James Little "Union Agreed to some job losses"

[700UW]

Since you like to tell everyone that they're wrong, you're wrong. Your contract wasn't abrogated. The judge ruled that the company could abrogate your contract but the company didn't, did they. Your wonderful IAM put the final offer out for a vote and it passed, so the members agreed to the changes - by definition they were not imposed on the members.

Jim

And the night before the abrogation, the company handed us their final offer, we recessed talks for dinner, then went back to CCY till 4am in the morning, going back and forth and and improving it a bit.

The Judge in court stated he was going to abrogate and impose the final offer presented to us and the court. He asked the IAM to vote on the final offer as he wanted labor peace and US and avoid a possible job action (NW case about striking wasnt filed at this point in time). The IAM International agreed to let the members vote on the final offer, as the Judge didnt want a job action that would liquidate the company.

Were you in the Courtroom in Alexandria, VA?

I was, didnt see you there, did I miss you?

Read this

US Airways' pact with 8,800 machinists tossed out by bankruptcy court
Airline, union agree to more time for members to vote on contract offer

 

[Buck]

In response to Mr Red, I would also like to see a legitimate choice given to the senior folks of which moral has been so destroyed. It would be great to have the opportunity to move our lives toward the next chapter and allow the younger guys and gals the ability to work toward a future of rebuilding AA over their careers.

My moral has been so destroyed, but I see no legitimate choice. What would the legitimate choice be?

Red, what would it take for you to go?

 

[BoeingBoy]

I was, didnt see you there, did I miss you?

Yeah, you were dozing when I dropped in...

You keep saying that the judge abrogated the IAM contract and that is wrong. I don't care how the judge phrased it, the law is clear:

"The debtor in possession, or the trustee if one has been appointed under the provisions of this chapter, other than a trustee in a case covered by subchapter IV of this chapter and by title I of the Railway Labor Act, may assume or reject a collective bargaining agreement only in accordance with the provisions of this section.

There, in black and white, is the law. The judge approves the motion to reject (abrogate) a contract, but it's the debtor that actually rejects it. No real difference from any other contract rejection during bankruptcy like leases - the judge approves rejection but the company actually rejects. In the US case, the debtor didn't choose to reject your contract did it? You kept working under the old contract at least until the new one (with some changes to the "last and final" offer to improve the chances of ratification) was ratified.
If, as you say, the judge abrogated your contract it would have been abrogated before the ratification vote ended.

Again, like so many things, I have no idea what AA would do if the judge approved the abrogation of any groups contract. It could be anything from abrogating immediately to continuing to negotiate a while longer in hope of getting a consensual agreement.

Believe it or not, a few union classes and sitting in a courtroom doesn't make you a labor law expert. I watch TV but don't pretend to be a producer or actor. I change the oil in my car but don't pretend to be an expert mechanic. You have the annoying trait of thinking that you know everything about everything.


Jim

 

[Mr Red]

My moral has been so destroyed, but I see no legitimate choice. What would the legitimate choice be?

Red, what would it take for you to go?

How about 5 and 5.Probably would'nt have to lay off anyone.With 4 Billion in bank I would think theirs a moral obligation to let people leave with a little Dignity!
All the other B/K airlines offered earlly out.TWU get with the program!!

 

[topDawg]

Yeah praying! Are you kidding me? You honestly think praying is going to help? You effing dupe! American Airlines could give a flying shite about us. I tell you what, pray in one hand and shite in the other.... tell me which fills up faster. Keep voting right wing and lets see what that gets us? If you people cant see whats happening to the middle class by now you deserve what you get. What pisses me off it that your dumbass way of thinking is dragging me and my family down with you. Yeah right..... Amen brother... dumb arses!

ouch. All i'll say is what makes you think i vote right or left? or vote at all? Not sure how my thinking is dragging down your family....

good luck anyways though.

 

[topDawg]

Unless I'm mistaken, Top Dawg doesn't even work for AA; he's just hoping it ends well for you all, as are several of us on here.




At NW, the IAM (ramp & stores) shot down the first T/A. The company was ordered back to the table to hammer out a 2nd agreement, that was then voted on/ratified/etc.




Yes you do! Since I can see tons of stuff AA "took" from other carriers BK term sheets, I'm surprised that wasn't in it (unless I missed it?). I've read tons of posts about what the judge may or may not do. The better question is what are Little & Co. going to counter the term sheet with?

You would be right. This is the worst possible thing that could happen to a scope hawk like me. Hard to argue for more in-house work (thus more people under me) if no one is doing it. I am hoping both sides can do something to save jobs but i don't think AA is willing to. :angry:

Its whatever though. He/she is probably upset and i get that. I was when it was my time.... If i could pay AA (and UA/US/DL) to do all work in-house and pay everyone 60 an hour i would....but i can't.

 

[700UW]

Bottom Line is the Judge did abrogate the CBA and the Judge, the Company and the IAM agreed to hold the ruling in abeyance as he wanted no job actions, so we voted on the final offer.

 

[2ndGENAMT]

Does the company have to argue as to why these changes are necessary before the court??

Will their argument be from contracts of past 1113 filings or what other carriers have today??

 

[FWAAA]

Does the company have to argue as to why these changes are necessary before the court??

Yes, the company has to make arguments, but those arguments are pretty easy; it's not like the standard of proof in a criminal case (beyond a reasonable doubt). Convincing one judge (who is biased against companies failing) is a lot easier than convincing 12 jurors to convict.

Will their argument be from contracts of past 1113 filings or what other carriers have today??

Probably a mix. AA has the highest labor costs in the industy today, even compared to other formerly bankrupt airlines.

 

[700UW]

The judge's primary responsibilities are to endure the company has a viable POR and that the creditors get the most money back as possible

 

[BoeingBoy]

Bottom Line is the Judge did abrogate the CBA and the Judge, the Company and the IAM agreed to hold the ruling in abeyance as he wanted no job actions, so we voted on the final offer.

So after correcting others minor mistakes you're only worried about the bottom line when you make a mistake? Plus you're still saying that the judge abrogated the CBA - he didn't. He ruled that the company could abrogate the CBA. Your attempt to use a media report to prove otherwise just illustrates how little reporters in general know about bankruptcy procedures. Since you were there and know so much, why not just quote the part of the judges ruling where he personally abrogated your contract? I wasn't in court that day but did read his ruling - he approved the motion by US to allow abrogating the contract.

Here's another news flash for you. Nothing in section 1113 says that negotiations must continue after a contract is abrogated. The parties can continue to negotiate if they both agree to do so, but nothing requires it. Likewise, the NMB says nothing about abrogated contracts. As far as they're concerned the employees have a new contract. How often does a new contract get ratified outside of bankruptcy and negotiations continue after ratification (absent any provisions specifically labeled as "subject to further negotiations")?

And finally, one last news flash - the NW FA ruling on striiking after contract abrogation is binding on no other judicial circuit since SCOTUS didn't rule on the issue. So making a blanket statement that striking has been ruled illegal is wrong. Unfortunately for employees, AA's bankruptcy is being heard in the same circuit as the NW FA's suit and appeal, so that ruling is binding on this case.

Jim