TWU negotiations.........what?

[Interested]

Doesn't history show that the company hands us the "best" contract, then we vote it down. The next one is a little bit worse and we vote it down. Then the last is is way worse and we vote it in?

Before I vote NO on this one, I do wish I could see into the future and see how worse the next offer is going to be.

 

[Bob Owens]

Yes I have heard the threat for yrs now there going to shut Tulsa down blah blah, Blow smoke up some other arse. I was sugesting a way to have 2 differnt contracts a line and base, and if you dont like the I got mine attitude I dont care this is the only union I have ever belonged to so wonder were I learned it.
How many line presidents voted to remove regional pay Chuckie

I would suggest that you closely look at page 7, Article 1.

Don V came in and touted this as "Industry leading spin off protection".

Keep in mind that we had absolutely nothing to do with writing this language, it was the company's creation.

We never got to look at it before we voted, had to take Dons word for it, needless to say I voted "NO".

This is yet another huge concession being sold as a gain. One more step to completing "The Vermont Plan". Instead of preventing a spin off it clearly allows it.

For over 25 years we had spin off protection, now we are allowing the company to spin off "20% or more". In reality this language doesn't prevent them from spinning off anything or everything, it only requires that whoever buys "20% or more" offers work to our members. If they buy less than 20% they don’t have to offer those workers anything.

Our spin off protection, what still prevents them from spinning off everything, is our system protection. If they spun off the operation what would they do with the workers that have System or Station Protection? The fact that they had to keep us meant that they had to keep the operation.

So in the past they couldn’t really spin off much.

Each contract we would roll the date up to include everyone on payroll on the DOS. This kept refreshing the defacto spin-off protection. Each time someone attrits out, the company can spin off more of the operation.
Even though attrition constantly occurs every two or three years the System Protection date got rolled forward so there was very little opportunity to spin off much, they did squeeze out a few things, like the can shop at JFK, wheel shops JFK and LGA etc. However this time we aren't rolling that date FWD to include everyone on payroll on the DOS. Aircraft Maint was actually rolled back to 1998 in 2003, a disgrace, now they are only rolling it FWD to 6/6/2000. Why 6/6/2000? Why not the same as everyone else? 3/1/01? Doesn't that strike anyone else out there as strange?
My gut tells me that they have already done the numbers and that date corresponds to a number of mechanics that they don't want to have system protection so they can spin something off the day this deal goes through.
You have to remember that every year people retire, resign, get terminated or Die. Just as the number of those with a "P" has dwindled (less than 200) so has the number of those with an "S"(around 7500), and it will dwindle even more. We currently have nearly 1800 without System protection.(Close to 20%).
By 2013 you have to figure at least another 1200 A&P mechanics will have retired, resigned, died or be terminated.
By this September the total Title I headcount probably will be around 9200. Any A&P hired after 6/6/2000 will not have system Protection. With each year the number without system protection would grow by anywhere from 300 to 500 just to maintain our operation. The TA would bring the current 1800 down to 1300 but by 2013 turnover may bring it well over 2500.

DOS the company could spin off any operation with up to 1300 TWU Title I mechanics with no restrictions, the buyer doesn't even have to offer employment to those 1300 guys.

With each year the number without system protection will probably grow anywhere from 300 to 500. Maybe even more, if this TA is accepted, as the company tries to get the SMA numbers up to 20%.
How many years would it take before they would have enough people without system protection in the system to be able to spin off the Tulsa base and absorb those with system protection?
Let's say in 2012 the company already sold AFW (those with system protection bumped the system) and now decides to sell Tulsa. They would get the TWU to sign a LOA allowing the use of OSMs and SMAs at DWH, better yet, they would simply claim that they can put them in any "maintenance Base", and that just because the language says that a maintenance base "will include TUL, AFW and MCI" it doesn't exclude any station where they have mechanics based and work that OSMs/SMAs can do. This would allow the company to move system protected OSMs/SMAs into any class 1 station(which will pretty much be all that's left due to the doubling of Eagle ASMs). Most of the current OSMs would probably be SMAs by then, so they could easily work line B-checks. They just could not work the engines.
-With nearly 39% of the base on the OSM/SMA pay-scale it may make an attractive investment for an MRO provider. The buyer may have to offer employment to those at the base but they only have to adhere to our contract for another year. As an MRO they would not fall under the RLA either. The day the contract expires they could impose new terms.

The company wrote this language, and made several other changes in the contract. It's riddled with subtle changes that when you connect them all up may allow the company to complete "The Vermont Plan" without ever filing for Bankruptcy.

If this passes the company wil have hit back to back Grand Slams at Negotiations.

 

[Chuck Schalk]

Yes I have heard the threat for yrs now there going to shut Tulsa down blah blah, Blow smoke up some other arse. I was sugesting a way to have 2 differnt contracts a line and base, and if you dont like the I got mine attitude I dont care this is the only union I have ever belonged to so wonder were I learned it.
How many line presidents voted to remove regional pay Chuckie

I agree that the line and overhaul might be better off with seperate contracts. I asked for it back in 2000 when the up and coming Jim Little visited JFK. He would not endorse it, but under cross questioning stated there was nothing to stop it. Line and Overhaul have vastly different work rules and interests.

As far as the regional pay vote, We had sellout presidents in the line that did not represent their members interests. Hopefully, the members of the line stations will remove the sellouts and vote in people who will.

 

[comatose]

I agree that the line and overhaul might be better off with seperate contracts. I asked for it back in 2000 when the up and coming Jim Little visited JFK. He would not endorse it, but under cross questioning stated there was nothing to stop it. Line and Overhaul have vastly different work rules and interests.

As far as the regional pay vote, We had sellout presidents in the line that did not represent their members interests. Hopefully, the members of the line stations will remove the sellouts and vote in people who will.

Sorry Chuck, but Zimmerman the sellout won't seek a second term.

 

[TWU informer]

I agree that the line and overhaul might be better off with seperate contracts. I asked for it back in 2000 when the up and coming Jim Little visited JFK.

Really? And you oppose this T/A because it is dividing the union? Hmmmm, that's interesting information. I don't recall you admitting that you were attempting to seperate line contracts from overhaul contracts in the middle of the last AMFA card drive. I had no idea you requested this in 2000. What else were you doing that we were unaware of? The more of this BS I hear the more I believe we in Tulsa were just being used by you guys to advance your own personal agendas. Tell us more about your union beliefs and what might be best for you and yours in NY.

Let's get this straight. Bus Drivers were screwing you over so you wanted AMFA. Fleet Service was screwing you so you got seperate locals, fleet service was screwing you so you got seperate negotiations, now Overhaul is screwing you so you want sperate contracts. And you take an oath of office to advance unionism and organized labor while promoting these positions? What's next Chuck "We want a JFK Contract and One Station Negotiations"? How about a Chuck and Bob Union and you 2 are the only voters on all issues?

 

[Tex-Mech]

Sorry Chuck, but Zimmerman the sellout won't seek a second term.

This is somewhat interesting because it goes without saying that your pres soldout at the end, but what would be your reaction if he agreed to regional pay that dfw, the biggest line station would of not gotten. Because the proposal I saw had dfw getting nothing.

BTW...my non-scientific poll on friday at afw now has the ta going down about 60-40%. It was 80-20% 2 months ago, and about 70-30% before fleet took the roll call vote in tulsa and changed a lot of votes. Also the retro to May 5th keeps building and the guys want that cash.

I'm still a no vote. 😉

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

Really? And you oppose this T/A because it is dividing the union? Hmmmm, that's interesting information. I don't recall you admitting that you were attempting to seperate line contracts from overhaul contracts in the middle of the last AMFA card drive. I had no idea you requested this in 2000. What else were you doing that we were unaware of? The more of this BS I hear the more I believe we in Tulsa were just being used by you guys to advance your own personal agendas. Tell us more about your union beliefs and what might be best for you and yours in NY.

Let's get this straight. Bus Drivers were screwing you over so you wanted AMFA. Fleet Service was screwing you so you got seperate locals, fleet service was screwing you so you got seperate negotiations, now Overhaul is screwing you so you want sperate contracts. And you take an oath of office to advance unionism and organized labor while promoting these positions? What's next Chuck "We want a JFK Contract and One Station Negotiations"? How about a Chuck and Bob Union and you 2 are the only voters on all issues?

What bothers you more
The fact that you make the same money New Yorkers do and still find it difficult to make ends meet in a place where it costs 30 percent less to live
OR
The fact that New Yorkers and the rest of the line stations try and negotiate a COLA adjustment which never happens and figure maybe the only way to get it is to negotiate seperately from people like you

 

[comatose]

This topic of TWU negotiations is somewhat oxymoronic.

With Videtich clamping down and not allowing any direct real negotiating between our supposed negotiating committee and the company, its all on Videtich for the two years of no retro pay that we are going to get screwed out of.

From the ridiculous black and silver uniforms that he himself hand picked and will never have to wear to the his Tiger Woods behavior towards secretaries, nothing should surprise anyone by the actions from the TWU Int’l.

It’s all on Videtich for the lack of language for DFWH (which will be covered in some form of LOA) allowing whatever the company wants.

It’s all on Videtich for the creation of the SMA’s, another 20% of the workforce that will get screwed by RIFing lowest time AMT’s. Sure they
won’t have to hit the street but I hope they like their new classification and pay.

It’s all on Videtich that the below age fifty workers will have their retiree medical abolished (a plan that employees have been paying into for twenty years) with the company saving millions.

It’s all on Videtich for the ASM eagle cap language increase(which will have everlasting effects that we will feel in years to come).

It’s all on Videtich that he used a 5th grader while helping the company write some weakest article language I’ve ever read. Don are smarter than a 5th grader?

This TA is by far and away a worse overall agreement even compared to the 03 concessions package. The 03 package basically was a major hit in the pocketbook. This TA is total decimation of our contract with another free two years to drag it out.


With a few puppet presidents, the Don will do anything.

 

[Chuck Schalk]

Really? And you oppose this T/A because it is dividing the union? Hmmmm, that's interesting information. I don't recall you admitting that you were attempting to seperate line contracts from overhaul contracts in the middle of the last AMFA card drive. I had no idea you requested this in 2000. What else were you doing that we were unaware of? The more of this BS I hear the more I believe we in Tulsa were just being used by you guys to advance your own personal agendas. Tell us more about your union beliefs and what might be best for you and yours in NY.

Let's get this straight. Bus Drivers were screwing you over so you wanted AMFA. Fleet Service was screwing you so you got seperate locals, fleet service was screwing you so you got seperate negotiations, now Overhaul is screwing you so you want sperate contracts. And you take an oath of office to advance unionism and organized labor while promoting these positions? What's next Chuck "We want a JFK Contract and One Station Negotiations"? How about a Chuck and Bob Union and you 2 are the only voters on all issues?

Dave,

You know me better than that.
First of all, I never attempted to seperate anything I only asked the question on behalf of the members who inquired about it since Tulsa members were openly telling the line guys "if you don't like it move to tulsa" and the "I got mine". Which still lives on today by your own agenda. seperate contract books did not mean different unions. We have totally different work rules that needed to be addressed and why not by the people who have to live by them was the theory. The fact that you only knew about it now shows it was only a question back in 2000. The only show going on here is you and your ignorance to what reality is! If you want to vote "yes" don't justify it by any other means than your own.

 

[TWU informer]

Dave,

You know me better than that.
First of all, I never attempted to seperate anything I only asked the question on behalf of the members who inquired about it since Tulsa members were openly telling the line guys "if you don't like it move to tulsa" and the "I got mine". Which still lives on today by your own agenda. seperate contract books did not mean different unions. We have totally different work rules that needed to be addressed and why not by the people who have to live by them was the theory. The fact that you only knew about it now shows it was only a question back in 2000. The only show going on here is you and your ignorance to what reality is! If you want to vote "yes" don't justify it by any other means than your own.

With the name calling and fear mongering going on I don't think I really know any of you at all. Don't forget though I am just the lowly welder without the A&P and cannot match up to your skill, your intelligence, your importance to AA, you and your friends there are far superior to me and my friends here, and on top of that I am blessed and lucky to be riding your coattails.

And so now, I am ignorant, and do not have a grasp on reality. But next week if you really need me I bet I am a different person. Just as my so-called friends treated me different when the AMFA Drive started, you guys appear to be much the same.

 

[Chuck Schalk]

With the name calling and fear mongering going on I don't think I really know any of you at all. Don't forget though I am just the lowly welder without the A&P and cannot match up to your skill, your intelligence, your importance to AA, you and your friends there are far superior to me and my friends here, and on top of that I am blessed and lucky to be riding your coattails.

And so now, I am ignorant, and do not have a grasp on reality. But next week if you really need me I bet I am a different person. Just as my so-called friends treated me different when the AMFA Drive started, you guys appear to be much the same.

Dave,
I don't know where this is coming from? We have not spoken in a while and I have not had an issue with you. So I am a little confused. If you want to clear some things up just call me.

 

[Bob Owens]

This topic of TWU negotiations is somewhat oxymoronic.

With Videtich clamping down and not allowing any direct real negotiating between our supposed negotiating committee and the company, its all on Videtich for the two years of no retro pay that we are going to get screwed out of.

It’s all on Videtich for the lack of language for DFWH (which will be covered in some form of LOA) allowing whatever the company wants.

It’s all on Videtich for the creation of the SMA’s, another 20% of the workforce that will get screwed by RIFing lowest time AMT’s. Sure they
won’t have to hit the street but I hope they like their new classification and pay.

It’s all on Videtich that the below age fifty workers will have their retiree medical abolished (a plan that employees have been paying into for twenty years) with the company saving millions.

It’s all on Videtich for the ASM eagle cap language increase(which will have everlasting effects that we will feel in years to come).

It’s all on Videtich that he used a 5th grader while helping the company write some weakest article language I’ve ever read. Don are smarter than a 5th grader?

This TA is by far and away a worse overall agreement even compared to the 03 concessions package. The 03 package basically was a major hit in the pocketbook. This TA is total decimation of our contract with another free two years to drag it out.


With a few puppet presidents, the Don will do anything.

Well I wouldnt say "its all on Videtich", your last statement is adds an important point.

When the company gave us the very first proposal of the May session I did a quick breakdown of the numbers, this was prior to the "Big Guns" meeting with us. I e-mailed a copy of my breakdown to everyone on the committee and copied in Weel and Tinsman. I recieved a message from Don that I was not to send any correspondence to the company.

Thats how Negotiations in the M&R group were conducted, only Don could speak, or correspond, with the company.

You are correct in saying that this agreement is worse than the 2003 agreement because just about all the concessions of the 2003 agreement, and there were only concessions in that agreement, remain in place. In the 2003 agreement we got 5-1.5% increases to our base pay, one each year including 2008, in this agreement we get what comes out to 1.2% a year, our basr pay in 2013 will still be less than it was in the 2003 agreement. This is worse than a 10 year pay freeze.In addition we lose our retiree medical, pension for new hires and a host of other concressions. The company basically rewrote the contract. Don, Luis and Gilboy kept advocating giving the comapny what they wanted, saying that we were going to get a dollar value for all those concessions and roll that into the economic proposal, as you know that never happened. We need to vote this down and scrap the whole thing , go to 2001 book with increases for inflation.

One of the sleeper gotcha's is the fact that we no longer are rolling system protection fwd to DOS, system protection was our spin-off protection and it was real, the stuff they threw in this agreement is fluff. More than half the workforce is over 50, attrtion rates are likely to accelerate as the workforce gets older, leaving an ever increasing amount of the workforce without system protection. That means that the company can spin off that much of the maintenance operation, up to nearly 20% per year, figure that our Class II stations will be hit first as those assets are transfered to TWU represented AE.

By the way, when negotiations started the company was asking for 8% on the ASMs, Don got them down to 12.4%!!!! :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh:

 

[Interested]

From what I understand, the company wants a "no cost contract". So if we get back the retire medical, what would we trade to get it.

 

[limit]

Why do you think we have to trade something?
Do you believe that this contract offer before us is"no cost"?
Well if so, its right there is no cost to the company.
In my opinion itsgreatly profitable and advantagious for the company.
Do you guys actually believe that the give backs to the company are not far larger
financially than the raises to the line and the pittance to Tulsa?
Giving up retirement pay for the new hires for ever is huge $$$ for the company.
Giving up retiree benefits for most for ever is huge $$$$ also.
Creating a new classification paying substantially LOWER, for ever,will do the same the same.$$$$$
Increasing the lower paying class in TUL to 50% -for, now more to come later-alone is huge $$$$ on a yearly basis.
And the list goes on and on.
You guys think 3% ,1.5%,1.5% plus a few bucks to the line comes anywhere close to equalling the give backs? ( in which case the proposal would be cost neutral to the company and US)
Why are you taking their proposal(TA) and consider it the STARTING POINT FOR A NO COST SETTLEMENT?


The starting point is the last contract we signed ,you braniaks,not a TA full of positives for the company,and huge ones at that, while its filled with tremendous give backs for us. FOR EVER and for what? 3% ?

Brilliant.


Not that we should have "no cost " contract,....but that is obviously a little too advanced a train of thought for some of you.

 

[The Goose]

OK - let's take the "no-cost" argument and explore it.

The company, since it's run by bean counters instead of businesspeople, have determined a maximum expenditure they will make for labor and said labor's benefits. The TWU understands the company's position and uses it to maximize their dues income - ie, keep the employment numbers artificially high, trading dues income for their membership's pay.

How is this possible?

The company doesn't give a damn how many people are employed as long as a certain amount of work gets done and its costs are contained within the specified parameters. The TWU does the math and figures out how much (or little) to fight for, hence our crappy TA. Dues flow is maintained.

Now - during our daily tours, how many people do we see doing nothing in their various shops for the entire shift? I'm guilty of this as are many others. I've worked in other union-represented jobs before American that had the equivalent of our executive board members work take members to task re: not doing a damned thing during the course of a shift - they recognized the contract cut both ways and the union knew supporting the slugs cost everyone money. Not so with the TWU, as their primary focus is on dues income.

There are inevitably those who will game the system to the max just as there are those who'll actually do their job. Union officers simply look the other way and the supervision is of such poor quality personnel they shouldn't be allowed to do anything other than time and attendance and should be closely watched while performing that function.

My guess is the company, at least on the bases, could easily do rather well with 60-70% of the present number of personnel presently assigned assuming everyone would do what they're supposed to for 5-6 hours a day. I can't speak for the Line as I have no knowledge of that operation.

Many want to strike (withhold our services) over this TA, but speaking of withholding services, what the hell have we been doing for years? Would the company even notice?

This is only an opinion but still an opinion that shows our real enemy to be the TWU.