TERM SHEET DURATION........

[FWAAA]

How is everyone going to feel getting the term sheets locked in for six years?

Changing unions will not help for at least six years.

It's possible that changing unions can help. How? The NW flight attendants changed unions and eventually voted to accept an agreement almost a year after NW imposed its terms on them. There's hope. Fire the worthless union and replace it. Then that new union can negotiate a better agreement than the term sheets. The worst thing would be to allow the worthless union to sell you an agreement, as then you would likely be stuck with it for six years.

 

[AA89]

So,................ based on the law and previous outcomes we can agree that voting NO and hoping for a better contract in a shorter period than 6+ years might have been a better move than voting yes?
At least that is the way I am interpreting all of this.

 

[Birdman]

Fire the worthless union and replace it. The worst thing would be to allow the worthless union to sell you an agreement, as then you would likely be stuck with it for six years.

I agree that the TWU must go but whoever is in place when the hammer falls will be stuck with the stigma of having inevitably lost jobs for years to come due to fleet renewal, increased duration between checks, and outsourcing. Perhaps the strange absence of TWU sycophants on the threads lately is evidence of those up and coming events.

 

[Overspeed]

No airline has ever done that.And if they did, it would be time to liquidate.

And you or this union has the power to force liquidation?

 

[DonnaU]

Again, the no vote gets us a worse contract (term sheet) than a yes vote. I think we collectively will never learn. We are doomed to do worse with every no vote that has come and gone. We never learn !!! Thanks again no voters.

 

[odie01]

Again, the no vote gets us a worse contract (term sheet) than a yes vote. I think we collectively will never learn. We are doomed to do worse with every no vote that has come and gone. We never learn !!! Thanks again no voters.

No need to thank us....it was an easy choice, in fact, I'm ready to do it again!

 

[700UW]

No need to debate him he is being an ass, he supported all the concessions at USAIR and is probably here hoping we do the same to make him look better for supporting concessions there.

The issue actually came up in discussion today between the Pilots lawyer and the company. They were talking about the labor concessions and the term. The Pilots lawyer indicated that theres a good chance that their Business plan may have to be adjusted and clearly stated to the Company witness that there will be no imposing of a six year term.. She said "Are you aware that if the 1113 is granted that it does not impose a new contract?"
Company witness "Yes, I'm aware."

If there is no contract there is no term.

I hear that some are claiming thats not the case but look at what the motion is, its to abrogate. There is no contract so there is no six year term. 700UW may be getting confused between an 1113(e) motion, where a Judge can impose changes to the contract but they are temporary till they either negotiate changes or the judge abrogates and an 1113c motion to abrogate. With $4.8 billion and climbing the company would be hard pressed to prove their case for an 1113(e), thats why they didnt bother. Like I said I see nothing in the law that gives the Judge the right to impose upon workers anything other than temporary changes.

First of all I never supported concessions and voted no everytime, your first mistake.

Two AA didnt file a 1113e, US did and we were forced TEMPORARY cuts,. your second mistake.

Third, AA filed a section 1113c and its an abrogation with a modified term sheet to your CBA, go read the motion again, third mistake.

Gee Bob, your track record, isnt stellar now is it? Everything you said has been wrong, AA filed and now your are all screwed.

 

[DonnaU]

No need to thank us....it was an easy choice, in fact, I'm ready to do it again!

Again you've made MY point you never learn!

 

[Birdman]

Again, the no vote gets us a worse contract (term sheet) than a yes vote. I think we collectively will never learn. We are doomed to do worse with every no vote that has come and gone. We never learn !!! Thanks again no voters.

Are you saying that the TWU is impotent and incapable of negotiating an improvement over the term sheet?

 

[787nightmare]

It's possible that changing unions can help. How? The NW flight attendants changed unions and eventually voted to accept an agreement almost a year after NW imposed its terms on them. There's hope. Fire the worthless union and replace it. Then that new union can negotiate a better agreement than the term sheets. The worst thing would be to allow the worthless union to sell you an agreement, as then you would likely be stuck with it for six years.

Gettin this nitronutt??

 

[DonnaU]

Are you saying that the TWU in impotent and incapable of negotiating an improvement over the term sheet?

History speaks for itself.

 

[Birdman]

History speaks for itself.

Great point, it has never been better the second time has it?

 

[AA89]

Donna, I'm pretty sure odie didn't carry the decision by his lone NO vote. In fact a majority think this "LBO" sucked, as did the prior T/A.
The majority spoke and as in past concessionary YES votes we will all live with the results of the vote.
Obviously there was nothing in this "LBO" that helped out the majority or it would have passed. I think guys see a trend and are tired of it. It's as simple as that.

 

[DonnaU]

History speaks for itself.

The no vote always does us no better.

 

[787nightmare]

History speaks for itself.

TWuer words were never spoken....;-)
Jeezzzz