Why there will never be a T.A.

[NYer]

I think it makes the company look bad for them to publish and not deliver. They are making promises at that point.
And yes, I would opt for a more valuable benefit(medical) and ease up on others. Parker wanted profit sharing negotiated. Negotiate it out to keep medical!

There is nothing to protect the IAM medical. It will be a casualty to the merger.

 

[NYer]

Worry about the could

W and Racer X don't agree with your concern about having the word "will" in a contract.

 

[ALUS78]

NYer already claimed in an earlier post that perhaps all of those Stations have a unique protection anyway due to the IAM presence and possible cross utilization but let’s go with this anyway Al.

The Company already televised it’s intent to keep staffed the 40 Stations already held separately by the 2 Unions. I’ve already mentioned the ill will/bad blood so I don’t think I need to go over that again. I believe BTW that the Association has asked for Stations to be reopened.

Now as far as the numbers even if they could close all 4 we’re talking about a few hundred max. Let’s say even 500 which I think is more than they’re currently staffed anyway.

In our contract almost all of those Members will have bumping rights and moving allowances. Most knowing that there may be a buyout lingering in the shadows are going to exercise their rights and move in to other cities either creating overages or bumping (lower paid) others out who have recall rights.

So that doesn’t solve much of any overstaffing issues.

Again ABSOLUTELY the language gives them the right but sometimes common sense has to come into play.

Weez Im sure you've seen you share of stations closed God knows Ive seen mine,your idea of it not happening again is fantasy will it happen now in Sep probably not but never say never

 

[WeAAsles]

There is nothing to protect the IAM medical. It will be a casualty to the merger.

And there he goes reverting back to his “absolutes” once again.

 

[ALUS78]

You’re welcome. BTW Racer I seem to recall that LUS Management had the ability in your prior agreement to utilize a Ready Reserve program at the Airline.

It’s my understanding that that language and program was never introduced (used) by the Airline?

Wrong we had them at LGA bunch of cops and fireman going for flight benefits till they realized they couldnt get on flights it was cheaper to buy a ticket.I would say it lasted a couple of years and kind of faded on its own

 

[WeAAsles]

Weez Im sure you've seen you share of stations closed God knows Ive seen mine,your idea of it not happening again is fantasy will it happen now in Sep probably not but never say never

Never said never in regards to anything Al. I feel the likelihood though of any of those 4 Stations being closed even after we pass our amendable dates is extremely slim to none.

But honestly if I worked in a small city I would never put my roots too far into the dirt personally.

 

[Racer X]

Worry about the could

I agree. If you followed the entire debate....I stated similar a bit earlier about knowing that when the company has the ability to do something....they usually exercise that right.

 

[ALUS78]

I would agree wholeheartedly to forego any claims or even desires for Profit Sharing if the Association could bargain a lower cost Medical for my Brothers and Sisters in the TWU.

Any further savings the Company would gain could be applied to other areas of any agreement and it would also appease any disagreement that any other organized groups at the carrier could make that we have an advantage over them.

Bam. Problem solved.

One contract everyone in the company had profit sharing and fleet didnt not sure about AMTS

 

[WeAAsles]

Wrong we had them at LGA bunch of cops and fireman going for flight benefits till they realized they couldnt get on flights it was cheaper to buy a ticket.I would say it lasted a couple of years and kind of faded on its own

Ah my apologies then Al. I knew at the time you gained your 2014 CBA that it wasn’t being used but I didn’t know it had been used in your past history.

With complete humility I stand corrected and I thank you for the correction.

 

[ALUS78]

I was informed by your Negotiators that the RR system was never used at LUS and as such provided a fairly easy argument for it to be struck from that 2014 deal.

Wrong definitely used at LGA

 

[ALUS78]

I agree. If you followed the entire debate....I stated similar a bit earlier about knowing that when the company has the ability to do something....they usually exercise that right.

It's been my observation too since 1978

 

[WeAAsles]

One contract everyone in the company had profit sharing and fleet didnt not sure about AMTS

I think honestly after the abysmal frankly laughable payout last year in comparison to our industry peers it’s discontinuation for improvements in other areas could be easily explained away to the majority.

When our Negotiators in the Bankruptcy gave away an even higher percentage for improvements in other areas I supported and still support that move. (Even if in some years the PS may have seemed more valuable to some out there)

 

[ALUS78]

Ah my apologies then Al. I knew at the time you gained your 2015 CBA that it wasn’t being used but I didn’t know it had been used in your past history.

With complete humility I stand corrected and I thank you for the correction.

In the stocks with you, tomatoes handed out to all ,Weez you loved to be publicly flogged

 

[WeAAsles]

Wrong definitely used at LGA

Thank you again Al. I still stand humbly corrected.

 

[Racer X]

This will confirm our understanding reached during the negotiations leading up to the agreement signed on September 12, 2012.

During these negotiations, we agreed that the following seventeen (17) stations will continue to be staffed with TWU represented employees following the implementation of Article 1(c). Those stations will remain staffed, with TWU represented Fleet Service employees, so long as the annual departures are at or above 2555 from the effective date of this agreement up to the day prior to the amendable date.

ATL, JFK, MIA, STL, AUS, LAS, ORD, TPA, BOS, LAX, SAT, DCA, LGA, SFO, DFW, MCO, SJU

Beyond the amendable date, Article 1(c) will apply.

I have read it several times now....Again nowhere does it say “ will outsource” I agree with them having the ability to do it, but I disagree it says they WILL do it....
I have also stated that when the company has the right to do something....they usually do. So I see where that could cause some concern.
But I’m crossing over and mixing discussions here, by what you have stated earlier about the company publicly stating something and then not being able to change that, It stands to reason that when the company publicly stated the 40 stations are ours ( just never stated what work we would be doing in those 40) that would mean that those 4 cities are protected now. Because that now can’t be changed. Correct?