Teddy Blasts Management

[diogenes]

Posted on: Mar 13 2005, 10:33 PM


Veteran
*****

Group: Registered Member
Posts: 1,551
Joined: 22-August 02
Member No.: 495
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We're concerned about this angle, too.

We asked the AGC if he had any further information other than the term sheets on the web. We asked for further details, that were in writing, as we have learned to our pain that is where the devil resides.

He replied he had no futher info than what was on the web.

We flat out asked, if the company, post-vote and pre- BK emergence, could unilaterally change terms due to economic distress, and he said no.

With that in mind, read

http://www.iam141.org/PDF/US%20Airways/USA...ree.1.13.05.pdf

Particularly,

"The IAMAW agrees that in the event this Agreement becomes effective, the BK Court order authorizing such effectiveness shall provide that if thereafter, PRIOR (emphasis mine) to the effective date of any Chapt. 11 plan of reorganization for US Airways, the Company is in grave and imminent danger that it will be forced to suspend, discontinue or materially reduce its mainline flight operations, as compared to the operations as of the date hereof, it may seek to have the Court modify the Section 1114 retiree benefits....."

and,

" In the event, after confirmation of a plan of reorganization, the Debtors suffer extreme hardship.....the Debtors.......may institute proceedings.....to effectuate such changes as the court finds necessary to avoid liquidation of the Debtors."

In the informational meetings, the IAM lawyer said this was standard language.


The beatings are not over, not by a long shot.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Y'all remember this conversation?

 

[USA320Pilot]

PitBull:

I will see Bill at this week's MEC meeting and I will talk to him about the issue.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[Dog Wonder]

Wipe that stuff off of your nose when you are done standing up for the workers.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Profit Sharing

ARLINGTON (theHub.com) - As more documents related to the US Airways-America West merger and US Airways Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization (POR) are filed over the next several days, our employees will see that changes have been made to the profit-sharing plan first offered in summer 2004.

In August 2004, US Airways’ board of directors approved a new proposed plan, which was never adopted. This plan had several conditions, including that the company and its labor unions quickly reach consensual agreements that would have avoided a Chapter 11 filing.

“We were crystal clear from the beginning that if we were unable to reorganize outside of Chapter 11, we could not guarantee that the profit-sharing plan approved by the board would survive the bankruptcy process,â€￾ said Jerry Glass, executive vice president and chief human resources officer. “Once in Chapter 11, we would be subject to a number of uncertainties outside of our control, including whether anyone investing in the emerging company would even agree to any profit-sharing plan.â€￾

Additionally, prior to our filing for Chapter 11, we had stated that the original plan might need to be changed in order for our POR to be approved. The continued, unprecedented increase in the cost of fuel has had a negative impact on the future earnings outlook for all airlines. While our new equity partners recognize the sacrifices of our employees, they also are aware of the risks involved in investing in this industry.

At the same time, however, our proposed merger with America West Airlines raises new hopes for the future of our company. The proposed new plan will pay employees, excluding officers of the company, 10 percent of the first 10 percent of pre-tax profits in the merged US Airways, plus 15 percent of anything over 10 percent. This proposal also requires approval from the bankruptcy court.

US Airways expects to file its POR in the coming days and is on track to emerge from Chapter 11 and consummate the merger with America West in the late summer/early fall time frame.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

PitBull:
In the case of ALPA, the RC4 lead MEC was the first MEC in history to give senior management more money than management sought – “in my book†that’s not too bright.
Regards,
USA320Pilot

[post="279201"][/post]​

Gee more inaccurate facts from the master of misrepresentation.

Seems Mr Pollack and the MEC during Bankruptcy I, and two rounds of concessions, voted to terminate your pension, funny I did not see the company ask for your pension during round one or two of the first chapter 11, so the MEC agreed to terminate your pension without a membership vote.

So it was not the RC4 it was the GAG.

Once again don't let the facts get in your way.

Dio,

Section 1114 only deals with retirees and their medical, not active employees contract terms.

MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE

March 22, 2003

This is Roy Freundlich with US Airways MEC update for Saturday, March 22, with three new items.
Item 1. The Negotiating Committee presented the MEC with tentative agreements yesterday evening on LOA 85, Pilots Defined Contribution Plan and LOA 86, Adjustments to Restructuring Agreements.

The MEC ratified both letters of agreements by passing the following resolution:

WHEREAS the Company’s Plan of Reorganization and ability to emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy requires final approval of the ATSB loan, and

WHEREAS the ATSB loan conditions require a resolution to the pension funding issue, and

WHEREAS the bankruptcy court judge has determined that the financial requirements set forth in ERISA for a distress termination of the Pilots DB Plan have been met, and

WHEREAS the bankruptcy judge has stated in his order that "unless the plan is terminated, the debtors will be unable to pay all of their debts pursuant to a plan of reorganization and will be unable to continue in business outside the chapter 11 reorganization process," and

WHEREAS ALPA retained Hewitt Associates, an actuarial firm, to verify the accuracy of the company’s actuarial data, and to determine if savings from the current funding obligations were available to avoid termination of Pilots DB plan, and

WHEREAS the conclusion of Hewitt Associates and ALPA’s benefit professionals is that no reasonable scenario is available to avoid DB plan termination, and

WHEREAS the Negotiating Committee was charged with investigating a follow on retirement plan that achieves the maximum level of benefits, on an equitable basis, for the greatest number of US Airways Pilots, and

WHEREAS the negotiations concluded on the evening of Friday, March 21st, with a TA being reached between the Negotiating Committee and the Company, and

WHEREAS the MEC has reviewed the company’s current situation, and the relevant sections of the Policy Manual and concluded that it is in the best interests of the US Airways pilots to ratify LOA 85 and LOA 86 by the MEC on an expedited basis,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the MEC ratifies LOA 85, Pilots’ Defined Contribution Plan, and LOA 86, Adjustments to Restructuring Agreements, and associated documents.

Provisions of the LOA 85, Pilots Defined Contribution Plan, proposal include:

ALPA’s consent to the distress termination of the pilots’ defined benefit pension plan on March 31, 2003.

The Company agrees to pursue and support a legislative and regulatory solution to the pension funding problem for its defined benefit plans for the remainder of 2003, with the objective of restoring the defined benefit plan.

Effective date of DC plan is April 1, 2003.

Contributions effective as of April 1, 2003, unless a DB restoration occurs in 2003.

2003 plan contributions would be paid into escrow accounts. Absent a DB plan restoration by December 31, 2003, escrowed funds are to be paid to the new DC plan. DB plan restoration by Dec. 31 will cause these funds to be paid back to the Company. Repayment provisions will be made for pilots retiring in 2003.

Contributions determined based on a target balance defined as approximately 1 million dollars, for age 60 pilot with 30 years of service.

Final Average Earnings defined as the 36 consecutive months in last 120 months in which the pilot has the highest earnings

Accrual rate is 1.8 % for first 25 years, and 1% for year 26-30

Contributions assumed to earn 8% annually

Requires PBGC approval. The PBGC review process will begin on March 22 and is expected to take up to five days. If it is approved, plan will be introduced in bankruptcy court next week for review.

Provisions of LOA 86, Adjustments to Restructuring Agreements, include:

ALPA granted US Airways Inc. board of directors seat, and has at least one major Board committee position, for as long as ALPA has a seat on the US Airways Group board.

Per modified Plan of Reorganization Stephen Wolf, Rakesh Gangwal and Larry Nagin’s 35 million-dollar lump sum payout will remain eligible for recovery by US Airways’ post-bankruptcy Board of Directors.

Effective Jan. 1, 2004, pre-65 retiree pilots may purchase basic life insurance provided the Company determines that there is no adverse impact to costs.

Elimination period for a disability covered by LTD program reduced from 6 months to 120 days.

Midway Jets for Jobs -- Midway jets for jobs aircraft will be staffed by 100% APL pilots beyond 30 aircraft after all furloughed Midway pilot have been offered recall.

Company budgets up to $500,000 to implement a special downgrade procedure for A330 F/Os to Group 2 Captain positions.

ACARS dispute will be addressed in the manner previously agreed to by ALPA, if matter is not resolved, then referred to grievance process.

ALPA agrees to withdraw the GATT calculations for lump sum distributions grievance.

A March 22 Fact Sheet and LOAs 85 and 86 are being posted on the pilots only section of the MEC website. A roadshow schedule to explain and discuss the agreements is expected to be considered by the MEC next week.

The MEC’s special meeting adjourned at 1:15 a.m. this morning.
.

 

[USA320Pilot]

700UW:

Your post and comments are so ridiculous it does not deserve much of a response. The code-a-phone message you posted is over two years old and is not germane to what happened furing bankruptcy II labor negotiatoins. In fact paragraph two said, “The MEC ratified both letters of agreements by passing the following resolution.â€

The concessions granted in your referenced code-a-phone message were negotiated with a TA, however, every union on this property gave the company a concession greater than the “ask†during the most recent restructuring. The RC4 who no longer are in power led this effort and the reach union thereafter gave a higher percentage give back over the “ask†in sequential order, culminating by the IAM’s dismal result.

In the case of ALPA the RC4 acted against the recommendations of the ALPA president, ALPA director of representation, the ALPA professional negotiator, the ALPA general counsel, the ALPA contract administrator, the ALPA financial advisor, the ALPA investment banker, ALPA E&FA’s lead economist, the Negotiating Committee’s CPA and certified fraud investigator, all three MEC officers, and two-thirds of the MEC.

The RC4 operated against the desire of every ALPA legal, every ALPA financial, and every ALPA economic advisor and were the first MEC in the history of ALPA to provide a company a concession greater than the "ask". In my opinion, that is almost criminal.

You cannot simply say “no†in bankruptcy and the company cleaned the union’s clock during the S.1113 process, with the IAM “naysayers†giving their members the highest percentage concession out of any labor group.

Unfortunately you cannot fix “stupidâ€. People like Jerry Glass love to see people like the RC4 and their supporters, who misrepresent information, because the company wins and the employees lose more than necessary.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

Once again you fail to let the facts speak.

ALPA all ready had let the membership vote and ratify two rounds of concessions and you all ready HAD a CONTRACT IN PLACE.

Then the company wanted your pension and the MEC let the company terminate the pension without a vote, so lets see the AFA and IAM kept their pensions during BK 1 and the company did not touch the frozen plan either.

So you can try to spin it anyway you want, it was not a new T/A, your MEC let the company terminate the pension, thereby giving more then the first two asks in the first round of bankruptcy.

Please show me where a third T/A was negotiated and voted on by the ALPA membership during BK 1.

You can't because you were caught once again misrepresenting what happened.

Once again, don't let the facts get in your way.

 

[PITbull]

Jerry's states "excluding Officers of the Company (old or new Officers)?

Officers don't get profit sharing. They receive bonuses tied to performance targets along with a big chunk of stock. Labor was left out of the stock (equity) choice according to the BOD vote this last week, and that violates our CBA.

Constant "let down". :down:

 

[USA320Pilot]

700UW:

The MEC had no option to vote to terminate the DB plan or in the view of every ALP advisor the company would have liquidated. I was at three of the four pension bankruptcy hearings and the MEC meetings.

I did not see you there to hear the facts or discussion.

Nobody, nobody likes losing a pension and now they're all gone. Without the courage of the MEC to make a tough choice with a gun pointed at their head US Airways would not be flying today according to the advisors.

You're crowd, other prolific posters, and other naysayers have badly hurt US Airways employees and are part of the reason the profit sharing plan is now under attack.

When would now be a good time to admit your mistakes and move on?

Meanwhile, today the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette wrote, "US Airways is making changes to the employee profit-sharing plan unions agreed to last summer. Under a new plan that still needs bankruptcy court approval, all employees except company officers would receive 10 percent of the first 10 percent in pre-tax earnings in the newly merged US Airways-America West Airlines and 15 percent of any pre-tax earnings above 10 percent. In August 2004, US Airways' board approved a plan offering employees 10 percent on the first 5 percent of profits and 25 percent if profits exceeded 5 percent. But that plan, contingent on quick labor concessions and avoidance of Chapter 11 bankruptcy, was never adopted. The new profit-sharing arrangement will be included as part of US Airways' reorganization plan, expected to be filed this week in bankruptcy court."

See Story

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

Are you serious?

You got to be kidding. Still dodging the issue at hand.

Your MEC during the first bankruptcy gave more then the ask, plain and simple, I still see you can't comprehend that fact.

And please show me specific examples of how I hurt US Airways employees and how any of my actions made the BOD take away the profit sharing.

Like I said, you are a member of a union, not a union member.

You have no idea and your posts are showing desperation.

Keep Trying to spin it, maybe if you post enough you will actually believe what you are typing.

This says it all about you:

Item 1. Today the Charlotte Observer published an anti-union editorial from one of our pilots, titled "Unions can Sink US Airways," that aggressively promotes management’s objectives on achieving concessions from other labor groups. The editorial goes so far as to suggest that the CWA union leadership, who represent customer service employees, is misleading their members on their negotiating activity, and implies that management’s side of a dispute is more accurate.

This editorial does not in any way represent ALPA’s position, understanding, or sentiment, on other unions and their sincere efforts to represent their members. ALPA has received no reports, nor would it assign any value to reports, that suggest that any union is misleading their membership. The pilot author of the editorial holds no union position in ALPA. The anti-union public statements from one of our pilot-ALPA members is regrettable.

We urge all pilots to contact their reps or the Comm Center for accurate updates on restructuring negotiations and the activity of other unions. We also request that all pilots refrain from promoting any management anti-union propaganda or chastise other employees in the media. There is little to be gained from such activity other than embarrassment for yourself, your fellow pilots, US Airways, and ALPA.

 

[USA320Pilot]

700UW:

You post the same thing over-and-over again. What’s wrong? No more bullets and an empty gun?

It’s tough to come to a gun fight with a six-shooter and no bullets. I have told you over-and-over again about the Charlotte OpEd column and you still do not get it, which is another reason you cannot fix stupid.

By the way, can you explain to other message board participants of an OpEd column?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

Why don't you get it that no one believes anything you dream up?

I am just posting facts, you said the RC4 was the first MEC to give more then the ask.

I proved you wrong and you can't accept that fact.

Once again, don't let the facts get in your way.

And there is a difference between an OpEd piece and a bunch of lies.

And I still see you are dodging the questions poised to you when you post your diatribe once again.

Time to back your posts up with facts, otherwise, give it a rest, you are just digging yourself a deeper grave.

Guess you can't fix yourself.

Hey Boeing Boy, do you have that post handy about mr you know who and insults?

 

[ClueByFour]

It’s tough to come to a gun fight with a six-shooter and no bullets. I have told you over-and-over again about the Charlotte OpEd column and you still do not get it, which is another reason you cannot fix stupid.

[post="279250"][/post]​

The problem is that there is no evidence to suggest that ALPA did anything except blast (in a very public manner) the author of the OpEd that 700UW refers to. Nothing in writing, just an unsubstantiated statement on your part. The rebuke is out there for all to see.

So, it's kind of like shooting an empty gun to suggest anything besides the very public fact that ALPA spanked the column's author.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Hey Boeing Boy, do you have that post handy about mr you know who and insults?

[post="279251"][/post]​

Presumably you mean this:

I'm not going to continue with "mud slinging", emotional comments, or to try and discredit the messenger.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

[post="266173"][/post]​

 

[USA320Pilot]

BoeingBoy:

How did I know you would post the same old rhetoric? You're no different than 700UW, ClueByFour or your favorite MEC members, the RC4 because you too bring an old song and dance to the party or a six shooter with no bullets.

Instead of debate you resort to try and discredit the messenger, which is a normal tactic for a so called "darksider".

By the way, it's not "mud slinging" or trying to "discredit the messenger" when the comments are fact, but how would you or your misrepresentation "buddiesâ€￾, who the MEC permanently banned from the ALPA message board, know any difference?

By the way, when would now be a good time for a nearly 59-year old pilot to stop misrepresenting information?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

P.S. By the way, I'm going to the MEC meeting this week. Why don't you show up for a change and ask the MEC in person why they passed the resolution to remove certain pilots from the ALPA message board? Or is your schedule to busy and your Internet posting more important than supporting your union leadership?