Wrong again. United was ahead of us in 2003. They didnt agree to go below us till 2005 in wages but kept a lot of stuff that we gave up.
Funny but most people who work under the deal consider 2003 to be the first BK contract. We gave up more outside of BK than they did in BK.
In december of 2002 UAL was making more than we were, yes the court, through an 1113e granted the company a 14% paycut, they came to a TA that knocked it down to 13% then two weeks later we agreed to concessions outside of BK in excess of 25%. We cut their balls off.
Better than SIX.
Two Fleet Service Clerks who rarely take part in M&R always seem to show up when some yes votes are needed.
You advocate destrying the profession and driving wages into the ground all under the false promise of saving jobs. What you are really advocating is destroying the jobs of all workers. I saw your response to SWAMT, you seemed to take pleasure in the fact that our concessions will likely drive SWA to push for concessions from them. You are a sick evil fraud. No A&P would take pleasure in seeing the profession destroyed as you advocate.
Oh Bob, there you go again distorting. UA asked for the 1113e when they filed asking for huge pay cuts and across the board cuts to pension and retiree medical. The pay cuts were reduced from approximately 20% to 10% when they emerged. And UA has just after eight years passed us on pay. If abrogation is such a good deal why didn't they get raises? Because the TWU screwed them? Hardly, their union was too busy letting all their AO work get outsourced to China and Korea. What stuff did they give up that we already did? It wasn't jobs because while UA shuttered IND and all of SFO AO we still had people making $33/hour while their AO guys made...wait...they don't have any AO guys!
2003 was a concessionary contract no doubt about it and it sucked. I never said it was great but it was nowhere near the train wreck in concessions in jobs that UA, US, and NW gave up. We still earned our pension for the last eight years and that is a BIG deal.
"We cut their balls off?" Hardly, with all the jobs they gave up they should have stayed kept their pay rates. The problem with UA was the ESOP already had that company heavily leveraged. We were not in that bad of shape. Tell the whole story Bob.
"Better than six?" In six years we will have lost close to double the jobs lost under the TA. As long as its not you Bob right? Way to go! Show that solidarity stand with you on the no vote but sorry to see you go. "Thanks for your support TUL on the geo pay for JFK! Chuck and I thank you."
Bob, plenty of M&R people left negotiations early, didn't show up, or showed up only when you needed them to vote no. You know the negotiations process and you manipulate it yourself. No you are mad you didn't have the votes. Go figure. You are only happy when you can run the club house.
Bob, I hope WN does well but to be 100% honest, their wage increase were driven by their unusual hedging advantage and explosive growth. Now they are a mature airline and struggling to find new revenue sources. WN is no longer a low cost airline and will be attacked by start ups just like they attacked AA, DL, UA, and US. Its a business cycle and its reality.