I suspect the pilots will vote for it by large %. The mechanics are probably the only ones who MAY fight against this railroading by the company. The contracts being ratified will only serve as a starting point for the real negotiations after ch11 is declared.
Ratification Odds
- Thread starter Connected1
- Start date
YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!!
Local562 will be an overwhelming NO. I predict 90% or better. Local 562 has JFK. LGA, BOS, SJU, EWR PHL, and BDL. Probably AA's most profitable area.
The concern is that the Company/union will wage a "Shock and awe" campaign in the bases that will leave out the fact that they will be not only be voting themselves a massive paycut and concessions for six years but for many, they will be voting themselves out of a job. The curent contract provides protection for all those hired before March 1 2001, the new agreement will knock that back to 97. Was this for $#!+$ and giggles? The road show including Art Luby, the representative for the International, not the members, will be giving these guys the worst case scenario and fail to inform these guys that he is recommend that they give away before BK more than UAL has recieved in BK. Our agreement gives much much more than the rejected UAL agreement would have. The rejected UAL agreement contained concessions that we gave back TWENTY YEARS AGO. Why would the International want to do this? Because if AA secures these concessions without going into bankruptcy it makes it more likely that UAL will liquidate. If UAL liquidates AA will likely expand into the void. TWU membership will swell. The TWU will strike another blow against the IAM. More dues for the TWU at the expense of the IAM.Its a Win win deal for the TWU and AA, its the worst deal that was ever put towards any workgroup that pretended to have a union.
This deal gives NO GUARANTEES, thats why the Union will try to sell it based upon FEAR. They will do whatever they can to prevent us from thinking, "DONT THINK, BE AFRAID,DONT THINK BE AFRAID, the sky is falling! Quick step into the trap, er I mean shelter, we shall protect you". Shock and awe. In one sentence we will tell you that in BK management will lose control of the company but then we will tell you that if we agree to give concessions and they go BK anyway they 'will try not to come back for more". Well how would they, they would be gone? If not gone they they would be directed by the DIP. "Sorry guys, we tried but we need another 10% and your first born" " What! You're not willing to sacrifice your first born on the altar of corporate greed? YOU ARE NOT A TEAM PLAYER!!!! "Hurry you have to vote right away, before you have time to think". "Hurry, the sky is falling. Give everything away before they take it!" Dont think just trust us, the same people who brought you the "Me Too clause", "The Virtual Early Out Package", B-Scale, "Iron Clad Language", Six year Contracts, 12 year progressions, System Attrition, OSMs, SRPs etc. Have we ever decieved you before?
Local562 will be an overwhelming NO. I predict 90% or better. Local 562 has JFK. LGA, BOS, SJU, EWR PHL, and BDL. Probably AA's most profitable area.
The concern is that the Company/union will wage a "Shock and awe" campaign in the bases that will leave out the fact that they will be not only be voting themselves a massive paycut and concessions for six years but for many, they will be voting themselves out of a job. The curent contract provides protection for all those hired before March 1 2001, the new agreement will knock that back to 97. Was this for $#!+$ and giggles? The road show including Art Luby, the representative for the International, not the members, will be giving these guys the worst case scenario and fail to inform these guys that he is recommend that they give away before BK more than UAL has recieved in BK. Our agreement gives much much more than the rejected UAL agreement would have. The rejected UAL agreement contained concessions that we gave back TWENTY YEARS AGO. Why would the International want to do this? Because if AA secures these concessions without going into bankruptcy it makes it more likely that UAL will liquidate. If UAL liquidates AA will likely expand into the void. TWU membership will swell. The TWU will strike another blow against the IAM. More dues for the TWU at the expense of the IAM.Its a Win win deal for the TWU and AA, its the worst deal that was ever put towards any workgroup that pretended to have a union.
This deal gives NO GUARANTEES, thats why the Union will try to sell it based upon FEAR. They will do whatever they can to prevent us from thinking, "DONT THINK, BE AFRAID,DONT THINK BE AFRAID, the sky is falling! Quick step into the trap, er I mean shelter, we shall protect you". Shock and awe. In one sentence we will tell you that in BK management will lose control of the company but then we will tell you that if we agree to give concessions and they go BK anyway they 'will try not to come back for more". Well how would they, they would be gone? If not gone they they would be directed by the DIP. "Sorry guys, we tried but we need another 10% and your first born" " What! You're not willing to sacrifice your first born on the altar of corporate greed? YOU ARE NOT A TEAM PLAYER!!!! "Hurry you have to vote right away, before you have time to think". "Hurry, the sky is falling. Give everything away before they take it!" Dont think just trust us, the same people who brought you the "Me Too clause", "The Virtual Early Out Package", B-Scale, "Iron Clad Language", Six year Contracts, 12 year progressions, System Attrition, OSMs, SRPs etc. Have we ever decieved you before?
OP
Connected1
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 332
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #18
----------------
On 4/1/2003 3:22:49 PM mistified wrote:
Do you have first hand knowledge of this?
Were you at any of the EBO meetings?
----------------
I have no first hand knowledge of this other than from the creative folks at BuyItFixIt.org (an entertainiing read, if you haven''t seen it), and past experience in evaluating pilot route proposals. I know from these experiences that there is a certain subset of pilots out there that is quite the swashbuckling lot, and take a lot of stock in their own ideas for reorganizing the company. Some of them have good thoughts, and some of them think that the right thing to do is replace our current management team with one that "will be amenable to employee ownership." (How does that add revenue or subtract costs, again?)On 4/1/2003 3:22:49 PM mistified wrote:
Do you have first hand knowledge of this?
Were you at any of the EBO meetings?
----------------
When you add together the 2,000+ pilots that stand to be furloughed, the rest that would take equipment downgrades in addition to the 23% pay cut, and the aggressively ignorant set mentioned above, you get the recipe for a rejected TA.
Bob,
Plenty of local 514 are P.O.''d. They remember also. When A.A. hit us again with the 6 year plan.
It lets us know what A.A. thinks of the workers behind the scenes. You know the one''s that follow F.A.A. regs. The invisible workers.
They never print in the paper, what the lowest paid employee makes. It is always the topped out pay. Which leads the public to think we are all greedy.
My vote will be no. Six years, Forget about it!!!!
MD80AA
Plenty of local 514 are P.O.''d. They remember also. When A.A. hit us again with the 6 year plan.
It lets us know what A.A. thinks of the workers behind the scenes. You know the one''s that follow F.A.A. regs. The invisible workers.
They never print in the paper, what the lowest paid employee makes. It is always the topped out pay. Which leads the public to think we are all greedy.
My vote will be no. Six years, Forget about it!!!!
MD80AA
----------------
On 4/1/2003 11:01:46 PM FA Mikey wrote:
In my work group the people seem rational and are waiting for more info before making a definite decision. Most I have spoken with are leaning to yes.
----------------
On 4/1/2003 11:01:46 PM FA Mikey wrote:
In my work group the people seem rational and are waiting for more info before making a definite decision. Most I have spoken with are leaning to yes.
----------------
Six years. What more do you need to know?
kirkpatrick
Veteran
----------------
On 4/1/2003 11:01:46 PM FA Mikey wrote:
In my work group the people seem rational and are waiting for more info before making a definite decision. Most I have spoken with are leaning to yes.
----------------
I honestly don''t think we have a choice. But I''d like to know what the company intends to do if one or more groups fails to pass its contract. On the APFA site it says there will be no renegotiation if rejected.On 4/1/2003 11:01:46 PM FA Mikey wrote:
In my work group the people seem rational and are waiting for more info before making a definite decision. Most I have spoken with are leaning to yes.
----------------
As bad as it is (and it''s every bit as devastating as what Icahn did to us in 1986) I do think it''s preferable to BK. I''ll be urging everyone to vote yes.
MK
----------------
On 4/2/2003 9:24:51 AM kiowa wrote:
again, this is just a starting point for the company to see how far each labor group will bend over without assistance.
----------------
This the ending point. Its an all or nothing take it or leave it deal. Vote NO means BK, and only fools think they will do better in a court fighting company lawyers and creditor committee lawyers.On 4/2/2003 9:24:51 AM kiowa wrote:
again, this is just a starting point for the company to see how far each labor group will bend over without assistance.
----------------
AMR will do ch11 if they find it in their best interest regardless of these contracts. They are just testing the waters to see how despatate all the labor groups are. A ratification will NOT prevent bankrupcy it will just show them panicked employees. my vote is NO!
----------------
On 4/2/2003 4:31:41 PM kiowa wrote:
AMR will do ch11 if they find it in their best interest regardless of these contracts. They are just testing the waters to see how despatate all the labor groups are. A ratification will NOT prevent bankrupcy it will just show them panicked employees. my vote is NO!
----------------
Amazing really. How did I not see this for what it was a just a TEST? You see them as panicked, I see them as making an informed intelligent decision about there future.On 4/2/2003 4:31:41 PM kiowa wrote:
AMR will do ch11 if they find it in their best interest regardless of these contracts. They are just testing the waters to see how despatate all the labor groups are. A ratification will NOT prevent bankrupcy it will just show them panicked employees. my vote is NO!
----------------
OP
Connected1
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 332
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #29
Taxes are irrelevant if you''re not making any money, mistified. The pilots don''t have a plan for making money, other than their own hubris. In fact, I would venture to guess that they might even believe somewhere in the back of their minds that they could skate by without any concessions if they owned the company.
AA80Driver
Advanced
- Jan 16, 2003
- 111
- 0
----------------
On 4/3/2003 8:00:40 AM Connected1 wrote:
The pilots don''t have a plan for making money, other than their own hubris. In fact, I would venture to guess that they might even believe somewhere in the back of their minds that they could skate by without any concessions if they owned the company.
----------------
Connected 1,On 4/3/2003 8:00:40 AM Connected1 wrote:
The pilots don''t have a plan for making money, other than their own hubris. In fact, I would venture to guess that they might even believe somewhere in the back of their minds that they could skate by without any concessions if they owned the company.
----------------
This post is completely misinformed and vindictive. The pilots on many occasions recently have affirmed the need for sacrifice and restructuring. They haven''t pushed a business on Don Carty, but have pushed Don Carty to produce a business plan that will make money. Our future is inextricably linked to the success of the company.
We are also painfully aware of the negative effects the strategic decisions of the last 5 years have had on our collective welfare. So, back to your assertion. Could we skate by if we owned the company? No. Could we institute postive change in the culture and be rewarded for our sacrifice? Maybe. There are no guarantees in this world that any particular course of action will produce the expected outcome. But this current course is getting a little old.
If you''d like copies of any documents analyzing our current situation, I''ll be glad to send them your way.
