Is USAirways hostile takeover Of AA for Real?

Status
Not open for further replies.
US at the last minute in the first bankruptcy case terminated the pilots pension,
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #107
US at the last minute in the first bankruptcy case terminated the pilots pension,

Actually, 700, the U pilots terminated their own pensions to get to their bogie numbers, if anyone could fathom that move.

That's why the pilots organzied to get rid of ALPA. What happened in 2003 BK (#2) is we had put in our contracts to freeze our pensions, but the pilots MEC told management that they would not pay to fund IAM and AFA frozen pension plans, being that their's was gone to the PBGC, they wouldn't be able to explain that away to their members... and USAirways motioned the court on Jan. 10 2005 (after our BK #2 concessionary contracts were signed and sealed) to terminate our pension plans, too.

that's the factual story.
 
US at the last minute in the first bankruptcy case terminated the pilots pension,
Yes, but US had not filed a legally-binding promise with the PBGC not to terminate the pilots' pension - something AA has agreed with the PBGC and I'm not certain that AA could change course now.

Actually, 700, the U pilots terminated their own pensions to get to their bogie numbers, if anyone could fathom that move.

That's why the pilots organzied to get rid of ALPA. What happened in 2003 BK (#2) is we had put in our contracts to freeze our pensions, but the pilots MEC told management that they would not pay to fund IAM and AFA frozen pension plans, being that their's was gone to the PBGC, they wouldn't be able to explain that away to their members... and USAirways motioned the court on Jan. 10 2005 (after our BK #2 concessionary contracts were signed and sealed) to terminate our pension plans, too.

that's the factual story.
The US pilots organized the USAPA to rid themselves of ALPA's merger policy which had resulted in the Nicolau arbitration decision with which the US East pilots disagreed. In their misguided thinking, they thought they could do an end run around an arbitrated result to which they had earlier agreed.
 
Legally binding promise?

No such thing, AA can terminate the pension if they take it to court.

AA can reject any type of agreement and contract while in bankruptcy, of course with a hearing in front of the judge.
 
Legally binding promise?

No such thing, AA can terminate the pension if they take it to court.

AA can reject any type of agreement and contract while in bankruptcy, of course with a hearing in front of the judge.
Terminating the nonpilot plans would require that AA file a new motion under 1113 and start the process all over again, along with a motion for a distress termination of the plans. It ain't going to happen. AA will obtain a freeze of the nonpilot plans (and may still have to terminate the pilot plan).

http://www.amrcaseinfo.com/pdflib/2602_15463.pdf
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #111
Yes, but US had not filed a legally-binding promise with the PBGC not to terminate the pilots' pension - something AA has agreed with the PBGC and I'm not certain that AA could change course now.


The US pilots organized the USAPA to rid themselves of ALPA's merger policy which had resulted in the Nicolau arbitration decision with which the US East pilots disagreed. In their misguided thinking, they thought they could do an end run around an arbitrated result to which they had earlier agreed.

This is true, but taking the issue of intergration to arbitration was ALPA's idea (as they were representing both America West Pilot members and USAirways East members...and they wanted to remain neutral on the issue of how to integrate the seniority list. That decision from arbitration and the recommendation of ALPA was the last straw for the USAirways pilots on the East.
The mistrust, however, started with ALPA (before the America West merger) giving advice to the MEC while in BK 1 to terminate their own pensions to get to the $1 billion cost savings..... (yes, I said 1 billion $$ bogie number) that USAirways said they needed from the pilot group in order not to liquidate, as they had threatened to do.
 
Yea, crazy like foxes, they took all your azzzes to court now didn't they....changed the laws via an amendment now didn't they.

They only changed delusional laws for a perceived problem that wasn't true. TWA WASN'T STAPLED! APFA charter, or rules basically protected their own.
 
Took us to court many times and drumroll please, lost EVERY SINGLE TIME!!! So what's your point?
 
Will somebody please cue the violins???
The SEC frowns upon misrepresenting ones self and not making disclosures while posting financial information. Just trying to make sure that the information is posted properly. My profile would be important in such a case and I have not been able to access mine.

Will somebody please que William Swelbar for a lesson on financial disclosure ethics? He is from MIT at Sloan which ISN'T Lincoln Labs.

I enjoy the violin, seriously.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #118
The SEC frowns upon misrepresenting ones self and not making disclosures while posting financial information. Just trying to make sure that the information is posted properly. My profile would be important in such a case and I have not been able to access mine.

Will somebody please que William Swelbar for a lesson on financial disclosure ethics? He is from MIT at Sloan which ISN'T Lincoln Labs.

I enjoy the violin, seriously.

How did he misrepresent himself on his website and blog? What's your fixation on Swelbar???
 
Wiki is not a credible source of information. Schools wont accept that as a reference in a paper.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top