Accept Contract or Authorize a Strike

[Bob Owens]

Added Videtich, “Our members understand that this has been a difficult economic climate to negotiate in. Understanding the challenges, we have been able to reach TAs that include raises and other improvements. The members must decide if these negotiated agreements are acceptable. If the members do not want to ratify the TA that is their right. However, It also is important that everyone understand the full consequences and next steps entailed in a “no” vote.”

Hopefully one of the consequences is that he is removed from heading the committee. As he gets his annual raises on top of his six figure salary (the smallest annual raise Don has ever seen since he went on the TWU payroll is 3%) he has steered this committee to this TA since at least the year and a half that I've been there. He justified our low table position by claiming it was a "credilbe offer" that we were firm on. Yep, we remained "credible" in the eyes of the company, and we didnt even get one contract article that was gutted in 2003 restored and the company put in dozens of additional concessions. The modest 'improvements" dont even bring us up to industry standard. I felt as if I was talking to the company whenever I spoke to Don and his followers. Everytime fuel went up a nickel a gallon he would make sure the Committee knew how much more it was going to cost the company, when it went down he would say nothing about the millions they were saving, last fall he kept hinting that the company may file for bankruptcy by this past winter, he said the Billion Dollar pension payment might push them to file, well it turned out to be $500 million and thats because they put nothing in for 2009. Don was talking BK to the committee despite the fact that most of the company's numbers were improving. Why would he do that?

One of the favorite lines of the Videtich pro-concession team is "how are you going to pay for that", its another way of saying that we have to give up something of greater or equal value to get something we want, not including our labor, because according to these guys that has no value. Our labor was worth all these things in the past, and our productivity has improved since then so if anything it should be worth even more, but Don and his minions didnt see it that way. We should be willing to accept whatever concessions the company was asking for because "we have overhaul". That was the pro-concession teams answer to all the inconvient questions. To borrow a line from one of the more progressive Presidents out there the strategy was "Dont ask for anything and you wont be dissapointed". Even though the question has never been answered as to whether keeping OH in house is better for the bottom line, I believe it is, thats why the company refuses to answer it, the assumption by the ATD is that AMR is doing us a huge favor by keeping these jobs 'in house'. I dont believe that AA does favors for labor, unless its good for AMR. If they could get it done cheaper by outsourcing, after everything is factored in, they would have. Prior to 2003 , even with low cost SRPs , AA was one of the leaders in outsourcing. Other carriers could not compete with AA's low cost structure so they sent it out. If we agree to this we lower their costs even more.

Its funny but even though our ATD officials get annual pay increases I dont see them giving up benifits to pay for them. How did these guys "Pay for" their increases in pay? Why is it that even retired TWU officials get COLA increases to their pensions but we have to give up benifits for increases that dont even keep up with inflation? I wonder if how these guys would react if Little decided to cut their pay, would they be willing to "Put it in their rear view mirror and do what's best for the TWU?"

 

[DallasConehead]

Hopefully one of the consequences is that he is removed from heading the committee.

Not going to happen but it's nice to dream. Besides, who would ascend to his spot? Some other local president? Hmm, maybe ole what’s his name down in MIA or the idiot in LA, perhaps Gilboy, he's been after a spot for a while. Maybe even you Bob since you're such a pain in their arse. Give you a nice salary and shut you up.

Don was talking BK to the committee despite the fact that most of the company's numbers were improving. Why would he do that?

Ummmm, it's his job.

One of the favorite lines of the Videtich pro-concession team is "how are you going to pay for that",

Steering the committee in "The Dons" way

I wonder if how these guys would react if Little decided to cut their pay, would they be willing to "Put it in their rear view mirror and do what's best for the TWU?"

Again, not going to happen.


I think it's really great that we have some people that are old school unionists and it would really be something to see things change into all TWU represented M&R becoming a more unified group. But, lets face history as it has been for 25+ years. The international will continue to be the owners of the agreements and the weak union leaders it has always been, (in some people’s opinion). (i.e., watch the numbers this POS passes by) They work WITH the Company, not against. They believe it is in their interest and ours as the "labor" to not knock over the apple cart. And the membership? Well, lets face the facts there as well, after all we are "ME"chanics. Each of us here for our own reasons, not here for the whole. Most of us haven't a clue as to why we even struck them 40 freakin years ago. What's more, we haven't a clue as to what real unionism even looks like. So, everyone here, keep ranting and raving, hey, it passes the time and you'll be the ones voting for it then complaining about it the next day..

Nothings ever going to change until I leave this craphole job someday, hopefully with my retirement.

Voting NO in Dallas (Not that it matters)

 

[paul1]

This contract is a worthless piece of crap !!!!!!!!!!!!,honestly I am embarassed to even belong to this company union.

thats why we will vote it in

yes

 

[paul1]

voting on the contract and by voting no giving the neg. comm. the power to do what they want is nuts


a strike vote should be that a strike vote nothing to do with this t/a


vote down the t/a we still can talk and don't think congress or who ever is going to give us a better deal

 

[Bob Owens]

Not going to happen but it's nice to dream. Besides, who would ascend to his spot? Some other local president?

I would prefer somebody who isnt an AA employee and doesnt get A-5 passes. If not then at least end the great lie, get rid of the negotiating (witness) committee altogether and make the International "own it", no more "Dont blame us, blame your negotiating committee". 90% or more of the time spent in "negotiations" is with us in one room and the company in another. When we meet Don is the only one allowed to speak and we are instructed to sit stoically like robots.

Ummmm, it's his job.

Perhaps in reality, but in theory, he should not be filtering information for the purpose of lowering the expectations of the committee. I have no problem with sharing info, but if he is going to tell about the impact of fuel going up he should do the same when it goes down. Tell all the whole story, not just the parts the company wants us to hear. If the people who own AA give bonuses to the people who run it even when the company posts a loss then there is more to the picture than profits.

I think it's really great that we have some people that are old school unionists and it would really be something to see things change into all TWU represented M&R becoming a more unified group. But, lets face history as it has been for 25+ years. The international will continue to be the owners of the agreements and the weak union leaders it has always been, (in some people’s opinion). (i.e., watch the numbers this POS passes by) They work WITH the Company, not against. They believe it is in their interest and ours as the "labor" to not knock over the apple cart. And the membership? Well, lets face the facts there as well, after all we are "ME"chanics. Each of us here for our own reasons, not here for the whole. Most of us haven't a clue as to why we even struck them 40 freakin years ago. What's more, we haven't a clue as to what real unionism even looks like. So, everyone here, keep ranting and raving, hey, it passes the time and you'll be the ones voting for it then complaining about it the next day..

I agree that we are in bad shape as far as being a union, I dont think its by chance either but rather by design. Our union here at AA is designed to fail. The structure is at fault and the only thing that the members are guilty of is tolerating it. The members can start to change that by voting NO. A NO vote sends a message to the company as well as the union. In some cases when a Union brings back a bad deal the members have voted out the union that brought it back as well. A NO vote sends the message to all parties that the membership will not tolerate it anymore.

One of the few things thats left on the Vermont Plan that the company never even asked for was the elimination of company paid union business. Why is that? Sure I bet it irks them that they pay me to be a little prick in their side but it also allows them to have people like Gilboy, Luis et al doing their bidding at the negotiations table and help lower the expectations of the membership. That $2 million is the best investment they make. They save at least $190 million a year just in M&R.

The fact that we are split up into 21 seperate locals leaves the International in control of our contract negotiations, and make no mistake the International negotiates the contract, not the committee, just look at Article 47, the so called negotiators are listed as "Witnesses". The membership however does have the final say and the purpose of the Negotiating Committee is to make the membership feel that people they elected had a part in making the deal. In reality the negotiating committee only negotiates with the negotiating committee. The International picks out a few willing participants, gives them International Titles and they work with the International on getting what the International wants the committee to bring back to the membership, we have 4 Presidents on the committee with International Titles, Luis, Gilboy, Clark and Zimmerman, of course all were Yes votes. All would support Dons position on every issue. All would reinforce Dons assertions of possible bankruptcy filing and othe expectation lowering propaganda. In one incident when I countered Dons fear mongering I brought up how Citibank just bought a Billion dollars worth of AAdvantage miles and I'm sure they did their homework. They wouldnt lay out a Billion dollars to a company that was about to file BK. Steve Luis, in an agitated tone retorted "That doesnt mean anything, a billion dollars is nothing to Citibank."

Nothings ever going to change until I leave this craphole job someday, hopefully with my retirement.

Well things have changed, for the worse, and if this passes it will be worse still. If you are planning to get out of here with your pension I would suggest you do it soon. If the 50plus guys can vote away our retiree health care the new hires will be able to vote away our pensions. If this passes look for the company to start hiring SMAs right away, even if they have to lay off AMTs six months down the road.

NO in Dallas (Not that it matters)

It matters. The larger the NO vote the better. Luis may be voted out next week, two yes votes from MCI may be gone by September, that could be a major shift in the committee that would send shock waves through both the company and the International. A new President from Tulsa who ran on a platorm of taking back the union isnt likely to be as pro-company as their current President. Plus I think the company wants to get a new deal in place before the Summer numbers start to get released. They made a profit last quarter, load factors for June broke records across the industry, AA's load factor was up 3.2% even though they increased capacity by 1.3% . Most of our gains were in the highly profitable International routes, Pacific up 15.4%, Latin America up 5.9% and Atlantic up 5.1%.

Signing a five year concessionary deal now would be dumb. Dont be so pessimstic about your brothers and sisters, they may suprise you. Share your reasoning with them. I've seen it before.

 

[Bob Owens]

• I VOTE TO ACCEPT

• I VOTE TO REJECT AND AUTHORIZE THE NEGOTIATING TEAM TO TAKE WHATEVER ACTION NECESSARY UP TO AND INCLUDING A STRIKE


It seems that the Internationals choice of language on the ballott is creating concern. I dont have a problem with the inclusion of the Strike authoriztion language, I have a problem with the omissions of what acceptance means. A five year extension of the 2003 concessions with the addition of over a dozen more major concessions.

Even in the TA, while the International is pretending to take a neutral stance clearly they arent. It makes a point of mentioning the pay adjustments but doesnt mention any of the new concessions. Sure its in the book, but so are the pay adjustments.

 

[Hopeful]

• I VOTE TO ACCEPT

• I VOTE TO REJECT AND AUTHORIZE THE NEGOTIATING TEAM TO TAKE WHATEVER ACTION NECESSARY UP TO AND INCLUDING A STRIKE


It seems that the Internationals choice of language on the ballott is creating concern. I dont have a problem with the inclusion of the Strike authoriztion language, I have a problem with the omissions of what acceptance means. A five year extension of the 2003 concessions with the addition of over a dozen more major concessions.

Even in the TA, while the International is pretending to take a neutral stance clearly they arent. It makes a point of mentioning the pay adjustments but doesnt mention any of the new concessions. Sure its in the book, but so are the pay adjustments.

I hope everyone realizes that "WHATEVER ACTION NECESSARY UP TO AND INCLUDING A STRIKE" will also include Little undoing a rejection of the contract by the membership. You know, for the good of the members.

I hope everyone does not have memory loss...Little was ready to undo the 2003 concession package if it was rejected.

You know, for the good of the members..


I truly hope that all members realize how worthless the TWU is.

Here he have Little, Conley, Gless and Videtich with their executive compensation pushing this contract on behalf of the company..

DOES THIS NOT SIT WELL WITH EVERYONE?

 

[The Goose]

It would be comical if EVERYONE would do this to the wording on their ballot:



• I VOTE TO REJECT AND AUTHORIZE THE NEGOTIATING TEAM TO TAKE WHATEVER ACTION NECESSARY UP TO AND INCLUDING A STRIKE

Fat chance of that, though.

 

[Hopeful]

It would be comical if EVERYONE would do this to the wording on their ballot:



• I VOTE TO REJECT AND AUTHORIZE THE NEGOTIATING TEAM TO TAKE WHATEVER ACTION NECESSARY UP TO AND INCLUDING A STRIKE

Fat chance of that, though.

Let's not give the worthless union a reason to void a ballot.

In case some people don't know, the ballots will be based on 50% +1 of the ballots returned. NOT 50% + 1 of all affected members like in the past.
So an unreturned ballot is simply not counted.

 

[DallasConehead]

It would be comical if EVERYONE would do this to the wording on their ballot:



• I VOTE TO REJECT AND AUTHORIZE THE NEGOTIATING TEAM TO TAKE WHATEVER ACTION NECESSARY UP TO AND INCLUDING A STRIKE

Fat chance of that, though.

It's always been the same language. Ok, lets put this in easier terms, the Yes vote would be to accept the POS TA as our contract. The vote to reject is a vote to reject the TA in its current form. And it is also a vote for a strike. Which most of you don't have the stones to do nor are most of you prepared for. Most of you just rant and rave then drive your brand new 40k truck to your 3500sqft house and pay for the gas with one of your maxxed out credit cards.

 

[TWU informer]

Why are everyone's panties in a wad?

This is the TWU M.O. that has taken place since the day you all hired in, and today you act as those you just now came to know these facts are common.

I don't get it? The AMFA Card Drive went on for over 5 years from 1998-2003 and I know literature was published and distributed pointing out with proof, exactly how this has happened in the past, there were power point presentations presented at all informational meetings showing documented proof that this is how the TWU handles negotiations. Yet, you guys all sound as though the truth has been just revealed and when it hits you in the face again, you are shocked. Sigh, What a wasted 5 years of time and money.

If you makes you feel better to complain and vent your frustration fine. But are you really shocked that this is happening?

PS Dont forget the Printed Sales Pitch that will arrive with your ballot informing you of all the positives of the agreement while ignoring the negatives.

 

[TWU informer]

It would be comical if EVERYONE would do this to the wording on their ballot:



• I VOTE TO REJECT AND AUTHORIZE THE NEGOTIATING TEAM TO TAKE WHATEVER ACTION NECESSARY UP TO AND INCLUDING A STRIKE

Fat chance of that, though.

This would not be recommended to do if you want a NO vote to count. The balloting is done by so-called secret ballot and if mark your ballot in this way, this ballot will be thrown out and not counted. Comical? Maybe, but seriously do not consider doing this.

 

[The Goose]

This would not be recommended to do if you want a NO vote to count. The balloting is done by so-called secret ballot and if mark your ballot in this way, this ballot will be thrown out and not counted. Comical? Maybe, but seriously do not consider doing this.

Aw hell, D - I know that.

I was simply musing re: the effect it would have if a few thousand people did this or if anyone would notice.

Then again, we could all walk in, sing a bar of "Alice's Restaurant", and walk out. Didn't Arlo say that they'd think it was a "conspiracy" or something if that was done?

Screw the restaurant - the concession stand is closed.

"You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant - (excepting Alice)" ...

 

[Bob Owens]

It's always been the same language. Ok, lets put this in easier terms, the Yes vote would be to accept the POS TA as our contract. The vote to reject is a vote to reject the TA in its current form. And it is also a vote for a strike. Which most of you don't have the stones to do nor are most of you prepared for. Most of you just rant and rave then drive your brand new 40k truck to your 3500sqft house and pay for the gas with one of your maxxed out credit cards.

It wasnt on the 2003 Ballott but I agree thats its been on the ones before that, 2001, 1995 etc. While I do see it as a scare tactic, one thats proven to be effective I do agree with what I think you are saying, that if we arent prepared to fight for something better, and that includes striking, that we shouldnt complain when we keep getting something thats worse.

Please dont make any marks on the ballott, it just gives AAA, which is already bad enough, the excuse to void your NO ballot. In the past we have had contracts pass by the smallest of margins.

 

[Large Grey]

Since 2002 when AA/TWU collaborated to steal vacation we had in the bank from the previous year - AND got the saps in this "organization" to agree to a pay reduction without a "ShAAre the Gain" clause,
.. we have EACH lost (approximately) over $230,000 in pay alone.

Formula: $10 / hr. x 2080 (hrs per year) x 8 years = $230,400 EACH, not counting holidays, sk etc.
Since then, AA management put every dime of profit in their silk pockets and laughed at us day by day.

Every time we touch an airplane AA saves a lot of money. Contractors will never do as well as we can and do day by day although they will try.

At 49 I have finally realized this relationship has to end one way or another.

I VOTE NO!

You must have the courage and professional pride to walk away from a bad situation. I have it and will. Will you?