APFA Hotline regarding early out.

[jersey777]

APFA learned of AA’s rejecting our early-out proposal as most of you did – via a late in the day update on the company’s restructuring related website. When last we met with the company, although not embracing the proposal with resounding joy, there was not an official dismissal.

As has been the case for the past four years, APFA remains committed to reaching an agreement that considers all the Flight Attendants have sacrificed since 2003. At the same time it is very much aware that certain difficult steps must be taken to ensure that AA successfully reorganizes.

By rejecting APFA's early out proposal American has turned its back on similar plans it has embraced in the past as well as the early out plans recently endorsed by other airlines, which obviously believe in their economic efficacy. With this rejection, AA appears intent on forcing 2300 Flight Attendants out of their jobs and onto the street. Instead, it should find a way where the same number of Flight Attendants could leave or retire voluntarily if given an appropriate financial incentive.

Of course there's an up front cost, but the savings it provides over the contract's term should be very attractive to a forward-thinking management team. And the up front cost is minuscule compared to how much AMR is paying lawyers and financial advisers to find creative ways to exploit our membership.

We will continue to press the company on the early out. We have also presented the proposal in detail to the Unsecured Creditors’ Committee and the PBGC. APFA firmly stands by the proposal as a creative and efficient alternative to any head-count reductions while providing long-term savings for the company, and allowing Flight Attendants who have devoted much of their lives and sacrificed so much already to leave with dignity.

Negotiations will resume on Wednesday February 29, 2012.

 

[bluebird]

APFA learned of AA’s rejecting our early-out proposal...

That’s a shame.

 

[eolesen]

Maybe AA isn't pursuing financial incentives because they know they don't work. They are far from cost neutral, and only succeed in motivating people who would have likely left on their own terms within a year or two.

Sucks for those on the bottom, but the seniority system is what it is.

Gotta love the spin, though. Can't remember the last time APFA or APA did something "just to be nice" to the company.

 

[TWU informer]

Maybe AA isn't pursuing financial incentives because they know they don't work. They are far from cost neutral, and only succeed in motivating people who would have likely left on their own terms within a year or two.

Sucks for those on the bottom, but the seniority system is what it is.

Gotta love the spin, though. Can't remember the last time APFA or APA did something "just to be nice" to the company.

More than likely AA wants to negotiate cost cuts based on current seniority system and then offer the retirement incentives after the fact.

AKA have cake and eat it too.

Nothing like keeping those fearing for their job and in an unknown status voting on concession agreements.
Get those passed, and then watch the offer for early out after the voting.

AA even stated "At the appropiate time", i.e. after we have concessions locked in.

And you know all about spin. We are all here because it is our jobs and futures on the line.
You are here along with the paid triplets to act as the company propaganda ministers.

The failure to "be nice" goes both ways at American Airlines.
A belief that a possible $100 payout every three months is worthwhile while the big dogs rack in millions is like spitting in our faces on a quarterly basis.

 

[jason77]

The apfa could agree to everything in the term sheet in exchange for an early out and the company would still say no.There is no reason for the company to negotiate they have all the power.It's always cheaper to just lay people off.

 

[TWU informer]

The apfa could agree to everything in the term sheet in exchange for an early out and the company would still say no.There is no reason for the company to negotiate they have all the power.It's always cheaper to just lay people off.

Not once the concessions are locked in place. Vacation and Sick time alone is cheaper for lower senior employees.
There are many benefits to early out incentives, the only problem is that right now isn't the time and the last thing the company wants is to give the "unions" any credit at this point in the process. Just watch and see, after the concessions are completed, the early out will come out of the blue. I agree on your opinion regarding who has all the power right now. But there is a very strong potential of creating a fire starter that burns the place to the ground and it would be all over.

 

[damajagua]

While I personally wish that the company had granted the early out it makes absolutely no economic sense when you look at it from a purely business sense. Let's look at the people that are subject to furlough. The majorities at the top of the pay scale.. Top vacations accruals. A senior work force that uses medical insurance more. Again there is nothing more than I would have like for the company to accept; but no one with a half a brain could have believed that the company was going to agree to the early outs.
I do think it was disgraceful of the company not to tell the unions directly in negotiations about it. But this just prove to me that the company is not interested in any negotiations. They are just running the clock. I see contract abrogation on the horizon.

 

[jason77]

While I personally wish that the company had granted the early out it makes absolutely no economic sense when you look at it from a purely business sense. Let's look at the people that are subject to furlough. The majorities at the top of the pay scale.. Top vacations accruals. A senior work force that uses medical insurance more. Again there is nothing more than I would have like for the company to accept; but no one with a half a brain could have believed that the company was going to agree to the early outs.
I do think it was disgraceful of the company not to tell the unions directly in negotiations about it. But this just prove to me that the company is not interested in any negotiations. They are just running the clock. I see contract abrogation on the horizon.

I think American will be the first airline not to come to any agreements with any of the unions.

 

[TWU informer]

I think American will be the first airline not to come to any agreements with any of the unions.

I agree with you.

 

[ord78]

But this just prove to me that the company is not interested in any negotiations. They are just running the clock. I see contract abrogation on the horizon.

Spot on. And there is no 'spin' here as some would have it. I've been through every contract save one that apfa has negotiated and I state with clear concsouis that I have never been witness to an offer or counter offer being rejected out of hand as this last early out was that was NOT communicated to the union officers and negotiators FIRST. The company wants to go straight to the judge and to hell with the employees and/or their union. This management team is acting with an unearned bravado that may in the end cost each one of us our jobs permanently. They are drunk with power imho.

...just sayin

 

[eolesen]

When your employer is in bankruptcy, coming out and asking for $75,000 per buyout is also bravado. The unions knew that, too.

They also know they had their answer when the company chose not to discuss it. They're probably just not used to having to figure it out without the company spelling out "an official dismissal" in fifth grade language...

What has happened in past negotiations doesn't matter. This is a fast track, and there's no time for BS proposals for more than a years salary, medical, etc.

 

[TWU informer]

When your employer is in bankruptcy, coming out and asking for $75,000 per buyout is also bravado. The unions knew that, too.

They also know they had their answer when the company chose not to discuss it. They're probably just not used to having to figure it out without the company spelling out "an official dismissal" in fifth grade language...

What has happened in past negotiations doesn't matter. This is a fast track, and there's no time for BS proposals for more than a years salary, medical, etc.

I think the general feeling is that if this is going to be one-sided come hell or high water event, then there is plenty of time for BS proposals, because the entire process is nothing more than BS to begin with. Again, beware of the employees with matches seeking a burning. Never under estimate that they exist, Eastern Airlines showed what happens in this kind of enviorment. Interesting that AA Management showed everyone on the Tulsa Maintenance base the "Collision Course" Video about Eastern. Maybe that was required for training reasons, instead of a fear mongering tool? Since you are paid to be here, the burning will have a negative impact on you too. Welcome to the hard facts, that you seem to ignore. I can see the day you lose a client and then you get to feed and house me until I die, via more taxation.

 

[iluvaa]

I think the general feeling is that if this is going to be one-sided come hell or high water event, then there is plenty of time for BS proposals, because the entire process is nothing more than BS to begin with. Again, beware of the employees with matches seeking a burning. Never under estimate that they exist, Eastern Airlines showed what happens in this kind of enviorment. Interesting that AA Management showed everyone on the Tulsa Maintenance base the "Collision Course" Video about Eastern. Maybe that was required for training reasons, instead of a fear mongering tool? Since you are paid to be here, the burning will have a negative impact on you too. Welcome to the hard facts, that you seem to ignore. I can see the day you lose a client and then you get to feed and house me until I die, via more taxation.

I have a book of matches and the 100 other guys on my dock that will be layed off have lighters

 

[ord78]

Eastern Airlines showed what happens in this kind of enviorment.

My point exactly. At 34 years here i do NOT have a match waiting to ignite it anywhere. This IS my career and I am not about to willfully drive away the paying customer. But it is patently obvious the company wants to go straight to the court and get as low a pay scale and as a lose work rule environment as is possible. And they may well do that and get everything they want, but at what cost? Our industry is littered with the carcasses of other concerns attempting this very methodology and it DOES not work.

Agreed this whole process is coming down to a bs session of waiting out the clock...

 

[jimntx]

While I personally wish that the company had granted the early out it makes absolutely no economic sense when you look at it from a purely business sense. Let's look at the people that are subject to furlough. The majorities at the top of the pay scale.. Top vacations accruals. A senior work force that uses medical insurance more. Again there is nothing more than I would have like for the company to accept; but no one with a half a brain could have believed that the company was going to agree to the early outs.
I do think it was disgraceful of the company not to tell the unions directly in negotiations about it. But this just prove to me that the company is not interested in any negotiations. They are just running the clock. I see contract abrogation on the horizon.

All of that sounds good except it's not exactly true. The majority of the 2300 the company wants to get rid of are NOT at TOS. You must be referring to the former TW f/as. There are approx. 1000 former TWs on the active list (give or take a hundred), and some of them are not yet TOS. But, then that's rather a bogus argument because every single f/a currently active is, at minimum, well on their way to being TOS. Remember there is no one on the payroll who was hired after the Spring of 2001. The most junior active f/a--not counting the former TW f/as--will reach 10 years on the payroll within the next few months and will start the 11th year pay scale. I reached 10 years on the payroll last month, and there are some f/as junior to me (bidding seniority) who reached 10 years on the payroll almost 2 years ago because when we were furloughed, they went to work for Eagle. So, they are actually at a higher pay rate than I.

The company gains nothing financially in the long run by furloughing the former TW f/as plus another 1300 or so of us who are not yet top of scale. We will be on the furlough list, and the company will not be able to hire anyone cheaper than us as long as there is even 1 person left on the furlough list.

Instead of rejecting the union's early out proposal out of hand, the company should have made a counter offer for a lesser amount with more restrictions. They might have been pleasantly surprised that their first counter offer would be accepted. Now, to get the f/a corps to the size they want, they are going to have to furlough. Over 90% of the remaining f/as will be at TOS and the company has already said they are not going after wage cuts. Within a year or two, ALL of the remaining f/as will be TOS. At the rate that senior f/as are voluntarily leaving--i.e., retiring--it will be a LONG time before the company will be able to hire off the street at much lower wages.

The union, of course, was going to ask for the moon the first time. Who wouldn't? If you hope to get a Ford Mustang convertible in negotiations, you don't start out asking for that car, you ask for a BMW convertible. That's what negotiations are for. The company's behavior proves to me what others have said. The company has no intention of negotiating in good faith. (Try to imagine the shock on my face. Again.)