Change of Control Update

[Hadenough]

PJ
I would love to get everything you say. My backpay would also be about the same as yours. I am just trying to be a realist. There is no way we will get it all back and I think we will be lucky if we even get to vote next time. I was trying to think about what would be acceptable to the majority without having a riot on our hands. I am not selling myself short just ready to move forward in my life and career. I am tired on having to struggle to even put food on my families table. With no extention we could resolve some of the other issues when the contract come up.

 

[lithuanian]

Again. May I make this more clear! The representative in Phoenix that has represented both AWA/USAIRWAYS posted a summary of the Briefs on the 141 Web. He, Mr. Roth stated, that the briefs on the site of 141 are not ALL of the information submitted to Mr. Broch. Also, no one, knows the time frame for the Arbitrator. But, it has been circulated that after the briefs in November, around the 15th, the arbitrator has up to, 2 months to come to the conclusion.
Mr. Roth, is not a MIND READER. Don't Shoot The Messenger! It is a Waiting game. Either you wait it out (Or, for the EAST SIDE, WAIT IT OUT AGAIN!) Remember, this is the first time for AWA.
AFTER! the results! THEN WE TAKE ACTION! to help initiate the results!


N

 

[pjirish317]

Hadenough,
Either way we probably will have a riot on our hands. If we win and the I AM MANAGEMENT gives any award back to the company for some more table scraps, very unhappy workforce. If we lose, very very unhappy workforce. While I realize that we can't possibly get all that I stated we should, maybee the I AM MANAGEMENT will ask for it. Who knows.I just know that if it is the same TA just worded differently, and it gives any award back to the company, a riot will be only half of our problems.

 

[lithuanian]

PJ! You sound like you've been thru this a many of times with the IAM. I related in Phx what we have to wait for, the first time. I assume the East has been going thru this numerous times and are fed up with the IAM, that, I also think, IS IN BED!
So! What do you think? After the result of the CIC, we all get together and give the company and union our thoughts where their STINKING! company can go. Or! We can help them become the BEST DARNED LEGACY AMERICAN AIRLINE that will give ANY INTERNATIONAL competitor! a RUN FOR THEIR MONEY!

 

[Hadenough]

PJ
A riot is not necessarily a given. I agree a reworded T/A would not be acceptable. What would be? Everyone has their own threshold of acceptability. Each would have to decide if that threshold is met. I stated what some of mine are earlier. I would love to have it all but I will accept a little less for the time being just to be able to move forward.

lithuaian
I'm with you on making this thing work. I want to wear my uniform proudly in public again. I want the airline something we can be proud of again. Everyone can beat me if they want this is the way I feel. I like what I do for a living. I chose to be in this industry. All of this is from a 20 year plus man on the east side.

 

[pjirish317]

Hadenough & Lith,
I agree that we all need to come together to make this work. With that said, it all depends on the I AM MANAGEMENT throwing us under the bus or not. Past history says they will. I hope that they realize they messed up big time with the last TA and really amp it uf for us so we can move on. I doubt it though.

 

[Hadenough]

AMEN PJ I agree with you. I think we are basically on the same page just not reading the exact same lines. I agree I think its in the IAM's hands right now. The history is not very good.

 

[The Bagfather]

Bagfather,

Allow me to briefly respond to your various comments as I see it:


"IMO the common sence approach to the meaning of the
terms should be taken into account. Laws are meant to
take normal meanings of things into account.

So one should ask the simple question. Is US Airway
under control of the same entity as it used to be?
Are the former owners of the company still running it?
If not then there was a change of control."

By that definition, when any corporation has stock holders buying and selling stock or experiences a change in managment, then that would be a 'Change in Control'. Clearly, the CIC language was placed into the contract for a pending United deal in which neither company would be in BK.


"US airways was a company in BK . For me to understand
that there was no change of control would mean that
US airways with the help of investers emerged from
bankrupcy as the same company. That would have
to mean that America West experienced a change of control."

To expand a company or to have a merger does not automatically mean a change of control, but the BK issue alone creates if nothing else a change in ownership from the stockholders to the creditors, which again, using the most lose definition of 'Change in Control' would mean the creditors would be forced to accept a labor snap back agreement? I don't see that happening.


"One Particular question I have is why did whoever was the
company get two other labor groups to agree to drop
COC language and not the IAM? Did ALPA at one point
say; 'Hey guys, before you agree to take us on as
employees there's something you should know about our
contract'"

I have said from the beginning that very intelligent and very informed legal minds from both Management and other labor groups have crawled through this issue of CIC, and yet IAM was the only one who saw things differently? Another reason why I don't think IAM will win this one.


"When one company purchaces or merges with another
company they assume responsabiliy for all contracts
including labor contracts. The labor force is a commodity
in that respect. The lawyers are responsible to advise
their employer as to the details of the contract."

Unless the another company is in BK and all contracts are subject to modification or rejection and often times an estoppel agreement is signed just to be sure everyone does not have some material issue which needs to be addressed before further actions are taken. (As was done with the IAM.)


"What appears to me to have happened is someone dropped
the ball on this and the company until now has been able
to ignore it. The fact that the company would not have
agreed to FS contract with it's CIC clause is completely
irrelevant. At least in terms of the arbitration."

You are right that someone dropped the ball... it was the IAM. They failed to act and notify either the Courts or Management of their intentions and their understanding as to the meaning of the CIC even after the first BK. They hid their true intentions and while they claim not to have any obligations to disclose their bargaining tactics, a Judge might find this to be misleading and a deliberate material omission in a bankruptcy proceding for potential investors. Parker himself said that there would have been no deal if the CIC was going to be claimed later by the IAM. Probably Parker would have used the BK laws as a hammer to remove it, but since IAM wasn't making any claim (along with other labor groups), why bother?


"Is anybody still reading this crap? If you are your either
pretty crazy or a closet lawyer wannabe like me..Thanks BF"

Still reading and maybe law school yet for me.

Jester thanks for your comments. The complications of this are really
way beyond the scope of my understanding. But I learned today a little
of the history of ALPA and the CSA's union( I forgot the name) . Both
of them agreed to give up CIC langauage to gain other
consessions from the company. For some reason the IAM did not do
this. But the company lawyers are responsible to read the contract.

So my statement about somebody dropping the ball was probably wrong.
Both parties were taking there chances. To be cynical for a moment you
could say that the company had no respect for the IAM and thought they
could probably get rid of the COC language in a TA .
Thanks, BF

 

[The Bagfather]

Jester

FWIT: I think the ruling on the COC would have been in our favor. We all have opinions on this matter. We are all real good s**t house lawyers but alas we choose to sling bags for a living. Bagfather yes we are still reading this stuff. Everyword. I think its great to hear everybodys ideas about the brief. Good read by the way. It was easier to print it out and then read it. Actually took it to work after I was through so others could read it.

Now back to my reason for all this. Notice I said "would have been in our favor".
IMO its a moot point. Rumor has it that Canale is conducting prelim talks with the company. I really do not think either the IAM nor the company wants the ruling to proceed. The repercussions of a unfavorable ruling are huge for both sides. The only way for both side to assure a "win" is to prevent the arbitrator from making a ruling. The only way to do that now is to come to a agreement between the two parties.

Now this is where I take some heat.
I would gladly trade the COC for a fair offer. What I mean by that is $20 an hour, a 5th week of vacation after 30 years, full pay sick time, no 60 day rule, no extention. That would be a good starting place. There are other issues but from everybody I talk to these are some of the main issues. I am not alone in this. This would be acceptable to the majority of east and west. Remember all this is my opinion. I am ready to move forward and put all this behind us. We have the potential to make USAirways something to be proud of. We have a long way to go to get there but I know what the people I work with are capable of achieving.

I think your right about these secret negotiations. It will be interesting to see what M&R
do. The difference is M&R for the most part is not as desperate as we are.
For my own part I wouldn't support anything just to save the IAM from spending
their money.

 

[The Bagfather]

Today, our representative in Phoenix, Mr. Roth, posted the points of the Briefs. He was polite enough to add that the Briefs on the 141 site are also abreviated. That there are also case files from the negotiations and much more information submitted to the arbitrator. So, if anyone, like myself, who thought we could've added more in our defense, Mr. Roth. stated that there was plenty of material for the unions defense that the Brief did not mention. He did not however, mention any deadline. We agree together that the result and what results after the COC, or CIC, will remain with Mr. Broch.

lith: It's good that your chair is trying to educate PHX. In general it has been
141's position to keep FS in the dark least they get some "upstart ideas"
which might cost them money. thanks BF

 

[The Bagfather]

Again. May I make this more clear! The representative in Phoenix that has represented both AWA/USAIRWAYS posted a summary of the Briefs on the 141 Web. He, Mr. Roth stated, that the briefs on the site of 141 are not ALL of the information submitted to Mr. Broch. Also, no one, knows the time frame for the Arbitrator. But, it has been circulated that after the briefs in November, around the 15th, the arbitrator has up to, 2 months to come to the conclusion.
Mr. Roth, is not a MIND READER. Don't Shoot The Messenger! It is a Waiting game. Either you wait it out (Or, for the EAST SIDE, WAIT IT OUT AGAIN!) Remember, this is the first time for AWA.
AFTER! the results! THEN WE TAKE ACTION! to help initiate the results!


N

lith: The reason I want to shoot the messenger is because they
seem to be doing every thing is their power(Ron's msg an exception)
to lower expectations. That way they take no risks of their own.
BTW what's Ron's position on section 6 for his PHX boys and girls?

Is he willing to risk his standing to say what he knows is right? Why are
we the only ones sacrificing?

 

[Rook]

Here is some food for thought,
Well,This is BS cause the ruling will come after the holidays and during the slow time of the year!
Also the longer Parker can stall this the more $$$$ the company can get on the money in the bank.Also, Rumor has it that Parker is set up to recieve between $15-22 mil in bonus alone not to mention his stock opitions.

 

[pjirish317]

Lith,
Ask your I AM MANAGEMENT rep what the hourly wage will be if we win the "COC"? It seems that the I AM MANAGEMENT team has issued a gag order. They do not want Fleet Service to know. It would be interesting to hear his response. Although my guess it will be something like "I'll get back to you on that" or some other variation to that effect.

 

[lithuanian]

Ya! Know! What p***es me off right now is the lack of support from the others that thought IBEW could make a difference, and, who knows; How! Why did we give this group, Cart Blanc! to convince fleet and also mechanics that they could instantly make a difference.
The COC is just a beginning to the truth into what this Union STUFF has done to US AIRWAYS, and AWA and to all the other combinations of airline industry realignments.
Being too many agents do not last over 10 years, many have not and will never see the events of merging and acquisitions of airlines. Only the career members will have the knowledge and perhaps the ability to rite the wrongs airline industries throw at employees wishing for that American Dream imposed by an industry that leads the way for generations.

 

[Richard]

We are going to consolidate change of control issues into a master IAM thread. Please do not make duplicate threads covering similar information.

The IAM will have a master thread each week as will the other unions.

Thank you.