Labor relations turns ugly at Southwest

[falconvalley]

Um, no.

Philosophy and application- 2 COMPLETELY different things. Answer this: why does there exist a need for a contract?? AND, why is there a grievance process? AND, why is all this governed by a set of regulations? Could it be that there needs to be a way of handling the agreements made and broken? I know that we could debate the philosophy of SHOULD a contractual agreement be broken, but the facts are clear. The system is set up to anticipate this and all parties can be aware of the process. Negotiations are hopefully conducted with the process in mind. My pilot group's CBA is a case study on that. I lose a lot of philosophical battles with my company, so I hear ya when you say um, no. But, I realized a long time ago that this world is not the simple handshake agreement that I want it to be. Of course, the technique of actually working a contract from a worker's sense is something of an art. I hope we agree on that.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

The problem with your statement is that you're conflation interpretation of an agreement with an intentional violation of that agreement. The RLA requires that management have a rational interpretation that would allow them to take an action. In other words, there has to be a legitimate difference of opinion as to how a provision is to be interpreted, and those opinions have to be reasonable. You can't simply ignore the agreement and say "grieve it." That becomes a major dispute rather than a minor one, and then the courts and self help get involved instead of the grievance process.

 

[falconvalley]

The problem with your statement is that you're conflation interpretation of an agreement with an intentional violation of that agreement. The RLA requires that management have a rational interpretation that would allow them to take an action. In other words, there has to be a legitimate difference of opinion as to how a provision is to be interpreted, and those opinions have to be reasonable. You can't simply ignore the agreement and say "grieve it." That becomes a major dispute rather than a minor one, and then the courts and self help get involved instead of the grievance process.

In the staffing example, bringing in an extra available worker for overtime would be the contractual thing to do. I'm not saying contracts are made to be broken. I'm saying that it's easy to misinterpret the spirit of a line in a contract. As for the ramper example, you have a management employee doing what is supposed to be 100% union rampers' work. What does that mean, exactly? Does that mean that work has to stop if there are no more rampers available and hiring would only be for temporary needs? What would follow if hiring occurred? Furloughs? This is language and spirit of language dependent, but obviously, if extra workers are available and not being utilized, that would be something that is a major violation if a supervisor is used, no? I'm not suggesting that is ok. What I'm saying is that overtime is meant to be overtime and should be used. And hiring should occur when there is a need for an additional worker. The contract needs to spell out the boundaries. A perfect example is a line that specifies a maximum amount of manager involvement. Each real world scenario has facts that are relevant and scenarios can vary.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

First, there is no such thing as "the spirit" of a contract. There is language, and failing language, there is intent. But language always prevails when it is clear. If a contract says clearly that only members of the class and craft covered by the CBA can load bags onto the airplane, then there is no legitimate dispute over that language. Doesn't matter what you think the "spirit" is. The language is plain. Anyone else loads bags, you've violated the contract. And if it happens on a regular basis, it would be a major dispute.

 

[bksslc]

If there are no rampers available, the flight sits until a crew becomes available to work it. This almost always results in a delay, and is a result of poor staffing by the company.

If you only need temporary help, we can get temp agents from other stations for 30 days. My particular station is staffed and we currently have a guy temping in PHL to help them this month.

As far as a sup working while other rampers are sitting around, his job is to get them to get off their butts and help. Not just do it himself. That's a failure on his part to do his job.

 

[nabbyfan]

As far as a sup working while other rampers are sitting around, his job is to get them to get off their butts and help. Not just do it himself. That's a failure on his part to do his job.

A sup that is doing covered work while letting rampers sit in the break room is just a bad sup, and is not going to last very long!

The language in the contract says that Sups are allowed to 'assist' the loading of bags and cargo....Interps say that means they may not be in the bin alone or at the bottom of the belt alone for more than half of the load. I generally would always get in the back bin with a ramper and slide bags. The situation I talked about was literally Two of us at the Bottom of the belt, Two in the bin. Other agent at the bottom of the belt went to the bin to ask someone a question and I continued to feed bags....Got grieved for it. It happens. Anyways, I don't work there anymore and don't have to deal/worry about it anymore. I just want to see SWA get the contract done in a way that makes sense to both parties because it was generally a fun place to work and I hope it stays that way.

 

[genot]

I fully understand the thoughts behind Covered Work and I support Unions. I didn't become a Sup to be a jerk, I was just bored at being a Ramp Agent and wanted more responsibility. My thing with Covered Work is, I understand grieving it if we aren't giving out OT, and then Supervisors are loading flights. But if I'm literally just out there to help out and you catch me loading 5 bags by myself....grieving that is a little silly. But hey, it was my fault for being in a situation where I technically violated the contract.

And Yep, I'm at the Academy currently for ATC. Not even thinking or worrying about NATCA or anything else until I hopefully get through the classes and then report to my facility ( which is unknown until the day after we graduate!). But I'm sure its a night and day difference between NATCA and TWU555.

Good luck at the academy! You have the right mindset in that nothing matters until you graduate. Even then its murky until you check out. When you graduate (and I believe you will) if you need anything ask your NATCA rep, if you don't have their contact info PM me and I'll get it for you or for that matter I'll be glad to tell you your rights as a new hire reporting.

 

[ChasenSFO]

I haven't even been controlling their gates here for a whole year yet, and already I've noticed a big change. Flights don't turn out as quickly, rampers used to be as good as the pilots as doing whatever we asked, now they push slow and incorrectly almost routinely. I was told by an HR rep at the company they have a 3% turn over rate. I had a hard time believing that, especially in SFO.

 

[mrivc211]

As a current SWA ramp rat, I agree it's not a bad place to be overall

But, as far as covered work goes, the company agreed to those terms. If management staffed the ramp properly, it wouldn't be an issue. Supervisors know they can't do covered work, yet they do, and should be grieved for violating the CBA.

Also, saying the job simply requires picking things up and putting things back down is kind of like the guy wo says Pilots only need to know how to push buttons. Is it a relatively easy job? Yes. But you know it's a little more involved than your overly simplistic notion of just picking stuff up.

I see nothing wrong with this ad. We have been in negotiations for over 3 years now with a management team who lately has refused to even make counter proposals. I applaud the 555 leadership for this.

How can you legitimately complain about a job that doesn't require a degree and pays that much? You and your union have lost sight of reality. Beginning of the end for WN? Probably not when the company is making record profits, but this can't be sustained in bad times.

 

[bksslc]

It's not complaining. It's saying enough is enough. Settle the contract negotiations already and provide adequate staffing.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

How can you legitimately complain about a job that doesn't require a degree and pays that much? You and your union have lost sight of reality. Beginning of the end for WN? Probably not when the company is making record profits, but this can't be sustained in bad times.

What does a degree have to do with anything? The only thing that is important is whether or not the work is necessary -- if it is necessary for the enterprise to succeed then there is bargaining leverage. There should be such things as well paying blue collar jobs, you know, right?

 

[falconvalley]

First, there is no such thing as "the spirit" of a contract. There is language, and failing language, there is intent. But language always prevails when it is clear. If a contract says clearly that only members of the class and craft covered by the CBA can load bags onto the airplane, then there is no legitimate dispute over that language. Doesn't matter what you think the "spirit" is. The language is plain. Anyone else loads bags, you've violated the contract. And if it happens on a regular basis, it would be a major dispute.

What is the difference between spirit and intent. DONT LOOK IT UP, say it now.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

What is the difference between spirit and intent. DONT LOOK IT UP, say it now.

Spirit is more nebulous. It's open to interpretation. Intent gets to the heart of what was discussed at the bargaining table. Negotiating notes are used to show intent, as is testimony from the parties who sat at the table. "Spirit" could be your interpretation of what the language was supposed to be about rather than the intent of the people who actually negotiated it.

 

[WestIndian425]

This sounds a lot like the debates going on in Washington, D.C. concerning implementing rules from the U.S. Constitution.

 

[Phil Schuyler]

Some random thoughts (in no particular order)
1. Southwest contracts with the union for ground services. If bags are not getting where they need to go, that’s on the union.
2. Union contracts should contain incentives for exceeding the goal and fines for not reaching the goal.
3. Show the company you’re worth what you want instead of showing them you’re not worth what they’re paying.
4. Saying “the company agreed to it” is very much like Luca Brasi holding a gun to your head while the Godfather tells you either your brains or your signature will be on the contract.
5. $26 an hour is a good wage for unskilled labor.
6. If you’re a 20 year ramp agent then you've not taken advantage of the opportunities available at Southwest.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

The stupid! It burns!!!

 

[amorris311]

Some random thoughts (in no particular order)
1. Southwest contracts with the union for ground services. If bags are not getting where they need to go, that’s on the union.
2. Union contracts should contain incentives for exceeding the goal and fines for not reaching the goal.
3. Show the company you’re worth what you want instead of showing them you’re not worth what they’re paying.
4. Saying “the company agreed to it” is very much like Luca Brasi holding a gun to your head while the Godfather tells you either your brains or your signature will be on the contract.
5. $26 an hour is a good wage for unskilled labor.
6. If you’re a 20 year ramp agent you've wasted the last 17 years.

Stop! Do you have any idea how ignorant this post is? Are you trying to start debate or are you just regurgitating talking points from another ignorant deity?

 

[adk]

1. Southwest contracts with the union for ground services. If bags are not getting where they need to go, that’s on the union.

If SWA contracted the TWU for ramp service, the TWU would have full authority over who to hire and fire. They don't.

2. Union contracts should contain incentives for exceeding the goal and fines for not reaching the goal.

In Southwest's case, they do. Profit Sharing.

3. Show the company you’re worth what you want instead of showing them you’re not worth what they’re paying.

I would argue that SWA knows the rampers are worth it and are just trying to get the same for less.

4. Saying “the company agreed to it” is very much like Luca Brasi holding a gun to your head while the Godfather tells you either your brains or your signature will be on the contract.

Sounds kind of like what they told the Pinnacle pilots during the bankruptcy TA vote.

5. $26 an hour is a good wage for unskilled labor.

I agree, but I don't think that ramp work is unskilled labor.

 

[bksslc]

Some random thoughts (in no particular order)
1. Southwest contracts with the union for ground services. If bags are not getting where they need to go, that’s on the union.
2. Union contracts should contain incentives for exceeding the goal and fines for not reaching the goal.
3. Show the company you’re worth what you want instead of showing them you’re not worth what they’re paying.
4. Saying “the company agreed to it” is very much like Luca Brasi holding a gun to your head while the Godfather tells you either your brains or your signature will be on the contract.
5. $26 an hour is a good wage for unskilled labor.
6. If you’re a 20 year ramp agent you've wasted the last 17 years.

Thank You so much for your judgment on #6 ol' wise one! Until you walk in my shoes, then just stop talking!

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Thank You so much for your judgment on #6 ol' wise one! Until you walk in my shoes, then just stop talking!

You're talking to a regional airline dispatcher who probably makes half what the average SWA ramper makes. I wouldn't worry too much about what he thinks of you.