AFA Council 40 Responds to Dave''s Letter

[EdLDK]

MR Planes, you do not negotiate contracts in court, sections 1113 and 1114 were enacted by Congress after Lorenzo used the courts to pillage the employees, there are clear cut steps that must be taken in the process in order for a court to abrograte a contract.[BR][BR]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3][FONT color=#000000]all the procedures and steps in the bankruptcy codes.[SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"] [/SPAN]One item covered in depth is the 1113 letter, which refers to the section of code that ensures that a company negotiates with the union before they seek abrogation of the labor agreement.[SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"] [/SPAN]When a company seeks protection, the agreement remains in effect.[SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"] [/SPAN]When a union negotiates an 1113 letter it secures an agreement with the company showing that the company will not seek further cuts from labor.[SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"] [/SPAN]To this date, no company that has had an 1113 letter negotiated has ever asked the court to abrogate it.[?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /][o][/o][/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3][FONT color=#000000] [o][/o][/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3][FONT color=#000000]Companies that request abrogation of the labor agreement but it must meet the following nine (9) distinct requirements:[o][/o][/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3][FONT color=#000000] [o][/o][/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]1.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The debtor in possession must have made a proposal to the union.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]2.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The proposal must be based upon the most complete and reliable information available at the time of the proposal.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]3.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The modification must be necessary to permit reorganization.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]4.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The modification must provide that all affected parties be treated fairly and equitably.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]5.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The debtor must provide the union with such relevant information as is necessary to evaluate the proposal.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]6.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The debtor must have met with the collective bargaining representative at the reasonable times subsequent to making the proposal.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]7.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The debtor must have negotiated with the union concerning the proposal in good faith.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]8.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The union must have refused to accept the proposal with good cause.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in; TEXT-INDENT: -0.25in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list 1.0in"][FONT color=#000000][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]9.[/FONT][SPAN style="FONT: 7pt 'Times New Roman'"] [/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN lang=EN style="mso-ansi-language: EN"][FONT size=3]The balance of the equities must clearly favor rejection of the agreement.[o][/o][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]

 

[trvlr64]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/29/2002 6:39:20 AM ITRADE wrote:




[BLOCKQUOTE]
----------------
On 12/28/2002 9:40:31 PM trvlr64 wrote:



Seems to me your monthly cost for medical benefits are actually quite good. I'm paying $65.08 a month in my company for what is considered your 90/70 plan. Even when I worked in the hospitals here in PIT, we paid even higher monthly contributions for "home hostage healthcare" than you are going to have to pay. And this was back in the 1980's this started for hospital employees. If we even tried to go outside of the hospital network our out of pocket costs doubled.

The low cost of your contribution days are long over. It just took your management years to finally figure it out.

----------------[/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]


Yeah, boo hoo hoo. My firm's medicals have shot through the roof for 2003. My 90/70 plan for a husband/wife is $223 a month; family is $406 a month.[/P]
----------------
[/blockquote]


WOW !! Now that's called getting screwed royally?!

PS.....PAGirl.......I have coworkers and friends at my old hospital that work strictly for their medical benefits. They carry their family for the insurance and the husband's check pays the bills.

That too is getting screwed royally!

 

[PITbull]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/29/2002 11:49:12 AM mrplanes wrote:

mlt:

If Siegle were union "busting" we would NOT have had the chance to negotiate (albeit under duress) anything. He would have negated the contracts under the BK code and could have done so long ago. You seem to miss that point. What is happening here is a change to the very industry that has provided substantially excellent pay and working conditions over the years. We are in front leading the pack in those changes. If you think the other major airlines will not follow suit in short order you are drinking from the same cup as your Troubled Teddy. Look at UAL for example. Ask yourself which management team is more "labor friendly".

If you and Teddy think he is bluffing you are sadly mistaken. Just as Poli and Bryan were at ATC and Eastern. This industry will no longer support the kinds of pay and working conditions you have been used to. And USAirways is the first to understand that. The MAJORITY of our union leadership also understand that. That's why you are presented anything to vote on in the first place. Unfortunately, some of our union members don't understand what is happening. And they will vote no as is there right. But in the end, the yes votes will win. And common sense will prevail over emotion and denial.

Our jobs and our industry have changed. You can blame whoever you want but that will not change that fact. And all the name calling and chest thumping may make you feel better but it will do no good.
----------------
[/blockquote]
mr:

I don't think Teddy cares if your bluffing. From what she has written on her web page, implies the job has no quality of life left and wages are too low to meet personal bill obligations. I called the union office and asked about "sick time" for International f/as...and how these new provisions proposed apply...no one knows..no written language. Who purchases a car or house with no written paper work with details on how much it is and who pays for what costs at closing? Or the lender, at one interest rate and what closing costs? How can anyone vote "yes", if they don't know WHAT THE HELL WE ARE VOTING ON?! Again, quick timelines, hurry up, we don't want labor to be able to think things through and get any information...hurry, hurry.

Blue collar America "WAKE UP CALL"...THEY'RE HERE!!!!

 

[PITbull]

As long as there are two wage earners in a houshold and one is able to use there medical coverage for the family, and the other doesn't, than, for some, you can live with that. However, when there is only on wage earner (single parenting) that that cuts way deep and folks need to start using their credit cards in ordser to make ends meet at the end of the month. Even if you don't use the medical system and have only to deal with the contributions monthly, can place families in finacail jepoardy.

Realistically, this is why folks unionize. For better wages, work conditions and benefits. When you have a management that does not consider their "rank and file " employees on any of these levels and protect their work force...prime targets for unionization of employees. If unionized workers accept these types of work conditions with no increases in wages going forward, and don't put up any type of protest, then why be union?

"Union spirit" needs to be reawaken from it's deep sleep. There are folks (like in the Crystal palace in D.C.) that make their living feeding off the carcasses of battered unions. We should all be saying in unison "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH". As long as unions keep bending and being scared off by management dangling their jobs in front of them as the ultimate threat, Labor will never move forward. Do not critisize the Union Leaders that speak out, those have arrived in this battle early and know what lies ahead.

 

[MarkMyWords]

PAgirl - Teddy - Whatever your name is, let me ask you this: Do you think the company is bluffing? Are you willing to bet your job or your pension to prove it? You talk about quality of life issues and not being able to make ends meet with the current concessions, then I say that you, or who ever you are talking about, are living beyond your means. Should you continue with your stance and do persuade enough people to your point of view, what will your quality of life be like when there is no USAirways and you are going to have to take you "job skills" to Eat N Park? How many 50K a year jobs are out there that you and 9000 other F/A's could walk right into. Let's not even talk about the topped out F/A;s, lets use your average of 32K. Are you willing to risk it all on your belief that the Management of this company is lying?

I'm sorry, but personally, I think Dave is doing what needs to be done in order for us to survive. Do you think it was his idea to come back for Round 2? No. It was the ATSB that dictated that the concession levels and revenue predictions were not sufficient to achieve the 7% profit margin. Dave and Company came to the unions in the summer with a plan and projected needs. They settled on 83-85% of the original concession amounts because they felt that they may get better revenue rates by this time. It didn't happen. I propose to you, YOU come up with a better plan to achieve the desired results to secure the ATSB loan. Let's hear your words of wisdom on where you would have come up with 1.6-1.8 billion dollars in cost savings. How would YOU solve the pension crisis? If you were Dave S, how would you have navigated us through the bankruptcy process?

Yes it is great to approach "negotiations" with a sense of skepticism, but your union has seen the books. They know the full story as does all of the other unions. Your skepticism and loud mouth tactics are not shared by any of the other AFA members or any of the other unions in the company. Doesn't that in itself speak volumes? Wouldn't ALPA, a labor group contributing in excess of 585 million dollars, be the first to stand up and fight if they felt the company was bluffing? Would they have rolled over on the 100 Million in additional concessions if they felt that the threat of liquidation wasn't real?

What's your plan to get us on the road to profitability PAGirl - Teddy - Whoever you are? It is great to slam and flame what Dave and Dave are doing, but do you have a better plan?