Mechanics turn down the concessions.

[Bob Owens]

Unitedchicago;
Bob...why don't you just stick to the AA board. Especially in the crucial period, we don't need someone from AA over here.

Hey I thought you said that you dont work for United? So what's up UC did we catch you in a lie? If you dont work for United then why do you call yourself Unitedchicago and why would you say WE. The word we connotes inclusion in a group, otherwise you would have said they. Now how credible can your posts be when you hide under an alias AND get caught in lies?

 

[will fix for food]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/29/2002 4:09:45 PM sastal wrote:

[....... I attended the school I mentioned for six years, and I am on my way to earning an MBA from yet another private institution. ......


Wow...sounds expensive, how do you afford it?


...........My father was a 747 pilot for Alitalia......................


Ahhh....that explains it.

----------------
[/blockquote]

 

[ual747mech]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/29/2002 756 AM atabuy wrote:

The reasoning the mechanics are spouting here puts me in mind of a large group attending a menoupause covention titled: Aim your anger at anything!
You have menoupause.

There is only two issues here to vote on. 4 days no pay for vacation and 7% pay reduction.

Everything else is for another time.

7% of base pay comes out to about $2.01 and hour. 4 days without pay is $1,120
2.01 x 2080 = $4,180 + $1,120 = $5,400.8

35 x 2080 = $72,800
7.3% x 72800 = 5,314.40

The biggest supporters of AMFA are the ones who don't get involved in thier own union and try to change the things within it. They sit and #### about everything and expect someone else to change policy.
I had a discussion with some mm's who were saying the union sucked. I asked why they did not run for the positions? Their response was they did not have the meetings to be eligible.

What they need is a good baby sitter who can change them and put them down when they get cranky.
As I said before, most of these guys would #### if they were hung with a new rope.

I know this isn't about money. You all have this pent up anger and want someone to notice it.
If it were about money, You would not turn this down and throw away 1200 shares of stock. Your retro, and seats on the board.
The shares represent a great upward potential by themselves. The retro is about 15,000 and seats on the board priceless.

This is about how immature people behave when they don't get their way.
And you want respect? Sorry. You have to earn that one. It is not anywhere in the contract laguage or, will it ever be.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Atabuy;

Don't worry, I think this thing will pass the next time around. People are just frustrated, we just got our raise just to give it right back. Let's face it you guys enjoyed yours for about 2 yrs already, full retro and all.
I know, I know, that's how it goes so you don't have to explain.. I, myself, would rather not go thru bankruptcy if we can avoid it. It sucks being in this predicament but we need to look at the consequences of bankruptcy and I think a lot of my colleagues don't realize that yet, they're still mad. Let's hope people will calm down before it's too late.

 

[Bob Owens]

atabuy;
There is only two issues here to vote on. 4 days no pay for vacation and 7% pay reduction.

I,m guessing of course that is YOUR OPINION. Because there is a lot more to this than the lost Vacation and the INITIAL pay cut. What about the fact that its SIX YEARS and will most likely be a real cut of around 18%?

 

[Bob Owens]

mancityfan;
The judge listens, says Duly noted and then hits you with the hammer that the company has proposed he should hit you with!

Oh really? And how do you know this? Show me the precidence. You are talking out of your behind.

Does the IAM have a business plan that will get the company out of CH11?

Should they? Isnt that managements job?

This is the BIG TIME! This is not a PEB, this is not even a real negotiation. This is a trip before the guy who cares NOT about the individual, but rather the entity, and who's mantra is this is the way you WILL do it, because I am all knowing and have the power to do whatever I want. I hope someone did not forget to mention that to the guys in the break room!'

Wow! And I thought we lived in a democracy where the rule of law was enforced. The judge is the enforcer of that rule of law and he is supposed to follw the intent of the authors of the laws that he uses to make rulings. The intent of the revisions of the C-11 rules concerning the abrogation of labor contracts is reletively clear, labor contracts are treated differently than other contracts, the company must negotiate and only if the labor group fails to show good cause for rejection of the offer can he abrogate it.

 

[Bob Owens]

Unitedchicago;
The reason I sometimes slip and say we is that my dad worked for United. I grew up on United. United paid for my food, shelter, and for college.

I think that the current employees would like to do the same for their children as your parents did for you.

How much do you make?

 

[Bob Owens]

ATABUY;
This is about how immature people behave when they don't get their way.

I guess your right. How did you want the vote to go? I guess that you didnt get your way.

 

[Bob Owens]

mancityfan;
Could you please tell me when the AMR mechanics got their contract, and how far inferior it was to UAL mechanics.? Then, could you ell me how much UAL pilots are giving up and how much UAL mechanics are being asked to give up? Until I can compare all the numbers, it is hard to make any comparisons at the moment.

I'll do better than that. I'll get you a full copy of our contract if you give me a full copy of your contract. Deal? By the way the AA mechs contract was ratified in October of 2001, full retro back to March 1, 2001, paid in full.

I guess you will be over at the AA boards shortly telling them that they need to take paycuts to save their company too?

No I would not expect them to give back anything. They've earned it. I dont think anyone should give paycuts, execpt the executives, after all its their fault the company is in the position its in. But if pilots are going to tell mechanics that they should accept paycuts I will not hesitate to point out that in the end the pilots will end up with a better deal than the mechanics. At the end of the six year contract most pilots will likely have progressed up to better pay. Retirements will allow them to move up. This will offset their 'paycuts. Mechanics on the other hand are at top pay in 5 years and their losses will be real, their real income will actually go down. So the few pilots that actually see a real paycut after the 6 year contract will be a handfull of the top paid pilots that are still around. At $300,000 a year I doubt that any of those guys will be forced to work a second job to make ends meet.

I am not privy to the details, so I cannot comment from a position of fact.

Thats just it. Some pilots want to tell others to accept pay cuts and say what they are giving up but how can anyone really check to see?

 

[Bob Owens]

GGPillow;
I don’t think that anyone feels that the BK judge will be his or her Savior. But one of the conditions that the judge must see before he abrogates the agreement is that the mechanics rejected the company’s proposal without good cause. In other words that their reason for rejection was not based on a good reason. Good reason does not mean the best, or indisputable it just means that there is a good reason why that rejected it, that they did not just reject it without any reason or consideration. You may claim it was emotional, and I have no doubt that emotions were expressed but sometimes emotional expressions come from logical realizations. The six-year term is good cause for rejection. It’s an unusually long period of time. The mechanics have the right to look out for their interests just as the company does. I seriously doubt that any of the commercial enterprises that UAL is doing business with is going to be willing to agree to long term concessionary deals like the employees are being told to agree to.
I agree that 141m is in a bed of nails, but that’s where they were before the vote, now they just pulled the company on to the same bed. It’s more like a standoff. The company put a gun to the head of the mechanics, but then said “Don’t blame me I’m just following orders from the ATSBâ€, by voting no the mechanics just pulled out their own gun and put it to the company’s head and said “I don’t care who you claim gave the order, you have the gun, and so do Iâ€.
The terms of the ATSB loans are too onerous and are specifically targeted at airline employees. It’s terms are the result of an anti-labor President who got into office by virtue of a decision by the Supreme Court, a man who actually received less votes than his opponent and an un-elected panel of bankers. The mechanics have made a move that could put them in a more neutral setting, comparatively speaking. Under the terms of the ATSB fairness is absent from the equation, the bill is almost solely for the benefit of investors (what else would you expect considering). In BK court all the mechanics have to show is that their reason for rejection was “goodâ€. At least here they will have a chance to argue their case. At the very best the judge will rule that the mechanics had “good cause†to reject the agreement and refuse to abrogate the contract. At the very worst he may choose to abrogate the agreement and thus free the mechanics to strike, which would almost certainly mean the end of the company and huge losses to the creditors. The most logical course that I see the judge taking is telling the parties that they both must make a better effort at reaching an agreement that they both can live with. At the very least the 6-year term and the Iraq War escape clause have got to go.

The realization that we will be next is one of the reasons why I’m here. I believe I’ve made that perfectly clear.

 

[Bob Owens]

atabuy;
Your retro, and seats on the board.
The mechanics have seats on the board?! I thought that their union had them. It doesnt seem to have done them all that much good has it now?

 

[Bob Owens]

sastal;
In all fairness to the pilots its still one of the more dangerous jobs around, they do work a long time and put in many years to make what they get and if they are lucky to make it that far, their career is over at 60, whether they like it or not.

 

[sastal]

On 11/29/2002 4:09:45 PM sastal wrote:

 

[UnitedChicago]

Bob Owens:

Once again, I do not work for United. If I worked for United, I would proudly admit that.

See...I am a Premier Exec...a very good, loyal customer to United.

The reason I sometimes slip and say we is that my dad worked for United. I grew up on United. United paid for my food, shelter, and for college.

I became very passionate about the airline industry and - mainly - United. So, I often refer to United as we.

Looking forward to scrutinizing AA's business once UA is on its way to restructuring.

 

[Bob Owens]

Unitedchicago;
So you are a United wannabe. Well you are an outsider not only to the United but also to the industry. What gives you a greater claim to post opinions here than I? What happens at UAL will have an effect upon my ability to support my family in the future. Other than being a customer and wanting cheap fares at the expense of the workers how will all this effect you? I think its fair to say that I have just as much self interest at stake over what happens over at UAL as you do.

 

[UnitedChicago]

Oh Bob Owens. Assumptions, assumptions. You are so good at making assumptions.

I am not a United wannabe. I have interviewed there on three seperate occasions for marketing positions and ultimately decided against offers of employment.

How do you know how much I pay for airfare? I continue to book last minute travel and generally only get cheap fares when I plan a vacation in advance.

I studied aviation management, marketing, and labor relations in college. I am extremely well read in this area. So I feel I am extremely qualified to post my opinion.

You have yourself a nice day.