AA and Labor Negotiations-2020

[CremaDiLimone]

yahoo keeps pushing a news item. a risk assessment company says with certainty that aa will file for BK. it's exclusive 'point system' that seemingly never fails - scores aa 1 point worse than united..each company tens of points behind delta and southwest.

ok. seems to me that every company that this risk assessment company correctly had filing for BK and filed for BK..those companies didn't receive govt. aid to ward off BK.

i wonder how they scored delta and united in 2002 and how they scored aa in 2010?? all under different economic circumstances.

it was GM and chrysler that received govt. aid in 2009-2010..paid some 90% of the loans back.

the difference is that the argument in 2009 was that ford and foreign car makers who didn't receive money were being 'penalized'. in this 2020 case, all the large commercial airlines in the usa have taken money to keep the airline industry afloat, until the virus crisis subsides.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

UA is a great example of how NOT to handle this. For everything they did right, they undercut it with something completely ham-fisted.

if this is kirby's first test..he seems hysterical. not that he's hysterical, but let's talk about how bad this is to get some concessions. i get the feeling that's what united employees are detecting.

it's parker that looks like churchill, mocking the crisis in the face of uncertainty.

aa will fight this virus on the beaches, on the streets and in the hills. aa will forge on.

 

[Kev3188]

Companies and unions should be working now to figure out what life after 9/30 looks like. I don’t think there’s any doubt all will be smaller to some degree; the question is how they get there.

 

[Kev3188]

if this is kirby's first test..he seems hysterical. not that he's hysterical, but let's talk about how bad this is to get some concessions. i get the feeling that's what united employees are detecting.

it's parker that looks like churchill, mocking the crisis in the face of uncertainty.

aa will fight this virus on the beaches, on the streets and in the hills. aa will forge on.

Kirby is known for being brutally honest. That might be an asset in the C-Suite, but can clearly backfire in a wider audience. He also needs to figure out the balance between “real talk” and being reassuring.

 

[eolesen]

Kirby now has a layer between him and labor -- United named Brett Hart as President a week or two ago. Brett's the guy who filled in for Oscar when he had his heart transplant, and people who know him say he's very likable, but also a lawyer by trade. That implies to me he's a good negotiator, something Kirby never had to deal with.

If someone said to me "work 80% schedule until traffic returns or be laid off" I think I'd rather have 80% of something than 100% of nothing. But that's just me. I can find a way to reduce or replace 20% of my take-home pay

 

[Kev3188]

I agree. And it can be an even easier “sell” if it’s framed the right way. If you demand that I work 30/week, I might balk- even if I know how bad everything is right now. But if I see a 3 day weekend or even 3 10’s on a shift bid? Suddenly it’s a different story.

Delta initially tried to make everyone work 5, 6 hour days. That went over poorly. They quickly course corrected and gave stations some flexibility on how best to implement the cuts.

 

[T5towbar]

Sounds like instead of just reducing FT to PT now he wants to negotiate that deal.
Just based on how he wanted to ramrod that through before I would be very careful what they agree to.
Make sure there is a time limit and it isn’t the entire staff.
Get it all in writing.
I would not trust Kirby at all and at AA I would also be careful agreeing to anything similar as well
These executives could care less what we get as long as there is a big bonus in it for them

There was only 30% of people for the last offer of taking a COLA.
If Kirby was to be "upfront", he should have been honest to tell everybody that the CARES Act wasn't supposed to cover full payroll until Sept. 30. BEFORE you asked everybody to lobby for it. There was a major campaign (the company and ALL of the unions together) to lobby our legislative members to pass this act. It was sold as this thing to cover payroll completely, because everybody knew what was going to happen if traffic don't pick up, and a lot of people would be out the door. At least people would have a income for the summer and could make plans for other employment or separation. After it was passed, then you tell us that it wasn't designed to cover payroll in full, instead of trying to hoard cash for later. We all understand the need to save cash and cut expenses, but it wasn't sold as such. That in itself was dishonest and you just blew 5 years of labor peace.

I don't recall anybody saying that CARES was only going to cover a PERCENTAGE of pay instead of covering it FULL. I'm quite sure if the unions were told it wasn't, the members were to be informed and come up with alternative solutions to help the company reduce payroll and keep people still on property with an enhanced out; better COLA; or a reduced hours scheme. I'm quite sure that people would have taken those options or something creative, since you had a large hub and station directly in the hot zone. (at least the only thing that made sense was the 3 on - 4 off weekday, since people died here.) But now, since everybody don't trust what the company says, we are at somewhat of a standstill. At least we have tripled the amount of flights, but the hub its still a shell of itself. I've never seen it this bad, and it much worse than 9/11. I don't know about the FA's or pilots (since they have their own issues); and AC MX is needed and probably be unaffected somewhat. They have to still care for the fleet and get it ready for action when needed. (sidenote: I don't know the situation with Facility MX and GSE MX) but the IAM members and M&A (they are very pissed) are wary of what management are saying.

IMHO, if this was handled correctly and management was completely "open and honest", a solution could have happened earlier where everybody would have understood and would have helped out. Now, not so sure anymore...

This is an opportunity for unions to show they can pivot quickly and/or adapt to new realities. To be clear, I’m not talking about agreeing to concessionary language- I’m talking about getting creative to keep people on the property while also making sure there are some guard rails in place (as VO Reason notes above).

To be honest, I think there is more of an appetite for 30(ish) hour lines than people might think? The key is to make it an appealing option, rather than just being voluntold to take one. There are several easy ways to make that happen.

I'm with you, Kev.
The IAM has some ideas, and planning to make it known to us soon. But it better not be anything concessionary or to set a precedent - it has to be limited to the crisis and has to have an end date, since full travel might not pick up till next year. Also, it has to also be said that 2021 is a contract year. IMHO; you can't give up anything we have now. Only stronger scope is needed. And I think that some of the people, especially the IGM crowd is figuring this out.

 

[Buck]

Interesting quote by one of the founders.... well done EO

Never forget Thomas Paine...

 

[ALUS78]

This is an opportunity for unions to show they can pivot quickly and/or adapt to new realities. To be clear, I’m not talking about agreeing to concessionary language- I’m talking about getting creative to keep people on the property while also making sure there are some guard rails in place (as VO Reason notes above).

To be honest, I think there is more of an appetite for 30(ish) hour lines than people might think? The key is to make it an appealing option, rather than just being voluntold to take one. There are several easy ways to make that happen.

30 hours for people who live paycheck to paycheck? Maybe if its temporary and if its ALL groups.On the other hand I cant see keeping everyone working when there's no work it doesnt make any sense.I probably took more cuts in my years than anyone here and as you know you it leaves a bitter taste

 

[ALUS78]

Kirby now has a layer between him and labor -- United named Brett Hart as President a week or two ago. Brett's the guy who filled in for Oscar when he had his heart transplant, and people who know him say he's very likable, but also a lawyer by trade. That implies to me he's a good negotiator, something Kirby never had to deal with.

If someone said to me "work 80% schedule until traffic returns or be laid off" I think I'd rather have 80% of something than 100% of nothing. But that's just me. I can find a way to reduce or replace 20% of my take-home pay

When's traffic going to return? All airlines said they're going to shrink.All airlines will layoff in October and everyone will probably take a cut,are you saying those that remain should take a deeper cut to subsidize unneeded employees so they can play cards for 8 hours ?

By the way ask the US and AW pilots what the "Kirby" was. It his proposal to bring the two groups together, it was argued for years. Needless to say it was unsuccessful

 

[dfw gen]

Companies and unions should be working now to figure out what life after 9/30 looks like. I don’t think there’s any doubt all will be smaller to some degree; the question is how they get there.

this is america west, they hire people to tell them what to do. the association aka. the iam (because they own the twu) does not change they are still stuck in the stone age. do you know how much it hurt for them to vote online, instead of forcing the membership tp vote at the union halls? which the twu does not have anymore, the sold the maintenance union halls to punish the membership/

 

[dfw gen]

30 hours for people who live paycheck to paycheck? Maybe if its temporary and if its ALL groups.On the other hand I cant see keeping everyone working when there's no work it doesnt make any sense.I probably took more cuts in my years than anyone here and as you know you it leaves a bitter taste

you think?

 

[wings396]

30 hours for people who live paycheck to paycheck? Maybe if its temporary and if its ALL groups.On the other hand I cant see keeping everyone working when there's no work it doesnt make any sense.I probably took more cuts in my years than anyone here and as you know you it leaves a bitter taste

We've already had a few boneheads speak up in our local town hall meetings that are suggesting that we give up 10% in order to keep the junior people around. I can tell you that there were a lot of eyes on them after tossing that out there. We also have a handful who keep suggesting some type of a terrific buyout in order to move a bunch of those pesky senior guys out the door in order to save them from being furlouged.

 

[CremaDiLimone]

We've already had a few boneheads speak up in our local town hall meetings that are suggesting that we give up 10% in order to keep the junior people around. I can tell you that there were a lot of eyes on them after tossing that out there. We also have a handful who keep suggesting some type of a terrific buyout in order to move a bunch of those pesky senior guys out the door in order to save them from being furlouged.

everyone i know with around my seniority agrees with you. no concessions to save the PT (6 years) with an am s/m shift.

also agree about the pesky senior citizens. some were on the fence with retirement until the virus hit. now, they sit in a chair for 8 hrs a day and fully believe they can sit in a chair for another 5 years earning $35/hr.

some of these people are in their 70s. it's unbelievable.

i stay out of it, but there is some tension and a lot of badgering. guys in their 50s getting angry at guys in their 70s for not retiring and taking desired shifts. that's bad enough - and then the guy in his 70s expects to sit around all day...

 

[1AA]

We've already had a few boneheads speak up in our local town hall meetings that are suggesting that we give up 10% in order to keep the junior people around. I can tell you that there were a lot of eyes on them after tossing that out there. We also have a handful who keep suggesting some type of a terrific buyout in order to move a bunch of those pesky senior guys out the door in order to save them from being furlouged.

Like in 2003? Cut pay, save jobs, save union dues. The company laid off anyway and the pay cuts stayed on for years as well as the loss of other benefits. Can we afford to go through another disaster like the last one? In 2003 most of us were in our 40's. We recovered a bit but it cost us our career gains due to the many years of suffering. Don't let history repeat itself. Unfortunately the membership has no say.