Profit sharing

[scorpion 2]

 
Not saying that at all. There was a reduction, as you state, from the 20% going to 17% AND a reduction for the monetizing of the profit sharing.
 
I guess the APA and APFA have the same "salesman" since they agreed to the same deals.

Didnt realize that they had a whopping 5.5 percent MATCHING contribution to their 401's. Are we talking the whole deal or just your spin doctored one? 

 

[Bob Owens]

 
We didn't get 4.3% in exchange for the 15%, it was only for the final 5%.

Correct, we had already given back 10%. 

 

[Bob Owens]

So what your saying is we bought our own 3% reduction and the me too didnt have anything to do with it. Sweet. According to some twu kool-aid drinkers the me-too equity was also part of the 3% reduction deal. Bottom line is we got fu@@ and the twu helped! Why would a 3% reduction for the me-too have give backs ie. 10% of our profit sharing going away. All we got was a massive shell game. When the company deals with the twu they automatically know that a built in salesman (twu international) comes with the deal thats helps fearsale the contract.

We gave a lot more than 17%, a lot more than 20%. The company decided that they would base the savings on outsourcing using Domestic MRO rates, but most of the heavy work went overseas where they pay much less so we gave much more than 20%. Headcount alone is over 20% lower than when the company went into BK, all the rest, the pension, retiree medical etc etc was all on top of that. ITS LIKELY WE GAVE CLOSE TO 40%. 

 

[NYer]

We gave a lot more than 17%, a lot more than 20%. The company decided that they would base the savings on outsourcing using Domestic MRO rates, but most of the heavy work went overseas where they pay much less so we gave much more than 20%. Headcount alone is over 20% lower than when the company went into BK, all the rest, the pension, retiree medical etc etc was all on top of that. ITS LIKELY WE GAVE CLOSE TO 40%. 

 
You guys negotiated the contract, so I'd guess you'd know if you gave them 40%.

 

[Bob Owens]

 
You guys negotiated the contract, so I'd guess you'd know if you gave them 40%.

No we didn't, the International did, and you advocated and still defend it, thats why we sued. We were basically observers who they wanted to endorse what they struck. They know that without such endorsements none of the deals they brought back would ever get ratified. 
 
At least you aren't denying it anymore. 

 

[NYer]

No we didn't, the International did, and you advocated and still defend it, thats why we sued. We were basically observers who they wanted to endorse what they struck. They know that without such endorsements none of the deals they brought back would ever get ratified. 
 
At least you aren't denying it anymore. 

 
Sued and lost.
 
It amazes me how an advocate for so many actions is so powerless to fulfill all those theories because someone is always standing in the way, whether it is the International, the ATD, TUL, other title groups, lawyers, financial advisers, CEO's, management in general, Federal Judges, most other union leadership, the media, ect., ect.
 
It would seem that such intelligence would be able to overpower the forces that continually and consistently gets in the way. I guess some day.

 

[scorpion 2]

 
Sued and lost.
 
It amazes me how an advocate for so many actions is so powerless to fulfill all those theories because someone is always standing in the way, whether it is the International, the ATD, TUL, other title groups, lawyers, financial advisers, CEO's, management in general, Federal Judges, most other union leadership, the media, ect., ect.
 
It would seem that such intelligence would be able to overpower the forces that continually and consistently gets in the way. I guess some day.

"We all lost"  not just those that had the backbone to sue. Workers have the least support of all when going against the system. What sucks is our own union has become part of the obstruction to worker justice and they use our money to battle us.

 

[NYer]

"We all lost"  not just those that had the backbone to sue. Workers have the least support of all when going against the system. What sucks is our own union has become part of the obstruction to worker justice and they use our money to battle us.

 
We didn't all lose. Those that go against the grain lost. Those that choose to believe the rhetoric lost.
 
The assertions made in that lawsuit was clearly wrong and THAT is why they lost. It should make people that follow that train of thought realize that they may be on the wrong side of the issue. The arguments made in Court LOST, that means it was wrong.

 

[scorpion 2]

 
We didn't all lose. Those that go against the grain lost. Those that choose to believe the rhetoric lost.
 
The assertions made in that lawsuit was clearly wrong and THAT is why they lost. It should make people that follow that train of thought realize that they may be on the wrong side of the issue. The arguments made in Court LOST, that means it was wrong.

I have an idea.   Instead of back dooring the twu's agenda so that the membership (((who supposedly ARE THE UNION)))   have no voice,   lets try a democratic vote sometime. Nothing like having a bunch of lackys deciding your fate and then adding insult to injury you pay them to do it. DFR suits are very hard to prove but it doesnt mean that they arent valid or lack substance. My hats off to these guys for standing up for what they believe in.    

 

[Bob Owens]

I have an idea.   Instead of back dooring the twu's agenda so that the membership (((who supposedly ARE THE UNION)))   have no voice,   lets try a democratic vote sometime. Nothing like having a bunch of lackys deciding your fate and then adding insult to injury you pay them to do it. DFR suits are very hard to prove but it doesnt mean that they arent valid or lack substance. My hats off to these guys for standing up for what they believe in.    

NYer and Sharon Levine made out real well.
 
  They cant wait for the next one. "Hey if you can file with $5 billion in the bank why not file with $5billion in profits", Where does it say that a company earning billions in profits cant enjoy the benefits of a bankruptcy filing??? No doubt Mark Richard has all his rehersed panic inducing speaches memorized for the next round. 

 

[Bob Owens]

 
We didn't all lose. Those that go against the grain lost. Those that choose to believe the rhetoric lost.
 
The assertions made in that lawsuit was clearly wrong and THAT is why they lost. It should make people that follow that train of thought realize that they may be on the wrong side of the issue. The arguments made in Court LOST, that means it was wrong.

The assertions that Unions should be democratic and serve the membership was wrong I guess. 
 
So its your opinion that every Court decision is correct and those who lost were wrong? Hmm, even our court system allows for appeals and for judgements to be overturned.
 
Didn't the court once rule that African Americans are property?
 
Didn't the court once rule that it was OK to exclude Jews from membership and employment?
 
Didn't the court once rule that Unions were illegal?
 
According to you the court is always right. Like I said, if you want Jokes hire Mark Richard, if you want good legal advice-don't. 

 

[Bob Owens]

 
Sued and lost.
 
It amazes me how an advocate for so many actions is so powerless to fulfill all those theories because someone is always standing in the way, whether it is the International, the ATD, TUL, other title groups, lawyers, financial advisers, CEO's, management in general, Federal Judges, most other union leadership, the media, ect., ect.
 
It would seem that such intelligence would be able to overpower the forces that continually and consistently gets in the way. I guess some day.

There is one fact, we have as a group followed the direction that all those you talk about have laid out for us and as a result we earn less than before, have less security than before and have less benefits than before. Our standard of living has plumetted by following your lead. Our standard of living plummetted while revenue, and now profits soared. One doesn't have to be more intelligent than the next guy to realize that. These concessionary deals pass by the smallest of margins and are looked at by people such as yourself as victories, victories because you don't have to live under the terms of the deals you help put in place. 
 
Thankfully your margins of Victories are getting smaller each time as more and more people realize, just as workers did 100 years ago that although the CEOs, Judges, Media, weak Union Leaders etc may be telling them that no matter how much money we help them make they have no choice other than to accept less and less so the boss and shareholders can get more and more,  that they can and should fight back to get a fair share of the wealth they produce. More and more realize that you and Ayn Rand are full of shyte even though you may have CEOs, Judges and the media backing you up. 
 
Its actually a comment that you attack my intellect, because I have never claimed to be more intelligent than the next guy, I've said that I'm just a grease monkey, an average Aircraft Mechanic who has read a lot to try and understand what went wrong, why it went wrong and what we can do to fix it, its what mechanics do, so when people accuse me of having a lawyer write my posts or making a point to challenge my intellect when they find it hard to challenge what i say, I find it amusing.  Most people are aware that it takes much less intellect to tell the truth and get away with it than it does to lie and get away with it. So I don't need to be more intelligent than you because I tell the truth, you without a doubt have a much more difficult challenge in these debates than I do. I admit I'm on the losing side, and I would still be on the losing side even if I didn't challenge all your lies and spin but I do get satisfaction by challenging those who claim to be more educated, more informed  and more intelligent  such as yourself. And each time when the votes go through your margin of Victory gets smaller, so there is some hope that one day the truth will win. And that makes it all worthwhile.

 

[Bob Owens]

I have an idea.   Instead of back dooring the twu's agenda so that the membership (((who supposedly ARE THE UNION)))   have no voice,   lets try a democratic vote sometime. Nothing like having a bunch of lackys deciding your fate and then adding insult to injury you pay them to do it. DFR suits are very hard to prove but it doesnt mean that they arent valid or lack substance. My hats off to these guys for standing up for what they believe in.    

Well you are "the Union", but every organization needs structure and leadership because without it its not an organization, its just a big group of people, anarchy. Over the years the word Union and collective bargaining agent became one, and even members began to associate the collective bargaining agent as "the Union" but the reality is the Union is the collective membership acting as one. The union is in reality an intangible, a state of being.
 
When we form a Union and determine who the Collective bargaining agent will be we also grant them the authority to negotiate and enforce Contracts. Contracts are the ultimate goal of every union and is the foundation upon which a Union is placed upon. 
 
We as a group of people chose (back in 1946) a collective bargaining agent to foster organizing us into "a Union". The mechanics at AA had a collective bargaining agent in place but they ousted them and went with the TWU after seeing what they accomplished with other groups.
 
There is no doubt the TWU needs restructuring, in 1946 I doubt the mechanics at AA would have ousted "the Union' (collective bargaining agent) they had for a Union (collective bargaining agent) that said "We will do whatever it takes to make sure we have more mechanics (dues payers) per airplane than any other union even if it means the lowest pay, fewest Holidays, least amount of sick time etc etc".  
 
In part due to deteriorating working conditions in our current state we are not a Union even though we pay dues to a Collective bargaining agent and the Association would not do anything to remedy this situation. It would make it worse. Our collective bargaining agent, lead by appointed individuals who generally have very little regard for the people they "represent" has manipulated competing interests within our workgroup for decades to get deals in place that pass by the smallest of margins, concessionary deals.  We have deep divisions, we have many members who see no benefit in being in a union and its hard to argue that Just cause and seniority are worth the trade off of lowest compensation in the industry.
 
So how do we fix this? 
 
First we bust down the structured silos that allow competing interests to fester and allow us to continue as a divided membership where appointees of our Collective bargaining agent and the company exploit these divisions to get concessionary deals that pass with 51% approval.  The best way to do that is remove the structure where appointed individuals who often in the past have very little regard for the people they represent control the process instead of elected representatives. Another step is to correct the Title II situation. Title II should be allowed to decide whether they want to remain with Title I or not. They cant be half in half out. We cant have Title II spread through out nine Locals and Aircraft Maintenance in three. They have to be the same. saying we cant do that because it would leave the Local they leave financially unstable is a bad excuse. Putting a single Locals financial interests ahead of an entire contract groups interests is unacceptable. If the Title III local system is dependent on Title II dues then the Title II Local system needs to be restructured. 
 
Once we have our contract group confined to three Locals those three Locals can select a Chairman for their negotiating committee and after we get our contract in place we should look to making it one Local.

 

[Bob Owens]

The assertions that Unions should be democratic and serve the membership was wrong I guess. 
 
So its your opinion that every Court decision is correct and those who lost were wrong? Hmm, even our court system allows for appeals and for judgements to be overturned.
 
Didn't the court once rule that African Americans are property?
 
Didn't the court once rule that it was OK to exclude Jews from membership and employment?
 
Didn't the court once rule that Unions were illegal?
 
According to you the court is always right. Like I said, if you want Jokes hire Mark Richard, if you want good legal advice-don't. 

Missed one;
 
Didn't the court rule that Corporations are persons entitled to free speech? 

 

[scorpion 2]

NYer and Sharon Levine made out real well.
 
  They cant wait for the next one. "Hey if you can file with $5 billion in the bank why not file with $5billion in profits", Where does it say that a company earning billions in profits cant enjoy the benefits of a bankruptcy filing??? No doubt Mark Richard has all his rehersed panic inducing speaches memorized for the next round. 

I spoke with Sharon Levine within weeks of the BK filing. Her mind was made up on what our fate was before the fight began. She had a mindset that was prerecorded and had no desire to fight on our behalf other than the  lip service  gig at a few hearings.
 
We watched the company poor through cash at the maintenance base on stupid ass projects prior to the BK filing and couldnt understand why since the company was struggling with high fuel costs. I told a manager that it looked like they were getting ready to file for BK. His comment was that the company prided itself to much on the fact that they were the last legacy to not file and wouldnt because of that. I answered back that the company would do it to get out of retiree med n to get out from under the pensions. Then the corporate world would high five Horton for how bad he screwed his employees. The manager didnt think that would happen.  
Your right when you say file with 5 billion in profits. Hell why not file next month before the 2015 profits role in and make people question why they filed. Thats why they filed when they did in 2011. Their window was closing and the industry was coming back regardless of the merger.
Its flat disgusting the way the twu zealots try and discredit its members for having a voice and speaking out.
 
Every time I here one of them defend giving up profit sharing since it hasnt paid off over the years makes me wonder if they think we are really that stupid not realize that all the parameters are different concerning profit sharing going forward. Jim Little nor any one individual should have been in a position to make that call on his or their own.