Enough is enough! All systems red!

[Duke787]

I think it's safe to say that all airline employees deserve a raise, and we all have good and bad parts of the job, but for any one work group to act the martyr is disingenuous. For anyone of us to think we can't be replaced is delusional. It's just the FA's union in my opinion is being harmful and even destructive with their rhetoric. The APFA is saying we're getting everything back, then the union is saying give us a yes for a strike vote. Now when the APFA doesn't get everything back they want to be released then go on strike to bring AA to their knees. What I think is going to happen is that they will be replaced. AA will have a lot more then 30 days to train new FA's and not to mention the ones that will continue to go to work. I believe the APFA rhetoric will be the down fall of that union.

 

[AA89]

I completely agree management at AA is incompetent and does not have employees interests at heart. Honestly, I'd like to see AA continue to provide stable, rewarding careers to its employees (like yourselves) but you must recognize that some of the union demands are unreasonable at this time given AA's capital position and operating environment of $75/barrel oil and a (slowly improving) global economy in turmoil. As I've said before, I'm pro-employee but it also seems the consensus among the posters on this board is labor issues should be separate from customers which I appreciate.

I think AA management could improve the profitability of AMR if it worked to align employee interests with management interests, encouraged (and valued) employee participation, and also encouraged management involvement on the front lines. If Arpey & Co were subject to working with the traveling public and flying MD 80s regularly, they would understand that many of the employees concerns are legitimate-I certainly do. I agree that the bonus situation can be frustrating to employees who have given pay concessions year after year to this company. But recognize that their compensation is part of a legally binding contract, much like yours. Again I'm not here to rationalize bonuses are acceptable given AA's financial performance but I do believe they could attract better talent in management with better pay.

It is unfortunate they did not consider adding the overhead crew rest. Perhaps they are being "penny wise and pound foolish" as the additional first class seats could be sold (assuming a more competitive product was offered in a better configuration). I know Delta and Continental offer these for crew on their 777s. If I may ask though, what is the bunkroom neat row 31 on the 777? Is it only for FAs? I flew LHR-JFK in March in seat 31B and was able to see inside.

As for the non-rev issue, it was fairly clear to me that the individuals were non-revs/pass riders of some sort. Several were discussing work related matters with the purser and other FAs, taking pictures of the meal and cabin seating, and had airline IDs. I also overheard the purser mention we had 9 non-revs in F cabin.

Again, I apologize if I come across as being overly critical and anti-employee. Judging by how AA treats its customers, I can only imagine how employees are treated on a regular basis. I feel as a customer I have legitimate concerns, but I also feel employees have a right to honest, open communication with management, fair pay, safe working conditions, and involvement in decision making. No pun intended here, if the management does end up working during any strike actions, I hope they will come to appreciate how challenging the job is and have more regard for their employees when making decisions.

Josh

Josh,

I think if you asked the majority of the AA posters here, they would say that executives receiving bonuses in the years after our concessions in 2003 was the turning point. Before that it was "Pull Together - Win Together" and I think we really thought our sacrifices would secure our future. Yes, all (except one) airlines have lost money since then and sqeezing the restoration of our wages and benefits from AA at this time would seem silly. But the rationale is: If management can have theirs then why can't we?

I agree that there is nothing illegal about executives taking bonuses, but to me it is certainly immoral.

A point I have brought up before and one no one has an answer for is: Why did the unions sign off on this deal without language preventing the bonuses? Seems like a simple question.

I will agree that front line employees should keep their feelings to themselves. Thats why I'm not one. I couldn't do it every day either. But I think that the vast majority of them do a great job.

Finally, I hope that you would take as much time as you have on this forum to send your thoughts to our "leaders" and board of directors.

 

[Duke787]

Josh,

I think if you asked the majority of the AA posters here, they would say that executives receiving bonuses in the years after our concessions in 2003 was the turning point. Before that it was "Pull Together - Win Together" and I think we really thought our sacrifices would secure our future. Yes, all (except one) airlines have lost money since then and sqeezing the restoration of our wages and benefits from AA at this time would seem silly. But the rationale is: If management can have theirs then why can't we?

I agree that there is nothing illegal about executives taking bonuses, but to me it is certainly immoral.

A point I have brought up before and one no one has an answer for is: Why did the unions sign off on this deal without language preventing the bonuses? Seems like a simple question.

I will agree that front line employees should keep their feelings to themselves. Thats why I'm not one. I couldn't do it every day either. But I think that the vast majority of them do a great job.

Finally, I hope that you would take as much time as you have on this forum to send your thoughts to our "leaders" and board of directors.

Well said, here is an interesting article.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/DN-Airdebt_06bus.ART0.State.Edition1.1aa9b70.html

 

[eolesen]

A point I have brought up before and one no one has an answer for is: Why did the unions sign off on this deal without language preventing the bonuses? Seems like a simple question.

You can't prevent a bonus that isn't a bonus.

Don't take my explanation as being a supporter of the PUP payments, but FWAAA and I have pointed out for several years that the PUP isn't a bonus. It's variable compensation, and contractual between the plan participant and the company.

Ask any HR generalist, and you'll find bonuses generally defined as discretionary payments, typically awarded for a company's or an individual's performance; percentages or amounts might be defined in an employment contract, but the decision to pay them out is entirely discretionary.

Variable compensation isn't discretionary. It's very clearly defined as far as the criteria and targets, as well as the payouts to be received for meeting those targets.

You can argue all day long about whether or not management should have taken bigger cuts or lost their variable compensation, but I suspect most of you still wouldn't be happy if management pay went to zero....

Secondly, the PUP and SERP were public knowledge for at least ten years before the RPA's were signed. If the union heads didn't know about them, then they're bumbling idiots for not reviewing the company's SEC filings with a fine tooth comb (or paying someone to explain it to them) the way equity analysts do....

Had they been arbitrarily canceled, it's likely that the company could have been forced to pay them in a breach of contract lawsuit.

What senior management *should* have done is refuse the payments. If Arpey and his senior management team had declined to accept the awards, I strongly suspect that there would have been a vast majority of the underlings who would have followed the examples. Instead, they all lined up like pigs at the trough...

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

The fact remains it was OK to shred our contract before its amendable date but when it comes to revoking their compensation "It's variable compensation, and contractual between the plan participant and the company" they play to a different tune. What was good for us is beyond them and theirs a double standard and corporate greed at its best...

 

[jersey777]

I think it's safe to say that all airline employees deserve a raise, and we all have good and bad parts of the job, but for any one work group to act the martyr is disingenuous. For anyone of us to think we can't be replaced is delusional. It's just the FA's union in my opinion is being harmful and even destructive with their rhetoric. The APFA is saying we're getting everything back, then the union is saying give us a yes for a strike vote. Now when the APFA doesn't get everything back they want to be released then go on strike to bring AA to their knees. What I think is going to happen is that they will be replaced. AA will have a lot more then 30 days to train new FA's and not to mention the ones that will continue to go to work. I believe the APFA rhetoric will be the down fall of that union.

Forget about the "rhetoric" from the union. What is going on at the contract table? I, nor you have no idea. No one on the line has any idea of what percentage raise the APFA is specifically asking for. Nor do we know what has been exchanged back and forth besides what the company has told us what they have offered. I personally think that the union and management are not that far apart. And as far as the strike vote goes, there has only been 1 contract in the 7 or 8 history of negotiations that has not gotten close to a strike. Come on, you know who we are dealing with! This is a group of managers that will never and has never offered a fair contract until the last minute.

 

[Skymess]

Forget about the "rhetoric" from the union. What is going on at the contract table? I, nor you have no idea. No one on the line has any idea of what percentage raise the APFA is specifically asking for. Nor do we know what has been exchanged back and forth besides what the company has told us what they have offered. I personally think that the union and management are not that far apart. And as far as the strike vote goes, there has only been 1 contract in the 7 or 8 history of negotiations that has not gotten close to a strike. Come on, you know who we are dealing with! This is a group of managers that will never and has never offered a fair contract until the last minute.

Forget it M. He's been trying to tell the TWU guys they are crazy for asking for anything too.

 

[Duke787]

Forget about the "rhetoric" from the union. What is going on at the contract table? I, nor you have no idea. No one on the line has any idea of what percentage raise the APFA is specifically asking for. Nor do we know what has been exchanged back and forth besides what the company has told us what they have offered. I personally think that the union and management are not that far apart. And as far as the strike vote goes, there has only been 1 contract in the 7 or 8 history of negotiations that has not gotten close to a strike. Come on, you know who we are dealing with! This is a group of managers that will never and has never offered a fair contract until the last minute.

that's true, you make a very good point.

 

[Duke787]

Forget it M. He's been trying to tell the TWU guys they are crazy for asking for anything too.

I notice the people that can't make an argument same I'm a shill for the company. I just speak from a different point of view where I'm not blowing smoke. I respect the opinions of Bob and Ken mainly because they use their real names not like the rest of us. I might respect their opinions, but I don't agree with them half the time. Bob and Ken said that AMFA was going to be the AMT savior, but it didn't work out to well for NWA and UAL. I also don't agree with some FA's who think they can't be replaced and they are going to get everything back. I don't think that unions have the strength that some people on this forum think they have. Unions spent $10 million to have Sen. Blanche Lincoln of AR voted out of office. Blanche won.
Based on the bullet points of the TA, the TWU is giving up a lot more then what they're getting, but the TWU still hasn't sent anything out.

 

[AA89]

........................Secondly, the PUP and SERP were public knowledge for at least ten years before the RPA's were signed. If the union heads didn't know about them, then they're bumbling idiots for not reviewing the company's SEC filings with a fine tooth comb (or paying someone to explain it to them) the way equity analysts do....

Had they been arbitrarily canceled, it's likely that the company could have been forced to pay them in a breach of contract lawsuit.

Everything was on the table for labor and everything should have been on the table for management. Are you saying our contract wasn't breached?
All I'm saying is: The unions were either asleep at the negotiating table or in bed with the company to not let the membership know the WHOLE picture as far as the so-called "SHARED SACRIFICE"
I'm not a malcontent but I know ignorance when I see it.

 

[Rogallo]

If the union heads didn't know about them, then they're bumbling idiots

That's our union leadership.

 

[Mr Red]

We are a rudderless ship waiting to go down,lets go down with HONOR !!

 

[eolesen]

Everything was on the table for labor and everything should have been on the table for management. Are you saying our contract wasn't breached?
All I'm saying is: The unions were either asleep at the negotiating table or in bed with the company to not let the membership know the WHOLE picture as far as the so-called "SHARED SACRIFICE"
I'm not a malcontent but I know ignorance when I see it.

Your contract wasn't breached. It's only breached when one party doesn't adhere to it. Both sides signed the RPA. Stone cold facts... no point rehashing old history.

The only breach that occurred was that of trust.... trust of the company by employees, and trust of the union by their members.

And yes, the unions were asleep at the negotiating table. They could have asked for a lot more of an upside than they did, and they could have insisted on more givebacks by management. The "they had a gun to our head" argument is nonsense --- neither side wanted to file, and had the unions been better represented in the negotiations, you might have seen more controls placed on exec comp, or at least considered...

And it's still not too late to demand that. Yet nobody has mentioned it except for individuals on this board....

 

[ReadyNow]

The "they had a gun to our head" argument is nonsense --- neither side wanted to file, and had the unions been better represented in the negotiations, you might have seen more controls placed on exec comp, or at least considered...

And it's still not too late to demand that. Yet nobody has mentioned it except for individuals on this board....

Competent executives don't fear re-entering the marketplace - Eliminating a significant portion of their pay will force the good ones on to the street for better jobs while the incompentent remain behind. Then you will have 100% incompentents rather than 80%. Good people won't replace them - corporate raiders will - they will come in to carve up the company and leave.

Some people fear competition and the marketplace and they incorrectly assume everyone else does as well. Executives are used to moving and getting new jobs and since their value is measured by their talent, not their seniority, they have nothing to fear - and they will vote with their feet - unlike many others who value job security over all else..complain about everything but are afraid to quit and move.

 

[wcs]

...they could have insisted on more givebacks by management. The "they had a gun to our head" argument is nonsense --- neither side wanted to file, and had the unions been better represented in the negotiations, you might have seen more controls placed on exec comp, or at least considered...

At the risk of a "yes they did, no they didn't agrument" the company did have a gun to our collective heads. If I recall correctly, Carty had the lawyers on the way to the courthouse as the APFA waited for the vote. Carty was all set to file. He was considering filing before the TWU and APA asked to consider
re-negotiation of the contracts. As for union control of exec pay that isn't a unions job. The unions took Carty's word that there would be restraint and "shared sacrifice". That's the reason for the uproar when it was discovered his word wasn't worth anything and therefore his ability to lead was worthless as well.