Bankruptcy

[strikeforce]

Yeah that's it. Go ask TWU Informer, maybe he can tell you what the "All-in" prevailing wage is that includes our defined pension and retirement insurance value.

TWU Informer is the one that has been paid to represent you in negotiations.

TWU Informer is the one that asked you to vote NO.

TWU Informer is the one that was ready with a plan once you voted NO to prove to you it was the right thing to do.

What is the workers argument Bob? A Boat Load of questions that you have that should have specific value answers and should have been answers in the memberships hands before we started negotiations?


Screw you Bob, you cannot answer these basic elementary questions so instead you attack me for being concerned about my job and future. Great Leader you are pal.

I am not the fall guy for your ignorance, your inability to lead effectively, or the failure of the negotiating committee to have professional assistance in negotiations.

PS BOB, check your facts about people going to TIMCO for experience. Here at AA in Tulsa, we hire zero experienced relatives of current employees and the TWU makes us train them how to our jobs. That is the real world and the truth, not just what sounds good or what people want to hear.

How about the 29D grievance by Gless where the union fought for ZERO experience!

 

[Bob Owens]

OK, but when you get done playing cards, and if I still have job, can we hire someone to NEGOTIATE?

I share your dissatisfaction with the Negotiations process. I do not control it. I have a voice but as I've told you before its the Internationals show. Now we do not even meet with the company anymore, Two, sometime three, representatives from the International and one who was chosen by the subcommittee to be Co-Chairman are the only ones who meet. Prior to that we as a committee did try to negotiate but the company will not move towards us, even if we move towards them. Their offers have been regressive. Why? Because they can, without a release they have no reason to negotiate no matter who is sent in there.

It doesnt really matter who these questions are directed at. Either the Union should have answers to them or by now the company should have provided proof of their position.

Should. But they arent available and the company has not provided them.

Unless of course in the card game facts dont really matter it is really a game of who can bluff and not getcalled. Which would explain your belief that the request for release will change the outcome of the card game. I dont think so, I think we end up deeper in the wrong end of nowhere.

There's always risk. Even if you ask for nothing.

I am just appauled that the negotaions that my future rides on is like a card game, and that this description comes from a negotiator.

Well I guess you can say that I'm not telling you what you want to hear.

So it is overhaul committe members job to repesent my interest and you are all for the line and your GEO Pay, which the overhaul member might have been doing all along using the roll call vote that you so much have an issue with.

???

 

[jimntx]

FWIW, my two cents says asking for release from mediation will be a wasted effort. If they have refused to release the flight attendants 3 or 4 times in the past two years, why should they release anyone else? If we should ever get a Congress that is willing to see the unions' side of things, the law should be changed that allows the NMB to keep unions in indefinite mediation--PARTICULARLY, in situations where the NMB's own mediators have thrown up their hands in despair and walked out. That should be an immediate and automatic release into the 30-day cooling off period. As Bob stated above, the company has no incentive to move ahead. Something has to happen that will get the company's attention.

 

[TWU informer]

I share your dissatisfaction with the Negotiations process. I do not control it. I have a voice but as I've told you before its the Internationals show. Now we do not even meet with the company anymore, Two, sometime three, representatives from the International and one who was chosen by the subcommittee to be Co-Chairman are the only ones who meet. Prior to that we as a committee did try to negotiate but the company will not move towards us, even if we move towards them. Their offers have been regressive. Why? Because they can, without a release they have no reason to negotiate no matter who is sent in there.

No, I've told you many times before this is what would happen and voting NO was futile.

You are the one who said vote NO with a dilusional belief that you could play cards better than they can.

You mentioned earlier something about me ranting. Isn't ranting on this bulletin board about all you have been able to produce since the Vote NO YouTube video?

Unless your hire in date is after 1989, you have seen this play out once before and therefore you should have known better.

I believe that during the AMFA Organizing Campaign had smoeone asked why don't we take this path instead of replacing our union, you would have told them what you are trying is impossible and correctly so.

In case you have forgotten, in 1989 we were in mediated negotiations and after rejecting one T/A and fast approaching a strike, a worse T/A was agreed to and the Union without hesitation said they had fought for us as hard as they could and we best ratifiy the worse agreement because nothing better will come from prolonging the fight. And so now, with your help, here we are again

 

[Bob Owens]

FWIW, my two cents says asking for release from mediation will be a wasted effort. If they have refused to release the flight attendants 3 or 4 times in the past two years, why should they release anyone else? If we should ever get a Congress that is willing to see the unions' side of things, the law should be changed that allows the NMB to keep unions in indefinite mediation--PARTICULARLY, in situations where the NMB's own mediators have thrown up their hands in despair and walked out. That should be an immediate and automatic release into the 30-day cooling off period. As Bob stated above, the company has no incentive to move ahead. Something has to happen that will get the company's attention.

We took a TA back to the members, it was rejected. The NMB walked out of the process, what would be their reasoning behind failing to release us? They made the rules and the rules describe the process and when they feel that Mediation will not produce an agreement, which is what they said, they are supposed to proffer binding arbitration and if either side says no then the parties are released and put into a 30 day cooling off period, after that its either settlement, self help or PEB.

We need to push the NMB to follow their own rules and enforce the RLA as it was written. It was never the intent to drag out negotiations until the unions are forced to submit due to inflation, thats why PEBs usually recommend back pay.

Four years, when the normal term of a contract us two years is excessive. Time to release the parties and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[TWU informer]

We took a TA back to the members, it was rejected. The NMB walked out of the process, what would be their reasoning behind failing to release us? They made the rules and the rules describe the process and when they feel that Mediation will not produce an agreement, which is what they said, they are supposed to proffer binding arbitration and if either side says no then the parties are released and put into a 30 day cooling off period, after that its either settlement, self help or PEB.

We need to push the NMB to follow their own rules and enforce the RLA as it was written. It was never the intent to drag out negotiations until the unions are forced to submit due to inflation, thats why PEBs usually recommend back pay.

Four years, when the normal term of a contract us two years is excessive. Time to release the parties and let the chips fall where they may.

Come on Bob you just answered the question posed this time in an earlier post.

"what would be their reasoning behind failing to release us?"

Because the International is in charge and behind closed doors they are against a release. And this is communicated on a regular basis to the NMB.

Are you getting so close that you cannot see it anymore?

 

[Birdman]

Bob, many around the system appreciate that you, as a local president, take time to come on this forum and debate the issues with the commoners while the other presidents cower under their desks, terrified that their thoughts would be broadcast for all to see. I, along with 2/3's of the membership gambled that the economy would turn around. It didn't, and you Informer nor the internAAtional could have predicted it. I'm over it.

 

[Birdman]

Dupe

 

[TWU informer]

FWIW, my two cents says asking for release from mediation will be a wasted effort. If they have refused to release the flight attendants 3 or 4 times in the past two years, why should they release anyone else? If we should ever get a Congress that is willing to see the unions' side of things, the law should be changed that allows the NMB to keep unions in indefinite mediation--PARTICULARLY, in situations where the NMB's own mediators have thrown up their hands in despair and walked out. That should be an immediate and automatic release into the 30-day cooling off period. As Bob stated above, the company has no incentive to move ahead. Something has to happen that will get the company's attention.

There will never be a Congress that will see the Union's side of things as long as "Money" is considered FREE SPEECH by the Supreme Court, and the Wealthy outspend us in FREE SPEECH by a huge margin of 11 to 1.

Campaign Finance and lobbying controls all things and the AFL-CIO and other idiots like the leaders of TWU actually hold to a belief that we can somehow win a game that the score is 11 to 1 before the game even starts.

Read up on some labor history and you will find that civil disobedience or flat out chaotic anarchy is the only thing that has ever led to congressional action favorable towards the Unions. But even then, as the violence quells the laws put in place are slowly decimated back to unfavorable balance.

It appears that it is much easier to play a game of cards, and blame others than to begin a movement that would actually reverse the decimation of the middle class.

 

[Bob Owens]

Unless your hire in date is after 1989, you have seen this play out once before and therefore you should have known better.

I believe that during the AMFA Organizing Campaign had smoeone asked why don't we take this path instead of replacing our union, you would have told them what you are trying is impossible and correctly so.
[/quote]


True, I've seen it play out before but I'm still going to try. The Internet has provided us a means to communicate like never before and who knows, maybe, using this we can change things. I have no illusions about the International. I do not believe they have our best interests at heart but they have always been able to get the members to buy in. Well maybe informed members wont buy in as easily. I think the International plans on giving up retiree medical. They are withholding information. Refusing to respond to questions. The letter they released from Rosen said nothing. We put the Prefunding Plan on our Website so everyone can read it. I think they are working with the company and have deliberately done everything they can to drag negotiations out, hoping that the members get so desperate they will accept anything.

Here are some of the questions I asked, excuse the grammer and spelling as I sent them off on Monday between meetings and people kept interupting me as I typed.

Bobby;
The responses are somewhat misleading and basically and are very similar to how the company replied on what would become of the funds left over for the Supplimental Medical plan they termianted last year.
Rosen said;
1. The money in the trust is for purposes of paying retiree medical benefits and cannot under any circumstances either revert to AA, or be spent for its purposes or benefit.
Yes the money does not go back to the company,in that it does not go into the general fund, just like the funds from the supplimental medical plan however the company can use it to pay benefits, not neccisarily the benefits for the person on the account from which the funds were set aside. These funds may not be used by the company to buy airplanes, but they do benefit the company since they take the place of funds that would have otherwise come from the general fund to pay benefits. Its still a windfall for the company even though they are restricted to spending the money on benefits.



2. ,,,, Those funds must be used for payment for "retiree welfare benefits due to Participants under the terms of the plan,,,,,,
Question; Currently anyone who leaves the company only gets their contributions back, the matching funds remain and will not be used for that persons benefits since they left the plan, so as long as the company uses those funds for any participants benefits they are compliant correct? So the company would get to use the funds for other employees, again, these funds would offset what would otherwise come from the general fund , correct?
3. "exhaustion of these matching contributions on behalf of each employee does not waive or modify the retirees entitlement"


In other words if we have qualified by meeting the prefunding requirements and lets say our total funds are $10,000 but it would require $20,000 for the coverage the company has to pick up the expense and continue to provide coverage at no cost to us as long as we remain participants of the prefunding plan, correct?


3. ,,,,,,,as it is for those retiring under the plan without the new amendments".


So with the amendments (new contract)it's not true ?


4. ,, The only circumstance ,,,the Trust holding the prefunding contributions is terminated."


With the proposed amendments workers who do not retire within three months are effecively terminated from the trust correct?
With the proposed amendment we are consenting to have all those members terminated from the trust arent we?
One a member has their contributions returned they are terminated from the Trust correct?
All the matching funds would then be used for those who remain in the plan, correct?
So three months after ratification all the participants would be retirees, and all the funds in the plan would be used to provide those retirees benefits correct?
So the matching funds from the active workers who were terminated from the plan would be used to provide retirees benefits, correct?
The matching funds would probably not be used to provide active workers benefits, correct?
Basically the matching funds from active workers would be used to pay for current retiree benefits, the likelyhood of workers who remain on payroll after three months is nill. The company will in fact see a windfall because they will be able to use the match of workers who remain to pay for retiree benefits, these funds offset what would otherwise have to come from the General fund under current language correct?

 

[Bob Owens]

There will never be a Congress that will see the Union's side of things as long as "Money" is considered FREE SPEECH by the Supreme Court, and the Wealthy outspend us in FREE SPEECH by a huge margin of 11 to 1.

Campaign Finance and lobbying controls all things and the AFL-CIO and other idiots like the leaders of TWU actually hold to a belief that we can somehow win a game that the score is 11 to 1 before the game even starts.

Read up on some labor history and you will find that civil disobedience or flat out chaotic anarchy is the only thing that has ever led to congressional action favorable towards the Unions. But even then, as the violence quells the laws put in place are slowly decimated back to unfavorable balance.

It appears that it is much easier to play a game of cards, and blame others than to begin a movement that would actually reverse the decimation of the middle class.

Welcome Back!!

 

[TWU informer]

Welcome Back!!

Never left, just have no unfounded belief that anything is going to change.

 

[comatose]

Never left, just have no unfounded belief that anything is going to change.

Oh, but things have changed. The TWU/AA has a fed up workforce with the ability to communicate.
Unlike years past.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Oh, but things have changed. The TWU/AA has a fed up workforce with the ability to communicate.
Unlike years past.

Yep - looks like all the goading and whining of years past re: "Go to school and get an education" might be turning into a major charley-foxtrot for the twu, amr, and many other companies. I love it.

To add to another conversation going on, why aren't the matching prefunding contributions being looked at as deferred compensation, as it is?

Where's the other deferred compensation, to wit, the week of vacation taken from us that was already earned?

Burn File, baby, burn file.

 

[Overspeed]

That actually sounds like a LOT to lose to me.

Not to mention while Bob claims AA has never talked our elimination of overhaul, the Vermont Plan had substantial removal of overhaul jobs within it,

Including Composite Center, APU Wiring Center, and Wheel and Brake shop just to name some. I think my current work assignment would be eliminated in BK but I would bump someone esel using my seniority, but I would likely lose my skill premiuim pay. You will never convince me that we have nothing to lose in BK. That is 100% BS!!!

Why are people so one sided and blind unless it directly effects them?
Go tell those members working in those areas that AA has never talked about elimination of their jobs.

I did vote NO on the poll, but only because we have no control, not because I don't worry about it.

So far it appear we have only gone further backwards since the Bob vote NO show. And until he shows me a gain I am not following the logic.

Bob has a lot to deliver on. That's why he has focused so much on the conspiracy theories and spinning that BK is really not that bad.

Have you seen this?

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/11/to-ta-or-not-to-ta-that-is-the.html