That's right Bob.You are not paranoid in my opinion.
You are dealing with management, make that AA Management, and that would make any intelligent sane person appear paranoid.
You stay the course and the rest of us will sit around without ALL the pertinent information and try to form accurate opinions and make correct decisions. Hard to do if WE don't have all the facts. Which we have never had.
IF the information that the company has to offer is to sway negotiators and influence negotiations, then they surley didn't learn from the last membership voting experience. It has now been proven that just because the International sells a T/A and just because negotiators favor the agreement, does not mean the membership votes yes. I wouldn't be shocked to find this is their strategy though, and it has often worked in the past. And never so fantastic as the "We are Going Bankrupt" confidentiallity agreements worked out to their favor.
TWU should hire a Law firm and negotiate their own terms of agreement to sign off on any confidentiality or just say NO.
The first time I was presented with the Confidentiality Agreement I refused to sign it then floated it past our local lawyer. He advised against it, the liability was extreme, the information, even if it did have value could not be exploited and there was no guarantee that the information was in fact valid. In other words I would be assuming a huge liability but no value.
Lets say AA decided to start a huge lie, like they were on the verge of BK, they throw this in front of the Presidents Council, complete with figures, graphs etc,then it gets out into the Media and causes a stock panic, then when the truth comes out that it was just a negotiating ploy and AA is sued by various investors and the SEC. Well with the Confidentiality agreement the Union guy who let it out would be terminated and held liable, if the SEC subpeonaed him he would have to talk to the company before talking to the government, of course the company lawyers would then convince him that he should throw himself on his sword to save the company, then turn around in court and claim he was a disgruntled Ex-employee. However if they start a huge lie, get the Presidents to believe it, which would no doubt influence how they approach negotiations, and use the Confidentiality agreement to keep it from getting out, and exposed, they could end up with yet another concessionary contract. I think it would be geared more towards RAMP, because the majority of those Presidents refused to go forward with the TA but once one major group falls I think the company expects the rest will follow.After the damage was done and all the information given proved to be false what could the Presidents do? Cry foul? The company would simply claim that they simply gave the union projections, and everyone knows that projections are like, in "The Christmas Carol", just shadows of what may be, not what will be.
During Negotiations information is a valuable tool. In fact one tactic for labor is to demand all sorts of info, info that the company would need to produce to support their arguements but is averse to releasing to the public. Unions should never sign Confidentiality agreements because then the information loses its value. Employers often back off rather than release such info that would end up in the public domian, its something we have not done much of. For three years the company would throw out how we still do OH as their excuse as to why we should except inferior compensation, even some Union officials said the same thing, without producing any evidence whatsoever as to the cost to the company of doing it in house vs outsourcing, well this past session was the first time, since thanks to the change in the committee we can all talk, that I was able to challenge them on the Overhaul question. I have not recieved any figures as of yet. The behavior of the company is a good indicator of the truth, the fact that they have not only kept work in house but brought more work back in, despite being way over the contractually mandated headcount(System Protection). Currently we have around 1700 people without system protection, thats all work that could be sent out if the company could get it done cheaper, but the company isnt sending it out, in fact they plan to add 900 more heads this year. So there is value in keeping it in house, probably made up of several components, direct costs such as the labor and maintenance of facilities, plus the control, plus the quality. When the direct costs are given, the other two must be added as well. Once agian, the companies behavior is a better indicator than any figures they produce and agree to share.
