USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
New Us Airways Creditor Agreement
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
usairways_vote_NO
Veteran
- Sep 9, 2002
- 1,882
- 57
USA320Pilot said:
When Judge sides with union's then a newer US Airways Creditor Agreement will NOT depend on Interim Wage Cuts
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #3
I stuck this comment in a thread somewhere when I got back from my last trip. It is appropriate to your subtitle - depends on interim wage cuts. I'll go my earlier comment one better...
$5 to anybody who can quote the requirement for wage cuts (interim or permanent) in the new ATSB agreement.
Having been through the proposed agreement twice, I can honestly say that I don't anticipate having to pay out a single red cent.
Of course, what the company shills will say is that U can't meet the requirements of the new agreement without pay cuts. That may or may not be the case since all the company has is forecasts based on a set of assumptions.
The agreement with the ATSB is already in place - with no pay cuts. All that's left is for the judge to approve it.
As for meeting the requirements in this agreement - that is something only time will reveal. Whether there are paycuts or how big the paycuts are.
Jim
$5 to anybody who can quote the requirement for wage cuts (interim or permanent) in the new ATSB agreement.
Having been through the proposed agreement twice, I can honestly say that I don't anticipate having to pay out a single red cent.
Of course, what the company shills will say is that U can't meet the requirements of the new agreement without pay cuts. That may or may not be the case since all the company has is forecasts based on a set of assumptions.
The agreement with the ATSB is already in place - with no pay cuts. All that's left is for the judge to approve it.
As for meeting the requirements in this agreement - that is something only time will reveal. Whether there are paycuts or how big the paycuts are.
Jim
usairways_vote_NO
Veteran
- Sep 9, 2002
- 1,882
- 57
Boeingboy you have a link for that agreement?
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
- Aug 23, 2002
- 2,627
- 945
I saw an article earlier in the week which, I believe, quoted Lakefield as saying that it specifically DID NOT require the paycuts. Wish I had the article to post, but I don't. It may have bben from the Philly Inquirer.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #6
uvn,
Here's the link you requested:
Proposed Order
This proposed order contains the agreement. If you want the whole docket, which includes the company's motion for the judge to approve the agreement , the proposed order, and a comparison of the interim (the one thru Oct 15) and final (the new agreement) orders it's here:
Docket #419
Happy reading....
Jim
Here's the link you requested:
Proposed Order
This proposed order contains the agreement. If you want the whole docket, which includes the company's motion for the judge to approve the agreement , the proposed order, and a comparison of the interim (the one thru Oct 15) and final (the new agreement) orders it's here:
Docket #419
Happy reading....
Jim
firstamendment
Veteran
- Apr 1, 2003
- 1,348
- 0
And your reasoning for hammering this tired statement over and over and over and over and over and over?
A320Pilot, you are a broken record. WE GET IT!!! :down: :down: :down: :down:
A320Pilot, you are a broken record. WE GET IT!!! :down: :down: :down: :down:
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
- Aug 23, 2002
- 2,627
- 945
USA320Pilot is WRONG AGAIN! At least he's consistent! If there's one thing I've learned, whatever he says, believe the opposite!
Similar threads
