Turn AAround Plan Complete

[artiefufkin1]

But not for the CEO and upper executives!

These CEO raises don't occur in isolation. How's his pay comparison to other CEO's? Considering the turn around? Considering other airline have gone bankrupt? When was is last raise? When was his last pay cut? Was he offered better pay at another company?

I don't know the answer to these questions. I would tend to think with his raise, his new pay is not out of line in comparison to other CEO's running similar enterprises.

Maybe you would like the UA team to come over at half the price?

 

[Hopeful]

These CEO raises don't occur in isolation. How's his pay comparison to other CEO's? Considering the turn around? Considering other airline have gone bankrupt? When was is last raise? When was his last pay cut? Was he offered better pay at another company?

I don't know the answer to these questions. I would tend to think with his raise, his new pay is not out of line in comparison to other CEO's running similar enterprises.

Maybe you would like the UA team to come over at half the price?

My advice to ARPEY or any other fat cat executive who feels he or she is underpaid:

DON'T LET THE DOOR KICK YOU IN THE AA$$!

 

[Bob Owens]

The pilots' pay rates were cut 23% in 2003 plus their other concessions.

The mechanics pay rates were cut 17.5% in 2003 plus their other concessions (vacation, sick time, double time, etc).

One of the proposals during the concessions campaign was to take a straight 25% paycut, despite the fact that the International and company claimed that they could meet the figure "however they saw fit"-a lie, they rejected that proposal along with the one to meet the savings through job cuts. The loss of Holiday pay alone resulted in a $4000 loss of income each year.

In 2004, the pilots "got back" 9% while TWU got back only 1.5%. Meanwhile, over at the APA, the long lead time pay cuts were implemented (equipment downgrades and in some cases, loss of left seat).

And we have cases where A&Ps had to downgrade to OSMs.

So in June, 2004, which work group had recovered more?

The answer is easy: The APA pilots. By a negligible amount. Do the math:

APA: 23% 2003 pay rate cut = 77% of pre-concession pay rates. 9% increase in 2004 = 83.93% of pre-concession pay rates (1 - .23 = .77) and (.77 x 1.09 = .8393)


TWU: 17.5% 2003 pay rate cut = 82.5% of pre-concesion pay rates. 1.5% increase in 2004 = 83.74% of pre-concession pay rates (1 - .175 = 82.5) and (.825 x 1.015 = .8374)

Wrong, you left out Holiday Pay, Vacation Time, Shift differential etc.So our annual pay was cut by 25%, not 17.5%. These are real cuts that drastically cut our regular yearly salary. Thats not even figuring in money lost due to changes in OT rules such as double time, penalty hour etc.

Mr Owens, I know that you gave up a lot more than the 17.5% pay rate cut. But so did the pilots. Because the "other" pay cuts for the pilots couldn't be implemented overnight (like yours could), the pilots had a bigger pay rate cut the first year than you. Then, their big "raise" in 2004 brought them back to parity with everyone else who gave up 17.5%.

Do you have a copy of the Pilots contract? Because I do. The fact is that we all basically gave up 25%, productivity improvements were won from all groups but Pilots are the only ones that got credit for it. If we are to count these changes then you would have to bump our concession percentage to 35% or better, just like the pilots these changes took time to impliment, such as the further reduction of headcount through attrition etc.

I've said it before - if you had wanted to give up 23% in year one (in addition to all the other pay cuts that you detail here about once a week), I'm certain that AA would have gone along with it and restored 9% in 2004. But that wasn't the deal your worthless union rammed down your throat.

Wrong again, AA rejected the offer.

The fact is that I agree that the APA did a much better job than the TWU, even though they both screwed their members big time.But at least the APA members had the right to change leadership.

 

[AMFAMAN]

One of the proposals during the concessions campaign was to take a straight 25% paycut, despite the fact that the International and company claimed that they could meet the figure "however they saw fit"-a lie, they rejected that proposal along with the one to meet the savings through job cuts.

Both ideas were rejected by the international because of the loss of dues money.

 

[Bob Owens]

Both ideas were rejected by the international because of the loss of dues money.

Exactly,shift differential, Holiday pay etc are not part of the calculation for dues even if they are a part of our yearly compensation. Thats why Jim Little made sure that we lost as much money as possible from any source other than the posted base hourly wage.