Abrogating Contracts Q & A

[BillLumbergh]

Nice to see the even Bill can stray off topic every once in a blue moon. I hate to even respond again to this, hung hury maybe but acquittal truly psychic. I did like that you threw in "possibly" at the end of the post. Shows reasonable doubt.

Possibly was meant to refer to the viewpoint of the jury members after the glove revelation. As I said, that most likely turned some jurors, if not all of them. Hence, the possibly.

As the trial progressed and Mr. Cochran continued to poke holes into the prosecution's theories, the specter of victory became larger and larger.

Remember, the standard for a criminal conviction in California is "beyond a reasonable doubt." Having seen the gloves, the testimony of several moronic police officers, and a "plausible" defense alibi, a jury which may have been the least bit predisposed to the defense in the first place, certainly would have been likely to have been swayed.

 

[PITbull]

In my company the saying goes, "Is this the hill I want to die on" I don't know the legal points or IAM strategy but a lot is at stake.

If this ain't the "hill" for the IAM, then there is no such thing for anyone at anytime.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Possibly was meant to refer to the viewpoint of the jury members after the glove revelation. As I said, that most likely turned some jurors, if not all of them. Hence, the possibly.

As the trial progressed and Mr. Cochran continued to poke holes into the prosecution's theories, the specter of victory became larger and larger.

Remember, the standard for a criminal conviction in California is "beyond a reasonable doubt." Having seen the gloves, the testimony of several moronic police officers, and a "plausible" defense alibi, a jury which may have been the least bit predisposed to the defense in the first place, certainly would have been likely to have been swayed.

Some maybe not all

Juror #98, Carrie Bess, a postal worker, later stated, "Those gloves fit. He wasn't putting them on right... I do believe the gloves fit. I have no doubt about that. The glove demo didn't impress me at all. Not one iota."

Marsh Rubin-Jackson, #984, also a postal worker, agreed. "Sure, "you know, they fit. ... I must have had an expression on my face because as he stood there, it was like he was talking to me, and he went, 'They don't fit.' They would have fit anybody."

 

[cavalier]

Juror #98, Carrie Bess, a postal worker

I am sure glad you two have photographic memories of that entire sham of the century.

 

[Smartest Loser]

Remember, the standard for a criminal conviction in California is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

I like to use this, even though there are some pieces missing can someone please tell me what this is…??

Correct, the same goes for the theory of ‘BEYOND A RESONABLE DOUBTâ€￾.

 

[jimntx]

Pineybob since you have a opinion regarding the courts and labor can you cite a handful of examples that helped you form your opinion.

PinyeBob may not have specific examples of how court is a crapshoot, but how about...

1. The ridiculous award against MacDonald's for the woman who was driving with hot coffee clutched between her legs.

and on the pro-company side....
2. A hospital in the Houston area extended privileges to a surgeon who had had his license revoked in 2 or 3 other states for gross negligence/incompetence--a matter of public record. (Why Texas awarded him a license is a question for another day.) As a result of one of his surgeries there is a man in the Houston area today who is paralyzed from the neck down. The Dr.'s incompetence is not in question. However, a pro-business judge dismissed the hospital from the family's suit, ruling that the hospital could not be held responsible for giving staff privileges to a known incompetent.

3. The judge in the Fastow (Enron) case who is allowing Mr. Fastow to stay out of prison until his wife serves her sentence so that there will be someone at home to take care of the children. According to articles I have read, Federal sentencing guidelines specifically prohibit such accommodations to convicted felons, and I can assure you that such courtesies are not extended to less well-to-do defendants who can not afford high-powered celebrity lawyers.

4. Judges that allow bankrupt companies to create/maintain golden parachute arrangements for officers of the company while cutting worker pay and benefits. It seems almost prima facie evidence that the management of a company is suspect if a company is in bankruptcy (I know, I know. There are sometimes circumstances beyond anyone's control--9/11, for instance.) A prior condition to any worker bee pay or benefits reductions or contract abrogations should be abrogation of any and all management "golden parachute" arrangements and a prohibition against setting up new ones for some minimum time (say, 5 years) following emergence from bankruptcy.

(I would feel less strongly about this if management pay in most companies today was some more reasonable multiple of average worker pay and was based upon performance alone, not some pre-arranged contract that says "I get paid in full whether or not I do the job.") But don't get me started...

 

[WestCoastGuy]

I could never understand why a Board of Directors of any company would not have the foresite to base a CEO and they're exec's compensation based on company returns and profit. Yes, if a CEO operates a company and successfully produces results in the form of profit, reward him well. It seems this company and it's Board as had it's heads up its *SS and rewards the incompetent, mismanaged, and totally inept executives with millions and millions after they run the company into bankruptcy. Why would any person be entitled to such excess after such a terrible job???? Where is the logic in that??? From Colodny to Schofield and up to now, they're all living the good life and we're here giving up more and more of our pay for their mistakes and bad business decisions. The bankruptcy court should have order all those millions returned to the company last year!

 

[sentrido]

PinyeBob may not have specific examples of how court is a crapshoot, but how about...

1. The ridiculous award against MacDonald's for the woman who was driving with hot coffee clutched between her legs.

The lady never got her "ridiculous" award.:http://www.citizen.org/congress/civjus/tor...cles.cfm?ID=785

 

[cavalier]

4. Judges that allow bankrupt companies to create/maintain golden parachute arrangements for officers of the company while cutting worker pay and benefits.

This earthly life of flesh and bone is not eternal and everyone answers for what they sowed. Whether one believes this truth or not, matters not because the same fate waits each individual soul regardless.


Riches do not profit in the day of

Wrath,

But righteousness delivers from

Death


If you don’t like what I wrote take it up with the LORD, not me as I was only answering a question showing that there is indeed a day of final accounting to God, the divine Judge.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

PinyeBob may not have specific examples of how court is a crapshoot, but how about...

4. Judges that allow bankrupt companies to create/maintain golden parachute arrangements for officers of the company while cutting worker pay and benefits. It seems almost prima facie evidence that the management of a company is suspect if a company is in bankruptcy (I know, I know. There are sometimes circumstances beyond anyone's control--9/11, for instance.) A prior condition to any worker bee pay or benefits reductions or contract abrogations should be abrogation of any and all management "golden parachute" arrangements and a prohibition against setting up new ones for some minimum time (say, 5 years) following emergence from bankruptcy

(I would feel less strongly about this if management pay in most companies today was some more reasonable multiple of average worker pay and was based upon performance alone, not some pre-arranged contract that says "I get paid in full whether or not I do the job.") But don't get me started...

Actually I thought Pineybob had specific bankruptcy cases pitting companies against unions that helped him for his opinion that labor usually is not treated kindly or fairly. I am not trying put down your post but I just don't think these cases fit the profile I was looking for.

1. Company against individual in civil case

2. Company against individuals in civil case

3. Company vs Federal Government in criminal case

4. Agreed this sucks but judges also allow Unions and companies to have a side 1113 letter of agreement. I have to say I love your idea.

 

[jimntx]

Actually I thought Pineybob had specific bankruptcy cases pitting companies against unions that helped him for his opinion that labor usually is not treated kindly or fairly. I am not trying put down your post but I just don't think these cases fit the profile I was looking for.

1. Company against individual in civil case

2. Company against individuals in civil case

3. Company vs Federal Government in criminal case

4. Agreed this sucks but judges also allow Unions and companies to have a side 1113 letter of agreement. I have to say I love your idea.

I understood that you were primarily interested in bankruptcy cases (aren't we all these days? <_< ), but I think PB's point was that you go into any court and no matter how "righteous" your cause, it's still a crapshoot based upon lawyers involved and their quality/judge/jury/political environment.

Even in bk, if you look at courts across the country, for every precedent you find in one court, you are going to find an opposite precedent in another. For instance, U was allowed to drop the pilot's pension plan in your 1st bk, but UAL's judge would not allow them to drop their pension plans w/o further negotiation--if I understand that ruling correctly. It's why some companies and their lawyers "shop" for the "right" court in which to file bankruptcy. If you are looking to drop your pension plans, you surely do not want a judge who is known to favor worker rights.

And, the really big crapshoot in bankruptcy court is the creditors' committee. If your company has a history of screwing over creditors, you may have a very powerful enemy in court, and the creditors' committee carries a lot of weight with the court. Creditors committees can force a change to Ch. 7, and many have done so in the past.

 

[delldude]

What do you think Lakefield is doing?? He knows the company is going BK again and probably liquidate as well. He's trying to give the appearance of a good faith effort and make the unions look intrasigent to bolster management's case for complete abrogation. What has management to lose? They refused to change anything during the last year, so what makes anyone think this time they're "sincere." Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me, Fool me three times . . . . Well, I guess I'm just a chump.

He's trying to give the appearance of a good faith effort and make the unions look intrasigent to bolster management's case for complete abrogation.

i don't beleive these 'voluntary discussions' actually fall into the good faith sessions.....inside of BK the court will force negotiations prior to abrogation and then failing to negotiate in good faith becomes an issue for the court to act upon.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

700UW

Since you question me regarding my information lets put it on the table. Here is my argument and with link to US code. Now prove me wrong with facts as you like to say.
================================================

§ 1113 allows a Debtor to secure the bankruptcy court’s approval for the interim and/or permanent rejection of collective bargaining agreements

REF: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/htm_hl...ter_first_match

================================================

§ 1114 provides the bankruptcy code’s mandatory mechanism for seeking to modify or terminate the medical, disability, death and other non-pension benefits of the bankrupt’s retired employees, their spouses and dependents

REF: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/htm_hl...ter_first_match

=================================================

Throw this in as additional ref:

http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:Mh-xP...+abrogate&hl=en

700UW since you back from extended leave....

 

[cavalier]

i don't beleive these 'voluntary discussions' actually fall into the good faith sessions.....inside of BK the court will force negotiations prior to abrogation and then failing to negotiate in good faith becomes an issue for the court to act upon.

dude. This is your BEST picture yet because as they say a picture is worth a thousand words.


CCY in your face with the judge and you WILL submit because we have the full weight of the law behind us and will crush you little twerps is what I thought of when I saw this photo. I couldn't stop laughing. GOOD JOB DUDE!