will fix for food
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 664
- 50
----------------
[/blockquote]
"It's a new ball game will." UA or their trustee would request for a rejection of all contract and it's up to the judge whether to accept or deny that request, after he looks at the current condition of the company of course. Check out my post about "rejection of collective bargaining agreement" on 11/26.
----------------
[/blockquote]
I/m no lawyer, but after reading Sec. 1113 it seems that the judge can only legally abrogate the CBA/s of those employees that "refused to accept such proposal without good cause"[1113©(2)]. Since all the employee groups have accepted a restructuring proposal except the mechanics, they are immune to abrogation.
In essence that means the mechanics are the only ones eligible to have their contract written by the bankruptcy judge.
It appears that their only recourse is to ratify a restructuring plan in some form, or to make a successful plea before the judge to leave the CBA unmodified [1113(d)(1)].
Section 1113 appears to favor the DIP or Trustee in the way it is written. My question is, is [1113(e)] a provision that allows the trustee to implement short term changes in the CBA pending the court's ruling? I wonder because of the last sentence that says "The implementation of such interim changes shall not render the application for rejection moot".
Of course, like I said, I am no lawyer, so I don/t know if my interpretation is correct.
[/blockquote]
"It's a new ball game will." UA or their trustee would request for a rejection of all contract and it's up to the judge whether to accept or deny that request, after he looks at the current condition of the company of course. Check out my post about "rejection of collective bargaining agreement" on 11/26.
----------------
[/blockquote]
I/m no lawyer, but after reading Sec. 1113 it seems that the judge can only legally abrogate the CBA/s of those employees that "refused to accept such proposal without good cause"[1113©(2)]. Since all the employee groups have accepted a restructuring proposal except the mechanics, they are immune to abrogation.
In essence that means the mechanics are the only ones eligible to have their contract written by the bankruptcy judge.
It appears that their only recourse is to ratify a restructuring plan in some form, or to make a successful plea before the judge to leave the CBA unmodified [1113(d)(1)].
Section 1113 appears to favor the DIP or Trustee in the way it is written. My question is, is [1113(e)] a provision that allows the trustee to implement short term changes in the CBA pending the court's ruling? I wonder because of the last sentence that says "The implementation of such interim changes shall not render the application for rejection moot".
Of course, like I said, I am no lawyer, so I don/t know if my interpretation is correct.