TWU,TEAMSTERS AND AA

[swamt]

Done. E-mail sent to Mr Josh McInerney.

I will post his response when (or if) I get one.

LMFAO!!! Josh is the same attorney that represented the poor AT mechanics. He's a pathetic little liar that got his a$$ handed to him during the integration nego's by AMFA, AMFA's attorney's, SWA, and SWA's attorney's. What an embarrassment this guy was to the entire AT mechanics membership. A complete idiot that was all about the image of the teamsters, not anything to do with how or what the membership of AirTran wanted. He was so defeated at the end the AT guys forced him to shut the F-up and take the deal to a vote. He was beaten down drastically, it was almost too embarrassing to watch, Pathetic I tell you, pathetic!

 

[Anomaly]

LMFAO!!! Josh is the same attorney that represented the poor AT mechanics. He's a pathetic little liar that got his a$$ handed to him during the integration nego's by AMFA, AMFA's attorney's, SWA, and SWA's attorney's. What an embarrassment this guy was to the entire AT mechanics membership. A complete idiot that was all about the image of the teamsters, not anything to do with how or what the membership of AirTran wanted. He was so defeated at the end the AT guys forced him to shut the F-up and take the deal to a vote. He was beaten down drastically, it was almost too embarrassing to watch, Pathetic I tell you, pathetic!

And at the same time McInerney was able to negotiate a very good deal on behalf of the IBT Pilots at Horizon?? They have no complaints about him winning the baseball arbitration case, nor have I seen any written complaints from the AT Mechanics he represented when you and amfa attempted to gang rape that group.

All I hear is a childish rant that must belong to swamt. You know, you really do sound like that school yard kid that just will not shut up. Yip yip yip yip yip yip yip yip yip.....

Why is that?

 

[Anomaly]

The only issue in AFA v USAir was whether the Shuttle employees were automatically covered by the AFA-USAir contract or their existing TWU-Trump Shuttle contract until a new combined joint agreement could be negotiated.

The court correctly upheld the district court's decision that found that the status quo was the TWU-Trump Shuttle contract, not the AFA-USAir contract.

Nothing in the holding supports any assertion that a newly elected representative has any power to force the employer to renegotiate an existing contract prior to its amendable date.

Again, the IBT, their stooge mouthpieces and even apparently an outside attorney are willing to misrepresent and distort the truth in their quest to get your money.

Almost makes the losers running the worthless union look like choirboys by comparison.

And guys, it wasn't USAirways. At the time, it was called USAir. Read the decision.

In other words, the Hero would like me to answer what is not there?

Thank you FWAAA, I agree that what McInerbey states does not seen to be in the link provided by our self proclaimed Hero. I do not know, or understand where this attorney gains his opinion. Perhaps the link provided by the Hero/lawyer/mechanic is a incorrect? Or perhaps there is something not seen or written in this decision that only an attorney would know?

I do not know so I asked the question directly to the one who wrote the statement in the first place. I appreciate your weighing in on this subject as you at least try to make some sense. I hope I get an answer (but honestly do not expect it) from the attorney.

If I do, I promise to post regardless of the answer.

 

[swamt]

And at the same time McInerney was able to negotiate a very good deal on behalf of the IBT Pilots at Horizon?? They have no complaints about him winning the baseball arbitration case, nor have I seen any written complaints from the AT Mechanics he represented when you and amfa attempted to gang rape that group.

All I hear is a childish rant that must belong to swamt. You know, you really do sound like that school yard kid that just will not shut up. Yip yip yip yip yip yip yip yip yip.....

Why is that?

Don't care what he did for some pilot group. Watching him head to head with Seham was priceless. Written complaints? Really? Are you serious? What a joke. LMFAO!!!

 

[Anomaly]

Don't care what he did for some pilot group. Watching him head to head with Seham was priceless. Written complaints? Really? Are you serious? What a joke. LMFAO!!!

Shhhh. Quiet now little guy.

The adults are talking

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

And at the same time McInerney was able to negotiate a very good deal on behalf of the IBT Pilots at Horizon?? They have no complaints about him winning the baseball arbitration case, nor have I seen any written complaints from the AT Mechanics he represented when you and amfa attempted to gang rape that group.

All I hear is a childish rant that must belong to swamt. You know, you really do sound like that school yard kid that just will not shut up. Yip yip yip yip yip yip yip yip yip.....

Why is that?

Wow!

Would that be the Horizon pilot deal that the teamsters and all their vaunted power and resources took almost 4 and a half years to negotiate?

http://www.teamster.org/content/horizon-teamsters-reach-tentative-agreement-pilot-contract

 

[Anomaly]

Wow!

Would that be the Horizon pilot deal that the teamsters and all their vaunted power and resources took almost 4 and a half years to negotiate?

http://www.teamster....-pilot-contract

Yup, the very one. Pilots who were at the top of their industry right before 9/11 took a few years to renegotiate a contract that kept them on top. Any more questions? amfa would have had an excuse as to why the would have failed. But you already know this.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

In other words, the Hero would like me to answer what is not there?

Thank you FWAAA, I agree that what McInerbey states does not seen to be in the link provided by our self proclaimed Hero. I do not know, or understand where this attorney gains his opinion. Perhaps the link provided by the Hero/lawyer/mechanic is a incorrect? Or perhaps there is something not seen or written in this decision that only an attorney would know?

I do not know so I asked the question directly to the one who wrote the statement in the first place. I appreciate your weighing in on this subject as you at least try to make some sense. I hope I get an answer (but honestly do not expect it) from the attorney.

If I do, I promise to post regardless of the answer.

Anomaly/McInerney statement/misquote

“a newly-certified union has full bargaining rights with respect to covered employees without regard to whether the employees have previously been covered by a collective bargaining agreement.”

AFA vs US Air actual decision language sec -25

"a newly certified union in situations such as this one has full bargaining rights with respect to covered employees without regard to whether the employees previously have been covered by a collective bargaining agreement."

Don't see it huh?

So the misquote obvious to even the most casual of observers is still lost on you.

 

[Vortilon]

Anomaly you really are a piece of work. You get your ass handed to you over and over, and yet continue to attempt to defend the indefensible. Your posts smack of desperation. Bottom line, you are wasting your time trying to sell your snake oyl on this BB.

 

[1AA]

Anomaly you really are a piece of work. You get your ass handed to you over and over, and yet continue to attempt to defend the indefensible. Your posts smack of desperation. Bottom line, you are wasting your time trying to sell your snake oyl on this BB.

He is a paid IBT officer or sucking up to be one. It is obvious he has no interest in our class an craft as an AMT. How sad he is pushing to degrade our craft for a self serving agenda. AMFA is a BIG threat to him.

 

[swamt]

He is a paid IBT officer or sucking up to be one. It is obvious he has no interest in our class an craft as an AMT. How sad he is pushing to degrade our craft for a self serving agenda. AMFA is a BIG threat to him.

You hit the nail on the head. He is the mirror image of the Josh M (teamster attorney), all about their images, nothing for or about the class an craft of the people that they are suppose to "represent". I'm talking identical to each other, they could be twins...

 

[Just Another BK]

I really hope you guys don't vote the Teamsters. Unless you want to miss two or three years of retirement money. I still don't think UAL guys have any retirement since AMFA and Teamsters took over. In fact the most pathetic thing about the UAL Contract is allot of the LOA's agreed upon have IAM letterheads. For my money the IAM Contract at US is much better. Starting wages alone are up to 20.64 compared to AA 15 and change. The IAM is trying to negotiate a Pension Contribution of around $104/yr of service this coming contract. I just don't see how the best of the TWU and IAM contracts doesn't benefit us all.

 

[TRAVIS]

I really hope you guys don't vote the Teamsters.

Well don't get your hopes up because these 3 or 4 AMFA supporters will not vote Teamsters but the MAJORITY of AA AMT's will.

 

[1AA]

Well don't get your hopes up because these 3 or 4 AMFA supporters will not vote Teamsters but the MAJORITY of AA AMT's will.

. Is that what your Hoffa crystal ball tells you? You do not even work for AA. I can tell you that from the feedback I am getting from around the system many do not want the teamsters. Many are talking about the Write In choice of AMFA. So if there will be a vote you will see more AMFA votes than you think. With the help of the twu moving forward with the anti teamsters campaign it will only help AMFA on the ballot. Keep posting. We are all listening to you. Lol...

 

[Anomaly]

Anomaly/McInerney statement/misquote

“a newly-certified union has full bargaining rights with respect to covered employees without regard to whether the employees have previously been covered by a collective bargaining agreement.”

AFA vs US Air actual decision language sec -25

"a newly certified union in situations such as this one has full bargaining rights with respect to covered employees without regard to whether the employees previously have been covered by a collective bargaining agreement."

Don't see it huh?

So the misquote obvious to even the most casual of observers is still lost on you.

Anomaly you really are a piece of work. You get your ass handed to you over and over, and yet continue to attempt to defend the indefensible. Your posts smack of desperation. Bottom line, you are wasting your time trying to sell your snake oyl on this BB.

I am attempting to get to the bottom of a debate. I believe the IBT attorney's are clear in what they are doing. The Hero thinks they are wrong because of his example above. He would like me to acknowledge that the change in the quote creates something different. I can see the difference as clearly as any of you but I am not an attorney, so I have to ask the one who wrote it since our hero will not.

TSH would rather charge after someone else rather than simply ask for clarification and the reasons are now clear. It turns out that amfa has already challenged this statement and have already received an explanation from the IBT attorneys that they could not dispute. Our Hero knows this but has brought it up again in an attempt to redirect recent embarrassments directed towards the association.

So you're gonna write your lawyer to find out, thats nice. Just curious, when he sticks to his misquote(because thats what the teamsters pay him to do), are you gonna actually come back here and claim that you didn't misquote the decision? I only ask because up til now it sounds like you and your pretzel logic are angling toward that.

Why does TSH appear so dead set against me contacting the IBT attorney's?

I sent a politely worded e-mail to the IBT attorney's and explained exactly who I was and the reasons for my inquiry. I asked if the difference in the quotes creates any type of an unknown challenge. He was good enough to send me a return e-mail explaining his position and also explained that this had already been thoroughly reviewed by amfa.

Mr McInerney explained that the words left out "in situations such as this one" have no bearing to the meaning of the decision in his expert opinion. He believes those words only described the subject situation and were not meant to describe that each subsequent case must follow exactly the same scenario. As a lawyer, he has several years of experience researching decisions and has found no two case circumstances are ever exactly alike. He has no doubt that he can successfully argue that the decision should allow the American Airlines mechanic contract to be reopened. He did not misquote the decision but instead quoted exactly the basis for his argument. The heart of the decision falls on this quote and was reviewed by other IBT attorneys as well. “a newly-certified union has full bargaining rights with respect to covered employees without regard to whether the employees have previously been covered by a collective bargaining agreement.”

amfa was notified and had the quote explained to them. Since then the Seaham team as well as amfa have been suspiciously quiet. Our hero of course knows this but finds his association on thin ice.

Now I know the reason he did not want me to contact Mr McInerney. He did not want me to find out what I learned. He knows his argument means nothing but a waste of time. He knows that amfa was wrong in their interpretation but can not turn back now for fear of being exposed. He knows that once again, amfa failed.

Thanks for pushing this hero. More than ever I see the weakness of amfa.