How The Merger Went Down...
- Thread starter L1011Ret
- Start date
FibberMcGee
Member
- Aug 20, 2002
- 85
- 0
The only reason this was technically an acquisition and not a merger was because of the debt problems and Icahn otherwise this was a merger. You know it, I know and the American people know it. It's a dead issue anyway, TWA was killed. If it looks like a duck...
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
You're leaving out the small details. When two companies MERGE, one company doest not pay $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the other outright.
Looked to me like AA paid $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for TWA. Of course, the
company that is BOUGHT out has assets that the PURCHASER desires,
but I don't recall TWA forking over any $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ except their debt!
Looked to me like AA paid $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for TWA. Of course, the
company that is BOUGHT out has assets that the PURCHASER desires,
but I don't recall TWA forking over any $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ except their debt!
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #19
John Ward called it a merger in Skyword and in testimony to the Senate. I do not believe that the term you use is going to make any difference in the court proceedings as to whether the merging of the two groups was, "fair and equitable." In a Federal court proceeding before a jury, motivation of the parties and what they promised both verbally and on paper will scrutinized by the jury. It might be that a jury fill find that it was "fair and equitable." On the other hand, given the track record of APFA with the TWAers - exclusion from union meetings, taking away furlough pay, forcing them to commute, denying opportunity to fly international so that Aa F/As had to be deadheaded in to STL to fly the Int'l trips and more importantly APFA's failure to even speak to IAM representatives - it would seem to me that a jury would find that the SIA was not "fair and equitable." If it is found by a jury that AA did not live up to what was promised, and it certainly would appear not to be given Carty's remarks in a post above, then some sort of damages and remedy will result.
Although we may hold vastly differing opinions on the issue, having it all presented to a jury for deliberations may go a long way towards resolving the issue. Once settled legally, it will be up to the individual members of APFA and the TWAers as to whether they want to move on or rehash the issues forever. Hopefully the majority will move on.
Although we may hold vastly differing opinions on the issue, having it all presented to a jury for deliberations may go a long way towards resolving the issue. Once settled legally, it will be up to the individual members of APFA and the TWAers as to whether they want to move on or rehash the issues forever. Hopefully the majority will move on.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #21
I can appreciate your reply about what AA should have done, but under the previous leadership, it was unlikely that AA would do such a thing. In press releases AA has blamed APFA for the whole sorry mess despite the fact that AA was secretly negotiating the "staple" SIA with APFA and excluding IAM from those meetings. I hope this whole sorry mess is brought before a jury so we ALL can get transcripts of the testimony and judge for ourselves. Remember Carty was the one making the promises that it appears he would not keep. It also appears he lied to his own BOD about the special retirement monies set aside for executives. Carty appears to have said whatever people wanted to hear all the while doing other things out of sight of prying eyes and ears. Had the unions known about the special retirement monies set aside for executives, it is highly unlikely concessionary agreements would have been signed. So, while others may certainly disagree with my opinions, Carty became the sacrificial lamb that saved AA from C-11.
Just some clarification on some of this hogwashL1011Ret said:
TWA'ers were members of APFA when furlough pay was "voted" out by the membership (this did not only affect ex-twa'ers, it happened to everyone on furlough.) "forcing them to commute" - No one is forced to commute, it is a choice. In fact AA will pay for moving expences should you transfer to a new base. AA has had bases close over the years and this is the type of job were you can commute if you want to. "deny opportunity to fly international" This one is pretty simple, TW'ers were not trained on the equipment that was being used at the time. AA normally schedules out of base F/A's to fly trips do to manning concerns from time to time. Fact is there are only 2 weekend flights (STL to CUN and STL to SJU) even operating out of that base now, hardly the need for Intl F/A's at that base. I think that a jury will be impressed that even though your company (TWA) had declared bankruptcy, the TWA flight attendants recieved a raise. A raise is a raise no matter how large or small you cut it. Our friends at USAirways probably find that to be amazing. The fact that the airline nearly had to declare BK and was forced to reduce staff was not directed squarely at the former TW'ers, many original AA'ers are out as well. We all took a big hit, some of use were lucky enough to stay employed. Although its too soon to tell, it looks like the company is doing better and recalls are looking better and better.
With all the drivel that you regularly post, if I were you, I would not use the word hogwash so casually in describing another poster's opinions.MiAAmi said:
For what it is worth, the company did not even ask for the furlough pay concessions. It was the brain child of your great leader John Ward. He did so because it impacted the TWAers much harder than the very junior furloughed nAAtives, as furlough pay is calculated based on length of service and rate of pay. There is a major difference between losing two weeks of pay at the bottom of the pay scale and two months at that top of the pay scale. Ward decided to sacrifice some of the junior nAAtives on the altar in order to give the TWAers the royal shaft motivated by his pathological hatred of anything which has to do with TWA. A company negotiator, seating at the opposite side of the table from the Wart told him that he should be ashamed of himself.
A forced commute is not a choice unless you consider resignation and unemployment to be a viable option. Many TWAers, who were based in New York had many roots and family obligations in New York, such as working spouses and kids in school, that prevented them from moving to STL. Besides, AA did not close any bases in New York. It would not have been a big deal to allow some TWAers to continue to originate their flight pairings from LGA and EWR after the remaining handful of TWA flights were discontinued at JFK.
Lastly, that hourly rate raise, which you keep repeating as a mantra over the years, has been discussed here ad nauseum. With the loss of scheduling flexibility and 401k matching funds from TWA, the increase of inefficient trips and mandatory employee contributions toward insurance at AA, not to mention the cost of maintaining a commuter place in another city, most TWAers ended up with less, not more, disposable income.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #24
As noted by other posters, AA was very against taking away furlough pay. The Judge in the Integration hearings really questioned the validity of using furlough pay to provide concessions monies for those still working. Ward took money from those about to be laid off and applied it to those who would keep their jobs. It has to be one of the most disgusting items ever negotiated by a labor leader.
TWAers were forced to commute. They had no choice despite your assertions.
Fact was that there several Int'l trips out of STL to HNL, OGG and LGW. AA came to APFA asking them to allow the TWAers to be trained on the AA equipment that was to replace the TWA equipment. APFA refused. There is a DFR about this.
I do not think a jury will be necessarily impressed with the pay raise. My spouse compared her W-2 Social Security wages for 2000 and 2002. The difference at AA was miniscule largely due to TWA's putting 12% in her retirement. TWA's medical and dental benefits were better too.The difference was less than a COLA raise. Take in forced commuting, paying for hotels, etc., her income was less. It is unlikely a jury will be concerned about this at all. If you look at the briefis from the parties, the pay raise is not an issue anywhere. The hogwash is all yours.
TWAers were forced to commute. They had no choice despite your assertions.
Fact was that there several Int'l trips out of STL to HNL, OGG and LGW. AA came to APFA asking them to allow the TWAers to be trained on the AA equipment that was to replace the TWA equipment. APFA refused. There is a DFR about this.
I do not think a jury will be necessarily impressed with the pay raise. My spouse compared her W-2 Social Security wages for 2000 and 2002. The difference at AA was miniscule largely due to TWA's putting 12% in her retirement. TWA's medical and dental benefits were better too.The difference was less than a COLA raise. Take in forced commuting, paying for hotels, etc., her income was less. It is unlikely a jury will be concerned about this at all. If you look at the briefis from the parties, the pay raise is not an issue anywhere. The hogwash is all yours.
I have to ask you - why was it so important that AA JUST HAD TO HAVE US! AA couldn't do without us. So much that they would lie to us, Congress, even the employees of AA. That should answer your question! Miami - you are so arrogant! Life has a way of comoing back and biting you in the butt - hope there is truth in KARMA!MiAAmi said:
twasilverbullet
Advanced
- Jan 25, 2004
- 206
- 0
MiAAmi,
You will know the meaning of karma soon!
You will know the meaning of karma soon!
