Jetmech said†â€Texas Pacific Group ,according to a recent Time magazine article, was intent on using the bk court to restructure US AIRWAYS even though Dave preferred not to. TPG set all the rules and condition for the (DIP) financing, maybe they should re-visit that and make some changes.
Chip answers: Jetmech, I agree with your point, but with TPG adamant about the filing, and with corporate raider investors like Marvin Davis seeking to be the DIP/Emergence investor, Siegel said TPG was the best offer. TPG doe not care how much you, I or anybody else makes. In fact, they would likely prefer our pay and benefits be reduced further so the company’s EPS increases, and thus the new issue stock appreciation.
Jetmech said: â€Dave's idea of fair surely applied in your case.( 20% ownership of the company for your parity Our parity wasn't even taken into consideration and we had to come up with another 6.8% on top of that!! To add insult to injury, he gutted every article of our contract, everything that was won over the last 40 + years was sacrificed . Maybe Dave could reconsider his idea of fairness and look at it from the mechanics point of view.
Chip responds: Jetmech, I disagree with your comment about the pilot sacrifices, but that’s not the point and is irrelevant to both the CWA and IAM-M options. You have to convince the company what is fair, but to change other labor agreements kicks in the “me too†issue. The company cannot afford to try re-open other union contracts and has show no willingness to do so. The options for those unions without ratified agreements are to ratify the current agreement or when the court’s bankruptcy orders so far are used as a benchmark, make is very possible those unions without a deal will likely see their CBA agreement abrogated, a contract imposed with much deeper cuts, and the potential for multi-million financial penalties imposed on the union and it’s members.
Jetmech said: â€Dave said he could not reach any agreement with the lessors or creditors , so he had to filed for bk. If that's true, let him go after them and push them a little more for the $$$$. We are not looking for a free ride, we just want what is really fair!â€
Chip comments: Jetmech, we all want what’s fair and there are probably 40,000 opinions of what is fair. My $75,000 per year cut in W-2, not the other cuts imposed as well, hardly seems fair and will impact my family forever. So will your cut as well. I hate this situation we are in, but those unions without a deal have to look at their options. There are two: The current deal or most likely have one much worse imposed. In regard to the lenders taking a greater haircut, this was already done. When the company lowered the employee concessions to 85 percent of the original planned concession, the company went and obtained greater lessor and creditor givebacks. This was part of the plan to eliminate obligation on the 67 aircraft spare engines, and facility leases.
Jetmech said: â€Chip, If he does abrogate our contract, it will be a precedent setting decision. No contract has been abrogated in the U.S bk courts since Frank Lorenzo forced congress to change the laws in the early eighties.â€
Chip comments: Jetmech, you’re correct. Every other union has provided concessions (in the history of commercial aviation) and it will be a legal precedent to have a contract imposed. The difference between Lorenzo and Siegel is that CO unilaterally cut pay and benefits in half and Siegel is complying with federal law per the U.S. Bankruptcy Code Section 1113.
Nobody likes this situation, but we all need to move past our anger, look at the options available, and in my opinion limit the pain.
Chip