APFA to send AA's last best offer to members for a vote
- Thread starter FWAAA
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #17
All valid reasons to dislike the LBO, but what about the alternative?
The choices are
A. LBO
B. Abrogation and imposition of the term sheet; or
C. Judge denies motion to abrogate.
If you discount the probability of B by assigning a higher probability to C, then a rejection of A doesn't look so bad.
jimntx
Veteran
Rah rah team! Go Horton! We all know your position. But, then you're not faced with what is before us. No the LBFO does not look good in comparison to the term sheet. Even though you cheerleaders have to believe that in order to keep cheering for that bunch of thieves.
Has a judge ever voided out the Pilots, Mechanics and Flight Attendants Contracts all at the same time?
I think if all three of us vote it down the Judge will not abrogate, at least not till after the Summer.
Like I've said many times before, pegged to the bottom, by a wide margin for another six years is the worst case scenario for me. Let them impose if they must, and I'll enjoy watching it blow up in their faces.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #20
The judge has said that he'll render the decision no later than Aug 15, and delaying that decision would require AA's consent. Since the judge does not impose the term sheet (only abrogates the current agreement, permitting AA to impose its terms), the judge could certainly rule by Aug 15 yet AA could wait another couple of weeks or couple of months before imposing its terms. And not because it's worried that mass walkouts would occur - rather, it would give the workgroups one last chance to negotiate agreements before AA imposes its terms.
Seems to me that negotiating leverage would decline substantially if the other side is holding a judicial order permitting it to impose its terms upon the workgroups, but I'm certain that many will disgree.
And, of course, there's that other possibility, the one where the judge denies AA's motion and refuses to abrogate the agreements, but that's a longshot. There aren't very many other cases where the debtor failed to get the 1113 relief they requested.
And why wouldnt AA give consent again. like June 6, June 22 and June 29th? Sure the Judge needs their consent but how wise would it be for AA to say "no I need it now?" (OK, heres your answer-motion denied.)
Not really, whats the difference? Either way we are at the bottom. If we accept we are stuck for at least 6 years, if we reject its still open.
Sometimes the threat is worse than the punishment. AA doesnt even enforce what it can do, so they abrogate and now try to put in place rules that the guys are against without the excuse of "you guys accepted it". Like I've said, "powder keg, let them provide the spark".
Are there any other cases where an Airline enterred BK with over $4 billion in cash, 500 new airplanes on order (which make up most of the debt, and workers who lag the industry in pay, benefits, workrules ect? Back to my original question, has a Judge ever abrogated the Pilots, Flight Attendants and mechanics contracts all at once? I know why you wont answer the question. Because if one group holds out and all the others accept it, all other things being equal, the lone group that gets abrogated appears unreasonable, after all everybody else accepted the offer, so that group comes under pressure from other work groups to settle however if the three major groups all reject it that dynamic which puts pressure on the holdout to settle is not there and the likleyhood that abrogation will force acceptance diminishes, as does the likelyhood for abrogation or implementation in the event of abrogation. Facing one group is one thing, facing the pilots, Flight Attendants and Mechanics, three large groups which cant be outsourced readily is another.
Lets say the Judge does abrogate, the RLA still is in place, what would be the legal reasoning for the NMB to determine that after four years of negotiations, three in mediation , an 1113 filing, three rejections via membership vote and abrogation-or not- that an impasse does not exist? In order to retain any credibility the NMB would have to release, after all abrogation already released one party. I'm not saying that they would let us strike but they have to follow the process, the next step would most likely be a PEB. Thats how its been done in the rails for years and before you bring up AMTRAKs 8 year deal let me fill you in on a few things, first of all the only some of the contracts were 8 years amendable, and they didnt push too hard because they had COLAs which gave them pay increases all along. The PEB also ruled for full retro saying that to do otherwise rewards the company for delaying negotiations and as it is they got an interest free loan off the backs of their workers.
jimntx
Veteran
Unfortunately, Bob, the f/as will approve this abortion of an LBFO. The ones who plan to stay will look only at the "giant" 9% raise (stretched over 6 years), and won't even consider what flying 100 hours every month with the possibility (or probability) of having only 1 day off between trips will do to them. To get 100 hours of flying time will require over 200 hours a month on duty for most trips. I just flew a trip that was worth 17 hours and 25 minutes of flight pay. It was scheduled at 54 hours and 10 minutes time away from base; so, 36 hours and 45 minutes is unpaid (if you don't count our princely $1.25/hr expense money). In reality, due to delays time away from base was closer to 60 hours, but paid time only increased 10 minutes.
The ones who want the early out will vote Yes, take the money and run, and never think (or care) about the mess they are leaving for their fellow f/as who stay.
And, I've already heard some say, "It's so much better than the term sheet." It's not. If you actually read the comparison table most of the entries in the LBFO column say "Same as term sheet."
Oh, and the NMB will simply do what it has done up until now, they will refuse to release the unions from mediation on the basis that the impasse is due to unreasonable demands on the part of the unions. Failure to bargain in good faith on the part of the company will not even be considered as a possibility.
The ones who want the early out will vote Yes, take the money and run, and never think (or care) about the mess they are leaving for their fellow f/as who stay.
And, I've already heard some say, "It's so much better than the term sheet." It's not. If you actually read the comparison table most of the entries in the LBFO column say "Same as term sheet."
Oh, and the NMB will simply do what it has done up until now, they will refuse to release the unions from mediation on the basis that the impasse is due to unreasonable demands on the part of the unions. Failure to bargain in good faith on the part of the company will not even be considered as a possibility.
- Banned
- #23
What money? It will be eaten up in taxes. Do you think they’ll get many takers?
jimntx
Veteran
Amen, but it's like employees in a company I used to work for. In a class action discrimination suit, some of them got $60,000 cash compensation. The employee parking lot immediately displayed a rash of new Cadillac Escalades and Chevy Surburbans (loaded). Then, and only then, did those employees not only start complaining that they had to pay taxes on the $60,000, but also the cost of gas was outrageous.
I have heard from at least one member of management that I need not worry about being furloughed (I'm right in the middle of the 2300 f/as that they will no longer need when Domestic and International are combined). She feels that so many will take the early out that they will have to have new hire classes in the first half of 2013.
By the way, the full LBFO specifies that people on the furlough list who take the early out must forfeit any recall rights. (Well, duh.) The important point is that the people still on the furlough list are eligible to take the $40,000.
- Banned
- #26
I don’t think many will take the early out but I may be wrong.
Also, it’s my understanding that airlines will grow in the future. I think you are going to be needed like the rest of us--who are never given incentive to leave.
Demand for airline pilots set to soar
jimntx
Veteran
Hon, demand for pilots IS set to soar because December of this year makes 5 years since the mandatory retirement age for pilots was increased from 60 to 65. There are going to be a lot of pilot retirements over the next year or so. However, there is no shortage, nor will there be, for flight attendants.
The public still believes the movies that lead them to believe that all f/as fly around the world and have 3-day layovers in Paris and Rome. I have friends who KNOW that I am a domestic flight attendant, and they still ask me if I ever work flights to Paris. There were a couple of people in my new hire class that thought they would go immediately to International because they spoke Spanish. (little did they know) If AA were to advertise for new hire flight attendants, the line would stretch from DFW airport down to Six Flags, at least.
Now, not all of those would be "hireable." Not all would make it through training. Not all would even accept the job when they put pencil to paper, did the math (those capable of doing the math, I mean), and figured out what the gross is on $18/hr (which sounds great to people making minimum wage) with a guarantee of only 70 hours/month. However, AA would be able to replace all of us in a relatively short span of time. Whether all those new hires would be able to provide a decent level of service is a "don't care" item to the company. The Severe Abdominal Gas (Chicken Quesadilla) and the salmonella (that "Mandarin" Salmon Salad) lunch entrees prove that.
I've already pretty much decided to retire shortly after collecting my signing bonus. I worked slightly over 100 hours in May. I didn't like it. Flying 5 or 6 days straight--particularly with today's "whatever I want to do is my bygod Constitutional right to do" passengers--is not my idea of good clean fun. :blush:
The public still believes the movies that lead them to believe that all f/as fly around the world and have 3-day layovers in Paris and Rome. I have friends who KNOW that I am a domestic flight attendant, and they still ask me if I ever work flights to Paris. There were a couple of people in my new hire class that thought they would go immediately to International because they spoke Spanish. (little did they know) If AA were to advertise for new hire flight attendants, the line would stretch from DFW airport down to Six Flags, at least.
Now, not all of those would be "hireable." Not all would make it through training. Not all would even accept the job when they put pencil to paper, did the math (those capable of doing the math, I mean), and figured out what the gross is on $18/hr (which sounds great to people making minimum wage) with a guarantee of only 70 hours/month. However, AA would be able to replace all of us in a relatively short span of time. Whether all those new hires would be able to provide a decent level of service is a "don't care" item to the company. The Severe Abdominal Gas (Chicken Quesadilla) and the salmonella (that "Mandarin" Salmon Salad) lunch entrees prove that.
I've already pretty much decided to retire shortly after collecting my signing bonus. I worked slightly over 100 hours in May. I didn't like it. Flying 5 or 6 days straight--particularly with today's "whatever I want to do is my bygod Constitutional right to do" passengers--is not my idea of good clean fun. :blush:
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #28
Not exactly. The top line (revenue) is improving, but the bottom line (net or loss) is still weak. $95 million profit on $6.5 billion of revenue in a very busy second quarter? This week, UA and DL will likely report profits five times larger (excluding special items), primarily because of their lower labor costs.
That's not among the statutory criteria for abrogating contracts under 1113. If AA satisfied the requirements, then the judge will grant AA's motion.
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
Tongue in cheek maybe...But a valid realistic point.
The judge's main priority is getting AA OUT of BK.
