7 July 2014,
United Airlines today confirmed that 12 out of the 15 previously announced line stations will be outsourced as of 10/1/2014.
District 141 and representatives from KOA, LIH and OGG were able to tentatively agree to modifications to the current collective bargaining agreement to maintain IAM-represented employees working in those locations.
Informational meetings and a ratification vote is currently being scheduled. As per current contractual terms, two-thirds of members in those locations must ratify the tentative contractual modifications for them to take effect. Moreover, no IAM member stationed in those locations will be forced to work under any ratified modification. IAM members will retain their right to accept furlough or exercise their seniority at the Hawaiian Point or on the system.
Regarding the other 12 locations (ABQ, BUF, CHS, CLT, CMH, DSM, DTW, ELP, FSD, ICT, PNS and SLC-BTW), agreement could not be reached because the cost reductions the vendors provided United were insurmountable. United, wrongly, places no value on the much better service quality provided to United’s customers by IAM-represented employees. It is truly puzzling, considering United’s dismal financial and service performance, that it will “double-down” on its failed outsourcing strategy.
It is important to note that due to the contractual protection against furlough due to outsourcing, all IAM members with a company seniority date of 4/1/2006 will have the option to retain their employment with United Airlines. Moreover, those junior to 4/1/2006 will also have the opportunity to retain their employment with United due to increased vacancies.
It is equally important to emphasize that in the 12 outsourced stations approximately 90 percent of the flight schedule is operated by United Express. Due to the massive reliance on United Express—approximately 67 percent of United’s entire operation—it is important to understand that the contractual seniority protection guarantees every IAM-represented employee with a company seniority date of 4/1/2006 a job with United Airlines. This language is unprecedented in the airline industry and provides IAM members real employment protection.
Lastly, District 141 does not in any way condone or endorse this bad business decision by United. It’s wrong. United should maintain their IAM-represented workforce in every station. We simply do a better job.