TWU and the Company reached a Tentative Agreement

[Overspeed]

This time the full text was released sooner than the previous one.
I wonder how many hidden details to be ratified at a later date is in the text.
Either way I am still voting NO. This is not a contract. It is an ultimatum. I'll take the ultimatum.

Hurry up with the YouTube videos. We need to educate the Yes voters again.

First video is out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxg716xgTcI&feature=related

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

JULY 2012 TO: ALL TWU MECHANIC & RELATED AND STORES AMERICAN AIRLINES MEMBERS You have the opportunity to consider the full text of the proposed tentative agreement between the TWU and American Airlines covering our mechanic & related and stores membership. If the agreement is approved, the Company will withdraw its motion to reject our collective bargaining agreement now pending in Bankruptcy Court. If the proposed agreement is rejected, Judge Lane will issue his decision on, or around, August 15, 2012. The Company offered the APA a contract that moderated its concession demands; the TWU work groups with ratified agreements were contractually entitled to the same treatment. After considerable discussion, the Company agreed to apply the same principles to all TWU represented work groups. Among other things, the tentative agreement you are now considering offers enhanced protection against outsourcing, better pay and better health care than the May LBO and is far better on all these matters than the “Ask” which the Company will be authorized to impose in the event our contract is rejected. The agreement also offers a wage adjustment based on industry standard after 36 months. This is not a wage “opener”, but rather a contractually required adjustment based on wages paid by competing major carriers. We would urge you to keep several facts in mind. First, this agreement was not the result of normal Section 6 negotiations under the Railway Labor Act. The negotiations occurred pursuant to Section 1113 of the Bankruptcy Code, which requires us to negotiate over those concessions necessary to permit the successful reorganization of the company in bankruptcy. Negotiations with bankrupt companies under this statute do not produce industry leading or industry standard contracts, nor will a Bankruptcy Court accept that the refusal of a bankrupt company to offer such an agreement is a reasonable basis for rejecting a consensual agreement. Second, while the TWU hired highly qualified professionals to handle our case before the Bankruptcy Court, no professional working on the case believes that the Court will not grant the Company’s motion to reject. There are numerous reasons for this, starting with the fact that such motions have been virtually uniformly granted by the courts over the last decade. It is also the case that the court only delayed its decision to give the various AA unions an opportunity to ratify consensual agreements. There would be no reason for this delay if the court were prepared to rule against the Company. Rejection of our contract in court is almost inevitable if this proposed agreement is not ratified. We recognize that there are those who are urging that you absorb the pain associated with this rejection and imposition of the Company’s “Ask” on the theory that, at some point down the road, the Company will be compelled to withdraw its concession demands and provide an industry leading agreement. The theory that there will be either expeditious negotiations or a quick release in the wake of the rejection of our contract by the Bankruptcy Court is, at best, pure speculation. What is not speculation is that, while this process is playing out over the course of years the membership will be deprived of pay and benefits, work which could be saved will be outsourced, and people will be unnecessarily furloughed or downgraded. The bottom line is that no work group has ever fared better after having its contract rejected in bankruptcy and those advocating such strategy will be unable to point to a single instance in which it worked. Airline bankruptcies typically produce mass outsourcing, job loss, and pension terminations. We will not hide the fact that this proposed agreement calls for more sacrifice from a Company that has demanded too much. However, the proposed contract protects the membership against the worst consequences typically inflicted on employees in bankruptcy. When voting, you should carefully consider whether you want to risk this protection to pursue a strategy that will inflict enormous pain without any realistic possibility of success.
Fraternally,
Garry Drummond Director
Air Transport Division

Wow, the guy I never elected into office and who
will NOT have to live under more concessions
is urging a yes vote. "Enormous pain without any realistic
possibility of success."? Only if we stay with the
twu!

Voting no and educating everyone else to vote
no!

Hey? When do I get my ballot to vote for gary
drummond?

 

[Overspeed]

Wow, the guy I never elected into office and who
will NOT have to live under more concessions
is urging a yes vote. "Enormous pain without any realistic
possibility of success."? Only if we stay with the
twu!

Voting no and educating everyone else to vote
no!

Hey? When do I get my ballot to vote for gary
drummond?

Did you give the money back to ARSA? The group that is trying to get all our overhaul brothers and sisters work to low wage MROs? Well AMFA, AMP (AMFA in drag), AMFA again, and anti-industrial union guy? Ken give the money back! Tell Sarah MacLeod she can keep her money. Show some integrity and do some fact checking next time.

Or is your goal to sell out the overhaul guys for your geo pay premium out on the line? Hmmmm....

How do I get my ballot to vote out the misinformed and self serving craft union organizer? The one who is actually destroying the craft through his ignorance and lack on knowledge.

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

JULY 2012 TO: ALL TWU MECHANIC & RELATED AND STORES AMERICAN AIRLINES MEMBERS You have the opportunity to consider the full text of the proposed tentative agreement between the TWU and American Airlines covering our mechanic & related and stores membership. If the agreement is approved, the Company will withdraw its motion to reject our collective bargaining agreement now pending in Bankruptcy Court. If the proposed agreement is rejected, Judge Lane will issue his decision on, or around, August 15, 2012. The Company offered the APA a contract that moderated its concession demands; the TWU work groups with ratified agreements were contractually entitled to the same treatment. After considerable discussion, the Company agreed to apply the same principles to all TWU represented work groups. Among other things, the tentative agreement you are now considering offers enhanced protection against outsourcing, better pay and better health care than the May LBO and is far better on all these matters than the “Ask” which the Company will be authorized to impose in the event our contract is rejected. The agreement also offers a wage adjustment based on industry standard after 36 months. This is not a wage “opener”, but rather a contractually required adjustment based on wages paid by competing major carriers. We would urge you to keep several facts in mind. First, this agreement was not the result of normal Section 6 negotiations under the Railway Labor Act. The negotiations occurred pursuant to Section 1113 of the Bankruptcy Code, which requires us to negotiate over those concessions necessary to permit the successful reorganization of the company in bankruptcy. Negotiations with bankrupt companies under this statute do not produce industry leading or industry standard contracts, nor will a Bankruptcy Court accept that the refusal of a bankrupt company to offer such an agreement is a reasonable basis for rejecting a consensual agreement. Second, while the TWU hired highly qualified professionals to handle our case before the Bankruptcy Court, no professional working on the case believes that the Court will not grant the Company’s motion to reject. There are numerous reasons for this, starting with the fact that such motions have been virtually uniformly granted by the courts over the last decade. It is also the case that the court only delayed its decision to give the various AA unions an opportunity to ratify consensual agreements. There would be no reason for this delay if the court were prepared to rule against the Company. Rejection of our contract in court is almost inevitable if this proposed agreement is not ratified. We recognize that there are those who are urging that you absorb the pain associated with this rejection and imposition of the Company’s “Ask” on the theory that, at some point down the road, the Company will be compelled to withdraw its concession demands and provide an industry leading agreement. The theory that there will be either expeditious negotiations or a quick release in the wake of the rejection of our contract by the Bankruptcy Court is, at best, pure speculation. What is not speculation is that, while this process is playing out over the course of years the membership will be deprived of pay and benefits, work which could be saved will be outsourced, and people will be unnecessarily furloughed or downgraded. The bottom line is that no work group has ever fared better after having its contract rejected in bankruptcy and those advocating such strategy will be unable to point to a single instance in which it worked. Airline bankruptcies typically produce mass outsourcing, job loss, and pension terminations. We will not hide the fact that this proposed agreement calls for more sacrifice from a Company that has demanded too much. However, the proposed contract protects the membership against the worst consequences typically inflicted on employees in bankruptcy. When voting, you should carefully consider whether you want to risk this protection to pursue a strategy that will inflict enormous pain without any realistic possibility of success.
Fraternally,
Garry Drummond Director
Air Transport Division

All,
 
Now that another T/A is out, many people will no doubt be asking the question: What’s the Local’s position yes or no? I will only speak for myself since we haven’t met as an Executive Board yet to fully discuss an “official” position. I for one will be voting to REJECT this so called proposal and I will explain why.
 
I know there will be members who disagree and they have that right, but I can’t in good conscience give up what took so long for past union members to gain. We have done nothing but concede to company demands since 2003, all the while, the top executives raked in the money from our sacrifice. We gave up things in my opinion we had no right to give up, we didn’t earn it. We had it because our brothers and sisters before us either with this union or another in the industry fought for it. We simply had the privilege of enjoying it, the ten holidays, double time, two weeks sick accrual just to name a few; all of which are gone today!
 
These are hard times we face in today’s economy and the fear of the unknown is a real issue, but there comes a time when you have to stick to what you believe. Now is one of those times. If we continue down the path we’re on, there will be no such thing as a career in aviation. People use to say to me “Wow you’ve got it made working for an airline.” Now I must say, most people are surprised that I haven’t left and gone into a new career. I haven’t given up hope just yet. I believe we can still stand together and regain what we lost and strive to achieve a career worthy enough for the next generation to participate. We may not get it all back this go around, but we surly can’t continue to regress. It may take having to have the contract abrogated through bankruptcy in order that we may continue to negotiate  under the RLA, but to make great gains one must be willing to make great sacrifices.
 
Of all the concessions, our defined pension has to be one of the biggest issues. If we are going to freeze it and settle for a matching 401(k), then why are we not jumping up and down screaming for the same level of company match as the pilots are currently being offered in their T/A 14% versus our 5.5%. That is what we call a substantial difference! You throw in the fact that over a five year period a 777 Captain goes from $204.83 an hour to $235.19, a $30.36 raise not counting what they may get over and above with their 36 month wage adjustment. A topped out AMT today only makes $32.20 with license premium, that’s a raise worth almost as much as one year’s salary! If it’s worth that much to have that Captain’s experience sitting in the left seat, then how much is that AMT worth that makes sure it’s safe for that plane to depart? Now before you say it, I know there aren’t many topped out 777 Captains running around, but look at the rest of the pay scales. For example a S80 First Officer goes from $109.64 to $125.89, a $16.25 per hour pay increase. It’s a slap in the face that the person maintaining the aircraft is only worth a raise of about $3.43 (assuming 3% wage adjustment) over the same five year period. That means it will be 2017 before we get back to the same base pay we would have topped out under the 2001 agreement! Who’s laughing at us now?
 
Among other reasons to reject this T/A, another would be the fact that this is the same offer we voted down sans moving around the pieces of the proverbial pie. The company might have added money to the pay, made minute reductions to benefits contributions, but we paid for them by giving up other things. They completely removed job security, stating in negotiations that why do we want it, this union has shown they are willing to lift it whenever we (AA) need them to. This statement was made by Jim Ream with no response from the International, but then again what can you say when it’s a factual statement? They also changed the full pay for sick time use back to half pay for the first day. Are we to rejoice that at least we got one day back? I think not! I won’t even begin to go into the amount of out sourcing that’s going to be allowed and for Tulsa to think that it’s going to stop there is laughable. What do you think is going to happen once the 737 starts to go away and the 767 begins to be replaced with the 787? The folks in Tulsa better wake up and start smelling the coffee before it’s too late. Under this agreement the Facilities department will be almost non-existent, you’d have to be a fool to vote for your own job to be out sourced.
 
These are just a few of the reasons this T/A needs to be voted down. There’s so many more, but this email is long enough already. I know it’s a scary thing to ask, I know we all have families to feed, but if someone in this country and in this union doesn’t start fighting back, we will leave nothing but a legacy of failure behind for future generations to come. Those generations will be made up of our children, or children’s children. Please consider this when the time to vote comes. I for one will be voting NO.
 
In solidarity,
 
KP
 
Kenneth E. Powell
Section Vice President Aircraft Maintenance
Air Transport Local 567
Transport Workers Union of America AFL-CIO
Cell: (817)690-3207

Well, well, well! gary drummond who was NOT
elected into office by the membership and will
NOT live under the concessions he is telling us
to accept and live under puts out a letter saying
vote yes.
But Ken Powell who WAS elected by the membership
and WILL live under the concessions, if voted in,
expresses why we should vote no.

"enormous pain without any realistic possibility of success."?
Only if we stay with the twu.

 

[Kev3188]

Wow, the guy I never elected into office and who
will NOT have to live under more concessions
is urging a yes vote. "Enormous pain without any realistic
possibility of success."? Only if we stay with the
twu!

Voting no and educating everyone else to vote
no!

Hey? When do I get my ballot to vote for gary
drummond?

They know what's best for you.
Do not ask questions.
Do not make waves.
Do not rock the boat.
Do not aspire to greater things
Be lucky you have a job.

(sarcasm, of course)

 

[2ndGENAMT]

2010 tulsa and afw didn't want to work weekends for str. pay. Now look and its going to get worse lol

I was working in A/O during that vote and no one that I discussed it with expected to keep 5/8s but were expecting more in return out of the TA.. We all know the results of the TWUs divisive TA!!

 

[Overspeed]

All,

Now that another T/A is out, many people will no doubt be asking the question: What’s the Local’s position yes or no? I will only speak for myself since we haven’t met as an Executive Board yet to fully discuss an “official” position. I for one will be voting to REJECT this so called proposal and I will explain why.

I know there will be members who disagree and they have that right, but I can’t in good conscience give up what took so long for past union members to gain. We have done nothing but concede to company demands since 2003, all the while, the top executives raked in the money from our sacrifice. We gave up things in my opinion we had no right to give up, we didn’t earn it. We had it because our brothers and sisters before us either with this union or another in the industry fought for it. We simply had the privilege of enjoying it, the ten holidays, double time, two weeks sick accrual just to name a few; all of which are gone today!

These are hard times we face in today’s economy and the fear of the unknown is a real issue, but there comes a time when you have to stick to what you believe. Now is one of those times. If we continue down the path we’re on, there will be no such thing as a career in aviation. People use to say to me “Wow you’ve got it made working for an airline.” Now I must say, most people are surprised that I haven’t left and gone into a new career. I haven’t given up hope just yet. I believe we can still stand together and regain what we lost and strive to achieve a career worthy enough for the next generation to participate. We may not get it all back this go around, but we surly can’t continue to regress. It may take having to have the contract abrogated through bankruptcy in order that we may continue to negotiate under the RLA, but to make great gains one must be willing to make great sacrifices.

Of all the concessions, our defined pension has to be one of the biggest issues. If we are going to freeze it and settle for a matching 401(k), then why are we not jumping up and down screaming for the same level of company match as the pilots are currently being offered in their T/A 14% versus our 5.5%. That is what we call a substantial difference! You throw in the fact that over a five year period a 777 Captain goes from $204.83 an hour to $235.19, a $30.36 raise not counting what they may get over and above with their 36 month wage adjustment. A topped out AMT today only makes $32.20 with license premium, that’s a raise worth almost as much as one year’s salary! If it’s worth that much to have that Captain’s experience sitting in the left seat, then how much is that AMT worth that makes sure it’s safe for that plane to depart? Now before you say it, I know there aren’t many topped out 777 Captains running around, but look at the rest of the pay scales. For example a S80 First Officer goes from $109.64 to $125.89, a $16.25 per hour pay increase. It’s a slap in the face that the person maintaining the aircraft is only worth a raise of about $3.43 (assuming 3% wage adjustment) over the same five year period. That means it will be 2017 before we get back to the same base pay we would have topped out under the 2001 agreement! Who’s laughing at us now?

Among other reasons to reject this T/A, another would be the fact that this is the same offer we voted down sans moving around the pieces of the proverbial pie. The company might have added money to the pay, made minute reductions to benefits contributions, but we paid for them by giving up other things. They completely removed job security, stating in negotiations that why do we want it, this union has shown they are willing to lift it whenever we (AA) need them to. This statement was made by Jim Ream with no response from the International, but then again what can you say when it’s a factual statement? They also changed the full pay for sick time use back to half pay for the first day. Are we to rejoice that at least we got one day back? I think not! I won’t even begin to go into the amount of out sourcing that’s going to be allowed and for Tulsa to think that it’s going to stop there is laughable. What do you think is going to happen once the 737 starts to go away and the 767 begins to be replaced with the 787? The folks in Tulsa better wake up and start smelling the coffee before it’s too late. Under this agreement the Facilities department will be almost non-existent, you’d have to be a fool to vote for your own job to be out sourced.

These are just a few of the reasons this T/A needs to be voted down. There’s so many more, but this email is long enough already. I know it’s a scary thing to ask, I know we all have families to feed, but if someone in this country and in this union doesn’t start fighting back, we will leave nothing but a legacy of failure behind for future generations to come. Those generations will be made up of our children, or children’s children. Please consider this when the time to vote comes. I for one will be voting NO.

In solidarity,

KP

Kenneth E. Powell
Section Vice President Aircraft Maintenance
Air Transport Local 567
Transport Workers Union of America AFL-CIO
Cell: (817)690-3207

Well, well, well! gary drummond who was NOT
elected into office by the membership and will
NOT live under the concessions he is telling us
to accept and live under puts out a letter saying
vote yes.
But Ken Powell who WAS elected by the membership
and WILL live under the concessions, if voted in,
expresses why we should vote no.

"enormous pain without any realistic possibility of success."?
Only if we stay with the twu.

AFW is getting closed regardless, of course he is going to say vote no and he has 1995 seniority. He is probably scared that he is going to OSM or Title III. If the 3/22 deal goes down he will be lucky if he bumps to FSC.

Fact is the vote no campaign has not yielded any fruit. You continue to bash the worsening offers on the TWU yet we the members voted it down. Is it the members fault? Well apparently it's the Intl's fault for not bring an agreement back that does not pay top tier wages. But wait, the TWU did do that in July 2010 and we voted no.

Own it Ken. Show some integrity, you and the vote no coalition (Ruiz, Owens, Rojas, Schiable, Peterson, Mishak, Schalk, etc..) made a bad recommendation. No one in BK has received a pay raise. Not AMFA, not the IAM, or the IBT but the TWU has. Keep voting no though because you believe the BK process will somehow get us top tier wages because the judge will feel sorry for us. Really? Wake up Ken, regardless of whether or not we know we should get paid more, the law is not on our side. The law is written for corporations and banks, not employees.

Vote no? Sure you can do that. We all can. We also own the consequences. We can blame the system and the organization however it is the world you live in. If you know the rules don't favor you and you vote no, don't be surprised by the outcome. You can say your "fighting" and the concession stand is closed but it doesn't matter what you say, Judge Lane is going to give AA the abrogation it wants and open the door to the free for all on our jobs. But you went down fighting, oh wait, you are like Bob and like playing tough guy with other people's jobs.

Did you give the money back Ken? Show some integrity. Give the money back!

 

[Mr Red]

AFW is getting closed regardless, of course he is going to say vote no.

Fact is the vote no campaign has not yielded any fruit. You continue to bash the worsening offers on the TWU yet we the members voted it down. Is it the members fault? Well apparently it's the Intl's fault for not bring an agreement back that does not pay top tier wages. But wait, the TWU did do that in July 2010 and we voted no.

Own it Ken. Show some integrity, you and the vote no coalition (Ruiz, Owens, Rojas, Schiable, Peterson, Mishak, Schalk, etc..) made a bad recommendation. No one in BK has received a pay raise. Not AMFA, not the IAM, or the IBT but the TWU has. Keep voting no though because you believe the BK process will somehow get us top tier wages because the judge will feel sorry for us. Really? Wake up Ken, regardless of whether or not we know we should get paid more, the law is not on our side. The law is written for corporations and banks, not employees.

Vote no? Sure you can do that. We all can. We also own the consequences. We can blame the system and the organization however it is the world you live in. If you know the rules don't favor you and you vote no, don't be surprised by the outcome. You can say your "fighting" and the concession stand is closed but it doesn't matter what you say, Judge Lane is going to give AA the abrogation it wants and open the door to the free for all on our jobs. But you went down fighting, oh wait, you are like Bob and like playing tough guy with other people's jobs.

Did you give the money back Ken? Show some integrity. Give the money back!

The money that needs to be given back, is the dues we've paid for the last 10 YEARS .

 

[BigMac]

2010 tulsa and afw didn't want to work weekends for str. pay. Now look and its going to get worse lol

So you're "lol'ing" because it's getting worse? Trying to stir sh!t or you have a bad case of dumba$$??

 

[Raptorman49]

AFW is getting closed regardless, of course he is going to say vote no and he has 1995 seniority. He is probably scared that he is going to OSM or Title III. If the 3/22 deal goes down he will be lucky if he bumps to FSC.

Fact is the vote no campaign has not yielded any fruit. You continue to bash the worsening offers on the TWU yet we the members voted it down. Is it the members fault? Well apparently it's the Intl's fault for not bring an agreement back that does not pay top tier wages. But wait, the TWU did do that in July 2010 and we voted no.

Own it Ken. Show some integrity, you and the vote no coalition (Ruiz, Owens, Rojas, Schiable, Peterson, Mishak, Schalk, etc..) made a bad recommendation. No one in BK has received a pay raise. Not AMFA, not the IAM, or the IBT but the TWU has. Keep voting no though because you believe the BK process will somehow get us top tier wages because the judge will feel sorry for us. Really? Wake up Ken, regardless of whether or not we know we should get paid more, the law is not on our side. The law is written for corporations and banks, not employees.

Vote no? Sure you can do that. We all can. We also own the consequences. We can blame the system and the organization however it is the world you live in. If you know the rules don't favor you and you vote no, don't be surprised by the outcome. You can say your "fighting" and the concession stand is closed but it doesn't matter what you say, Judge Lane is going to give AA the abrogation it wants and open the door to the free for all on our jobs. But you went down fighting, oh wait, you are like Bob and like playing tough guy with other people's jobs.

Did you give the money back Ken? Show some integrity. Give the money back!

Dude will you get over 2010 already ....PLEASE, 2010 is gone & it's not coming back let it go & join us in 2012 .... Living in the past will get you nowhere, do you look at the lottery results & say dang I should have picked those numbers back in 2010 & I would be a millionaire ? If you would have bought Microsoft back in the 80s you would be a millionaire & wouldn't be at AA, join us in 2012 & the contract we have today ... forget about 2010 ... we get it.

 

[OldGuy@AA]

AFW is getting closed regardless, of course he is going to say vote no and he has 1995 seniority. He is probably scared that he is going to OSM or Title III. If the 3/22 deal goes down he will be lucky if he bumps to FSC.

Fact is the vote no campaign has not yielded any fruit. You continue to bash the worsening offers on the TWU yet we the members voted it down. Is it the members fault? Well apparently it's the Intl's fault for not bring an agreement back that does not pay top tier wages. But wait, the TWU did do that in July 2010 and we voted no.

Own it Ken. Show some integrity, you and the vote no coalition (Ruiz, Owens, Rojas, Schiable, Peterson, Mishak, Schalk, etc..) made a bad recommendation. No one in BK has received a pay raise. Not AMFA, not the IAM, or the IBT but the TWU has. Keep voting no though because you believe the BK process will somehow get us top tier wages because the judge will feel sorry for us. Really? Wake up Ken, regardless of whether or not we know we should get paid more, the law is not on our side. The law is written for corporations and banks, not employees.

Vote no? Sure you can do that. We all can. We also own the consequences. We can blame the system and the organization however it is the world you live in. If you know the rules don't favor you and you vote no, don't be surprised by the outcome. You can say your "fighting" and the concession stand is closed but it doesn't matter what you say, Judge Lane is going to give AA the abrogation it wants and open the door to the free for all on our jobs. But you went down fighting, oh wait, you are like Bob and like playing tough guy with other people's jobs.

Did you give the money back Ken? Show some integrity. Give the money back!

The fact is that AA must have agreements will all unions to come out of BK. The TWU is not negotiating in the membership's best interest. The membership clearly said they wanted benefits back, but the TWU seems intent on giving away MORE of our hard earned benefits. If you think an AMT (or machinist, welder) deserves inferior benefits than a stock clerk or a bag smasher then you are wrong. We are expected to live with one less week of vacation AND 1/2 sick pay? Yes we are in BK, but we are already on the bottom of the industry as far as pay and benefits. Also we are giving away our seniority. If an inspector or crewchief are surplussed, they should have the right to bump a junior inspector or CC. Also we should not have to go infront of a board controlled by management in order to get a CC job. The only thing we can do is to keep voting no until our union stops offering our benefits to the company. It is apparent that once the benefits go they aren't coming back. NO MORE GIVE BACKS. AA enjoys the lowest wages paid in the industry as it is. They don't need any more help from the TWU international. The only course of action is to vote no. I pray that the majority of the membership sees this and votes it down. But yes we do have some leverage even though the TWU won't admit it.

 

[Flying low]

Question, Page 20 of the T/A lists the aircraft work to be outsourced.
Page 21 says "Aside from the above, the company’s current plan is that all remaining aircraft overhaul and line maintenance work will be performed by TWU represented mechanic and related personnel pursuant to the terms of the AA/TWU Mechanic and Related Agreement Article 1".
Does this pertain to the new airbus work? Will we be able to work on them? Or, does it just relate to the current fleet?

 

[Deleted member 14439]

Question, Page 20 of the T/A lists the aircraft work to be outsourced.
Page 21 says "Aside from the above, the company’s current plan is that all remaining aircraft overhaul and line maintenance work will be performed by TWU represented mechanic and related personnel pursuant to the terms of the AA/TWU Mechanic and
Related Agreement Article 1".
Does this pertain to the new airbus work? Will we be able to work on them? Or, does it just relate to the current fleet?

Look at pg 23 attachment 1.4 it leads me to believe we will work on anything apa flys.

 

[Chuck Schalk]

Ok overspeed, lets clear up something.
you keep mentioning the Bankruptcy. The judge will say yes or no to the new terms thats it. The battle has and will always be with American Airlines over the contract. We should focus on management and negotiating whether it is before or after the judge rules. The company can end this anytime they want. Just make a reasonable proposal that we can reccomend. but you fail to address this only to attack everyone else. Why dont you attack the company for bad faith bargaining and their inflexibility. It appears to me you are company sympatheizer with his own agenda. either people are part of the solution or part of the problem. It is obvious which side you are on since you make no suggestions for solutions.
your rhetoric is getting old and you offer nothing that will help us going forward.

 

[Tex-Mech]

Looks like to me that if we turn this turd down, the company still has one week to finally start real negotiations. More then enough time to find out what the pilots did, and get a deal that takes care of all of our concerns. We can finally test that bringing down to the wire theory. If we get a real T/A, not a Hewitt "I'll take it" roll-call deal, I highly doubt the judge would get in the way of a vote to and demand an immediate abrogation.

VOTE NO