View Changer --- The Story of Alliance

[mike7863]

From what I hear from the ex TWA guys up here they too were fed up with MCI and the way they rolled over for every concession as long as they took the line guys down with them. So its not a TWA vs AA thing, its not an OH vs Line thing, its whether we fight like Union men or roll over every time the company makes a threat.

By the way I spoke in favor of system protection for TWA and voted in favor of it, but your boys from MCI did not support GEO pay.

IIRC 2003 passed by around 70 votes and MCI provided around 1200 yes votes. There were enough NO votes out of Tulsa but not enough to overcome the overwhelming YES vote out of MCI. The company laid out the same threat to Tulsa and AFW that they did to MCI but neither of them folded to the extent that MCI did. So MCI voted to screw themselves instead of fight. Your former TWA coworkers on the line can't spend months basking in the Caribbean, in fact many cant ever retire thanks to you guys. You keep talking about how you were screwed by the AA guys but forget how you screwed your own for years before AA ever showed up.

Who led the drive for the YES vote in MCI, and where did he end up?


So do I feel bad for the guys at AFW more so than MCI? Yes, but not because they were AA, its because AFW always was willing to fight.

ok bob not for sure but dont think there was 1200 amt's in mci in 2003 think it was probly less than 500. most guys i knew working the line in stl #### about being lumped in with the ramp. maybe a little bitching about mci. but even if there was 1200 guys voting yes in mci. all 10,000 aa amts should have been able to out vote them, so its really kind of unfair to blame that 2003 mess all on mci.

 

[Bob Owens]

ok bob not for sure but dont think there was 1200 amt's in mci in 2003 think it was probly less than 500. most guys i knew working the line in stl #### about being lumped in with the ramp. maybe a little bitching about mci. but even if there was 1200 guys voting yes in mci. all 10,000 aa amts should have been able to out vote them, so its really kind of unfair to blame that 2003 mess all on mci.

In 2003 Local 530 MCI had 1091 YES votes and 368 No votes, for a total of 1459. That includes everyone at MCI. So around 1200 in the M&R contract. So 1200 yes votes was probably a little high but it was more than 500.

Is it all their fault? No, as you said if everyone else had voted no then it would have been voted down, more than likely if everyone who didnt bother to vote had voted NO it would have failed but we know that never happens. The fact remains that if you exclude MCI completely, the vote would have failed and MCI voted overwhelmingly in favor of accepting the deal that allowed the company to close the base, then they complained how the AA guys threw them under the bus. I didnt see the MCI guys say anything when other stations were closed, in fact I didnt see the guys from those stations complain how they were treated as red headed step children either, they excercised their seniority and either followed the work or hit the street, They knew "thats the business we chose". So what should the rest of us have done when the company decided to close MCI?

 

[mike7863]

In 2003 Local 530 MCI had 1091 YES votes and 368 No votes, for a total of 1459. That includes everyone at MCI. So around 1200 in the M&R contract. So 1200 yes votes was probably a little high but it was more than 500.

Is it all their fault? No, as you said if everyone else had voted no then it would have been voted down, more than likely if everyone who didnt bother to vote had voted NO it would have failed but we know that never happens. The fact remains that if you exclude MCI completely, the vote would have failed and MCI voted overwhelmingly in favor of accepting the deal that allowed the company to close the base, then they complained how the AA guys threw them under the bus. I didnt see the MCI guys say anything when other stations were closed, in fact I didnt see the guys from those stations complain how they were treated as red headed step children either, they excercised their seniority and either followed the work or hit the street, They knew "thats the business we chose". So what should the rest of us have done when the company decided to close MCI?

well you are probly right about the numbers then i was down there at the time but didnt seem like that many guys were there, i was only there for a year after being laid off out of stl after aa gutted it the first time. and i will tell you right now i was a no voter. but one thing you also have to understand though the guys were told by aa, if they voted for it, they would keep the base open, personally i was commutting at the time and them keeping the base open really didnt matter to me but it did to guys with homes there and thats probly why they voted yes. but to say that if you take mci out of the equation it wouldnt a passed you could say the same thing about tulsa. and they were not told it would save their jobs. all aa has done is lie to the twa people. all we heard was if you good work you will keep the work. but we all know thats a lie. hell they even lie to the native aa people. they say they will put work in the best performing cities, really?? lets see mci was better performing than tulsa, closed. afw better performing than tulsa, closed. so the way i see it aa wants the lease performing cities to get the work. hmm maybe thats why this company is in bk. and bob i dont want you to thank i was calling you a liar, like i said it just didnt seem like that many people were in mci at the time.

 

[OldGuy@AA]

Lets face it mci afw and tul don't make sense to have overhaul at.

At TUL the city pays the water and electric bill for AA, pays for any improvements and it charges AA $10 a year for rent. At MCI the city paid for improvements and the rent was very cheap. AFW cost AA millions per year in rent and, try as they may, they were never able to get it reduced. So if you consider this, in a business sense, it made no sense at all to have AFW in the first place. Realestate in the DFW area is very expensive and you would need a lot of it to have the capacity for the entire fleet of AA. So I guess it all depends how you look at it if it makes sense to you or not.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

Yep. All in the eye of the beholder I guess. Imho mci and tul made no sense. Imo consolidate all maintenance in the dfw area. That's just my opinion and ya know what they say about those. See ya at dwh if I ever get processed.

 

[FWAAA]

66-----Let's face it! After AA took over TWA, MCIE was no longer doing overhaul, although we were quit capable of doing so! And that, was seen as a threat to both AFW, and TUL. MCI had to go and they got the job done now didn't they?

Here's a press release from Sept 28, 2001, in which AA said that MCIE would take over as the 738 overhaul base despite losing the MD-80 engine work to TULE:

http://web.archive.org/web/20011002001738/http://www.amrcorp.com/news/200110_news_releases/20011001_kc.htm

At the end of September, 2001, MCIE employed about 2,350 people but AA was preparing to lay off 575 as the engine work moved to TULE.

 

[MCI transplant]

FW---- In 2001 MCIE was to take over the 737, and the F-100 fleets for heavy maintenance, but the highest maintenance we did on the 737s was a "C" check before it was taken away from us! And the F-100's we never saw.

 

[MCI transplant]

From what I hear from the ex TWA guys up here they too were fed up with MCI and the way they rolled over for every concession as long as they took the line guys down with them. So its not a TWA vs AA thing, its not an OH vs Line thing, its whether we fight like Union men or roll over every time the company makes a threat.

By the way I spoke in favor of system protection for TWA and voted in favor of it, but your boys from MCI did not support GEO pay.

IIRC 2003 passed by around 70 votes and MCI provided around 1200 yes votes. There were enough NO votes out of Tulsa but not enough to overcome the overwhelming YES vote out of MCI. The company laid out the same threat to Tulsa and AFW that they did to MCI but neither of them folded to the extent that MCI did. So MCI voted to screw themselves instead of fight. Your former TWA coworkers on the line can't spend months basking in the Caribbean, in fact many cant ever retire thanks to you guys. You keep talking about how you were screwed by the AA guys but forget how you screwed your own for years before AA ever showed up.

Who led the drive for the YES vote in MCI, and where did he end up?


So do I feel bad for the guys at AFW more so than MCI? Yes, but not because they were AA, its because AFW always was willing to fight.

Oh we had our own TWU stooges! Our ex-Local Pres. didn't get his presant job with the International by encouraging a "No" vote!------ But let me enlighten you on one big factor! If I can bask in the Carbibean sun,it's not because of my TWA retirement, whitch don't amount to a hill of beans, or my AA retirement either,whitch started in 2001, but because I worked, and invested, over the years, outside of them!----- I made some good decisions, and my timing was good! And yes! I built it by myself! Without the aid of Obama!!! Let me also remind you that I worked for twenty three years at a line station before working at MCI, and in 2003 MCIE was no longer "overhauling " Aircraft. We were doing "C" checks at best! So this latest thing about Line vrs. Overhaul realy wasn't a factor!. --- As for the number of "yes" votes that came out of MCI, I can only say that I feel two factors were at play here at the time,------ One: I got the impresion that the average AMT here on the floor felt that they had absoluely no representation at all, in fact the Union had told us that if we the T/A down, AA would close the base! So to servive, they had to vote "yes"! Second, but to a lesser extent, there were those who said if I'm going down, at least I might take a few of them with me!

 

[Bob Owens]

Oh we had our own TWU stooges! Our ex-Local Pres. didn't get his presant job with the International by encouraging a "No" vote!------ But let me enlighten you on one big factor! If I can bask in the Carbibean sun,it's not because of my TWA retirement, whitch don't amount to a hill of beans, or my AA retirement either,whitch started in 2001, but because I worked, and invested, over the years, outside of them!----- I made some good decisions, and my timing was good! And yes! I built it by myself! Without the aid of Obama!!! Let me also remind you that I worked for twenty three years at a line station before working at MCI, and in 2003 MCIE was no longer "overhauling " Aircraft. We were doing "C" checks at best! So this latest thing about Line vrs. Overhaul realy wasn't a factor!. --- As for the number of "yes" votes that came out of MCI, I can only say that I feel two factors were at play here at the time,------ One: I got the impresion that the average AMT here on the floor felt that they had absoluely no representation at all, in fact the Union had told us that if we the T/A down, AA would close the base! So to servive, they had to vote "yes"! Second, but to a lesser extent, there were those who said if I'm going down, at least I might take a few of them with me!

So let me get this straight, if a company says "accept this or else" then you are saying you have no choice other than to accept? Did you ever consider the idea of fighting back?

Of course they were threatening to close the base, what do you expect them to say? "If you vote no, don't worry , we will get back together and just let us know what you need in order to vote YES".

 

[FWAAA]

FW---- In 2001 MCIE was to take over the 737, and the F-100 fleets for heavy maintenance, but the highest maintenance we did on the 737s was a "C" check before it was taken away from us! And the F-100's we never saw.

The combined mainline fleet was almost 950 the day the acquisition closed. Not too many years later, the mainline fleet was just above 600, fewer planes than AA had in early 2001. No need for three maintenance bases for fewer planes than maintained at two bases before the TWA assets were purchased. Sadly, MCIE was furlough cushion for the nAAtive mechanics.