Yea or nay

Do you think this contract will pass?

  • Yes

    Votes: 34 38.6%
  • No

    Votes: 54 61.4%

  • Total voters
    88
Status
Not open for further replies.

Hopeful

Veteran
Dec 21, 2002
5,998
347
I'm not polling what your votes will be if you are Title I and Title II....
But do you think it will pass or not?
 
I say it will pass. The TWU will probably use the same method of voting as the last time. If it does not pass for some reason and the votes are close watch Little sign off on it. He can you know. He has the authority to do so if it is in our best interest.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #3
I say it will pass. The TWU will probably use the same method of voting as the last time. If it does not pass for some reason and the votes are close watch Little sign off on it. He can you know. He has the authority to do so if it is in our best interest.

Yes you're correct about Little...But fear not, this rag will pass.
 
I won't vote in the poll. The margin will be close, but I agree it will probably pass. You got a few things back from the 2003 RPA that were really offensive (e.g. 50% sick pay, holiday pay).

It's not restitution, restore and more, or any of the rallying cries. But for those who are worn down by the lack of an agreement, it might be enough for them to say "move on already"and "we'll get ém next time..."....
 
This proposed 'Contract' was designed to create animosity between those who 'Push Out' planes for revenue flights and those who dissemble, clean and inspect and re-assemble. This was a 'Bean Counter'/ Attourney written proposal that has counted those NOT at a maintenance & engineering base and those at a M & E base. GOAL: to start down the road to Mr Reams pet project, OUTSOURCING the MAINTENANCE! To get those AMTs with high enough seniority to move from the bases to the line stations!

Another Point: TIE THE PAY RAISES TO THE INFLATION RATE. We are being dragged through the dust behind the economy! If the CPI is 3% and we get a 1.5% raise, the COMPANY makes 1.5% for the coffers. With our raises TIED to the CPI, we will at least 'survive'.

Point additional: Restore our VACATION time, that we HAVE ALREADY EARNED!!!! Why were the holidays and vacations AMPUTATED, to get more PRODUCTIVITY. MR REAMS, How do YOU feel after a VACATION?? Sometimes we feel we are working for the FEDERAL PRISION INDUSTRY!!! (ESPECIALLY ON A HOLIDAY, When the PARKING LOT IS EMPTY!!)
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #6
This proposed 'Contract' was designed to create animosity between those who 'Push Out' planes for revenue flights and those who dissemble, clean and inspect and re-assemble. This was a 'Bean Counter'/ Attourney written proposal that has counted those NOT at a maintenance & engineering base and those at a M & E base. GOAL: to start down the road to Mr Reams pet project, OUTSOURCING the MAINTENANCE! To get those AMTs with high enough seniority to move from the bases to the line stations!



Very good post.
has to make you wonder why a voluntary separation pay was not included for mechanics.
 
They folded like a cheap china made lawn chair!!! What happened to all the strike issues?? Why sell out all the guys under 50 years old? Divide and conquer is what this supposed T/A is all about. Just the opposite of unionism. Thanks to all the local presidents for this piece of crap! AA took 7 dollars an hour away over 7 years ago and we are going to get 2 dollars to sell out the Eagle ASMs and the retiree medical! I would not want my name attatched to this garbage!! Any AA employee under 50 years old would be a fool to vote yes. I AM A NO FOR SURE!!!!
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #8
They folded like a cheap china made lawn chair!!! What happened to all the strike issues?? Why sell out all the guys under 50 years old? Divide and conquer is what this supposed T/A is all about. Just the opposite of unionism. Thanks to all the local presidents for this piece of crap! AA took 7 dollars an hour away over 7 years ago and we are going to get 2 dollars to sell out the Eagle ASMs and the retiree medical! I would not want my name attatched to this garbage!! Any AA employee under 50 years old would be a fool to vote yes. I AM A NO FOR SURE!!!!

In three years, they can take away retiree medical for EVERYONE...as part of the next contract.
 
I won't vote in the poll. The margin will be close, but I agree it will probably pass. You got a few things back from the 2003 RPA that were really offensive (e.g. 50% sick pay, holiday pay).

It's not restitution, restore and more, or any of the rallying cries. But for those who are worn down by the lack of an agreement, it might be enough for them to say "move on already"and "we'll get ém next time..."....

I agree, I wont vote in this either, who cares what people think will happen, why not just ask people how they would vote?

We got 2x time for 8 Holidays that are worked, we are still the lowest paid for Holidays, we had 10 at time plus time and a half if worked before.
Our sick pay and IOD pay acrrual rates are the lowest in the industry, and now that those 49 and under are losing the retiree bridge insurance and that time is needed to pay for coverage its more important than ever. A worker would need to have 31 years of perfect attendance in order to max out the sick bank(hard to do in light of the fact that we have less vacation than anyone else and only 80 hours of IOD vs the 600 that CAL gets) . IBT CAL has proposed rolling over their 600 hour IOD bank into the sick bank to pay for retiree health and allowing the employee the option to take full cash value for the unused time, we even lose the $25/day.

Since the sick bank is tied to the bridge insurance the accrual rate is more important than ever, AA is offering us only 64 hours a year but is going to charge us a minimum of 20 hours per month for coverage, whereas under the plans that they say they modeled this on (SWA and CAL) the employees get 96 hours per year (plus possibly another 96 in IOD time) and they only charge 11 or 12 hours per month. We are getting paid 30% less and being charged 45% more!! Putting numbers on it AA is paying us $186/month in sick time but charging us $700 per month for bridge insurance while others are getting paid $280 month (not including IOD time) and charged as little as $385/month,

You forget that the most offensive thing was the pay, this agreement will put us in 2013 where we were in 2006, only without Retiree bridge insurance and a pension plan thats more at risk, and getting riskier every day.

This is a concessionary agreement. A five year deal on the heels of a six year concessionary deal, 11 years of your life. Think about that. At what point will we say "Enough".
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #10
I agree, I wont vote in this either, who cares what people think will happen, why not just ask people how they would vote?


WHO CARES? The guys under 50...for starters. Everyone cares at this point.
Bob, you know as well as anyone..Ask every mechanic how he or she will vote and most will say NO.. TO YOUR FACE..or any fellow mechanic in general.........Then when the results of a contract vote are made public.......guess what......more than a few voted YES..

this is just a poll on what people think will happen,,,,,,an anonymous poll will get you more honesty than everyone identifying how they would vote.

Of course this offer is an insult....
I can't recall a contract being voted down in exchange for an even better one.

Talk is cheap....I hope I am wrong, But I think we all might be in for a shocker,,,one way or another.
But if we were to poll how mechanics would vote on this forum, what kind of results do you think you would get here when ANYONE could participate in the poll?
 
They drag their feet for two years and no retro. On top of that it becomes a three year deal that in three years will take another two years to negotiate mmaking it a five year contract on top of th eight years we just went through for a grand total of 13 years. Retro is the only way for this POS company to stop the two year stall tactics during negotiations. let them pay the 13K owed to us from the amendable date of the contract. better yet VOTE NO and tell them to up the anti.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #13
They drag their feet for two years and no retro. On top of that it becomes a three year deal that in three years will take another two years to negotiate mmaking it a five year contract on top of th eight years we just went through for a grand total of 13 years. Retro is the only way for this POS company to stop the two year stall tactics during negotiations. let them pay the 13K owed to us from the amendable date of the contract. better yet VOTE NO and tell them to up the anti.


I agree..now it's up to the members.
 
WHO CARES? The guys under 50...for starters. Everyone cares at this point.
Bob, you know as well as anyone..Ask every mechanic how he or she will vote and most will say NO.. TO YOUR FACE..or any fellow mechanic in general.........Then when the results of a contract vote are made public.......guess what......more than a few voted YES..

this is just a poll on what people think will happen,,,,,,an anonymous poll will get you more honesty than everyone identifying how they would vote.

Of course this offer is an insult....
I can't recall a contract being voted down in exchange for an even better one.

Talk is cheap....I hope I am wrong, But I think we all might be in for a shocker,,,one way or another.
But if we were to poll how mechanics would vote on this forum, what kind of results do you think you would get here when ANYONE could participate in the poll?

You are asking people what they think other people will do. People can vote here anonymously, why not just ask what they will do. Prior to the Seige at JFK if you had asked just about anybody if they thought that guys in that station would ever stick together they would have said no, well wasnt everybody suprised?

When I put the ad in the Tulsa World back in 2003 and they were asking me about how to set it up I asked her" Looking at how you have it laid it out, and having read it, how would you vote?" She enthusiastically said "Well heck, I'd vote NO", I said "Run it as it is". I didnt ask her how she thought others would vote I asked her how she would vote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top