Siegel's statement
- Thread starter Lakeguy67
- Start date
- Status
The rumor was started by LGA mechanics. LGA was one of the few mechanic bases who voted YES.
At any rate, no matter what Seigel says, Bob Owens is right on. And that is the reason why the vote will be close to 90% NO this time.
The membership will decide what is appropriate in regards to the IAM's future on the property.
I believe Seigel is focused and really won't liquidate since he would be throwing away 2.5 Billion dollars only to insists on not tweaking labors contract [$50million combined to still a whopping $800 million total].
At any rate, we will find out if he will liquidate by next Friday after he comes back with new instructions from Wolf, who is after all, the COB.
At any rate, no matter what Seigel says, Bob Owens is right on. And that is the reason why the vote will be close to 90% NO this time.
The membership will decide what is appropriate in regards to the IAM's future on the property.
I believe Seigel is focused and really won't liquidate since he would be throwing away 2.5 Billion dollars only to insists on not tweaking labors contract [$50million combined to still a whopping $800 million total].
At any rate, we will find out if he will liquidate by next Friday after he comes back with new instructions from Wolf, who is after all, the COB.
he works for AA and is the treasurer of TWU local 562, he is selling his own members who are TWU at US, he works at JFK, wonder where he got his law degree. And if Siegel was planning on chapter 7, they would have filed that instead of 11.
And Bob, the company will impose work rules, wages and benefits, and will gut the mtc dept and have massive layoffs if it is voted down, what does this accomplish? It is better to live to fight another die then to commit suicide. By the way Bob, wha kind of union staples TWA employees at the bottom so now they are all gonna get laid off.
And Bob, the company will impose work rules, wages and benefits, and will gut the mtc dept and have massive layoffs if it is voted down, what does this accomplish? It is better to live to fight another die then to commit suicide. By the way Bob, wha kind of union staples TWA employees at the bottom so now they are all gonna get laid off.
You mentioned Frank Reeves well written article in the Pgh Post Gazette. What Mr. Reeves failed to mention is the fact that the union was giving back for a period of 6 years while managment giveback was for 2 years.
This proposal would have flown with the membership had it not been for the length of the contract along with a bit more tweaking This industry , like the economy is very cyclical, 3 yrs from now we may be making money at the peak, 3 yrs after that we may be in the valley. What is expected then, another giveback?
Due to all the current coporate scandals going on in the business world the Judge is in a no win situation with a few opitions: 1st keep the current agrement in place, 2nd void the current contract, then the company will lay off 90% of the current mechanic and related. This will cause serious issues with the politicians who lobbied on U's behalf for the 900mil loan. 3rd force the company and Union to NEGOTIATE a fair contract for both parties.
This is just one man's opinion who is voting NO....AGAIN
This proposal would have flown with the membership had it not been for the length of the contract along with a bit more tweaking This industry , like the economy is very cyclical, 3 yrs from now we may be making money at the peak, 3 yrs after that we may be in the valley. What is expected then, another giveback?
Due to all the current coporate scandals going on in the business world the Judge is in a no win situation with a few opitions: 1st keep the current agrement in place, 2nd void the current contract, then the company will lay off 90% of the current mechanic and related. This will cause serious issues with the politicians who lobbied on U's behalf for the 900mil loan. 3rd force the company and Union to NEGOTIATE a fair contract for both parties.
This is just one man's opinion who is voting NO....AGAIN
C
chipmunn
Guest
Hi Joesy:
Joesy said: I believe Seigel is focused and really won't liquidate since he would be throwing away 2.5 Billion dollars only to insists on not tweaking labors contract ($50million combined to still a whopping $800 million total).
Chip comments: Joesy, I believe you may be in denial or you do not fully understand the legal brief filed with the multiple reports the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern Virginia District is anti-labor.
The credit facility requires ALPA, AFA, & the IAM reach their targeted concessions; however, they can be either voluntary or court-ordered. Since the court has approved every US motion the reported “anti-labor†judge will likely follow his track record and cancel the IAM-M contract 10 days. The judge will have no choice but to cancel any union contract not restructured so US can gain access to the financing or the company will liquidate.
In that case as Lakeguy67 reported Siegel said, “vote it down and (there will be) no utility, about 2,000 mechanics and a few stock clerks, just about only a line operation, which may save the financing with less employee expense.
Maybe that’s why Frank Schifano, president of IAM'S local lodge in Pittsburgh, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “We gave them the information to make a decision. Is it in their best interests (to vote yes)? Yes.
Chip
Joesy said: I believe Seigel is focused and really won't liquidate since he would be throwing away 2.5 Billion dollars only to insists on not tweaking labors contract ($50million combined to still a whopping $800 million total).
Chip comments: Joesy, I believe you may be in denial or you do not fully understand the legal brief filed with the multiple reports the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern Virginia District is anti-labor.
The credit facility requires ALPA, AFA, & the IAM reach their targeted concessions; however, they can be either voluntary or court-ordered. Since the court has approved every US motion the reported “anti-labor†judge will likely follow his track record and cancel the IAM-M contract 10 days. The judge will have no choice but to cancel any union contract not restructured so US can gain access to the financing or the company will liquidate.
In that case as Lakeguy67 reported Siegel said, “vote it down and (there will be) no utility, about 2,000 mechanics and a few stock clerks, just about only a line operation, which may save the financing with less employee expense.
Maybe that’s why Frank Schifano, president of IAM'S local lodge in Pittsburgh, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “We gave them the information to make a decision. Is it in their best interests (to vote yes)? Yes.
Chip
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/13/2002 9:39:14 PM Bob Owens wrote:
Chipmun;
From what I've seen of the IAMs handling at USAIR the mechanics should go to the AMFA.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Bob Owens from the TWU Officer ranks is now promoting/organizing AMFA?
![6.gif']](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2FWait+until+the+thought+police+find+out+about+this%21%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F6.gif%27%5D&hash=ff1c9a9e442cd819b15e2605c052166c)
----------------
On 9/13/2002 9:39:14 PM Bob Owens wrote:
Chipmun;
From what I've seen of the IAMs handling at USAIR the mechanics should go to the AMFA.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Bob Owens from the TWU Officer ranks is now promoting/organizing AMFA?
C
chipmunn
Guest
A & P Tech said: Any mechanic with less that 15yrs or utility with less than 10 will be voting themselves right out of a job. But thats just my opinion.
Chip comments: A&P, I agree with you. If the restructuring agreement is not approved you will vote yourself out of a job. The court will have no option but to cancel your contract so US can get its $175 million second tranche of the credit facility. Therefore, a no vote will likely result in your contract being “thrown out†and the company imposing its own terms, which could hurt more an definitely more people. It’s almost like shooting yourself in the foot by voting no and placing the company at risk of liquidation, just like Frank Reeves wrote today in his well-written article in the PIT Post-Gazette.
Could that be why the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported today, still, notices on the (IAM's) Web site advise members that if the proposal isn't ratified, US Airways will ask for deeper concessions in bankruptcy court. It also warns that the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern Virginia District, which is based in Alexandria, Va., and is hearing the case, has a reputation for moving cases quickly and being anti-labor?
Chip
Chip comments: A&P, I agree with you. If the restructuring agreement is not approved you will vote yourself out of a job. The court will have no option but to cancel your contract so US can get its $175 million second tranche of the credit facility. Therefore, a no vote will likely result in your contract being “thrown out†and the company imposing its own terms, which could hurt more an definitely more people. It’s almost like shooting yourself in the foot by voting no and placing the company at risk of liquidation, just like Frank Reeves wrote today in his well-written article in the PIT Post-Gazette.
Could that be why the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported today, still, notices on the (IAM's) Web site advise members that if the proposal isn't ratified, US Airways will ask for deeper concessions in bankruptcy court. It also warns that the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern Virginia District, which is based in Alexandria, Va., and is hearing the case, has a reputation for moving cases quickly and being anti-labor?
Chip
Non-union Cuts
On July 31, US Airways announced to non-union and management employees the necessary wage, vacation, sick leave and benefit reductions that are part of the restructuring plan to restore the company to financial health.
“While painful for us all, these reductions are a necessary component if we hope to secure the $1 billion loan guarantee and successfully restructure the company,†President and CEO Dave Siegel said in a letter to each employee.
The original non-union and management portion of the $985 million overall labor target savings was $35 million. That amount was reduced to 85 percent of $35 million, to just under $30 million, as a result of the unions meeting 85 percent of their target numbers.
To reach the $30 million savings annually for the next six and one-half years, reductions will be made in salaries, vacation and sick leave. Employee contributions for medical and dental care coverage will, in most cases, increase.
No employee earning $30,000 or less will have a salary reduction, and the maximum reduction for employees below the officer level will be 12 percent. The average base salary reductions by groups range from 2.5 percent for administrative employees to 11.7 percent for directors and managing directors.
In addition, the management group participating in the Incentive Compensation Plan (ICP) will not receive bonuses that might have been payable based on the company’s performance in 2002. Like the members of unions, employees in the non-union/management group will participate in a new profit-sharing plan to provide a return to employees on the investment they have made in the company.
Officers, meanwhile, will contribute 100 percent of their targeted savings in both salaries and benefits and this will have the effect of causing the non-union/management group as a whole to exceed their $30 million target.
Also, officers will be taking pay cuts that are a flat percentage of their salaries. Vice presidents will see their salary reduced by 13.5 percent, senior officers and executive officers by 17 percent and Dave Siegel by 20 percent. Further, officers will not receive payments from either the ICP or long-term incentive plan for both 2002 and 2003.
When all reductions for officers are taken into account, their compensation will be reduced, on average, by almost 45 percent.
Last updated: July 31, 2002
On July 31, US Airways announced to non-union and management employees the necessary wage, vacation, sick leave and benefit reductions that are part of the restructuring plan to restore the company to financial health.
“While painful for us all, these reductions are a necessary component if we hope to secure the $1 billion loan guarantee and successfully restructure the company,†President and CEO Dave Siegel said in a letter to each employee.
The original non-union and management portion of the $985 million overall labor target savings was $35 million. That amount was reduced to 85 percent of $35 million, to just under $30 million, as a result of the unions meeting 85 percent of their target numbers.
To reach the $30 million savings annually for the next six and one-half years, reductions will be made in salaries, vacation and sick leave. Employee contributions for medical and dental care coverage will, in most cases, increase.
No employee earning $30,000 or less will have a salary reduction, and the maximum reduction for employees below the officer level will be 12 percent. The average base salary reductions by groups range from 2.5 percent for administrative employees to 11.7 percent for directors and managing directors.
In addition, the management group participating in the Incentive Compensation Plan (ICP) will not receive bonuses that might have been payable based on the company’s performance in 2002. Like the members of unions, employees in the non-union/management group will participate in a new profit-sharing plan to provide a return to employees on the investment they have made in the company.
Officers, meanwhile, will contribute 100 percent of their targeted savings in both salaries and benefits and this will have the effect of causing the non-union/management group as a whole to exceed their $30 million target.
Also, officers will be taking pay cuts that are a flat percentage of their salaries. Vice presidents will see their salary reduced by 13.5 percent, senior officers and executive officers by 17 percent and Dave Siegel by 20 percent. Further, officers will not receive payments from either the ICP or long-term incentive plan for both 2002 and 2003.
When all reductions for officers are taken into account, their compensation will be reduced, on average, by almost 45 percent.
Last updated: July 31, 2002
JFK Fleet Service
Veteran
[blockquote]
----------------
cavalier wrote:
By the way Bob, wha kind of union staples TWA employees at the bottom so now they are all gonna get laid off.
----------------
[/blockquote]
For the record, TWA employees in STL and MCIE retained 100% of their occupational seniority.If they transfer out of those locations they have TWO other seniority dates available to them.If they transfer to a station that met the 10% ASM requirement, they recieve 25% of their occupational seniority, if the transfer to a non 10% ASM location, they have 4/10/01 as an OSD.
So the comment about them getting laid off en masse is incorrect, as is the statment about them going to the bottom of the list.(Not that I'm a rah rah TWU guy, but just in the interest of having the facts straight.)
----------------
cavalier wrote:
By the way Bob, wha kind of union staples TWA employees at the bottom so now they are all gonna get laid off.
----------------
[/blockquote]
For the record, TWA employees in STL and MCIE retained 100% of their occupational seniority.If they transfer out of those locations they have TWO other seniority dates available to them.If they transfer to a station that met the 10% ASM requirement, they recieve 25% of their occupational seniority, if the transfer to a non 10% ASM location, they have 4/10/01 as an OSD.
So the comment about them getting laid off en masse is incorrect, as is the statment about them going to the bottom of the list.(Not that I'm a rah rah TWU guy, but just in the interest of having the facts straight.)
- Status
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Alaska Airlines F/A's vote in favor of a new contract- Latest: Jalsporteam