Oil At $55 Per Barrel

[AMFAMAN]

So was it like 75%-25%, 70-30? What you are suggesting is something that could easily be proved and overturned in a court of law. Surely the AMFA has lawyers.

[post="254102"][/post]​

Never dealt with the NMB, have you.

BTW...60-40% it was until AA got involved.

Courts...sure we could have but it takes less time(1 year) to go out get the cards and re-file. And that is what we intend to do this September.

 

[Oneflyer]

Good luck to you. I honestly hope the company stays out, I also honestly think that changing unions won't help you at all.

 

[AMFAMAN]

Wow, the first response from you that I actually can respect. I too hope that the company stays out of it. Time will tell about changing unions.

 

[FWAAA]

Good luck to you. I honestly hope the company stays out, I also honestly think that changing unions won't help you at all.

[post="254112"][/post]​

Same here.

Someone recently posted that although they agreed that replacing the TWU with AMFA wouldn't change anything, it's just something that has to be done.

In my view, it would no more change the fate of the AA AMTs than would a livery change on the airplanes, but if the mechanics want it so badly, then just do it.

 

[MCI transplant]

Anyone represented by the TWU will do as they are told!

If that is a paycut, then you will take it and like it. Anything to keep as many employeed as possible, no matter the cost. Even you real unionists in MCI, this is not the IAM.

[post="253898"][/post]​

<_< Boy don't I know it!!!! The IAM robbed us blind, but our old contract was head and shoulder's about this thing we're working under now! Yes we had our concession also! But at least we had a "Snap-Back clause" in it! Apparently the TWU never heard of such a thing and just gave away what took years to get!! We also dovetailed Ozark people into our seniority! And they were AMFA!!!! But let's not go there! Now the TWU has droped all pretence in representing it's membership at TUL! That might just be a good thing for those favoring AMFA! I'm sure the AMT's down there will get fed up with that real quick! Or are they really that hard headed?????

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Get ready to bend over, Union boys and girls!

[post="253820"][/post]​

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"GOOD" I hopt to ***K it goes to $80 a barrel !!!!!!!!!!!!

WHY
Because FINALLY "that will be the straw that breaks the camels back'
BUT,
Hold on,
Which "Camel(s) ??????????

US, UA, DL mabey ????????

This DAM system(too many empty seats leaving runways every day) needs a giant ENEMA !!!!!!!

The faster we "flush" out the deadwood, the faster we start making $$$ headway.

USA domestic could function just fine with AA and NW(CO), and LCC's WN + B6


I hope it(oil) goes to $100 a Barrel !!!!!!!!!!!!


Bring it on.

NH/BB's

 

[Bob Owens]

Good luck to you. I honestly hope the company stays out, I also honestly think that changing unions won't help you at all.

[post="254112"][/post]​

Thats probably because you dont believe in unionism to start with.


FWAA,
Once again you take things out of context. Changing unions wont change the current terms of the contract but obviously the hope is that with new representation we will see improvements the next time around.

 

[Bob Owens]

<_< Boy don't I know it!!!! We also dovetailed Ozark people into our seniority! And they were AMFA!!!! But let's not go there! Now the TWU has droped all pretence in representing it's membership at TUL! That might just be a good thing for those favoring AMFA! I'm sure the AMT's down there will get fed up with that real quick! Or are they really that hard headed?????

[post="254175"][/post]​

Yea, lets go there.

Ozark was dovetailed because AMFA had language that said if they werent-NO DEAL. The IAM wanted the extra dues payers. There would be no dealmaking between AFL-CIO unions to get AMFA to change that.

Another consideration is that most of the OZARK people did not have that many years there. The disruption was minimal.

In your case the IAM and TWU made a deal, which screwed you. If the IAM had held to your successorship clause, or no deal, you can be sure that the TWU would have forced dovetailing as they had in the past. (Trans Carib, Air Cal). There is no way that the TWU would have lost out on the dues.

You have to remember that Sonny Hall was the head of the AFL-CIOs TTD, and as such he probably used the arguement of showing AFL-CIO solidarity against AMFA to get the IAM to sell you guys out.

Sonny no doubt sold the IAM on the fact that they were going to lose the TWA dues any way, however dovetailing could have given AMFA a boost in Tulsa. If they dovetailed 2000 of you guys they risked losing 16000 members to AMFA. So from the perspective of affiliated unions, better to keep them in, than let them go to AMFA, even if it meant stepping back from you guys.

 

[FWAAA]

Thats probably because you dont believe in unionism to start with.
FWAA,
Once again you take things out of context. Changing unions wont change the current terms of the contract but obviously the hope is that with new representation we will see improvements the next time around.

[post="254185"][/post]​

I apologize for giving that impression. I did not mean to imply that a successful AMFA representation vote would change the current concessionary deal. I honestly just don't see any chance for "improvements the next time around."

Every time I read a post detailing the sweet IBT-negotiated deal at WN, recently extended with small raises by AMFA, together with "If WN AMTs can earn THAT much, why can't we?" I wonder why the poster doesn't realize that nothing is permanent and that even WN may someday come knocking on its unions' doors.

Last year, WN gave in and bought peace with the FAs with a very generous contract. Anybody wonder why the AMTs settled for 3% raises while the FAs got many multiples of that??

Nevertheless, I truly hope that AA's AMTs get to vote on changing their union. Elections are good, and there's real reason to deny someone a vote.

 

[FWAAA]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"GOOD" I hopt to ***K it goes to $80 a barrel !!!!!!!!!!!!

WHY
Because FINALLY "that will be the straw that breaks the camels back'
BUT,
Hold on,
Which "Camel(s) ??????????

US, UA, DL mabey ????????

This DAM system(too many empty seats leaving runways every day) needs a giant ENEMA !!!!!!!

The faster we "flush" out the deadwood, the faster we start making $$$ headway.

USA domestic could function just fine with AA and NW(CO), and LCC's WN + B6
I hope it(oil) goes to $100 a Barrel !!!!!!!!!!!!
Bring it on.

NH/BB's

[post="254178"][/post]​

I agree completely. Let's finally kill the zombie (walking dead) airlines and get domestic capacity back to rational levels. $100/bbl to $120/bbl should do it. B)

 

[Connected1]

$100/bbl to $120/bbl should do it.

[post="254351"][/post]​

AA would not survive under those prices unless immediate and significant across the board fare increases stuck. Doubling the oil price would increase expenses by about $4B.

 

[FWAAA]

AA would not survive under those prices unless immediate and significant across the board fare increases stuck. Doubling the oil price would increase expenses by about $4B.

[post="254354"][/post]​

That kind of price spike would, in my view, finally put the bankrupt carriers out of their misery (and maybe a couple others as well), which would finally reduce some of the domestic overcapacity which has plagued the domestic market for more than 3 years now. Less capacity would probably lead to some higher fares.

 

[Connected1]

Agreed, but only if the increase is gradual. A more immediate increase would not allow enough time for the industry to restructure.

 

[aafsc]

<_< Boy don't I know it!!!! The IAM robbed us blind, but our old contract was head and shoulder's about this thing we're working under now! Yes we had our concession also! But at least we had a "Snap-Back clause" in it! Apparently the TWU never heard of such a thing and just gave away what took years to get!! We also dovetailed Ozark people into our seniority! And they were AMFA!!!! But let's not go there! Now the TWU has droped all pretence in representing it's membership at TUL! That might just be a good thing for those favoring AMFA! I'm sure the AMT's down there will get fed up with that real quick! Or are they really that hard headed?????

[post="254175"][/post]​

"When TWA bought Ozark, District 142 dictated that we dovetail their seniority, EVEN THOUGH MANY OF THE MEMBERS DISAGREED."(emphasis mine) This is a quote from Mike Serrapica, 4th Vice President of TWU local 530 in MCI taken from the "MCIExpress" (a local 530 publication). It is in the Jan-Feb 2005 edition on page 4.

 

[seed]

Another consideration is that most of the OZARK people did not have that many years there. The disruption was minimal

Should this issue be a consideration? Are we union in certain arenas and not others?