AMFA-SWA Technician Negotiations Update #7 (Text and Video)
Updated On: Feb 19, 2013
Participants for AMFA: Earl Clark – Region I Director Michael Nelson – Region II Director Bob Cramer – Local 4 Airline Representative
Nino DiMaggio – Local 11 Airline Representative Shane Flachman – Local 18 Airline Representative
Mike Young – Local 32 Airline Representative
Participants for Southwest Airlines:
Mike Ryan –VP, Labor Relations
Jim Sokol – VP, Maintenance
Gerry Anderson- Sr Director Labor Relations
George Tompkins – Director, Labor Relations
Mark Lyons – Sr. Manager, Labor Relations
Sam Moser - Planning Manager, Finance
The Negotiating Committee is providing this update to the AMFA Membership at Southwest Airlines. This is the only official authorized source of negotiating communications by the Committee. The Negotiating Committee returned to Dallas for two scheduled days of negotiations on February 12 and 13.
The morning of February 12 we spent as a Committee at the Local 11 office going over our Article 8 counter to be presented to the Company. We also spent this time dealing with our approach to an issue that has been brought to our attention in regards to what Company representatives allegedly said about the negotiations during a station visit. After lunch we met with the Company in the Mecca Meeting Room. We first asked the Company about the reports we received concerning messages from Company leaders to our members. Although the Company was unaware of any details, we left the discussion with a refreshed awareness that this process has rules and both parties need to adhere to them.
Following the above referenced conversation, we began to discuss Article 22. The Company’s main issue with the current language is that it does not address what happens to a grievance after it is filed for arbitration. They also proposed language regarding where Arbitrations are to be held as well as clarifications dealing with cost responsibilities. We then discussed the Company’s proposed changes to Article 21. Most of the discussions were based on clarifying the grievance process language and reinforcing the first step with the anticipation that more issues will be settled at this point. We also discussed the "group" grievance concept and cost responsibilities related to System Board. We then presented our Article 8 offer with the understanding that our counter was conceptual at this time as we were short one committeeman on Tuesday. After working through our changes to the Company’s initial proposal, we discussed International Field Service. Both sides are going to research the international issue further, continue working on our existing disagreements with the Article 8 proposals, and be prepared for further discussions during our next session.
The majority of Wednesday was spent discussing Article 21. Later in the afternoon we revisited the Article 22 proposal. We feel most of the major obstacles were worked out and are hopeful we can finish these Articles in our next session. We also worked on negotiation dates through the remainder of the year.
Our side continues to be committed to making a concerted effort to reach an agreement that addresses our members’, and the Company’s, concerns. Our Committee would also like to thank the observer that took the time to attend.