will fix for food
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 664
- 50
Are you saying that the judge could come back and impose the TA?
APA getting a tad nervous?
- Thread starter Hopeful
- Start date
Are you saying that the judge could come back and impose the TA?
OP
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #17
Informer, like everyone else here, I am giving an opinion. How things actually play out is anyone's guess.
But in this case, the Judge already showed his hand with respect to the pilots.
And unlike our rejected LBO I, we went right back to negotiations resulting in LBO II....
Do you see the pilots negotiating right now?
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
99Roadstar
Member
- Jul 12, 2011
- 46
- 59
I think by voting NO, APA told AA, See you in court!!
Judge Lane has already told the parties that his interpretation of the law is that he imposes nothing and does not have legal authority to tell AA what it can or can't impose. AA intially (when it filed the 1113 motion) asked the judge to bless AA's intention to impose the term sheets if the judge ruled granted the abrogation motion. In the NW flight attendant case, the judge wouldn't let NW impose the term sheet, he ruled that NW could impose nothing less favorable than the failed TA.
Somewhere in the past few weeks, I read something about the pilots being relegated to the little kids' table if the APA rejected the LBO while the FAs and TWU workgroups would have a seat at the adult (decision-making) table.
It wouldn't surprise me if that's beginning to sink in among some of the pilots who voted no. AA offered them an outsized claim that might end up being worth $500 million to perhaps $1.0 billion or more of the new company along with less-draconian scope and workrule changes plus substantially higher raises than the term sheet offered.
If a pilot voted yes, you gotta think that they can't be very happy that they were outvoted by pilots who let their emotional hatred overrule their financial good sense.
Employees almost never leave bankruptcy with as much or more as they had going in. Rational employees who can keep their anger and emotions in check recognize that and deal with the unfortunate reality that concessions are inevitable and they only thing over which they have control is minimizing the concessions or having input in the areas of cost-savings. By rejecting the LBO, it appears that thousands of pilots are hoping that their swagger and bravado get them what they desire, and that doesn't appear very likely.
The ultimate question is whether Horton will impose the term sheet or the LBO or, perhaps, some of the LBO but not all of it. Perhaps Horton will impose the LBO but not give the pilots their 13.5% claim. Maybe he'll impose the term sheet scope provisions but give the pilots the payraises from the LBO.
Somewhere in the past few weeks, I read something about the pilots being relegated to the little kids' table if the APA rejected the LBO while the FAs and TWU workgroups would have a seat at the adult (decision-making) table.
It wouldn't surprise me if that's beginning to sink in among some of the pilots who voted no. AA offered them an outsized claim that might end up being worth $500 million to perhaps $1.0 billion or more of the new company along with less-draconian scope and workrule changes plus substantially higher raises than the term sheet offered.
If a pilot voted yes, you gotta think that they can't be very happy that they were outvoted by pilots who let their emotional hatred overrule their financial good sense.
Employees almost never leave bankruptcy with as much or more as they had going in. Rational employees who can keep their anger and emotions in check recognize that and deal with the unfortunate reality that concessions are inevitable and they only thing over which they have control is minimizing the concessions or having input in the areas of cost-savings. By rejecting the LBO, it appears that thousands of pilots are hoping that their swagger and bravado get them what they desire, and that doesn't appear very likely.
The ultimate question is whether Horton will impose the term sheet or the LBO or, perhaps, some of the LBO but not all of it. Perhaps Horton will impose the LBO but not give the pilots their 13.5% claim. Maybe he'll impose the term sheet scope provisions but give the pilots the payraises from the LBO.
99Roadstar
Member
- Jul 12, 2011
- 46
- 59
Why would they not impose the T/A?.......the company already agreed to that.
99Roadstar
Member
- Jul 12, 2011
- 46
- 59
That is one reason I voted NO on this M&R pos. Why would the company impose term sheets when they already have agreed to something different. That would just alienate every employee, not just the no voters............
No reason to attack a women about her looks from a poorly lighted you tube video. on a public forum.
Keep your politics to yourself, this isn't the forum to prove your ignorance about the issues.
Because management can be mean and petty, just like everyone else?
One possible reason might be that imposing the LBO still leaves the majority of the workgroup angry at management, because they voted no. So if a majority of the workgroup is going to be angry at management, then why not impose what you said you'd impose (the term sheet) if the LBO was rejected? That way, the no voters are still very angry (they'd be angry even if the LBO was imposed) but the the yes voters are angry also. Maybe some of the yes voters are angry at the no-voters. So you get union infighting plus you save money by imposing the term sheet. If you're in for a penny, might as well be in for a pound.
Mach is correct, the way I see it, if you GIVE the pilots the LBO, then you are not giving the pilots what they voted for, which is a contract imposed by the bankruptcy judge. Remember the pilots voted to get a contract from a bankruptcy judge, who's responsiblity it is to make sure the company exits bk with every chance to succed after bk. Not to make sure a union gets an industry leading or even a fair contract during bk.
Ken MacTiernan
Veteran
Maybe for the same reasons the twu faithful said if we voted no then we would get something worse event though our t/a was what AA said they could live with. I think the company should not give the term sheet because there is no need for that.
Similar threads
