Proud "BLT" Member

[Bob Owens]

So we have the same debt and nearly 2.5 billion more in cash than we had when we got the AMFA raise in 2001.


WHY ARE WE STILL WORKING UNDER THESE CONCESSIONS??


Why is the TWU still running around saying we have to save the company when the company is as rich as it ever was?

Its time to hold these people accountable!

 

[Bill]

As far as I'm concerned as long as long as I'm working under a concessionary contract I'm not interested in doing anything extra.In fact I think we should be picketing at every terminal across the country due to the fact that AA management extracted way too many concessions under obviously false pretenses and that despite what gets doled out by the PRnews all is not well and we are not happy.

It is this very attitude that keeps one UNDER consessionary contracts Bobby. So this tells me that YOU are part of the probalem NOT the solution.

Question....between contract dates, what can be done to get any benefits back? Will bringing in a new union BETWEEN contract negotiations get anyting back?? Will a strike BETWEEN contract negotiations get you some money in your pocket?? Because let's face it....all you are concerned with is getting money back into your pockets. There is no concern for recalls, reinstatements, or benefits. Just like during the AMFA drive, what can you do for me?!

And while I'm at it, ask any officer of the TWU (local or internat'l level) if they are happy with the execs compenstation. You use the term bonus but in reality that is not what they are. I (and everyone else) am just as upset about the payouts as you. And I also believe there will be backlash felt. Being a union does not give us the right to precisely dictate how CEOs choose to get paid. We are still living in corporate America and unions hands are pretty much tied. But if we take your advice and do nothing extra (and your preception of extra in this case is not being accountable) then we all suffer and continue to give those who are against unions as well as those CEOs, more amunition.

 

[Bob Owens]

It is this very attitude that keeps one UNDER consessionary contracts Bobby. So this tells me that YOU are part of the probalem NOT the solution.

WRong again Bill. It is having an unaccountable TWU Internatioanl that gives themselves pay raises while signing in concessions for us that gets us concessionary deals.

What got us the big raise in 2001? Was it sucking up to the company and JLT, PLI or any of those other union busting company programs that got us the raise or was it the fact that AMFA had raised the bar at NWA and the company and TWU knew that if they didnt match that they would have serious problems?

We didnt have to suck up for the raise in 2001 because AMFA did the fighting for us at NWA.

Lets look at the facts. AA had $2.5 billion LESS in cash than they have now and around the same amount of debt when we got our increase.

If the companies situation was so precaroius why wasnt it an issue then,since after all we have the same debt now as then but over $2 billion more in cash?

Question....between contract dates, what can be done to get any benefits back?

If we can lose all those benifits in between contracts then we can get them back between contracts. Contracts are agreements between two parties and obviously, since ours was opened early in 2003, are not set in stone.

Lets also not forget that Jim Little ran around claiming that we were going to get it all back with the early openers in 2006.

Will bringing in a new union BETWEEN contract negotiations get anyting back??

It sure as hell would make it more likely than staying with a proven loser. We need to get ownership of our contract, which we do not have. The fact is the International owns the contract, not the members and the International is not accountable to the members.

Will a strike BETWEEN contract negotiations get you some money in your pocket??

It would likely be more successful than begging like the TWU is trying to have us do.

Because let's face it....all you are concerned with is getting money back into your pockets. There is no concern for recalls, reinstatements, or benefits. Just like during the AMFA drive, what can you do for me?!

If the TWU actually cared about those who were laid off they never would have agreed to roll back system protection so dont even try to take the high ground as if you actaully give a crap about the people, all you care about is the dues.The fact is the union should put the members interests first and only those who pay dues are members.The fact is they have failed to do that for at least 20 years, they have sacrificed quality of life for the members in exchange for more dues.

And while I'm at it, ask any officer of the TWU (local or internat'l level) if they are happy with the execs compenstation.

And what are they doing about it? If they are unhappy bending over backawrds for the same people is an odd way of showing their displeasure.

You use the term bonus but in reality that is not what they are. I (and everyone else) am just as upset about the payouts as you.

Obviuosly you arent since you are still sucking up to the company and negotiating away any leverage that we may have by working with the company to improve productivity without ANY quid pro quo.And recalls are not Qiud pro quo for the members.

And I also believe there will be backlash felt. Being a union does not give us the right to precisely dictate how CEOs choose to get paid. We are still living in corporate America and unions hands are pretty much tied. But if we take your advice and do nothing extra (and your preception of extra in this case is not being accountable) then we all suffer and continue to give those who are against unions as well as those CEOs, more amunition.

You are nothing less than sickening. Here you are saying that we should reward the company, which has more cash than ever before-our cash, for screwing us. You are saying that the "unions hands are pretty much tied", well if thats the case why have them? To keep people like you from having to work?

The fact is that unions were concieved in "corporate America", the only thing that has changed is the quality and the balls of the leadership of unions.

I say we do nothing extra for the company and prepare to shut them down if they dont restore what they took from us under false pretenses. You claim that we should be part of the solution, what solution-THE FINAL SOLUTION for unionism as seen from the eyes of corporate America? Thats what you are working towards. Remember what it said over the gates to the concentration camps-"Work will make you Free". Well here you are just like the Nazis, telling us , after we hgave back 25% of our pay, after we saw the workforce derease by another 25%, after we alraedy increased productivity that we must increase productivity even more and expect nothing for it until maybe, just maybe if we work hard enough , we will get something back in 2008. Sure, just like the work made the concentration camp victims free.

I also say that a union that is on company payroll is a company union and an obsticle to workers who seek fair pay, if they cant be fixed they must go.You are nothing but a scab masquerading as a unionist.

Its obvious that the TWU is going to get its payoff for selling us out. Why would AA be hoarding so much cash? To purchase another airline, that means that the TWU will get all its dues revenue back, but we will not get back our concessions. Once again the TWU will orchestrate a fued between the merged workgroupds that will have them fighting each other instead of the company while they sit back and collect the dues.

 

[Bob Owens]

Interesting that the Power Point Presentation on page 18 never shows a cash balance below 2.7 Billion.

I remember being told the cash balance was about 1.5 Billion when the "lawyers were on the steps" of the Bankruptcy Court.

Thats understandable since the figures are probably from the annuul report which is a snapshot on a certain date. So the balance could have been as low as $1billion at one point during the reporting period and it could have been much higher. Either way it illustrates that when you step back and look, even if there were minor episodes in between, AA has been very healthy all along. We were duped into giving long term concessions as a remedy for a short term episode that may have been purposely produced by a corrupt union and company that continue to work together at our expense.

 

[FWAAA]

Interesting that the Power Point Presentation on page 18 never shows a cash balance below 2.7 Billion.

I remember being told the cash balance was about 1.5 Billion when the "lawyers were on the steps" of the Bankruptcy Court.

That's because you aren't looking at the footnote at the bottom of page 18 which says "1/ Includes restricted cash" - the unrestricted cash balance at 12/31/02 (the date of the snapshot mentioned by Mr Owens) was $1.95 billion, and the financial covenants required that AA maintain an UNRESTRICTED cash balance of $1.0 billion or be in default. On 12/31/02, the restricted cash was $783 million, but the restricted cash couldn't be counted in computing whether AMR was in default on the covenants.

Unrestricted cash continued to decline during the first quarter of 2003. From the 10-Q dated 3/31/03, the unrestricted cash equaled $1.272 billion and restricted cash equaled $550 million. On top of that, increased credit card holdbacks and fuel prepayments (since credit cards and fuel sellers were convinced bankruptcy was around the corner) totaled another $251 million.

The unrestricted cash continued to decline during April, 2003 toward the magic $1.0 billion floor. We can all debate whether we think the creditors would have filed an involuntary Ch 11 petition or whether AA would have filed had the cash fallen to default levels - but one thing is certain: AA's already high interest rates would have gone up had default occurred.

 

[Bill]

WRong again Bill. It is having an unaccountable TWU Internatioanl that gives themselves pay raises while signing in concessions for us that gets us concessionary deals.

What got us the big raise in 2001? Was it sucking up to the company and JLT, PLI or any of those other union busting company programs that got us the raise or was it the fact that AMFA had raised the bar at NWA and the company and TWU knew that if they didnt match that they would have serious problems?

We didnt have to suck up for the raise in 2001 because AMFA did the fighting for us at NWA.

Lets look at the facts. AA had $2.5 billion LESS in cash than they have now and around the same amount of debt when we got our increase.

If the companies situation was so precaroius why wasnt it an issue then,since after all we have the same debt now as then but over $2 billion more in cash?
If we can lose all those benifits in between contracts then we can get them back between contracts. Contracts are agreements between two parties and obviously, since ours was opened early in 2003, are not set in stone.

Lets also not forget that Jim Little ran around claiming that we were going to get it all back with the early openers in 2006.
It sure as hell would make it more likely than staying with a proven loser. We need to get ownership of our contract, which we do not have. The fact is the International owns the contract, not the members and the International is not accountable to the members.


It would likely be more successful than begging like the TWU is trying to have us do.


If the TWU actually cared about those who were laid off they never would have agreed to roll back system protection so dont even try to take the high ground as if you actaully give a crap about the people, all you care about is the dues.The fact is the union should put the members interests first and only those who pay dues are members.The fact is they have failed to do that for at least 20 years, they have sacrificed quality of life for the members in exchange for more dues.
And what are they doing about it? If they are unhappy bending over backawrds for the same people is an odd way of showing their displeasure.



Obviuosly you arent since you are still sucking up to the company and negotiating away any leverage that we may have by working with the company to improve productivity without ANY quid pro quo.And recalls are not Qiud pro quo for the members.



You are nothing less than sickening. Here you are saying that we should reward the company, which has more cash than ever before-our cash, for screwing us. You are saying that the "unions hands are pretty much tied", well if thats the case why have them? To keep people like you from having to work?

The fact is that unions were concieved in "corporate America", the only thing that has changed is the quality and the balls of the leadership of unions.

I say we do nothing extra for the company and prepare to shut them down if they dont restore what they took from us under false pretenses. You claim that we should be part of the solution, what solution-THE FINAL SOLUTION for unionism as seen from the eyes of corporate America? Thats what you are working towards. Remember what it said over the gates to the concentration camps-"Work will make you Free". Well here you are just like the Nazis, telling us , after we hgave back 25% of our pay, after we saw the workforce derease by another 25%, after we alraedy increased productivity that we must increase productivity even more and expect nothing for it until maybe, just maybe if we work hard enough , we will get something back in 2008. Sure, just like the work made the concentration camp victims free.

I also say that a union that is on company payroll is a company union and an obsticle to workers who seek fair pay, if they cant be fixed they must go.You are nothing but a scab masquerading as a unionist.

Its obvious that the TWU is going to get its payoff for selling us out. Why would AA be hoarding so much cash? To purchase another airline, that means that the TWU will get all its dues revenue back, but we will not get back our concessions. Once again the TWU will orchestrate a fued between the merged workgroupds that will have them fighting each other instead of the company while they sit back and collect the dues.

Bobby, Bobby, Bobby....there you go again. Seems like I have heard this crap somewhere else. Comparing the TWU to the Nazis. Come on now Bobby. You can bark and growl and moan all you like but your attitude is what causes unions to become divided and what causes businesses to fail. You know good an well that getting ANYTHING back between negotiations is not possible. You also know that unions cannot dictate to the company reagarding what "perks' they give thmselves. We can argue until we're blue in the face Bobby but it falls on deaf ears. I dont' care how strong or weak a union is if the CEO wants a "perk" he's gonna get it. Does it make it right, no. Do we argue such things, you bet your ass we do. Sometimes successfully and sometimes not. But sometimes reality is just that, reality.

You're "attitude" is permiating thruout this system. But what you fail to realize is that this vigilant behavior causes those who are in favor of this Working Together process (and contrary to what you think, there are more of us than you choose to admit) to take the brunt of the load. And that is exactly what is happening.

Tell me where I said I want to reward this company. Because I choose to help secure my future (AND YOURS BOBBY) to be accountable for my position at AA (because afterall they are my employer) that means I am out to screw the union member. Take a look at yourself and your commments, your attitude toward the members. You are bascially saying screw everybody I am not doing a thing to help anyone. I WON'T do it, I refuse! My solution is to get another union in here so I STILL won't have to do anything. Bullsh*t Bobby and you know it. It is this very attitude that gives unions a bad name. What's so bad is that you can't even defend this behavior.

Spare me the lectures Bobby. You are very good at putting words into peoples mouths. Even better at false accustations. If you have no legitimate argument you start this crap. Just look above if you don't believe me!!!! I'm no Nazi Bobby!

 

[Hackman]

Bobby, Bobby, Bobby....there you go again. Seems like I have heard this crap somewhere else. Comparing the TWU to the Nazis. Come on now Bobby. You can bark and growl and moan all you like but your attitude is what causes unions to become divided and what causes businesses to fail. You know good an well that getting ANYTHING back between negotiations is not possible. You also know that unions cannot dictate to the company reagarding what "perks' they give thmselves. We can argue until we're blue in the face Bobby but it falls on deaf ears. I dont' care how strong or weak a union is if the CEO wants a "perk" he's gonna get it. Does it make it right, no. Do we argue such things, you bet your ass we do. Sometimes successfully and sometimes not. But sometimes reality is just that, reality.

You're "attitude" is permiating thruout this system. But what you fail to realize is that this vigilant behavior causes those who are in favor of this Working Together process (and contrary to what you think, there are more of us than you choose to admit) to take the brunt of the load. And that is exactly what is happening.

Tell me where I said I want to reward this company. Because I choose to help secure my future (AND YOURS BOBBY) to be accountable for my position at AA (because afterall they are my employer) that means I am out to screw the union member. Take a look at yourself and your commments, your attitude toward the members. You are bascially saying screw everybody I am not doing a thing to help anyone. I WON'T do it, I refuse! My solution is to get another union in here so I STILL won't have to do anything. Bullsh*t Bobby and you know it. It is this very attitude that gives unions a bad name. What's so bad is that you can't even defend this behavior.

Spare me the lectures Bobby. You are very good at putting words into peoples mouths. Even better at false accustations. If you have no legitimate argument you start this crap. Just look above if you don't believe me!!!! I'm no Nazi Bobby!

Looks like Bob wins again...... Nothing but whiney twu company man drivel.

 

[Bob Owens]

On 12/31/02, the restricted cash was $783 million, but the restricted cash couldn't be counted in computing whether AMR was in default on the covenants.
The unrestricted cash continued to decline during April, 2003 toward the magic $1.0 billion floor.

A covenant of convienience for AMR?

When was this covenent struck and how much was the loan for that this covenant was attached to?

We can all debate whether we think the creditors would have filed an involuntary Ch 11 petition or whether AA would have filed had the cash fallen to default levels - but one thing is certain: AA's already high interest rates would have gone up had default occurred.

We can and we should.

$1billion in unrestricted cash is a lot of money no matter how you slice it. I remember a few years back when Crandall claimed he was invincible because he had $500 million, now $1billion is broke? BS.

If anyone thinks that the bank would have driven AA into BK simply because they fell below the $1billion they are nuts. I'd like to see an example where a creditor forced a company with over $1billion in cash into BK because they violated a covenant.

 

[Bob Owens]

You can bark and growl and moan all you like but your attitude is what causes unions to become divided and what causes businesses to fail.

So its not the fact that the TWU has us split into over 20 locals, none of which have any authority over the contract? Can you show me a more divisive union structure than having over 20 locals competing over one contract? Even within the TWU?

Unions preach solidarity, yet the TWU keeps the members divided and powerless.

You know good an well that getting ANYTHING back between negotiations is not possible.

Oh really? Didnt the company get over 30% back between contracts? Didnt Little tell us that we had early openers for 2006 and we would get everything back?

You also know that unions cannot dictate to the company reagarding what "perks' they give thmselves.
We can argue until we're blue in the face Bobby but it falls on deaf ears. I dont' care how strong or weak a union is if the CEO wants a "perk" he's gonna get it. Does it make it right, no.

Are you talking about the company or the International here?

Do we argue such things, you bet your ass we do. Sometimes successfully and sometimes not.

When is the last time this union argued successfully for the membership?

You're "attitude" is permiating thruout this system.

Good, glad to see you finally admit it.

But what you fail to realize is that this vigilant behavior causes those who are in favor of this Working Together process (and contrary to what you think, there are more of us than you choose to admit) to take the brunt of the load. And that is exactly what is happening.

Well thats OK too. Every union has its scabs and company men to deal with.

Tell me where I said I want to reward this company.

Giving the company increased productivity after the company extracts huge concessions is rewarding them for screwing us. Sorry you cant see the connection.

Because I choose to help secure my future (AND YOURS BOBBY) to be accountable for my position at AA (because afterall they are my employer) that means I am out to screw the union member.

Help secure your future, hmm, isnt that why companies tell their workers they should reject unions, so they can secure their future? Thats what McDonalds and Walmart tell their workers, Dont get a union, because if you get a union and get pay raises you will be putting your future at risk.

Take a look at yourself and your commments, your attitude toward the members.

My attitude is that we should fight to get back what was taken from us, your attitude is that "although we are not happy about it" we should be thankful that we were able to give everything back to the company, in fact we should go out and give them even more by working harder than ever before.

You are bascially saying screw everybody I am not doing a thing to help anyone.

BS, I'm saying screw the management of AA and the TWU. They lied to us and they screwed us over. WE WANT IT ALL BACK NOW!!!!

I WON'T do it, I refuse! My solution is to get another union in here so I STILL won't have to do anything. Bullsh*t Bobby and you know it. It is this very attitude that gives unions a bad name. What's so bad is that you can't even defend this behavior.

The fact is I do my job and I do it well. Will I go above and beyond? NO WAY. That went out with holiday pay, doubletime, vacation pay, sick pay and the 17% pay cut.

What gives unions a bad name is unions like the TWU that take the members money and screws them over. Why do you think Continental just rejected the TWU? Because why should they pay a union that isnt going to do anything for them?

Spare me the lectures Bobby. You are very good at putting words into peoples mouths.

What words did I put in your mouth here Bill? These:" I WON'T do it, I refuse! My solution is to get another union in here so I STILL won't have to do anything."

Even better at false accustations.

Where are the false accusations Bill?

If you have no legitimate argument you start this crap. Just look above if you don't believe me!!!! I'm no Nazi Bobby!

Maybe not, you just follow orders right?