Glading's Delusions

[The Goose]

That's right, Bob thinks we should take no risk and get all the upside. If only it worked that way in the real world!

Glading, Hill, Little... I don't know what they are doing or why they can't see that locking in a short term deal now is the way to go. Might not have everything we want, but that is why it is called negotiation. Their numbers go up, ours come down, and we hammer out a deal that no one loves but can work for everyone.

You are the one living in the netherworld, Mr. Frontline, or should I refer to you as "Flatline"?

One must consider Little Jimmy is probably bought off by AMR to get them the best deal possible, injecting much drama as was done in 2003 - "The lawyers were on the courthouse steps when the cellphone rang ..." - nauseating.

I, as many others, have no interest in subsidizing this corporation's shenanigans and lies any longer.

 

[Mrs. McFly]

You are the one living in the netherworld, Mr. Frontline, or should I refer to you as "Flatline"?

One must consider Little Jimmy is probably bought off by AMR to get them the best deal possible, injecting much drama as was done in 2003 - "The lawyers were on the courthouse steps when the cellphone rang ..." - nauseating.

I, as many others, have no interest in subsidizing this corporation's shenanigans and lies any longer.

But here's the problem - the corporation has no interest in subsidizing labor's shenanigans and lies any longer.

I'm not picking a fight, but just pointing out that it goes both ways.

 

[MERV]

But here's the problem - the corporation has no interest in subsidizing labor's shenanigans and lies any longer.

I'm not picking a fight, but just pointing out that it goes both ways.

Which ones? Because I know that cost of living has gone up. From what I know they cut personnel to its limit and some of it is vended out. Yes I know that 90% of work is in house I am not just talking about MX department. I know both ways and I know we will not see same pay raise also.

 

[FrequentFlierCA]

I find it hard to believe that Little is both in the company's pocket and talking about release from mediation. Those are mutually exclusive for anyone caring to apply some logic to the situation.

 

[jimntx]

Does this mean you are willing to give up your guaranteed step / seniority raises for the same time period?

Reading comprehension not your strong suit? What is the first sentence of my post? Oh, I believe it is "We make the offer to accept the company's offer on pay and work rules for another 3-5 years."

As the company's offer is to keep the same pay rates imposed in 2003 for 5 more years, and as nearly 75% of the AA flight attendants are at top of scale already and therefore not getting any more step raises, yeah I guess that what I was saying was giving up guaranteed step/seniority raises since there won't be and haven't been for some time. Duh

And, for those of us who are not at top of scale, a 1.5% increase per year amounts to a pay cut under anything except totally non-existent inflation.

 

[Bear96]

Reading comprehension not your strong suit? What is the first sentence of my post? Oh, I believe it is "We make the offer to accept the company's offer on pay and work rules for another 3-5 years."

As the company's offer is to keep the same pay rates imposed in 2003 for 5 more years, and as nearly 75% of the AA flight attendants are at top of scale already and therefore not getting any more step raises, yeah I guess that what I was saying was giving up guaranteed step/seniority raises since there won't be and haven't been for some time. Duh

And, for those of us who are not at top of scale, a 1.5% increase per year amounts to a pay cut under anything except totally non-existent inflation.

Wow, are you an angry person.

Wouldn't it have been easier for you to just respond, "Yes." (Not that I believe that is your sincere answer, but I see it is pointless to try to engage you in any meaningful discussion.)

I am sorry you are so miserable in your life. Good luck to you and your search for happiness. Although, based on the tone of your posts, I am fairly sure you will never achieve it.

Have a great day!

 

[Bob Owens]

That's right, Bob thinks we should take no risk and get all the upside. If only it worked that way in the real world!

Glading, Hill, Little... I don't know what they are doing or why they can't see that locking in a short term deal now is the way to go. Might not have everything we want, but that is why it is called negotiation. Their numbers go up, ours come down, and we hammer out a deal that no one loves but can work for everyone.

When have we ever shared in the "upside"? Dont bother with Profit sharing, giving concessions worth tens of thousands of dollars annually for a possible profit sharing of a few hundred dollars hardly qualifies as sharing in the upside.

By the way our numbers came down and theirs went down even more. In the latest stores proposal the company pulled three DAT vac days off the table for 1300 stck clerks and offered to "restore a week" to new hires, all 26 of them, with less than five years. Then they called it "an improvement that brings us up to industry standards", Sure it might bring those 26 workers up but the the rest of the 1300 would be behind industry standards by a full week.

 

[The Goose]

I find it hard to believe that Little is both in the company's pocket and talking about release from mediation. Those are mutually exclusive for anyone caring to apply some logic to the situation.

It's not hard to believe at all.

Consider that AMR's CFO, Horton, wants rid of aircraft maintenance and has stated so many times. I believe he is willing to drag the company through a bankruptcy filing to do exactly that. All that's required is the breakinig of a financial covenant - that would be rather simple if pilots or FAs walked. Mechanics walking wouldn't be so bad but would be icing on the cake.

Buying a union presdent to help insure "corporate failure" and a BK filing to get on even ground with the other carriers? Not really so far fetched.

You probably feel the government is here to help us, also.

 

[Hopeful]

I find it hard to believe that Little is both in the company's pocket and talking about release from mediation. Those are mutually exclusive for anyone caring to apply some logic to the situation.

What's so hard to believe? Little is putting on a "tough guy" show for the members. That's all that charade is about.
This is the same Little who, during the 2003 concession ram-through package, stated that if the members voted NO on that deal, he, as ATD director could nix and override that vote.

The other reason might be due to the "NO CONFIDENCE" petition being circulated throughout the AA system.

Any change, any change at all, that he gets the company to agree on, and it could be a .$10 per hour raise, Little will say.."SEE, I THREATENED AA AND THEY GAVE US A $.10 AN HOUR RAISE..."

This is who we are dealing with.

 

[eolesen]

I know it's impossible to believe that any person who might see rationale behind the company's argument couldn't possibly come to those conclusions on their own, therefore must be getting paid off....

 

[Hopeful]

I know it's impossible to believe that any person who might see rationale behind the company's argument couldn't possibly come to those conclusions on their own, therefore must be getting paid off....

Not saying it is impossible. But with the track record of the TWU, going back to Koziatek, then Little, it is hard to believe otherwise. Did you ever think that Little's primary concern is preserving union dues?
The interesting point here is that the TWU historically has been a company union. You may think that is being rational and fair. But the TWU has sold the members out in more ways than just concessions. They have virtually agreed to most of AA's demands as far back as I can remember.

I fully understand the pro company types here believe AA is just so fair and above board with respect to negotiations. But as a member of a union who has more than helped this company be profitable with its PRO COMPANY contracts, it is time for payback.
I fully understand you went to the school that if a company is profitable, employees will share the rewards.
Believe it or not, I believe that to an extent.
I need not go further than the 1995-2001 6yr contract which got us a whopping 6 1/2% raise.

And this company insults us further with a flawed, unfair profit sharing plan? A few hundred shares of AA stock that no where equals what we gave back?
regardless of the unions inability to negotiate a better deal, no matter what we seek, what we give back...no matter any situation.....AA will not be fair in its negotiations.

Do you think 449 shares for $20,000 annual pay cut coming up on 7 years now was fair?

Do you think the company's latest profit sharing proposed formula is fair? Up to $250,000,000 profit, maybe I can see ONE weeks pay? Fair?

Each day I come across employees in just about every work group, union and non union alike fed up with this company.

I used to see gate agents jump through hoops to help a passenger. Pilots hold up flights for a few minutes to accommodate a connecting passenger.
Line cargo workers rushing out to a pushed back flight to load a late bag. Mechanics literally running out to departure time pilot calls. Flight attendants treat passengers like they were the most special passenger on board.
Even my immediate supervisors are at the breaking point.

Just think back why you left AA.

 

[eolesen]

I didn't leave AA because I hated the place, Hopeful. I left AA because a recruiter came to me with a job comparable to what I was already doing, and it had a salary well above even my pre-2003 AA salary. I didn't like the way that some things were being handled at AA (PUP and Love Field come to mind), but I don't think there was ever a day that I dreaded going to work, let alone despise the place as much as y'all appear to....

Nobody here's questioning what you or anyone else gave up, and nobody is saying you don't deserve to be earning more, get back sick time, holidays, etc.

I'm not saying you won't be able to find a way of negotiating increases, but it can't be a one-sided agreement, and it's a unshakeable fact that the industry is quite different from where it was ten years ago.

Trying to extract a contract with 1999 expectations in a 2010 economy is unrealistic. When I start seeing some 2010 reality in the proposals coming out of the unions, I'll be more than happy to start supporting them. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of visibility as to what the unions are asking for.

The only thing we know for certain is what the folks here don't like about it.

 

[Skymess]

I didn't like the way that some things were being handled at AA (PUP and Love Field come to mind), but I don't think there was ever a day that I dreaded going to work, let alone despise the place as much as y'all appear to....

We don't hate the place, we that we are treated like we're less than human by AA management. They pay lip service to the BS that we're all in it together when we're all in it for them to rape and pillage a once great compnay and a bunch of great employees.

 

[L1011Ret]

We don't hate the place, we that we are treated like we're less than human by AA management. They pay lip service to the BS that we're all in it together when we're all in it for them to rape and pillage a once great compnay and a bunch of great employees.

Do you really believe what you say? That AA management is out "to rape and pillage a once great compnay and a bunch of great employees."?

 

[Hopeful]

Trying to extract a contract with 1999 expectations in a 2010 economy is unrealistic. When I start seeing some 2010 reality in the proposals coming out of the unions, I'll be more than happy to start supporting them. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of visibility as to what the unions are asking for.

The only thing we know for certain is what the folks here don't like about it.

Here's the way I see this disagreement. It seems you think the company is offering us something reasonable for whatever reason, economy, sate of the airline industry, whatever.
You may think whatever pittance they are offering is better than nothing and better than what we have. You say we have to meet somewhere in the middle with the company.
What you don't realize or refuse to understand that there is no middle because of the massive concessions they took in 2003. How can you say what they are offering is fair when it doesn't even scratch the surface of what we gave back?

For me, meeting in the middle begins AFTER they have restored what was taken.
They undid 40 years of gains and you expect us to be reasonable by accepting outrageous work rule changes and pennies on the dollar?

You speak of visibility?
Have you read the entire company proposal to the mechanics and related group?

Not just about money.
You think what the company wants is fair so they can be competitive?
If they don't want to negotiate fairly, then by all means file Ch.11.
I truly am at the point where I could care less.


Then a normal negotiation process can begin.