. So for the 'you must vote yes' crowd, that dog won't hunt. U has been drooling to dump severance; here it is.

And before, I get my a$$ jumped, I haven't made up my mind yet - all the facts are not in. But a yes is not a given, yet. Basically, this deal reminds me too much of Esau selling his birthright for a mess of pottage. And I guess John Adams and Patrick Henry could have rationalized taxation without representation, too.

However it goes, I will have a Merry Christmas with my family - please don't let U rob you of that joy.

There is a reason for the season.
 

smallstFSA

Advanced
Dec 22, 2002
124
0
Regarding the fine print, if a station becomes express do FSA get credit for their current seniority for wage purposes or do we start at the beginning of of the wage scale. The fact sheet is vague on this point
 
OP
D

diogenes

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
2,515
0
Here's another fine print question.

Assume your little corner of paradise is 'expressed.'
Assume you say screw it, and take the furlough.
Assume your little Plan B goes south faster than U's stock.
Assume you want back in, and there's an opening at your location.

Do you come back with all of your seniority, for all purposes, pay, sked and vakay bid, etc.?

In the past, the answer was yes. I know several folks that accepted furlough, was out of work for 3 years, came into our station, and never missed a beat.

How now?
 

smallstFSA

Advanced
Dec 22, 2002
124
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/22/2002 3:22:43 PM diogenes wrote:

Here's another fine print question.

Assume your little corner of paradise is 'expressed.'
Assume you say screw it, and take the furlough.
Assume your little Plan B goes south faster than U's stock.
Assume you want back in, and there's an opening at your location.

Do you come back with all of your seniority, for all purposes, pay, sked and vakay bid, etc.?

In the past, the answer was yes. I know several folks that accepted furlough, was out of work for 3 years, came into our station, and never missed a beat.

How now?
----------------
[/blockquote]
Excellent questions and the answers will determine how we vote. The starting wage for mainline express is under $9. I'm willing to bet most FSA's can find similar wages somewhere else. But let's not jump the gun, lets get some concrete answers.
 

sdavis29

Advanced
Nov 13, 2002
222
0
www.usaviation.com
again i can only give what i have in the first cwa changed agreement,
but this covers all wholly owned carriers.

furloughed employees who accept positions at the wholly owned carrier will be entitled to such seniority and terms and conditions of employment as are applicable in the CBA or employmeent policies of the wholly owned carrier...

this info is from aug proposed changes...unless something has been changed sounds like it is up to express rules..
i know we had a few agts from express transfer to mainline a while back and they started day 1...just like a new hire..

except for fsa having no option 1 or 2..for vacations.and date of hire only for seniority.i believe are contracts are pretty close to mirror.

dont know if this is what you were looking for,,but it is all i can find...

 
OP
D

diogenes

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
2,515
0
Article A, paragraph B of the latest agreement says you will be offered jobs at express locations (non--MDA) per the CBA and the first restructuring agreement.

The 1999 CBA says mainline agents have no rights to express work.

The first restructuring agreement simplys says the company will 'ask' the express carriers to hire furloughed mainline employees.

If I'm reading this right, express can pick and choose who they hire (if anyone) from the furloughed ranks with no regard to seniority, start at the BOTTOM of the payscale, and become employees at will - no union protections.

I hope I'm wrong. Any authoratative info on this out there?
 

dash8ter

Member
Aug 20, 2002
73
0
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/28/2002 9:27:43 AM diogenes wrote:

If I'm reading this right, express can pick and choose who they hire (if anyone) from the furloughed ranks with no regard to seniority, start at the BOTTOM of the payscale, and become employees at will - no union protections.

I hope I'm wrong. Any authoratative info on this out there?
----------------
[/blockquote]

I believe that PSA gate/ramp agents and Allegheny gate/ramp agents are unionized by the Teamsters.
 

Mike W

Advanced
Dec 9, 2002
225
0
www.usaviation.com
Diogenes,
It appears that they have created another classification.Mainline express.In Cleveland we already work express flights along with mainline so when CLE goes express.as it most likely will,that work will continue to be done by the same employees at a lower rate of pay under the classification of "Mainline Express".I don't know how we could be covered under our current CBA and work for an express carrier who is represented by another union.
There are a lot of questions to be answered before we vote.I'm waiting to hear if there is going to be some kind of informational meeting for Committee Chairmen to help explain some of these issues.
 

Latest posts