2011 Executive Bonusses

[Frank Szabo]

Oh, it's the old "you're mad at the wife so you kick the dog or beat the kid" scenario?

Please. The dog will eventually bite, and kids get taught in school how to call CPS. Neither will help you deal with the abusive wife, unless being thrown out of your house counts.

All the mechs have to do is follow their training and do everything by the book - that alone will paralyze the company but there's not enough of that going on.

Present computer based training required of all employees emphasizes the word "verbatim" and even gives a definition for same. The company is begging that we do this, so why not?

... all because an engineer didn't specify a tolerance re: spacing of wire ties.

BTW - are you and fwaaa both into the battered wife comparisons today?

 

[FrequentFlierCA]

If "cost neutral" is a "strike issue" I suggest getting ready to walk out (if you can persuade the NMB) because I don't see AA offering much more than that with oil prices heading north so rapidly. I sincerely wish you luck, but think they'll have most of you replaced within a week.

 

[odie01]

If "cost neutral" is a "strike issue" I suggest getting ready to walk out (if you can persuade the NMB) because I don't see AA offering much more than that with oil prices heading north so rapidly. I sincerely wish you luck, but think they'll have most of you replaced within a week.

Funny how when I click on FrequentFlierCA's profile it takes me right to aa.comm
SPAM

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

I sincerely wish you luck, but think they'll have most of you replaced within a week.

I dont know about a week but its worth a shot

😀

 

[eolesen]

BTW - are you and fwaaa both into the battered wife comparisons today?

Dunno. We're the same person, so I guess so.

 

[Hopeful]

If "cost neutral" is a "strike issue" I suggest getting ready to walk out (if you can persuade the NMB) because I don't see AA offering much more than that with oil prices heading north so rapidly. I sincerely wish you luck, but think they'll have most of you replaced within a week.

I guess oil prices will have no impact on upcoming PUP pay, eh?

Replacing 9600 mechanics in a week?
Oh, right, you said MOST of us.....hmmmmm maybe 7000 weill be replaced in a week?

 

[700UW]

Yep, I guess he doesnt know about the federal background check and drug tests.

 

[Hopeful]

Yep, I guess he doesnt know about the federal background check and drug tests.

funny, I thought he knew everything!

 

[700UW]

They think they know it all, they need to come work for an airline and see what it is really like, they have no clue.

 

[737823]

Thats pretty much what they did in 2003. Under the treat of BK, in the middle of the contract they said "break it and give us what we want or we will file BK and take it all". They cherry picked the contract then and now they are looking to cut it down to a stump.

I feel we should have called their bluff and taken it to the streets, but unfortunatley the leaders of the labor movement are only willing to fight when the Union itself is put at risk. They determined that it was less risky for the unions to sacifice the living standards of the workers in 2002-2005 than to take a stand with workers who earned reletively high wages. I feel we should have had our General Strike in 2002 when they went after USAIR but, like the Priests in Ireland during the Famine who told their members not to drink the Protestant soup, none of them starved, none of these guys took pay cuts, not only that they continued getting raises. Now we see corporations not only going after State workers, who now have it better than airline workers, but their unions as well. Concessions are no longer enough, they want to do away with the unions completely. What did they expect?

Bob, with all due what would you have liked AA to do differently? It seems you're advocating nothing should have been done, AA should have filed and you feel a bankruptcy judge would somehow benevolently allow the status quo with regard to your contacts. Not going to happen. The company needed to restructure and it seems the RPA was the most democratic way for the company to get necessary concessions to continue operating while minimizing the change to employees standard of living and quality of life. In all honesty, I'm sure its very difficult having a ~30% prolonged paycut imposed, benefits slashed, hours cut, duties increased particularly if you are the breadwinner for the household. I have friends who have been involuntarily laid off due to the financial crisis and subsequent consolidation. They are always telling me how hard is to do without the extras we take for granted and the added stress and uncertainty. Trust me I know it can be difficult for the employees impacted.

In all seriousness, would you have preferred AA conduct involuntary layoffs? Significantly contract out maintenance to a foreign MRO? Outsource ground handling at outstations? Ground significantly more aircraft? Shutter more hubs, routes, and destinations? AA needed concessions from workers to restructure and keep the company viable. The RPA was a unique opportunity for the unions and the company to offer concessions and implement changes that would minimize the impact on employees. For example, many FAs are probably gladly willing to forgo the crew meals as part of the RPA than have further paycut as they can have left over F/J meals after the service. Perhaps the changes to healthcare costs were beneficial to some who can receive coverage from a spouse. Point is in a bankruptcy courtroom the employees and their collective bargaining agents couldn't have any input or the opportunity to vote on the concessions they'd simply have to accept what the court and creditors arrange.

Josh

 

[eolesen]

I don't think what AA sought from the RPA has been questioned as much as what happened afterward.

If "shared sacrifice" were truly the goal, then AA's senior management & board of directors would have eaten their own dog food with regard to the PSP & PUP plans. Yes, it was contractual, but there was nothing stopping Gerard or any other officer from voluntarily waiving their payouts. Had the top officers at AMR, who were still quite generously compensated, waived their payouts, there would have been no question about how genuinely committed they were to the idea of shared sacrifice. And I think that it would have trickled pretty far down once the precedent was set.

But they didn't waive. They cashed in the stock awards like pigs at the trough.

For me, it was quite an insult. I'd put my own reputation and credibility on the line explaining to my employees why they had to take pay cuts averaging 14-18%.

And in one motion, me and thousands of other front line supervisors & managers were left to twist in the wind, and look like liars to our employees.

Yet senior management, even though it was variable comp, had the appearance of being made whole. I get the whole concept of VC, but it should be done on operational or financial measures.

If the company is going to claim they can't pay out higher wages because of the cost issues, then they shouldn't be basing the PUP/PSP plan on another metric like relative stock performance....

That's why people are pissed off about it, Josh. Senior management didn't eat their own dog food. And I don't know how they're ever going to recover from that one, simple action.

 

[Frank Szabo]

I don't think what AA sought from the RPA has been questioned as much as what happened afterward.

If "shared sacrifice" were truly the goal, then AA's senior management & board of directors would have eaten their own dog food with regard to the PSP & PUP plans. Yes, it was contractual, but there was nothing stopping Gerard or any other officer from voluntarily waiving their payouts. Had the top officers at AMR, who were still quite generously compensated, waived their payouts, there would have been no question about how genuinely committed they were to the idea of shared sacrifice. And I think that it would have trickled pretty far down once the precedent was set.

But they didn't waive. They cashed in the stock awards like pigs at the trough.

For me, it was quite an insult. I'd put my own reputation and credibility on the line explaining to my employees why they had to take pay cuts averaging 14-18%.

And in one motion, me and thousands of other front line supervisors & managers were left to twist in the wind, and look like liars to our employees.

Yet senior management, even though it was variable comp, had the appearance of being made whole. I get the whole concept of VC, but it should be done on operational or financial measures.

If the company is going to claim they can't pay out higher wages because of the cost issues, then they shouldn't be basing the PUP/PSP plan on another metric like relative stock performance....

That's why people are pissed off about it, Josh. Senior management didn't eat their own dog food. And I don't know how they're ever going to recover from that one, simple action.

Amen.

 

[Hopeful]

That's why people are pissed off about it, Josh. Senior management didn't eat their own dog food. And I don't know how they're ever going to recover from that one, simple action.

That is the SUMMARY of the year, Eric! Good post.
This is where the gist of the anger stems from. They're should've been and should continue to be NO increase in ANY compensation for ANYONE until EVERYONE is made whole. Instead, we get the "YOU PEOPLE SHOULD BE LUCKY TO HAVE WHAT YOU HAVE, BLAH,BLAH, BlAH "

The company and pro company pundits cannot continually preach that mantra and expect the workers to swallow it time after time.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

In all seriousness, would you have preferred AA conduct involuntary layoffs? Significantly contract out maintenance to a foreign MRO? Outsource ground handling at outstations? Ground significantly more aircraft? Shutter more hubs, routes, and destinations? AA needed concessions from workers to restructure and keep the company viable. The RPA was a unique opportunity for the unions and the company to offer concessions and implement changes that would minimize the impact on employees. For example, many FAs are probably gladly willing to forgo the crew meals as part of the RPA than have further paycut as they can have left over F/J meals after the service. Perhaps the changes to healthcare costs were beneficial to some who can receive coverage from a spouse. Point is in a bankruptcy courtroom the employees and their collective bargaining agents couldn't have any input or the opportunity to vote on the concessions they'd simply have to accept what the court and creditors arrange.

Josh

It would have been a better alternative. Crandall himself said to leave the pay and benefits alone and slash 30 percent of the schedule and the workforce. Morale would not be what it is today had they went this route... But instead they slashed pay and benefits and over time cut back 30 percent anyway. It was a win win for them and morale at this place suxs