US IAM Fleet Service topic 8-13-

[necigrad]

Originally those cities were not suppose to close prior to dec. 31, 2011 which is ironically when the contract is up for negogiations.

Actually that's not correct. I thought is was when they announced the furloughs and it was a grievanc,e but it's not, at least not on those grounds. The CBA states:

... may not be out-sourced unless the station's mainline weekly jet departures are reduced to a level below twenty-eight (28) weekly departures on an annualized basis

I don't know what the weekly flight count is, but the CBA (as modified by the TA) does permit it before the end of 2011 IF there is less then 28 weekly mainline flights. I didn't feel like typing the cities out, but that quote follows the list.

 

[wings396]

Since the 28 flights per week is based on a yearly figure, would the station have to stay intact for that amount of time to justify this wording? It could be 28 now, and higher within a few months. Any and all of this outsourcing crap should not be permitted period. Being that my former station got the ax, I can relate all too well to this situation. The employees in the small stations are 10x more productive than those in the hubs. All of them do multiple job functions, such as deicing, cleaning, catering, ops, bagroom, and so on. Getting rid of a few employees in each of these stations isn't going to save the company tons of cash. It all amounts to a revolving door of contract employees who could care less about anything. That's who I want ground handling my A/C, especailly when winter comes along with deicing. For some reason the C/S people are still employed in the small stations, but I guess that's because their Union saw to it. :angry:

 

[robbedagain]

even though the C/S still have their own agents in those small cities, how long will the company keep them before they say its ending we will outsource much to the tune that they did with FSA in these small cities over the last few yrs?

 

[goodfellow]

The weekly jet departures are done by using April of 08 to april of 09 then doing the average based on past year of operation. When it drops below said average the company WILL OUTSOURCE the work. This system came from agreement with the old regime, yet all of us are stuck with it for now. The new guys have a grievance on file against the outsourcing and I will update further at a later date. As far as the inside they have protection that fleet doesnt, that is why they still have inside agents working in TUS. Sounds like something we need to add to our contract in 2012?

 

[robbedagain]

that was something they should have added but in the end fleet kicked out that old regime and with good reason wonder ole canary is doing at ual these days ive heard that ual is in bad shape but then again ive heard the same at usairways is there any update on the grievance about the point system crap? i know that in my station one guy got fired and at least one other one is on a level as a result of the dumb thing the company threw in after the voted in contract in regards to the point system.

 

[john john]

The union and management are quick to allow outsourcing to small and medium stations because it affects a small percentage of the unions vote. When negotiating and putting out a tentative agreement it’s all about votes the hubs and focus cities carry the votes. Medium and small stations are sacrificed to better the contract at the hubs and focus cities. And it’s been know that the unions and the companies cut deal to allow lower pay outsource union labor have the work WHIPSAWING at its best. A win win for the unions and the company. Has lower paid union workers replace higher pay union workers at USAirways not yet but it has at other airlines. Some thing to watch especially if Piedmont goes union and IAM Air Wisconsin keeps pursuing ground handling contracts
I remember sitting in a room and some BWI and PIT folks saying if you want a job move to a hub

 

[wings396]

The weekly jet departures are done by using April of 08 to april of 09 then doing the average based on past year of operation. When it drops below said average the company WILL OUTSOURCE the work. This system came from agreement with the old regime, yet all of us are stuck with it for now. The new guys have a grievance on file against the outsourcing and I will update further at a later date. As far as the inside they have protection that fleet doesnt, that is why they still have inside agents working in TUS. Sounds like something we need to add to our contract in 2012?

Sad to say, but 2012 is too late. Most of the East stations are gone already, and most of the West will be gone by then as well.

 

[The Janitor]

The union and management are quick to allow outsourcing to small and medium stations because it affects a small percentage of the unions vote. When negotiating and putting out a tentative agreement it’s all about votes the hubs and focus cities carry the votes. Medium and small stations are sacrificed to better the contract at the hubs and focus cities. And it’s been know that the unions and the companies cut deal to allow lower pay outsource union labor have the work WHIPSAWING at its best. A win win for the unions and the company. Has lower paid union workers replace higher pay union workers at USAirways not yet but it has at other airlines. Some thing to watch especially if Piedmont goes union and IAM Air Wisconsin keeps pursuing ground handling contracts
I remember sitting in a room and some BWI and PIT folks saying if you want a job move to a hub

You are incorrect, the hubs and focus stations don't carry the votes. The following is how the vote for this contract played out:
PHL 757 Votes Cast
692 NO VOTES
43 YES VOTES
22 voided (not filled out correctly

CLT numbers

599 NO

67 YES

2 void

22 inpounded
PIT 115 NO 88 YES

Each west coast station voted overwhelmingly to contract out their jobs. PHX and freedom led the charge along with Giants Fan from the east.

PHX voted proudly as follows
PHX 648 9

MKE voted unanimously for the extra $5 to throw their jobs away.
MKE 33 0

I'm always amazed how ignorant people blame the union but the union doesn't vote for you.
The contract came in by a 63% vote due to PHX, and all the west stations who went for the $. Some east focus stations like BOS voted for the contract and joined in with the west.

 

[freedom]

You are incorrect, the hubs and focus stations don't carry the votes. The following is how the vote for this contract played out:
(so and so forth )


Each west coast station voted overwhelmingly to contract out their jobs. PHX and freedom led the charge along with Giants Fan from the east.

(so and so forth )

I'm always amazed how ignorant people blame the union but the union doesn't vote for you.
The contract came in by a 63% vote due to PHX, and all the west stations who went for the $. Some east focus stations like BOS voted for the contract and joined in with the west.

Thank you for mentioning me by name ! yes your welcome! no need to thank me for helping to make the yes vote happen , i was just doing my small part ..


oh and just so you know , i'm not so big a man that i can't take a moment to tell you that " i told you so " .... i want you to remember that i told you how the US Economy was going to go down way before the crisis of last year , i was pushing hard when we were still in talks because i had a gut feeling that real bad things were going to happen , and low and BEHOLD , they have !

 

[ChockJockey]

MKE voted unanimously for the extra $5 to throw their jobs away.
MKE 33 0

Would like to see whatever evidence you have indicating that 1.) MKE operating under the old contract(s) would have kept both E&W fleet safe and 2.) that some never-conceived pie in the sky version of a TA would have done the same thing.

 

[bagchucker]

Regardless of how members vote, unions are supposedly in place to help protect jobs. It makes no sense to me to see the countless number of stations go by the wayside of outsourcing. How many East/West stations have closed their doors to unionized Fleet work since the IAM began representation of our work group? How many pay cuts has our work group taken vs. the amount of raises taken?
Our union needs to take a more aggressive stance to prohibit the company's aspiration to eliminate our workforce piecemeal! If it continues this way, we will eventually only see our work in the hubs. It makes no sense to take 2 steps backwards to later down the road get one step forward. NO back peddling allowed guys. You don't see this trend with CSA workgroup upstairs, do you? It does not need to be a factor in our workgroup either! Eliminate it from any future contract negotiations! Keep our work and our members safe! As long as the company knows it can sugarcoat a contract with pay raises at the expense of a few stations, guys will always vote it in, until the hubs are the only stations left. Not cool.

 

[robbedagain]

Regardless of how members vote, unions are supposedly in place to help protect jobs. It makes no sense to me to see the countless number of stations go by the wayside of outsourcing. How many East/West stations have closed their doors to unionized Fleet work since the IAM began representation of our work group? How many pay cuts has our work group taken vs. the amount of raises taken?
Our union needs to take a more aggressive stance to prohibit the company's aspiration to eliminate our workforce piecemeal! If it continues this way, we will eventually only see our work in the hubs. It makes no sense to take 2 steps backwards to later down the road get one step forward. NO back peddling allowed guys. You don't see this trend with CSA workgroup upstairs, do you? It does not need to be a factor in our workgroup either! Eliminate it from any future contract negotiations! Keep our work and our members safe! As long as the company knows it can sugarcoat a contract with pay raises at the expense of a few stations, guys will always vote it in, until the hubs are the only stations left. Not cool.

if this T/A if you call it that was voted down and out, the company would have had to comeback with a better offer, thus may be protecting more jobs. And you wonder why the old regime got their ouster. I know between 2003 and 2005 over 30 East Coast cities went out the door but that was all done under the old regime.

 

[cltrat]

Thank you for mentioning me by name ! yes your welcome! no need to thank me for helping to make the yes vote happen , i was just doing my small part ..


oh and just so you know , i'm not so big a man that i can't take a moment to tell you that " i told you so " .... i want you to remember that i told you how the US Economy was going to go down way before the crisis of last year , i was pushing hard when we were still in talks because i had a gut feeling that real bad things were going to happen , and low and BEHOLD , they have !

I would say something but I wont.t

though a well known quote from "Forrest Gump" comes to mind

 

[Dog Wonder]

oh and just so you know , i'm not so big a man that i can't take a moment to tell you that " i told you so "

Predict failure and you can always meet your expectations.

 

[ChockJockey]

if this T/A if you call it that was voted down and out, the company would have had to comeback with a better offer, thus may be protecting more jobs.

That's a fairly weak assumption to base an argument from.

I think it's more likely that they'd have focused their efforts elsewhere had fleet voted down a second TA and come back with nothing at all. What would it have been to them to maintain the cost savings of the old arrangement? Further, with the impending fuel crisis (at the time) and disappearing profits, why would you assume they'd have sweetened the deal in any way with a third attempt? Sure, the company said it was committed to seeing a combined workforce, and was probably telling the truth, but I'd hardly say they were desperate to do so.