Well youknow what they say, ther's no such thing as risk avoidance, only risk management. We already lost $160k.The longer we stay at the status quo the more we lose. There are risks no matter which way we go, at this point not taking on the company and settling for the status quo is more risky to our financial futures than taking them on. I'm willing to put it all on the line to find out. Are they? We shall see.
Planes out of service in the system
- Thread starter 767 mechanic
- Start date
Well youknow what they say, ther's no such thing as risk avoidance, only risk management. We already lost $160k.The longer we stay at the status quo the more we lose. There are risks no matter which way we go, at this point not taking on the company and settling for the status quo is more risky to our financial futures than taking them on. I'm willing to put it all on the line to find out. Are they? We shall see.
787nightmare
Veteran
- Aug 28, 2010
- 722
- 153
Well, Bob, I know WN and UPS operate very lean with AMTs, and get excellent utilization out of there mechanics.
I've mentioned it before, but worth bringing up again...I can't help but note one glaring fact about the top 3 paying carriers...and that is,
they ALL are pretty profitable(2 dominate the freight business-which is highly profitable IF done correctly/aggressively). One can't deny that they apparently were willing to meet there mechanics desires on compensation based on the health of the companys balance sheet. If this fact is dismissed, well...I think that person is just kidding him or herself. Otherwise, WN, UPS and club Fred have there share of warts, but all operate pretty streamlined & prudent.
IMO AA is playing hardball in negotiations because of: A) they are taking advantage of the geographical cost of living of TUL & AFW(who happen to possess the lions share of mechanic votes), & B mgt wants desperately to get the pilot deal done. The mechanics have always been able to have been hoodwinked in the past-with the assistance of the TWU(I know, big revelation)...but not this time.
And..."UPS told their mechanics if they wanted all the work in house all they would pay is $41/hr."
doesn't that kind of line up with what AA is telling you guys at the table about there position on the number of mechanics on payroll-why they feel the current offer is acceptable?
Just an interesting observation...
They have no reason to hide their money. The real question is "Where is all of AA's money going?" They slashed their workforce by as much as 50,000, but they didnt increase outsourcing, in fact they insource more. They shed 200 airplanes and their revenue has gone up by nearly $5billion. Normally that would be considered an economic miracle. Fuel went up $3 billion, ok fuel ate up the savings from cutting 50,000 heads, but their revenue went up nearly $5billion, where is all that money going?
Why are they playing hardball? Because they can. In the two and a half years I've been in negotioations I've seen the International make sure that despite whats going on in negotiations the company gets whatever it wants. First we saw where Fleet allowed the company to switch over bidding to the computer, saving the company a ton of money and speeding up the process. Then the Union lobbied in behalf of anti-trust immunity for the company only to watch as the company then allowed one world partners and other tenants put the work out to bid. Then we saw the LOA on DWH. Then we saw the LOA agreeing to zero experience for upgrades to the line. We saw the International sign off on an early out package for MCI workers only. We also saw where the company terminated the Supplimental medical and pocketed around $75 million after selling the plan as a supplimental retirement medical plan. So, as long as the Internatioanl is willing to sign away any additional leverage that could be used at the table why should the company bargain?
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
Don't know what may have changed, but there wasn't a huge cost savings when I wrote the business case for that six years ago. It does reduce the time and manpower needed to conduct and implement a bid, but the cost of maintaining the hardware/software to allow online bidding via Jetnet makes it a zero-sum proposition, if not making it cost negative. Either way, the locals were pretty much in favor of allowing people to view the bid and make their picks from home.
You mean the company chose to comply with the terms of their lease at JFK instead of violating their lease by honoring a past practice which is no longer tolerated under the FAA's guidance to airports receiving Federal dollars for airport improvement programs?....
Seriously, Bob, you wasted the members' money on a lawsuit over an issue that the Intl knew was one they couldn't win, and that got thrown out of court. And all you had to do was ask the right questions instead of assuming that the company was out to screw with you...
And still you keep beating the drum that the company is in the wrong... I know that keeping relevant facts away from membership is what unions like the TWU do on a daily basis, but when you start doing it, it begs the question of why anyone should believe you on the stuff that's truly important...
You need to get your facts strait. Local 501 filed the suit. None of our members money was spent on the suit, I wish I could say the same as far as the lobbying.
Acting like its business as usual without an agreement sends the wrong message to the company. By law we are limited but when given the opportunity to show displeasure it should be exploited.
787nightmare
Veteran
- Aug 28, 2010
- 722
- 153
Jeeesus...guys, like I said before...get rid of the TWU, and you solve a multitude of issues. What's mentioned above, is just a drop in the proverbial bucket.
What are the mechanics at American waiting for??............
Kev3188
Veteran
Why would this be a bad thing?
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, just wait...Once the threats start about outsourcing and major changes to the base, clsoing all Class II stations, etc...the TWU will once again tell the membership how important it is for us to swallow more concessions and how we will live to fight another day.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
What money does the Local have which didn't originate with a member's dues?...
Did Local 501 hold a bake sale to pay for filing the lawsuit? Or have they moved on to selling the candy bars my son used to sell for the school fundraiser?
'Hiding' money? That delusional phrase would be hilarious if it didn't reflect the very real ignorance of the worthless union's negotiators.
Where's the money going? Fuel, Wages, Rent, Interest and all the other categories of expenses shown on the financial statements issued under Sarbanes-Oxley. You know, that federal law that could send Arpey and Horton to prison if they know the financial statements are false. If you think those guys would risk prison time just to screw you and your co-workers, then you're beyond help.
Yeah Bob, never in history has an executive ever cooked the books and the ones that were jailed in the past were framed.
Yes, you and Bob are certainly correct. Some corporate execs recently committed some crimes, so logic tells us that Arpey and Horton are doing it, also. Risking prison terms hiding money from everyone in a grand conspiracy to screw the mechanics and other represented employees of AA. Hillary Clinton and her delusions of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" has nothing on you guys; compared to her lunatic rantings, you guys and your conspiracy theories are the voice of calm reason.
I know of two police officers who did hard time for perjury on the stand in their attempt to frame a famous defendant - so that means that all police officer testimony is suspect. Similarly, a kid with whom I went to school went to the big house for arson - he was a volunteer firefighter - so now we must suspect that all fires may have been started by firefighters.
A couple of AA pilots have showed up for their flights while under the influence - so your logic compels me to suspect that any pilot showing up for their flight may very well be drunk. Wonder why we don't breath/blood test all pilots before every flight?
Yep, your Bullet-proof logic at work.
The bad thing is they wanted it, it was a contractaul issue and two years into negotiations they let the company have it desppite the fact the company would not give the Union anything they wanted.
We went over this a while back, We left oiff with $2 billion unaccounted for. At first you were saying you were waiting for SEC filings to be released then you simply avoided it.
I didnt accuse the company of doing anything illegal but we both know that its easy for a viable financially sound company to show losses and not show a profit. Many of the tactics they employ are perfectly legal for them but would be illegal for individuals such as claiming writedowns of things where the loss has not been realized, things like depreciation of assetts, goodwill and other intangibles. My guess is that most small privately owned companies never show profits, instead they either roll excess revenues into the company or disburse to their owners as wage income or benefits instead of paying the higher corporate tax rate on profits.
Wages, even after all of managements bonuses and raises through the Rise program are added in are lower than they were in 2003. As far as other expenses, sure things go up, they go up for us as well, thats why its unreasonable for the company to tell us that we should not expect that the labor we provide continue to provide us enough revenue to maintain our standard of living. AA's revenues have nearly kept paced inflation, even after paying for fuel, our wages havent even kept pace with post concession levels. In real terms we are earning around 17% less than we were after taking the paycuts. When you factor in that revenues are up 20% on an operation thats 30% smaller AA should be fat.
You claim that AA I dont have proof that they cook the books, well I do. I'm not saying that anything they did was illegal but how do you pop $5.1 million a year in profit sharing into a cost out when you have never shown profits in the past that would support such a claim? My guess is they are estimating $250,000,000 a year in profits from 2011 to 2015. AA claimed their offer was worth $316 miillion over 5 years, well right off the bat it was off $25.5 million!
