American does not want binding arbitartion

[Bob Owens]

Had the financing come from someone else in the form of DIP, you can guarantee they'd be looking out for their interests first & foremost, ahead of your's & management's...

Oh, still waiting to see an example of an airline who settled their labor contracts thru binding arbitration.

Waiting to see an example of where workers who were at the bottom of the industry had their contract abrogated and even lower wages imposed.

 

[700UW]

1993 APFA Strike at AA

Artilce

 

[strikeforce]

Had the financing come from someone else in the form of DIP, you can guarantee they'd be looking out for their interests first & foremost, ahead of your's & management's...

Oh, still waiting to see an example of an airline who settled their labor contracts thru binding arbitration.

It's pretty obvious that management didn't want someone else telling them what to do. The non-DIP way of doing BK only reinforces my opinion that management is inept and scared that they would be kicked off the property. Something desperately needed at AA in order to survive!

 

[Bob Owens]

Attention AA AMTs: It's posts like this that cause me to predict contract abrogation in the near future.

What's the relevance of the amount of borrowed money that AA has not yet spent (the AA cash balance over which you constantly obsess)? Is your implication that $4 billion is so much money that AA should readily agree to the delay tactic of binding arbitration offered by the unions that are desperate to show their membership that they're doing something, anything in the face of concessions?

What's the practical difference, in your opinion, between a company that enters Ch 11 with very little cash and immediately borrows billions in debtor-in-possession financing and AA, which borrowed billions in the months before it filed for Ch 11, negating the need for DIP financing? In my view, no real practical difference. You seem to think there's a distinction. What's the practical distinction?

So if i'm holding a mortgage with $100,000 left on it and have $50,000 in the bank is that considered borrowed money? Are we all bankrupt regardless of our ability to service the debt?
Debt in itself is not toxic to a business, most businesses carry some debt, whats more critical is its ability to service the debt.

The fact that they are still able to borrow shows that people who get to look at a lot more than we do were confident that AA would be able to pay. Maybe these experts were wrong, but arent you the one who is always telling us we should rely on these types of experts?

As mechanics the two most important things we need to know are how to fix airplanes and how much to charge. Letting the company tell us how much we should charge while ignoring what our peers get for the same thing simply isnt good business.

I,m sitting here on what is now a Wednesday afternoon getting bumped from one flight to the next in a crowded terminal, if AA cant manage their money and pay us what others pay then as mechanics we are better off over the long run to see them liquidate, the sooner the better, because all theses people arent going to all of a sudden become homebodies. Somebody will scoop up the facilities and equipment and then they will need workers with the skillsets required to keep it all moving.

 

[strikeforce]

So if i'm holding a mortgage with $100,000 left on it and have $50,000 in the bank is that considered borrowed money? Are we all bankrupt regardless of our ability to service the debt?
Debt in itself is not toxic to a business, most businesses carry some debt, whats more critical is its ability to service the debt.

The fact that they are still able to borrow shows that people who get to look at a lot more than we do were confident that AA would be able to pay. Maybe these experts were wrong, but arent you the one who is always telling us we should rely on these types of experts?

As mechanics the two most important things we need to know are how to fix airplanes and how much to charge. Letting the company tell us how much we should charge while ignoring what our peers get for the same thing simply isnt good business.

I,m sitting here on what is now a Wednesday afternoon getting bumped from one flight to the next in a crowded terminal, if AA cant manage their money and pay us what others pay then as mechanics we are better off over the long run to see them liquidate, the sooner the better, because all theses people arent going to all of a sudden become homebodies. Somebody will scoop up the facilities and equipment and then they will need workers with the skillsets required to keep it all moving.

the problem is guys like Informer, Overspeed and many others are WILLING to work for much less than our skillsets require. AA, UA, NW/DL, CAL and others know that there are A&P's that will undermine and diminish the profession by undercutting. In ORD, we have our own mechanics that will work across the field for $30/hr and NO bennies, instead of working CS's or OT and make more than that. Didn't you say you work two jobs??? Do you work for one of these Line MRO's??? If you do or know someone that does.....then you or he/she is our problem. If Labor, like the TWU, IAM, and others were to make it illegal to work for AA and any competing MRO, then WE wouldn't have this problem. I even asked that question during Little's townhall, and he said, "he can't tell people where to work". Really??? Even if it's a detriment to our profession??? Blame labor, not AA.

 

[eolesen]

1993 APFA Strike at AA

Artilce

Yep. I'm shocked that it took this long for a non-AA person to come up with an answer. And it took almost two years to work thru all the issues.

Maybe that's why it hasn't been used since.