Anyone with less than 5 years seniority is signing their career away if they vote yes. The furloughs will be MUCH HIGHER than credited with this agreement. NO OVL BENEFITS=thousands of returning f/a''s. NO PART-TIME=hundreds of returning f/a''s. NO FURLOUGH PAY=more incentive for AA to furlough seasonally.
Junior F/A''s say NO...to T/A
- Thread starter twaokc
- Start date
----------------
On 4/3/2003 1:35:55 PM skivoodoo wrote:
Anyone with less than 5 years seniority is signing their career away if they vote yes. The furloughs will be MUCH HIGHER than credited with this agreement. NO OVL BENEFITS=thousands of returning f/a''s. NO PART-TIME=hundreds of returning f/a''s. NO FURLOUGH PAY=more incentive for AA to furlough seasonally.
----------------
That''s your guess, and its only a guess on the numbers. In BK court its the same cuts, plus lots more. If the No votes carry and we do ground the F100 in BK it will be thousands more and a longer time for anyone junior to be recalled. So how does being junior and voting no serve you better?On 4/3/2003 1:35:55 PM skivoodoo wrote:
Anyone with less than 5 years seniority is signing their career away if they vote yes. The furloughs will be MUCH HIGHER than credited with this agreement. NO OVL BENEFITS=thousands of returning f/a''s. NO PART-TIME=hundreds of returning f/a''s. NO FURLOUGH PAY=more incentive for AA to furlough seasonally.
----------------
MrMarky
Advanced
Hi Mikey,
I agree with you and hopefully your coworkers will get the message as well, unhappy though it is.
I''m still skeptical that AA will ultimately avoid Ch. 11, given the seeming inability of Carty to adapt to the changing face of the industry. The US folks gave the concessions and the company filed anyway.
Carty seemed to be playing a game of crafty brinksmanship while on the phone with Darrah claiming the lawyers were walking up the courthouse steps as they spoke and would enter the building unless the concessions were forthcoming. Now you know how the TWA unions must have felt when they were told to give up their scope clauses, etc, or have their contracts abrogated.
Hopefully, the sun will shine again for everybody.
Take care,
Marky
I agree with you and hopefully your coworkers will get the message as well, unhappy though it is.
I''m still skeptical that AA will ultimately avoid Ch. 11, given the seeming inability of Carty to adapt to the changing face of the industry. The US folks gave the concessions and the company filed anyway.
Carty seemed to be playing a game of crafty brinksmanship while on the phone with Darrah claiming the lawyers were walking up the courthouse steps as they spoke and would enter the building unless the concessions were forthcoming. Now you know how the TWA unions must have felt when they were told to give up their scope clauses, etc, or have their contracts abrogated.
Hopefully, the sun will shine again for everybody.
Take care,
Marky
TWAnr
Veteran
- Aug 19, 2002
- 1,003
- 0
----------------
On 4/3/2003 1:08:08 PM WXGuesser wrote:
Unless it is in the pilots'' contract, nobody else gave it up because nobody else *has* it....
Just wanted to clear up that misconception.
TANSTAAFL
----------------
The pilots certainly have it in their contract. I believe it is up to four and a half months pay, depending on length of service (compared to two weeks to two months worth for the flight attendants).On 4/3/2003 1:08:08 PM WXGuesser wrote:
Unless it is in the pilots'' contract, nobody else gave it up because nobody else *has* it....
Just wanted to clear up that misconception.
TANSTAAFL
----------------
Not only did the pilots'' union not give up furlough pay, they received unlimited recall rights and extended pass privileges for their laid off colleagues in return for their concessions.
As an aside, the value of the furlough pay is equivalent to 0.6% of the annual salary of the remaining workforce.
APFA - Where selfishness is valued above every other principle.
Selfishness is taking thousands of workers into Bankruptcy Court making them think that they might get a better deal. Knowing full well thats not the truth. I am beginning to wonder if all these TWA''ers that keep telling you that BK is worth a shot aren''t just trying to get the last laugh. All the TWA f/as will probably be furloughed either way. And as their Swan Song they want you to buy into the fact that a bankruptcy judge will look after your best interest. WRONG!!!! If everyone would just take their EGO out of this for a second and think about your future, then maybe we will have a fighting chance.
----------------
On 4/3/2003 7:53:18 PM twaokc wrote:
MiAAmi,
Why do you twist things around and try to blame everything on the TWA people. The TWA people have been there and know better, so come up with a better excuse....
----------------
L1011RetOn 4/3/2003 7:53:18 PM twaokc wrote:
MiAAmi,
Why do you twist things around and try to blame everything on the TWA people. The TWA people have been there and know better, so come up with a better excuse....
----------------
Member
Total Posts: 65
Last Post: 4/3/2003
Member Since: 10/31/2002
Member #1196
And here is an alternative proposal:
ATTENTION ALL AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT ATTENDANTS!
JUST VOTE NO!
Your future career is in jeopardy. Whether you are very senior, very junior or somewhere in-between, voting in this concessionary package is career suicide. You will NEVER re-coup the concessions agreed to in this proposal. Do not allow AA Management or APFA to intimidate you into voting yes.
I think is this kind of crap he is refering too.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #67
"Selfishness is taking thousands of workers into Bankruptcy Court making them think that they might get a better deal. Knowing full well thats not the truth. I am beginning to wonder if all these TWA''ers that keep telling you that BK is worth a shot aren''t just trying to get the last laugh. All the TWA f/as will probably be furloughed either way. And as their Swan Song they want you to buy into the fact that a bankruptcy judge will look after your best interest. WRONG!!!! If everyone would just take their EGO out of this for a second and think about your future, then maybe we will have a fighting chance."
MiAAmi,
Why do you twist things around and try to blame everything on the TWA people. The TWA people have been there and know better, so come up with a better excuse....
MiAAmi,
Why do you twist things around and try to blame everything on the TWA people. The TWA people have been there and know better, so come up with a better excuse....
----------------
On 4/3/2003 6:31:00 PM TWAnr wrote:
----------------
My apologies for my ignorance on that fact. Just wanted to make sure that folks knew that not everyone had it in their contract...On 4/3/2003 6:31:00 PM TWAnr wrote:
----------------
On 4/3/2003 1:08:08 PM WXGuesser wrote:
Unless it is in the pilots'' contract, nobody else gave it up because nobody else *has* it....
Just wanted to clear up that misconception.
TANSTAAFL
----------------
The pilots certainly have it in their contract. I believe it is up to four and a half months pay, depending on length of service (compared to two weeks to two months worth for the flight attendants).On 4/3/2003 1:08:08 PM WXGuesser wrote:
Unless it is in the pilots'' contract, nobody else gave it up because nobody else *has* it....
Just wanted to clear up that misconception.
TANSTAAFL
----------------
----------------
TANSTAAFL
----------------
On 4/3/2003 7:53:18 PM twaokc wrote:
"Selfishness is taking thousands of workers into Bankruptcy Court making them think that they might get a better deal. Knowing full well thats not the truth. I am beginning to wonder if all these TWA'ers that keep telling you that BK is worth a shot aren't just trying to get the last laugh. All the TWA f/as will probably be furloughed either way. And as their Swan Song they want you to buy into the fact that a bankruptcy judge will look after your best interest. WRONG!!!! If everyone would just take their EGO out of this for a second and think about your future, then maybe we will have a fighting chance."
MiAAmi,
Why do you twist things around and try to blame everything on the TWA people. The TWA people have been there and know better, so come up with a better excuse....
----------------
I've been there and I know better!!!! Try any one from Eastern, Pan Am, Braniff, or any other carrier that has been dragged thru BK. TWA is the only one that came out of BK with a Raise.On 4/3/2003 7:53:18 PM twaokc wrote:
"Selfishness is taking thousands of workers into Bankruptcy Court making them think that they might get a better deal. Knowing full well thats not the truth. I am beginning to wonder if all these TWA'ers that keep telling you that BK is worth a shot aren't just trying to get the last laugh. All the TWA f/as will probably be furloughed either way. And as their Swan Song they want you to buy into the fact that a bankruptcy judge will look after your best interest. WRONG!!!! If everyone would just take their EGO out of this for a second and think about your future, then maybe we will have a fighting chance."
MiAAmi,
Why do you twist things around and try to blame everything on the TWA people. The TWA people have been there and know better, so come up with a better excuse....
----------------
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #70
"
I''ve been there and I know better!!!! Try any one from Eastern, Pan Am, Braniff, or any other carrier that has been dragged thru BK. TWA is the only one that came out of BK with a Raise."
That''s odd, my paycheck never did show an increase. And I know as I was there.
I''ve been there and I know better!!!! Try any one from Eastern, Pan Am, Braniff, or any other carrier that has been dragged thru BK. TWA is the only one that came out of BK with a Raise."
That''s odd, my paycheck never did show an increase. And I know as I was there.
Guest
Get over your hatred for TWA or ex TWA. You are just scared that they are probably more professional than you and should take your job. They were given increases in pay to bring them to the level of pay you make. That is only fair. Why dont you direct your anger towards making this company strive buy stock when it is cheap and reap the rewards of making AA great once again. But let me guess you probably just want it handed to you on a platter. Are you a ramprat or mechanic hopeful.
from the union BB,
I am posting this on behalf of Jeff Bott.
April 4, 2003
Dear Fellow APFA Members,
I realize that within the last few days, since our announcement of the details of the painful cuts in our collective bargaining agreement, many of us have justifiably suffered angry and defiant reactions. You are not alone in those feelings - I have felt those same feelings and I understand why you feel the way you do. I can equate this to having a glass of cold water thrown in your face at the very least. That said, I
want to ask each and every one of you to take a step back and think very carefully before you place a vote potentially based on anger and frustration without first hearing all the facts.
The choice you will be making is probably one of the most important you will ever make in your career and the result of that choice will carry ramifications not only to the flight attendant work group, but to every
other workgroup at American, as well. Therefore, it is not a choice that should be made when you are feeling impetuous. It is such an important decision that you should get all the facts and a clear understanding of what the two options from which you have to choose will mean to you. Cast your vote based on the facts and not emotion. This decision is simply too important to our collective future.
"No" seems like the easy answer. In the minds of some, it leaves us status quo where we are right now, right? WRONG. First, if these agreements are not ratified American WILL file for bankruptcy. Period. This is not a maybe, it is a given. There are only two paths that can be taken: Path A: ratify the agreement; or Path B: face the uncertainty of changes and loss of controlling our destiny to a Bankruptcy Judge. Secondly, there is no "second chance" as some have been purporting - that we can go back and tweak to improve like our last two T/As. Our backs ARE up against the wall - it''s now or never. And thirdly, in bankruptcy, all bets are off with ANY and ALL agreements/contracts we have between APFA and AA.
Again, if this makes you feel like your back is up against the wall, you are exactly right, it is.
Is your APFA leadership drinking the Kool Aid? No. We have had the opportunity to confer and observe presentations from our attorneys, bankruptcy attorneys, financial analysts, investment bankers, and we have been provided access to studying financial data and other data that many of you will never have the opportunity to see. (In order to obtain access to this data we had to sign confidentiality agreements out of concerns for our competitors gaining proprietary information).
If we believed we could get a better deal in bankruptcy, we would be the first to steer the membership down that venue. The fact is, there was not a single advisor, attorney, or financial analyst that told us bankruptcy would be a better route to take. In fact, quite the opposite. The same goes for the other two unions on the property and their
advisors. In the end, none of us would have gone down this consensual road were there any better alternatives.
AA Flight Attendants have an advantage over United and US Air because we''ve seen firsthand their bankruptcy sagas unfolding before our eyes. At United, the IAM (the only group on their property who did not ratify their consensual agreement) had an immediate interim wage reduction, at the request of UAL, imposed on them at the beginning of the Ch. 11 process. The interim rate actually imposed by the Judge was HIGHER than what UAL was asking for. Again, they were the only group to go in with
no previously ratified consensual agreement. That put them in the front row of bankruptcy court with the other two unions, who were more cooperative, up next. Bankruptcy Judges seem to have little tolerance for defiant workers. Fortunately, for the Pilots and Flight Attendants at UAL, they settled their own fate and obtained consensual agreements
beforehand.
If you think you will get sympathy for our cause from a Bankruptcy Judge after rejecting a deal - think again. The Bankruptcy Judge''s primary role is to ensure the debtor emerges from bankruptcy. Look what happened to the US Air''s pilots pension plan. Did they get sympathy from the Judge? Anyone who knows anything about Chapter 11, including attorneys who practice bankruptcy, say the same thing - DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO
STAY OUT OF IT. One of the bankruptcy attorneys I spoke with told me the closest thing to God on earth is a Bankruptcy Judge. The power they wield means total loss of control for Unions and Management.
Additionally, in bankruptcy you have the entrance of various other very influential groups to the process to complicate matters further: enter the Creditors'' Committee and the Debtor in Possession financiers.
The creditors committee is made up of a cast of many, all seeking payment of what is owed to them. They seek to get as much as they can for themselves. Even if APFA and AA came up with another deal bargained inside of Chapter 11, the Creditors'' Committee could go to the Judge and request deeper cuts. Some I have heard seem to view the Creditor''s Committee as an ally. WRONG. First, there is no guarantee that flight
attendants would even be included on the Creditors'' Committee and second; each creditor on the committee seeks to take care of his/her own interest. I have heard the committee equated to a group of vultures that
fight over who gets any scrap of meat that falls their way. They could care less what our contract looks like or how much of a sacrifice we will be making.
Debtor-in-Possession (DIP) financiers lend the carrier money to enable the airline to continue operating after declaring bankruptcy. An example of a DIP is the Alabama Pension Fund. DIP lenders stand at the front of the line and are re-paid ahead of everyone else. I have heard them called a loan shark of sorts. They can impose very stringent conditions to the borrower for the use of their money since it is high risk, yet
the borrower will have to meet the terms to continue operating. You think that American had a gun to our head with these negotiations, just wait until the DIP lenders exert their conditions on AA and on us. DIP lenders simply say, "If you don''t meet the terms we''ve requested to get our money back we will liquidate you in Chapter 7." Remember US Air? Ask them about the DIP conditions imposed on the unions by the Alabama Pension Fund. They were told point blank: you do what we tell you or you''re liquidated. Guess what? US Air jumped real high. The DIP lender has no interest in any of us; they just want their loaned money
returned, hence, my equating them to a loan shark. The debtor borrows the money on less than desirable terms dictated by the DIP lender and if you don''t or can''t live up to the terms they cut your legs off by going
to the Judge and requiring action be taken, including the selling of assets. (Chapter 7). Even if management wanted to do a less painful deal, they have little control. The DIP lender, the Creditors'' Committee and the Judge pull all the strings.
How about the cost of all the legal proceedings that will be incurred? Who will pay the millions in legal fees APFA will expend to handle this issue? The answer is: APFA. Look at AFA at United and US Air. They have had to go into talks with other unions because of their relentless financial problems. If you don''t think a bankruptcy at AA could drive a bankruptcy at APFA, don''t be too sure.
The announcement of cuts that AA''s management group will take has caused
a great amount of uproar - and with good reason. Remember however, the Bankruptcy Judge in the United case allowed United to offer management bonuses in Chapter 11. Yes that''s right …bonuses under their KERP
program (Key Employee Retention Program). I''m told this is very common in bankruptcy as the Judge sees key managers as an important element in the debtor''s emergence from bankruptcy. No I''m not talking about just the top few either. Ironically, members of the same management team at the helm of driving United into Chapter 11 were subsequently awarded bonuses while all other employees took large pay cuts. Go figure.
Another reality that I''m sure frustrates you just as much as me is that like it or not management is portable. Many of them can bail with a golden parachute - we cannot. They can leave and take everything with
them, but we are tied to everything here, like it or not. We must protect ourselves and a viable airline is the only way to do that.
American''s 1113 proposal contains 38% more egregious cuts than the consensual proposal submitted to you for a vote. Just some examples: AA wanted to change our healthcare coverage to offer lesser benefits, AND
for four (4) times the premium we are paying now. In the proposal submitted to you current coverage is maintained for twice your current contributions. Neither is a good option, but clearly, one is twice as
good as the other! Could AA get its proposal in Chapter 11? Probably.
The negotiating team tried to maintain as many of our work rules as possible. AA''s 1113 proposal has drastic changes including duty rigs, foreign nationals on more international routes, etc. Would a Bankruptcy
Judge allow the Company''s changes? Probably. The bankruptcy process is geared toward providing the debtor with a "fresh start" and having them emerge from bankruptcy as a leaner, meaner competitor. A "No" vote means
you will be risking our duty rigs (E, F and G time), our current method of being paid vacation and sick time, i.e. all trips that touch our vacation or sick call... the Company''s 1113 proposal pays 2.45 per VC
day (a whopping 8.15 for a 3-day trip); and Sick Time in the 1113 is being proposed at 4 hours for a Reg. Sched. F/A and 3 hours a day for a Reserve - easy math on that one. We are also risking the possible loss
of all incentive pay, no more line-holder minimum guarantee, international flight attendants risk an additional pay cut if
international pay is eliminated as the Company proposes in its 1113. I know the proposal you''re about to vote on looks bad, but the alternative is worse.
"No" means we will be facing total uncertainty in a foreign arena. Who knows how long the process will play out or what''s on the other side. This is not like Section 6 Contract negotiations where we have some
protections under the Railway Labor Act. In this ballpark we have none. We could have a corporate raider come in to try and take control of the company. This has happened to other carriers in the same dilemma. In fact, prized routes have been sold off to the highest bidder in this scenario. Yes, there is anger with our management, but remember, the devil you know is better than the devil you don''t.
I am voting yes. I hope that those of you who are too angry to make a factual decision don''t drag the rest of our faces across the concrete just to prove your point by daring management to "take us there." If you feel that I''m trying to scare you into a "yes" vote, this is not the case. I feel that it is important to ensure the membership''s
understanding of the realities and uncertainties from my vantage point of what a "No" vote would generate. I have been immersed in this issue for many months, as have others in the APFA leadership. While we have had our differences on how to proceed, in the end, it is what it is and it''s better than the alternative of bankruptcy. I support it and I hope you will too.
In Unity,
Jeff Bott
APFA Vice President
I am posting this on behalf of Jeff Bott.
April 4, 2003
Dear Fellow APFA Members,
I realize that within the last few days, since our announcement of the details of the painful cuts in our collective bargaining agreement, many of us have justifiably suffered angry and defiant reactions. You are not alone in those feelings - I have felt those same feelings and I understand why you feel the way you do. I can equate this to having a glass of cold water thrown in your face at the very least. That said, I
want to ask each and every one of you to take a step back and think very carefully before you place a vote potentially based on anger and frustration without first hearing all the facts.
The choice you will be making is probably one of the most important you will ever make in your career and the result of that choice will carry ramifications not only to the flight attendant work group, but to every
other workgroup at American, as well. Therefore, it is not a choice that should be made when you are feeling impetuous. It is such an important decision that you should get all the facts and a clear understanding of what the two options from which you have to choose will mean to you. Cast your vote based on the facts and not emotion. This decision is simply too important to our collective future.
"No" seems like the easy answer. In the minds of some, it leaves us status quo where we are right now, right? WRONG. First, if these agreements are not ratified American WILL file for bankruptcy. Period. This is not a maybe, it is a given. There are only two paths that can be taken: Path A: ratify the agreement; or Path B: face the uncertainty of changes and loss of controlling our destiny to a Bankruptcy Judge. Secondly, there is no "second chance" as some have been purporting - that we can go back and tweak to improve like our last two T/As. Our backs ARE up against the wall - it''s now or never. And thirdly, in bankruptcy, all bets are off with ANY and ALL agreements/contracts we have between APFA and AA.
Again, if this makes you feel like your back is up against the wall, you are exactly right, it is.
Is your APFA leadership drinking the Kool Aid? No. We have had the opportunity to confer and observe presentations from our attorneys, bankruptcy attorneys, financial analysts, investment bankers, and we have been provided access to studying financial data and other data that many of you will never have the opportunity to see. (In order to obtain access to this data we had to sign confidentiality agreements out of concerns for our competitors gaining proprietary information).
If we believed we could get a better deal in bankruptcy, we would be the first to steer the membership down that venue. The fact is, there was not a single advisor, attorney, or financial analyst that told us bankruptcy would be a better route to take. In fact, quite the opposite. The same goes for the other two unions on the property and their
advisors. In the end, none of us would have gone down this consensual road were there any better alternatives.
AA Flight Attendants have an advantage over United and US Air because we''ve seen firsthand their bankruptcy sagas unfolding before our eyes. At United, the IAM (the only group on their property who did not ratify their consensual agreement) had an immediate interim wage reduction, at the request of UAL, imposed on them at the beginning of the Ch. 11 process. The interim rate actually imposed by the Judge was HIGHER than what UAL was asking for. Again, they were the only group to go in with
no previously ratified consensual agreement. That put them in the front row of bankruptcy court with the other two unions, who were more cooperative, up next. Bankruptcy Judges seem to have little tolerance for defiant workers. Fortunately, for the Pilots and Flight Attendants at UAL, they settled their own fate and obtained consensual agreements
beforehand.
If you think you will get sympathy for our cause from a Bankruptcy Judge after rejecting a deal - think again. The Bankruptcy Judge''s primary role is to ensure the debtor emerges from bankruptcy. Look what happened to the US Air''s pilots pension plan. Did they get sympathy from the Judge? Anyone who knows anything about Chapter 11, including attorneys who practice bankruptcy, say the same thing - DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO
STAY OUT OF IT. One of the bankruptcy attorneys I spoke with told me the closest thing to God on earth is a Bankruptcy Judge. The power they wield means total loss of control for Unions and Management.
Additionally, in bankruptcy you have the entrance of various other very influential groups to the process to complicate matters further: enter the Creditors'' Committee and the Debtor in Possession financiers.
The creditors committee is made up of a cast of many, all seeking payment of what is owed to them. They seek to get as much as they can for themselves. Even if APFA and AA came up with another deal bargained inside of Chapter 11, the Creditors'' Committee could go to the Judge and request deeper cuts. Some I have heard seem to view the Creditor''s Committee as an ally. WRONG. First, there is no guarantee that flight
attendants would even be included on the Creditors'' Committee and second; each creditor on the committee seeks to take care of his/her own interest. I have heard the committee equated to a group of vultures that
fight over who gets any scrap of meat that falls their way. They could care less what our contract looks like or how much of a sacrifice we will be making.
Debtor-in-Possession (DIP) financiers lend the carrier money to enable the airline to continue operating after declaring bankruptcy. An example of a DIP is the Alabama Pension Fund. DIP lenders stand at the front of the line and are re-paid ahead of everyone else. I have heard them called a loan shark of sorts. They can impose very stringent conditions to the borrower for the use of their money since it is high risk, yet
the borrower will have to meet the terms to continue operating. You think that American had a gun to our head with these negotiations, just wait until the DIP lenders exert their conditions on AA and on us. DIP lenders simply say, "If you don''t meet the terms we''ve requested to get our money back we will liquidate you in Chapter 7." Remember US Air? Ask them about the DIP conditions imposed on the unions by the Alabama Pension Fund. They were told point blank: you do what we tell you or you''re liquidated. Guess what? US Air jumped real high. The DIP lender has no interest in any of us; they just want their loaned money
returned, hence, my equating them to a loan shark. The debtor borrows the money on less than desirable terms dictated by the DIP lender and if you don''t or can''t live up to the terms they cut your legs off by going
to the Judge and requiring action be taken, including the selling of assets. (Chapter 7). Even if management wanted to do a less painful deal, they have little control. The DIP lender, the Creditors'' Committee and the Judge pull all the strings.
How about the cost of all the legal proceedings that will be incurred? Who will pay the millions in legal fees APFA will expend to handle this issue? The answer is: APFA. Look at AFA at United and US Air. They have had to go into talks with other unions because of their relentless financial problems. If you don''t think a bankruptcy at AA could drive a bankruptcy at APFA, don''t be too sure.
The announcement of cuts that AA''s management group will take has caused
a great amount of uproar - and with good reason. Remember however, the Bankruptcy Judge in the United case allowed United to offer management bonuses in Chapter 11. Yes that''s right …bonuses under their KERP
program (Key Employee Retention Program). I''m told this is very common in bankruptcy as the Judge sees key managers as an important element in the debtor''s emergence from bankruptcy. No I''m not talking about just the top few either. Ironically, members of the same management team at the helm of driving United into Chapter 11 were subsequently awarded bonuses while all other employees took large pay cuts. Go figure.
Another reality that I''m sure frustrates you just as much as me is that like it or not management is portable. Many of them can bail with a golden parachute - we cannot. They can leave and take everything with
them, but we are tied to everything here, like it or not. We must protect ourselves and a viable airline is the only way to do that.
American''s 1113 proposal contains 38% more egregious cuts than the consensual proposal submitted to you for a vote. Just some examples: AA wanted to change our healthcare coverage to offer lesser benefits, AND
for four (4) times the premium we are paying now. In the proposal submitted to you current coverage is maintained for twice your current contributions. Neither is a good option, but clearly, one is twice as
good as the other! Could AA get its proposal in Chapter 11? Probably.
The negotiating team tried to maintain as many of our work rules as possible. AA''s 1113 proposal has drastic changes including duty rigs, foreign nationals on more international routes, etc. Would a Bankruptcy
Judge allow the Company''s changes? Probably. The bankruptcy process is geared toward providing the debtor with a "fresh start" and having them emerge from bankruptcy as a leaner, meaner competitor. A "No" vote means
you will be risking our duty rigs (E, F and G time), our current method of being paid vacation and sick time, i.e. all trips that touch our vacation or sick call... the Company''s 1113 proposal pays 2.45 per VC
day (a whopping 8.15 for a 3-day trip); and Sick Time in the 1113 is being proposed at 4 hours for a Reg. Sched. F/A and 3 hours a day for a Reserve - easy math on that one. We are also risking the possible loss
of all incentive pay, no more line-holder minimum guarantee, international flight attendants risk an additional pay cut if
international pay is eliminated as the Company proposes in its 1113. I know the proposal you''re about to vote on looks bad, but the alternative is worse.
"No" means we will be facing total uncertainty in a foreign arena. Who knows how long the process will play out or what''s on the other side. This is not like Section 6 Contract negotiations where we have some
protections under the Railway Labor Act. In this ballpark we have none. We could have a corporate raider come in to try and take control of the company. This has happened to other carriers in the same dilemma. In fact, prized routes have been sold off to the highest bidder in this scenario. Yes, there is anger with our management, but remember, the devil you know is better than the devil you don''t.
I am voting yes. I hope that those of you who are too angry to make a factual decision don''t drag the rest of our faces across the concrete just to prove your point by daring management to "take us there." If you feel that I''m trying to scare you into a "yes" vote, this is not the case. I feel that it is important to ensure the membership''s
understanding of the realities and uncertainties from my vantage point of what a "No" vote would generate. I have been immersed in this issue for many months, as have others in the APFA leadership. While we have had our differences on how to proceed, in the end, it is what it is and it''s better than the alternative of bankruptcy. I support it and I hope you will too.
In Unity,
Jeff Bott
APFA Vice President
Similar threads
