Sign In
Create Account
2
I agree with you both, but for every 1 of the examples you listed, I'll bet there's at least an equivalent number who would jump if the right "trigger" was there. Maybe it's $$$, maybe it's decent retiree medical, maybe a combo of both. Will they get 5k? 500? I have no clue, but none of us will really know until something is presented. Are Glading and co. doing any kind of surveying to see what would pique people's interest in an early out?
#17
Posted 04 February 2012 - 11:31 AM
Kev3188
-
- Registered Member
-
- 4,983 posts
Veteran
Obstacles make you clever.
Back to top
#18
Posted 04 February 2012 - 12:43 PM
WorldTraveler
-
- Registered Member
-
- 4,338 posts
Veteran
Given that the company is in the position of laying off as many people as it wants and doesn't have to ask the court's permission to do so, there is little incentive for them to offer any early out packages at all. Unlike UA which is offering some packages as part of a merger, AA can force the changes it wants.
.
Yes, there are a whole lot of senior people who are retiring but the biggest factor that weighs against alot of retirements is that AA's philosophy in restructuring its CBAs is to not cut pay but instead increase productivity. There are many senior FAs in the US industry and they do what they do because they like what they do - and have nothing else to do if they quit. Probably already on Medicare, most of the tactics that can be used to force younger workers out won't work.
.
Yes, there are a whole lot of senior people who are retiring but the biggest factor that weighs against alot of retirements is that AA's philosophy in restructuring its CBAs is to not cut pay but instead increase productivity. There are many senior FAs in the US industry and they do what they do because they like what they do - and have nothing else to do if they quit. Probably already on Medicare, most of the tactics that can be used to force younger workers out won't work.
Celebrating the best in commercial aviation.
#19
Posted 04 February 2012 - 12:47 PM
700UW
-
- Registered Member
-
- 17,567 posts
Veteran
But they have to get the court to change their CBA so the work can be outsourced if the unions dont agree.
Guess you forgot about that fact!
Guess you forgot about that fact!
There is no America without labor, and to fleece the one is to rob the other.
#20
Posted 04 February 2012 - 12:49 PM
jason77
-
- Registered Member
-
- 31 posts
Member
The first thing the union needs to do to save jobs, is try and get beneifts back for overage leaves.They should have never given it up in 2003.
#21
Posted 04 February 2012 - 01:43 PM
Kev3188
-
- Registered Member
-
- 4,983 posts
Veteran
WorldTraveler, on 04 February 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:
Given that the company is in the position of laying off as many people as it wants and doesn't have to ask the court's permission to do so, there is little incentive for them to offer any early out packages at all.
Nobody said anything different. I'm asking what the APFA will bring back to the table.
Obstacles make you clever.
#22
Posted 04 February 2012 - 02:09 PM
WorldTraveler
-
- Registered Member
-
- 4,338 posts
Veteran
Unfortunately for the unions, 700, their ability to have much if any influence ended Nov 30, 2011 or whatever day AA filed.
You and others are well aware that the unions will do what they can to appear to try to soften the blow but ultimately the company will get what most if not all it wants. And there is still broad latitude in AA's CBAs to work w/ fewer people anyway... that has been said here for years among those that acknowledged that AA was overstaffed based on their 2003 assumption that other carriers would fail and AA would grow into their then-new sized workforce.
.
Given that even early out/retirement packages cost money, there will not be a huge appetite for those that remain to subsidize the exit plans of those that leave...
.
Perhaps you, Kevin, can share historical examples with us to the contrary but I doubt very seriously that the unions will divert much of any of their "budget" toward early outs.
You and others are well aware that the unions will do what they can to appear to try to soften the blow but ultimately the company will get what most if not all it wants. And there is still broad latitude in AA's CBAs to work w/ fewer people anyway... that has been said here for years among those that acknowledged that AA was overstaffed based on their 2003 assumption that other carriers would fail and AA would grow into their then-new sized workforce.
.
Given that even early out/retirement packages cost money, there will not be a huge appetite for those that remain to subsidize the exit plans of those that leave...
.
Perhaps you, Kevin, can share historical examples with us to the contrary but I doubt very seriously that the unions will divert much of any of their "budget" toward early outs.
Celebrating the best in commercial aviation.
#23
Posted 04 February 2012 - 02:20 PM
fltguymk
-
- Registered Member
-
- 167 posts
Advanced
jimntx, on 03 February 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:
NEWS ALERT!!!!
It was just announced on the ABC affiliate noon news here in Dallas that the APFA has informed them that they will tell the company in the first negotiating session that 5,000 flight attendants are prepared to retire if the company will offer some sort of early out package. Now, will the company plan that says 2300 f/as must be furloughed or logic prevail? I don't hold out much hope for the logic approach.
It was just announced on the ABC affiliate noon news here in Dallas that the APFA has informed them that they will tell the company in the first negotiating session that 5,000 flight attendants are prepared to retire if the company will offer some sort of early out package. Now, will the company plan that says 2300 f/as must be furloughed or logic prevail? I don't hold out much hope for the logic approach.
#24
Posted 04 February 2012 - 02:28 PM
fltguymk
-
- Registered Member
-
- 167 posts
Advanced
WorldTraveler, on 04 February 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:
Given that the company is in the position of laying off as many people as it wants and doesn't have to ask the court's permission to do so, there is little incentive for them to offer any early out packages at all. Unlike UA which is offering some packages as part of a merger, AA can force the changes it wants.
.
Yes, there are a whole lot of senior people who are retiring but the biggest factor that weighs against alot of retirements is that AA's philosophy in restructuring its CBAs is to not cut pay but instead increase productivity. There are many senior FAs in the US industry and they do what they do because they like what they do - and have nothing else to do if they quit. Probably already on Medicare, most of the tactics that can be used to force younger workers out won't work.
.
Yes, there are a whole lot of senior people who are retiring but the biggest factor that weighs against alot of retirements is that AA's philosophy in restructuring its CBAs is to not cut pay but instead increase productivity. There are many senior FAs in the US industry and they do what they do because they like what they do - and have nothing else to do if they quit. Probably already on Medicare, most of the tactics that can be used to force younger workers out won't work.
I have to disagree! There is an incentive to get the older/senior FA's off the books and hire new blood. New FA's at the bottom of the pay scale, healthy young adults who do not drain the health care budget, etc.... In the end, a buy out will save money. UA and DL have both done this. AA needs to get on the buyout band wagon.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
