RowUnderDCA
Veteran
- Oct 6, 2002
- 2,123
- 1
I know I must be daft, but how do you preserve equity in bankruptcy? Are does RSA have some kind of super equity than can survive bankruptcy?
🌟 Exclusive Amazon Black Friday Deals 2024 🌟
Don’t miss out on the best deals of the season! Shop now 🎁
Machinists Union Update
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
Smartest Loser
Senior
- Jun 20, 2003
- 313
- 0
This statement is "Purely Speculative ".USA320Pilot said:
to much time to quit
Senior
- Jun 17, 2003
- 318
- 7
Didn't the pilot group have their pensions protected in the S1113 letter?? Just curious of the facts of the past.USA320Pilot said:
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Equity does not have to be cancelled -- stockholders would simply become creditors. It's my understanding the current stock can remain in place and be part of the plan of reorganization (POR), but at a diluted value. Then the ownership percentage would remain the same versus if a DIP financier would be required, who could then demand financial changes as part of their participation in the "judical restrcuturing".
That's what just happened at United. The company's new DIP financiers are requiring management to not make any more pension payments while in bankruptcy and that the airline further renegotiate new aircraft leases, which has lead to reports this week the ccarrier could have aircraft repossessions.
If the IAM does not participate in the new business plan, the company will likely enter bankruptcy in October and as I have said, seek to set aside any labor agreement that does not have a new S.1113/S.1114 letter. In addition, the company is expected to reject facility and airport leases, such as gates, reservation offices, maintenance facilities, and excess office space. For example, US Airways leases 6 gates in Buffalo and only has a real requirement for 2 gates.
The key is to enter bankruptcy with a cash position high enough to not require DIP financing. Once the airline emerges, new equity could be issued to preserve RSA's investment and ownership percentage.
It's my understanding the ATSB is on-board with this plan and in fact, along with the creditors, the Bush Administration has indicated it would support the company again. This is key because the ATSB rejected United Airlines application three times and provided US Airways with “conditional†approval, final loan guarantee approval, and then an amended agreement last spring.
Bill Warlick’s comments in the Charlotte Business Journal are important because he is the ATSB's loan guarantee auditor and key financial representative. His recommendation will go along with the loan guarantee and for him to make his comments about another “formal restructuring†is significant.
The industry collapse is unfortunate, is painful, and harsh, but it’s the reality of a brutal marketplace. I do not like it, but labor has very little leverage. Either the unions participate in the new business plan, or they could be eliminated and their particular union becomes irrelevant to the process. That's why I believe ALPA, the AFA, and CWA have elected to negotiate with the airline.
What each employee and union must decide is if they want to participate at an America West or LCC level or move on – it’s really as simple as that.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
That's what just happened at United. The company's new DIP financiers are requiring management to not make any more pension payments while in bankruptcy and that the airline further renegotiate new aircraft leases, which has lead to reports this week the ccarrier could have aircraft repossessions.
If the IAM does not participate in the new business plan, the company will likely enter bankruptcy in October and as I have said, seek to set aside any labor agreement that does not have a new S.1113/S.1114 letter. In addition, the company is expected to reject facility and airport leases, such as gates, reservation offices, maintenance facilities, and excess office space. For example, US Airways leases 6 gates in Buffalo and only has a real requirement for 2 gates.
The key is to enter bankruptcy with a cash position high enough to not require DIP financing. Once the airline emerges, new equity could be issued to preserve RSA's investment and ownership percentage.
It's my understanding the ATSB is on-board with this plan and in fact, along with the creditors, the Bush Administration has indicated it would support the company again. This is key because the ATSB rejected United Airlines application three times and provided US Airways with “conditional†approval, final loan guarantee approval, and then an amended agreement last spring.
Bill Warlick’s comments in the Charlotte Business Journal are important because he is the ATSB's loan guarantee auditor and key financial representative. His recommendation will go along with the loan guarantee and for him to make his comments about another “formal restructuring†is significant.
The industry collapse is unfortunate, is painful, and harsh, but it’s the reality of a brutal marketplace. I do not like it, but labor has very little leverage. Either the unions participate in the new business plan, or they could be eliminated and their particular union becomes irrelevant to the process. That's why I believe ALPA, the AFA, and CWA have elected to negotiate with the airline.
What each employee and union must decide is if they want to participate at an America West or LCC level or move on – it’s really as simple as that.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #20
Once again, you know who does not report the facts.
No contract can be abrogated until negotiations and the steps are followed.
Companies that request abrogation of the labor agreement but it must meet the following nine (9) distinct requirements:
1. The debtor in possession must have made a proposal to the union.
2. The proposal must be based upon the most complete and reliable information available at the time of the proposal.
3. The modification must be necessary to permit reorganization.
4. The modification must provide that all affected parties be treated fairly and equitably.
5. The debtor must provide the union with such relevant information as is necessary to evaluate the proposal.
6. The debtor must have met with the collective bargaining representative at the reasonable times subsequent to making the proposal.
7. The debtor must have negotiated with the union concerning the proposal in good faith.
8. The union must have refused to accept the proposal with good cause.
9. The balance of the equities must clearly favor rejection of the agreement.
And the company cannot file a voluntary bankruptcy.
And you saw how the 1113 protected the pilots pension.
No contract can be abrogated until negotiations and the steps are followed.
Companies that request abrogation of the labor agreement but it must meet the following nine (9) distinct requirements:
1. The debtor in possession must have made a proposal to the union.
2. The proposal must be based upon the most complete and reliable information available at the time of the proposal.
3. The modification must be necessary to permit reorganization.
4. The modification must provide that all affected parties be treated fairly and equitably.
5. The debtor must provide the union with such relevant information as is necessary to evaluate the proposal.
6. The debtor must have met with the collective bargaining representative at the reasonable times subsequent to making the proposal.
7. The debtor must have negotiated with the union concerning the proposal in good faith.
8. The union must have refused to accept the proposal with good cause.
9. The balance of the equities must clearly favor rejection of the agreement.
And the company cannot file a voluntary bankruptcy.
And you saw how the 1113 protected the pilots pension.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Here are the facts:
1. US Airways told the SEC this week that the company was in compliance with financial covenants of federally guaranteed loans as of June 30, “it anticipates risk of failing to comply with the covenants as of Sept. 30, 2004.†If the airline violates the terms of the loan guarantee, then the ATSB (with coordination with US Airways), could force an involuntary bankruptcy filing.
2. According to the New York Times, the company is in discussions with the ATSB regarding a bankruptcy filing.
3. The ATSB’s loan guarantee auditor has said he believes US Airways has the sufficent liquidity to enter Chapter 11 and that he believes the creditors (which includes the ATSB) would support a “judicial restructuring†(I wonder how he knows that?).
4. According to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review in an article published last Thursday, Bruce Lakefield warned union leaders: "Please stop dragging your feet or hoping that Chapter 11 will help you. It most certainly will not. ... If US Airways fails to have new labor contracts in place well before Sept. 30, it faces a series of consequences ... which could have a destabilizing impact on the company and a negative impact on employees."
US Airways’ Legal Department and its consultants are preparing for a bankruptcy filing, where it’s expected the company will immediately present S.1113/S.1114 motions seeking a court order to set aside labor contracts and then reject aircraft/facility leases. The targets will be employee pay, retirement plans, and lease payments because these would be the largest drain on cash flow. It’s imperative that the airline maintain cash during its “formal restructuringâ€. It’s entirely possible that along with gates and office space, the company would reject the Charlotte maintenance facility and Winston-Salem reservation sales office, and close the Pittsburgh reservation sales and maintenance facilities too.
Finally, for anybody to suggest that labor would have any leverage in court for a twice failed company is nonsense. US Airways will compare its labor contracts against the profitable LCC’s and the court will order new contracts to protect cash flow, the debtor, and the creditors, period. Do I like it? No, of course not, but it’s reality.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
1. US Airways told the SEC this week that the company was in compliance with financial covenants of federally guaranteed loans as of June 30, “it anticipates risk of failing to comply with the covenants as of Sept. 30, 2004.†If the airline violates the terms of the loan guarantee, then the ATSB (with coordination with US Airways), could force an involuntary bankruptcy filing.
2. According to the New York Times, the company is in discussions with the ATSB regarding a bankruptcy filing.
3. The ATSB’s loan guarantee auditor has said he believes US Airways has the sufficent liquidity to enter Chapter 11 and that he believes the creditors (which includes the ATSB) would support a “judicial restructuring†(I wonder how he knows that?).
4. According to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review in an article published last Thursday, Bruce Lakefield warned union leaders: "Please stop dragging your feet or hoping that Chapter 11 will help you. It most certainly will not. ... If US Airways fails to have new labor contracts in place well before Sept. 30, it faces a series of consequences ... which could have a destabilizing impact on the company and a negative impact on employees."
US Airways’ Legal Department and its consultants are preparing for a bankruptcy filing, where it’s expected the company will immediately present S.1113/S.1114 motions seeking a court order to set aside labor contracts and then reject aircraft/facility leases. The targets will be employee pay, retirement plans, and lease payments because these would be the largest drain on cash flow. It’s imperative that the airline maintain cash during its “formal restructuringâ€. It’s entirely possible that along with gates and office space, the company would reject the Charlotte maintenance facility and Winston-Salem reservation sales office, and close the Pittsburgh reservation sales and maintenance facilities too.
Finally, for anybody to suggest that labor would have any leverage in court for a twice failed company is nonsense. US Airways will compare its labor contracts against the profitable LCC’s and the court will order new contracts to protect cash flow, the debtor, and the creditors, period. Do I like it? No, of course not, but it’s reality.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #22
Once again you distort the facts, the judge by law has to order the parties to negotiate before an abrogation can take place.USA320Pilot said:
And labor does have leverage this company cannot survive self-help action.
1113/1114 only covers labor, 1110 covers leases.
READ IT AGAIN!
Companies that request abrogation of the labor agreement but it must meet the following nine (9) distinct requirements:
1. The debtor in possession must have made a proposal to the union.
2. The proposal must be based upon the most complete and reliable information available at the time of the proposal.
3. The modification must be necessary to permit reorganization.
4. The modification must provide that all affected parties be treated fairly and equitably.
5. The debtor must provide the union with such relevant information as is necessary to evaluate the proposal.
6. The debtor must have met with the collective bargaining representative at the reasonable times subsequent to making the proposal.
7. The debtor must have negotiated with the union concerning the proposal in good faith.
8. The union must have refused to accept the proposal with good cause.
9. The balance of the equities must clearly favor rejection of the agreement.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
It's time to stop the rhetoric and fruitless "chest pounding". Any union that does not have a S.1113/S.1114 letter prior to the company entering bankruptcy will get "creamed" period, where the cuts will be much, much more painful.
The court will not side with labor and will protect the debtor and creditors, especially with the Bush Administration and the ATSB involved in the process.
As I have said before, the painful result could be as bad as rejection of labor accords, closure of all current major maintenance and reservation facilities, and virtually all outsourcing of jobs.
It's up to a union and its members of whether or not they want to work at US Airways at LCC levels, the only profitable part of the industry on an annual basis, or work elsewhere.
It's really that simple.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
The court will not side with labor and will protect the debtor and creditors, especially with the Bush Administration and the ATSB involved in the process.
As I have said before, the painful result could be as bad as rejection of labor accords, closure of all current major maintenance and reservation facilities, and virtually all outsourcing of jobs.
It's up to a union and its members of whether or not they want to work at US Airways at LCC levels, the only profitable part of the industry on an annual basis, or work elsewhere.
It's really that simple.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Just one more point…
Today the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette wrote an article titled “US Airways mechanics appear to soften stance a bit.†Who first said on this message board last week that this would occur in the not-so-distant future?
Furthermore, once the A320 overhaul issue is decided, especially if the Board of Arbitration issues an Opinion & Award in favor of the company, then I expect the IAM to get serious about negotiating, before they lose virtually all of their members (both the IAM-FSA and IAM-M) after September 30, if the company enters bankruptcy.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Today the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette wrote an article titled “US Airways mechanics appear to soften stance a bit.†Who first said on this message board last week that this would occur in the not-so-distant future?
Furthermore, once the A320 overhaul issue is decided, especially if the Board of Arbitration issues an Opinion & Award in favor of the company, then I expect the IAM to get serious about negotiating, before they lose virtually all of their members (both the IAM-FSA and IAM-M) after September 30, if the company enters bankruptcy.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Attachments
I have been reading these boards for some time. Never really felt the desire to join into the debate. But I just can't take it any longer. Yes it's entirely possibly the company may close the Pittsburgh Res office. It's also entirely possible they won't.
And I need someone to tell me why do I need to work for HP wages for this airline to be profitable. As far as I know they are the LEAST paid of all the LCC. Why must the company pick the least paid of the entire group. Why not an average of all the LCC? That is the one issue I find most offensive.
And I need someone to tell me why do I need to work for HP wages for this airline to be profitable. As far as I know they are the LEAST paid of all the LCC. Why must the company pick the least paid of the entire group. Why not an average of all the LCC? That is the one issue I find most offensive.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #26
It is time for you to stop posting false information and meddiling in other union's affairs.USA320Pilot said:
Lets see ALL unions had 1113 letters after the first round of concessions, what were they worth after Dr Bronner said if the unions don't agree to more concessions he will liquidate.
Bronner- 1, Unions with 1113 letters - 0.
Unions all agree to a second round of concession, then US terminates ALPA pension plan, boy, that 1113 letter really protected you!
Bronner- 2, ALPA- 0, great protection.
And it is time for you to stop posting the same information over and over and why don't you try posting something that is the truth.
The truth is you are scared since the IAM is doing as the overwhelming majority of its members want and it threatens your $200,000 a year income. Maybe ALPA should take some lessons, your group has given two rounds of concessions, lost your pension, gave up scope language to permit anyone with an RJ to fly it in US livery. Your pay rates for MDA pilots are shameful, when a F/O flying a 72 seat airplane makes the same as a utility person. And now you are getting ready to hang up the white flag and feed more of your young to the wolves.
No wonder why ALPA is getting sued by its regional members.
usfliboi
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 2,070
- 270
Cav It will be so interesting in the end my friend. Unified or not, your group will give as will ours and others. If not, it will be forced on you or you will all be out of a job. Plain, simple, reality? What about that do you not understand. Why are you here? Who are you loyal too? Your family? Your co workers? Whats amazing here, is reality hits you in the face with facts. I cant blame your leadership for making noise. History tells us, the IAM have always yelled a little louder when they bled. In the end, Im afraid not only will the iam be broken. youll all be out of a job, the very thing your leadership is suppose to be protectin. NOT YOUR JOB, but the majority of the jobs.cavalier said:
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #28
I guess you don't understand.usfliboi said:
The company wishes to eliminate all utility and stores.
They also want to lay over over 2,500 mechanics and outsource all heavy maintenance, GSE, Plant and component shops.
So no IAM member will ever vote for what the company wants. This company with its present management who has no leadership skills will unfortunately go Chapter 7.
to much time to quit
Senior
- Jun 17, 2003
- 318
- 7
Wasn't your PENSION protected under the S1113 letter??USA320Pilot said:
You continue to ignore the truth and keep spouting off how this useless S1113 is going to save all the other groups. :down: We see through you and no you are untruthful, so once again give it a break and stay out of our business, we are all grown adults and really do understand the risks, you'll never stop trying to save your own A$$!! Wishing you a chance to share in our PAIN. seeking the truth
Member
- Oct 31, 2003
- 90
- 0
Usa320pilot,
If a yes vote from you gaurenteed your furluogh from mainline, in addition, if Mid Atlantic wasn't an option or even if you decided to seek employment with MA, and if hired started as a new hire of the street and your years with USAIRWAYS and your current position now meant nothing, would you still cast the same vote. Just wondering ???
If a yes vote from you gaurenteed your furluogh from mainline, in addition, if Mid Atlantic wasn't an option or even if you decided to seek employment with MA, and if hired started as a new hire of the street and your years with USAIRWAYS and your current position now meant nothing, would you still cast the same vote. Just wondering ???
