Define secure employment. Do you have it now?
The company is claiming that everything that is in the ask is necessary in order for them to reorganize, this is not supposed to be regular pattern bargaining, this should no be a Wish List. Read 1113, it states that the modifications in the ASK must be "necessary to permit the reorganization of the debtor" and "assurs that all creditors and all affected parties are treated fairly and equitably".
AA is claiming that they need for us to accept a wage that is way below industry average in order to reorganize, not only is it below industry average its below industry bottom, they are claiming that we must also accept inferior benefits as well, in other words they are saying that we must subsidize their inefficiencies by agreeing to sell our product way below market rates. We are already at the bottom and they say that in order for them to successfully reorganize we have to go even lower, 20% lower. They claim that this is fair and equitable beacuse they pegged everyone at 20% but fail to acknowledge that we have gone four years without any pay increases while their Non-union workers have recieved at least two pay increases in that time and I dont believe any of them are at the bottom of the industry.
The ASK also includes many things for which the company placed ZERO value on, if it has no economic value then its not needed. Other changes in workrules that they seek are unprecidented in the industy.
Now before Overspeed goes off on how much OH we do in house keep in mind that under the ask we would outsource more than United and have fewer mechanics in both OH and the line per airplane than UAL does. AA's ASK is saying they need to outsource even more than UAL and pay us much much less than UAL in order to survive.
AA has taken the position that they need a 20% cost reduction from 2011 levels despite the fact that even without any changes they will achieve a large percentage of that as older aircraft are retired. They pumped up the numbers in 2011 by adding hundreds of heads, drastically increasing the workload paying record amounts of Overtime and outsourcing on top of that, took that pumped up number and said "we need to chop off 20%". In reality they will see much more than a 20% cost reduction from maintenance just like in 2003 when the got more than 25%.
AA is saying to the court that they need all this or they will not be able to successfully reorganize, the Judge will grant this on the basis that they give the companies whatever they want, Bankruptcy court is a business and if you want more business you give the customer(debtors) what they want. He will spin it that the workers would be better off if the company reorganized than if the company liquidated. For those us us who disagree he will say "you can quit", in other words acknowledging his bias against workers rights to collectively bargain. As a unionized mechanic I feel that over the term proposed we would be better off collectively, by 2018 to see the company liquidate than accept what they say is necessary to survive. AAs survival under these terms would put downward pressure on wages across the industry and drive other potentail employers (customers for our skillsets) into bankruptcy so seek similar labor cost advantages, the vicious cycle would continue. We gave 25% in 2003, Industry leading concessions that we still live under, now they are saying they need more concessions on top of that, our peers gave less than what AA is asking for and their employers are showing profits while AA is not, why should we agree that giving more than anyone else, once again, will have a different result?
So, if AA should get our contract abrogated I'm saying that we should engage in what every other unionized worker who has his/her contract abrogated can legally do, engage in self help, even though for Airline workers, and Airline workers alone, this would be considered illegal by the courts. I say I will not sit at the back of the bus simply because I work for an airline, if the courts will not grant us equality then we must demand it through civil disobedience, screw the courts, let them lock me up for doing what every other unionized worker can do if they abrogate our contract.
The courts have put us in an extremely unfair situation. They claim that despite the fact that we are under the RLA, our contracts can be abrogated (actually annulled) just like any contract under the NLRA, yet they claim that we can not strike like every other worker whose contract is abrogated because the public is dependant on the services we provide, our peers in the Railroad industry have the same limitations on self help as we do, for the same reason, however our peers in the railroad industry have protections in Bankruptcy that we do not have for no reason at all other than they work for a railroad and we work for an Airline. Its discrimation, plain and simple. It would be no different than saying Jews cant strike but Christians can. Sure the industry we chose was our choice but so is our faith. I still have yet to hear a legal rationale for this, FWAAA, care to chime in yet?
