Vote No Video from Presidents

[amtide]

local 514 had a news conf. today to urge there members to vote yes it's on there website if you would like to read it

That will be remember in AA history as one of the biggest betrayal. Horton will be laughing. You guys will carry the weight for the major consecuences of such a mistake. I'm voting no. Stand for what is right.

 

[amtide]

I hate to say it but as much fear the TWU is spreading here @ TUL and TUL being the majority. I believe the T/A may pass. I've voice my opinion til blue in the face...too many are scared and want the 45/15.

TA?

 

[Overspeed]

One simple question.
Can anyone explain how agreeing to eliminate Job Protection, both Station and system saves jobs?

If the deal truly saved jobs then why didnt the company agree to roll the date up to the last "saved " guy? The number will decline anyway once people put in for SIS and Early outs so its not as if they have to keep the headcount at that level.

Eliminating sysyem protection does not save jobs, it eliminates Job Protection.

This deal allows the company to outsource all the jobs they claim they are saving, and then some. It allows them to take their time and shop around for the best deal they get then outsource the work, and jobs, at their leisure.

How can people be so gullible as to believe that when the company eliminates the ASM cap, Job security and puts in language that could allow them to outsource over 55% of our routine work, plus outsource non-routine work like mods that just because they told the union that they would keep the work, for now, in house, that they will? Did they not learn from 1995 with "system attrition" where mechanics were booted out of the shops? In 1995 with the "Me Too "clause". In 2003 with the "early Opener"? In 2003 when they continued to lay people off who were told that the concessions saved their jobs? In 2003 where they said "If we give all these concessions now we will be better off when the company files BK"? In 2010 when the company decided to terminate Supplimental Medical and pocketed the $78 million that was in the fund? How many times does it take before some will realize that a promise from AA is not worth much?

Like I said if the company moved system protection up to the last guy "saved" then I could see them saying that they "saved" jobs. For the company they still get to get rid of even more than that number by not replacing guys who attrit out so if the offer is valid and they really agreed not to get rid of those workers then the company would gave agreed to set the date at that worker and not eliminate system and station protection entirely. Common sense, but I guess the startegy is to cause panic, then when the dust settles, those who are pushing a yes vote without saying to vote yes will sit back and say "All the info was out there, you made the decision".

It doesn't but we are in BK and AMR is asking for the relief. You said we should vote down the July 2010 TA because there was more money on the table than the committee proceeded to unwind damn near the whole TA and start over. You reference UAL's TA as being your benchmark contract well smart guy we had that and better in the TA you recommended shooting down. UAL didn't unwind their rejected deal, they only sweetened it with nothing more than a $75K early out could you have not just done that instead of dreaming of getting the deal of the century? No apparently, now we marched in to battle where we may have more casualties (read RIFs) than ever before. Now you spout all kinds of "facts" that are nothing but distortions and belittle people for even considering voting yes.

Tell the truth Bob, you are only for Bob and the belief that line should be paid more at the expense of others who also have mortgages, families, and other important responsibilities. Instead of taking them down, why don't you grow a pair and tell everyone your hidden agenda. That once Base has been outsourced more you will finally get the big raise you think your superior skills are worth. But you won't because you will continue lying and twisting.

I really hope good honest people that are relying on leadership to make responsible decisions that mitigate the bad and increase the good for our fellow members. Yes the LBO is bad but not as bad as what will most assuredly happen based on precedent setting cases. You could always put your money where your mouth is Bob, that you will take the first RIF if the term sheet comes to reality. How 'bout it Bob?

 

[BigMac]

If I was to walk out the gate right now with a "VOTE NO" picket sign would others follow? Law or no law @ this point I could care less.

 

[Boomer]

Outsourcing......probably worse than the term sheet when you consider the increase in the amount of annual departures.. required to keep line stations open...

I do not know how long you've been onboard, but the TWU M&R lost all rights to Line station staffing in the BWI/CLE Arbitration in '95. Nothing in the current LBO can return something the TWU already gave away given the failure of the TWU to include comprehensive language that contractually requires AA to do or not do something.

 

[comatose]

If your an AMT ask yourself one question - What fleet of A/C will you be working on in three years if this LBO passes?
MD-80............NO
757.................NO
767.................maybe(line only)
777.................maybe(line only)
737.................yes probably
787.................NO
A320...............NO

There really isn't a question in which way I'm voting.

 

[Bob Owens]

It doesn't but we are in BK and AMR is asking for the relief.

So in our case AA is asking for relief from a contract that has our wages at the bottom of the industry, less vacation than any of our peers, less sick time than any of our peers, less holidays than any of our peers and on the 5 Holidays they do recognize they only pay us half pay to work it, less than anyone in the industry, in meetings with the company the Union had said they were willing to allow the company to eliminate the Defined benefit pension, would not, could not block their decision to terminate the retiree medical and allow some outsourcing. So what exactly are they going to tell the Judge when we reject their proposal where they also want to eliminate PV days,(most of our peers have DATs), eliminate yet another week of vacation(for the first 30 years we get the least amount of vaction in the industry, its only after 30 years that we catch up to some of our peers), eliminate pretty much all of our work rules, (which when compared to other union shops, even those who have gone through BK, are already favorable to the company), to eliminate OT after eother 8 or 10 hours(no other union shop has that, in fact most have doubletime as well, we dont), eliminate the seniority system and scores of other concessions that none of our peers gave? What parts of our contract block the company from becoming profitable? Is it realistic for management to expect us to give or have the court allow them to impose terms in the language thats far in excess of what any other carrier recieved, far in excess of what they need to achieve survivability? Is it reasonable that we should have to give the company anything they want in order to achieve their goal of making $3 billion ayear in profits?

You said we should vote down the July 2010 TA because there was more money on the table than the committee proceeded to unwind damn near the whole TA and start over. You reference UAL's TA as being your benchmark contract well smart guy we had that and better in the TA you recommended shooting down. UAL didn't unwind their rejected deal, they only sweetened it with nothing more than a $75K early out could you have not just done that instead of dreaming of getting the deal of the century? No apparently, now we marched in to battle where we may have more casualties (read RIFs) than ever before. Now you spout all kinds of "facts" that are nothing but distortions and belittle people for even considering voting yes.

Look again at the UAL deal, 12 days of sick and IOD time per year, yea they screwed up with the 75% but the 12 days makes a lot more sense than 5. Look at the doubletime, Holidays and vacation as well. The purchase of work shoes, Geo pay and Taxi premiums. The shift differentials and retiree medical, the 401k contribution on all earnings. The 1.75x pay for all hours away from base on field work. Yes OS look at the facts.And Yes AA still had money on the table, they had $4 billion going into BK, in the final days of the pre-1113 negotiations they came to us with the "wage adjustment", said they "found a little money" to make this "ridiculously bad" offer "less bad" but it was only for line AMTs, said they could do no more, then Tulsa told the International that the if Tulsa doesnt get it too the deal was DOA, the following morning they found some more money and included Tulsa AMTs. Thats how it went down, so if they found what they thought was enough to get that 50% +1 without even bringing this to 1113 negotiations and June 6 then they scored a huge victory at no cost.

Tell the truth Bob, you are only for Bob and the belief that line should be paid more at the expense of others who also have mortgages, families, and other important responsibilities. Instead of taking them down, why don't you grow a pair and tell everyone your hidden agenda. That once Base has been outsourced more you will finally get the big raise you think your superior skills are worth. But you won't because you will continue lying and twisting.

Hmm, so the man with the hidden identity accusing me of a hidden agenda. I think I've made it clear, "save the profession, not dues for the Union". What did the TWU Internatioanl do recently when they ran short of cash? Did they ask all their employees to take pay or benefit cust or did they lay people off? They laid them off. Yes it sucks getting laid off, I've been there, so have many others, its a part of the Industry we chose, thats why we value seniority. We need to maintain the quality of the job, this way those who are laid off have something to come back to. Will it be rough? Yes, I know this is airline number 6 for me. Will I benefit from maintaining the quality and not degrading our pay every time someone claims it will save jobs? Yes, so ultimately will every other worker. And one more thing, explain to me how eliminating system and station protection, the ASM cap and icluding language that allows them to outsource 35% more than they outsource now saves jobs? Whats to stop the company from outsoucing right up to the additional 35% after the deal is signed?

There so I've laid out what you claim is my hidden agenda, will you reveal your hidden identity?

I really hope good honest people that are relying on leadership to make responsible decisions that mitigate the bad and increase the good for our fellow members. Yes the LBO is bad but not as bad as what will most assuredly happen based on precedent setting cases. You could always put your money where your mouth is Bob, that you will take the first RIF if the term sheet comes to reality. How 'bout it Bob?

Leadership good word, do you know what it means? Obviously not. The dictionary defines leadership as a quality heald by leaders and as such " a person who guides or directs a group". I think I'm doing my best to do that. The International and the company are providing all the reasons to vote YES, its obviously which way they want you to go but they are not saying to vote YES. if they did , agree or dissagree, at least we could say they are providing leadership, I'm providing what they either gloss over or completely fail to mention, and I'm providing a direction to follow, which is to VOTE NO. You all get to decide, based on the info they have given you, the info we have given you, your past experiences, present situation and future ambitions which way to go.

 

[Overspeed]

So in our case AA is asking for relief from a contract that has our wages at the bottom of the industry, less vacation than any of our peers, less sick time than any of our peers, less holidays than any of our peers and on the 5 Holidays they do recognize they only pay us half pay to work it, less than anyone in the industry, in meetings with the company the Union had said they were willing to allow the company to eliminate the Defined benefit pension, would not, could not block their decision to terminate the retiree medical and allow some outsourcing. So what exactly are they going to tell the Judge when we reject their proposal where they also want to eliminate PV days,(most of our peers have DATs), eliminate yet another week of vacation(for the first 30 years we get the least amount of vaction in the industry, its only after 30 years that we catch up to some of our peers), eliminate pretty much all of our work rules, (which when compared to other union shops, even those who have gone through BK, are already favorable to the company), to eliminate OT after eother 8 or 10 hours(no other union shop has that, in fact most have doubletime as well, we dont), eliminate the seniority system and scores of other concessions that none of our peers gave? What parts of our contract block the company from becoming profitable? Is it realistic for management to expect us to give or have the court allow them to impose terms in the language thats far in excess of what any other carrier recieved, far in excess of what they need to achieve survivability? Is it reasonable that we should have to give the company anything they want in order to achieve their goal of making $3 billion ayear in profits?






Look again at the UAL deal, 12 days of sick and IOD time per year, yea they screwed up with the 75% but the 12 days makes a lot more sense than 5. Look at the doubletime, Holidays and vacation as well. The purchase of work shoes, Geo pay and Taxi premiums. The shift differentials and retiree medical, the 401k contribution on all earnings. The 1.75x pay for all hours away from base on field work. Yes OS look at the facts.And Yes AA still had money on the table, they had $4 billion going into BK, in the final days of the pre-1113 negotiations they came to us with the "wage adjustment", said they "found a little money" to make this "ridiculously bad" offer "less bad" but it was only for line AMTs, said they could do no more, then Tulsa told the International that the if Tulsa doesnt get it too the deal was DOA, the following morning they found some more money and included Tulsa AMTs. Thats how it went down, so if they found what they thought was enough to get that 50% +1 without even bringing this to 1113 negotiations and June 6 then they scored a huge victory at no cost.




Hmm, so the man with the hidden identity accusing me of a hidden agenda. I think I've made it clear, "save the profession, not dues for the Union". What did the TWU Internatioanl do recently when they ran short of cash? Did they ask all their employees to take pay or benefit cust or did they lay people off? They laid them off. Yes it sucks getting laid off, I've been there, so have many others, its a part of the Industry we chose, thats why we value seniority. We need to maintain the quality of the job, this way those who are laid off have something to come back to. Will it be rough? Yes, I know this is airline number 6 for me. Will I benefit from maintaining the quality and not degrading our pay every time someone claims it will save jobs? Yes, so ultimately will every other worker. And one more thing, explain to me how eliminating system and station protection, the ASM cap and icluding language that allows them to outsource 35% more than they outsource now saves jobs? Whats to stop the company from outsoucing right up to the additional 35% after the deal is signed?

There so I've laid out what you claim is my hidden agenda, will you reveal your hidden identity?



Leadership good word, do you know what it means? Obviously not. The dictionary defines leadership as a quality heald by leaders and as such " a person who guides or directs a group". I think I'm doing my best to do that. The International and the company are providing all the reasons to vote YES, its obviously which way they want you to go but they are not saying to vote YES. if they did , agree or dissagree, at least we could say they are providing leadership, I'm providing what they either gloss over or completely fail to mention, and I'm providing a direction to follow, which is to VOTE NO. You all get to decide, based on the info they have given you, the info we have given you, your past experiences, present situation and future ambitions which way to go.

Hey you said we had nothing to fear and BK was a threat. So if the membership votes no, the CBA gets rejected, and 4,300 plus jobs are lost I can live with the results of the democratic process. I am firm in my belief that the CBA will be abrogated and 4,300 jobs will be cut if not more as a result. Remember UAL rejected their consensual agreement and the judge doubled the pay cuts UAL management wanted. Your distorted logic hasn't worked in the past.

Sick time goes to the first 24 hours per year at 100% and the remainder under a managed sick care program or you get paid 60% pay for the rest of the year according to the 3/22 term sheet. Did you read that? Apparently not. You are not telling people that UAL eliminated all airframe overhaul to pay for all that stuff you point out. Why is that Bob? Because you don't care as long as you get it. Still hiding your hidden line maintenance agenda...shame on you.

What stops the Company from outsourcing up to the 35%? Nothing and neither does it stop them from outsourcing up to the 40% everywhere. The LBO limits outsourcing to 35% at the bases and 15% on the line. Under the term sheet they can outsource everywhere at 40% even the line. Hey maybe the base could get their act together while you hide in your JFK club house making videos and all the line BCs, CFPs, and Class IIs get outsourced. It can under the term sheet language. Wouldn't that be a twist!

There is many different kinds of leadership. Some leaders blame everyone around them for their failures to face the facts, others understand the facts and tell the people the truth. You are obviously the former.

Not revealing your identity does not change the facts. Just because you use you actual name does not make your information factual. I have read much here from people who do not use their name that is credible and factual.

We will know by May 14th which of us is right won't we. I really hope if the deal is rejected that I and many others that you call weak and blame, are wrong for all sake of those 4,300 people who will pay the price for bad information.

 

[Buck]

Hey you said we had nothing to fear and BK was a threat. So if the membership votes no, the CBA gets rejected, and 4,300 plus jobs are lost I can live with the results of the democratic process. I am firm in my belief that the CBA will be abrogated and 4,300 jobs will be cut if not more as a result. Remember UAL rejected their consensual agreement and the judge doubled the pay cuts UAL management wanted. Your distorted logic hasn't worked in the past.

Sick time goes to the first 24 hours per year at 100% and the remainder under a managed sick care program or you get paid 60% pay for the rest of the year according to the 3/22 term sheet. Did you read that? Apparently not. You are not telling people that UAL eliminated all airframe overhaul to pay for all that stuff you point out. Why is that Bob? Because you don't care as long as you get it. Still hiding your hidden line maintenance agenda...shame on you.

What stops the Company from outsourcing up to the 35%? Nothing and neither does it stop them from outsourcing up to the 40% everywhere. The LBO limits outsourcing to 35% at the bases and 15% on the line. Under the term sheet they can outsource everywhere at 40% even the line. Hey maybe the base could get their act together while you hide in your JFK club house making videos and all the line BCs, CFPs, and Class IIs get outsourced. It can under the term sheet language. Wouldn't that be a twist!

There is many different kinds of leadership. Some leaders blame everyone around them for their failures to face the facts, others understand the facts and tell the people the truth. You are obviously the former.

Not revealing your identity does not change the facts. Just because you use you actual name does not make your information factual. I have read much here from people who do not use their name that is credible and factual.

We will know by May 14th which of us is right won't we. I really hope if the deal is rejected that I and many others that you call weak and blame, are wrong for all sake of those 4,300 people who will pay the price for bad information.

Then you information could also be flawed?

 

[Duke787]

Hey you said we had nothing to fear and BK was a threat. So if the membership votes no, the CBA gets rejected, and 4,300 plus jobs are lost I can live with the results of the democratic process. I am firm in my belief that the CBA will be abrogated and 4,300 jobs will be cut if not more as a result. Remember UAL rejected their consensual agreement and the judge doubled the pay cuts UAL management wanted. Your distorted logic hasn't worked in the past.

Sick time goes to the first 24 hours per year at 100% and the remainder under a managed sick care program or you get paid 60% pay for the rest of the year according to the 3/22 term sheet. Did you read that? Apparently not. You are not telling people that UAL eliminated all airframe overhaul to pay for all that stuff you point out. Why is that Bob? Because you don't care as long as you get it. Still hiding your hidden line maintenance agenda...shame on you.

What stops the Company from outsourcing up to the 35%? Nothing and neither does it stop them from outsourcing up to the 40% everywhere. The LBO limits outsourcing to 35% at the bases and 15% on the line. Under the term sheet they can outsource everywhere at 40% even the line. Hey maybe the base could get their act together while you hide in your JFK club house making videos and all the line BCs, CFPs, and Class IIs get outsourced. It can under the term sheet language. Wouldn't that be a twist!

There is many different kinds of leadership. Some leaders blame everyone around them for their failures to face the facts, others understand the facts and tell the people the truth. You are obviously the former.

Not revealing your identity does not change the facts. Just because you use you actual name does not make your information factual. I have read much here from people who do not use their name that is credible and factual.

We will know by May 14th which of us is right won't we. I really hope if the deal is rejected that I and many others that you call weak and blame, are wrong for all sake of those 4,300 people who will pay the price for bad information.

I usually agree with you, and enjoy your writings, but this time I disagree with you, our BK lawyer said it it's a good idea to vote for a consensual agreement, but this isn't a consensual agreement. Plus ALL the presidents except for TULE (who has a FSC as president) are against this agreement, tells me this something we should not vote for. All the presidents will be dealing with the laid off mechs from their locals so I don't think it's quite fair to say the presidents are being callus towards the junior guys.

A question about a rumor I heard can someone tell me if this true, the executive board for local 514 will most likely face a layoff because of their seniority, if this agreement does not pass.

 

[Tex-Mech]

A question about a rumor I heard can someone tell me if this true, the executive board for local 514 will most likely face a layoff because of their seniority, if this agreement does not pass.

My President said that Cirri worked it out so he wouldn't be laid off till he was ready to retire. He got his

 

[AA-MRO.COM]

What stops the Company from outsourcing up to the 35%? Nothing and neither does it stop them from outsourcing up to the 40% everywhere. The LBO limits outsourcing to 35% at the bases and 15% on the line. Under the term sheet they can outsource everywhere at 40% even the line. Hey maybe the base could get their act together while you hide in your JFK club house making videos and all the line BCs, CFPs, and Class IIs get outsourced. It can under the term sheet language. Wouldn't that be a twist!

.

Fear wont change my mind
VOTE NO

 

[Overspeed]

I usually agree with you, and enjoy your writings, but this time I disagree with you, our BK lawyer said it it's a good idea to vote for a consensual agreement, but this isn't a consensual agreement. Plus ALL the presidents except for TULE (who has a FSC as president) are against this agreement, tells me this something we should not vote for. All the presidents will be dealing with the laid off mechs from their locals so I don't think it's quite fair to say the presidents are being callus towards the junior guys.

A question about a rumor I heard can someone tell me if this true, the executive board for local 514 will most likely face a layoff because of their seniority, if this agreement does not pass.

You are right, the attorney did advise to vote for a consensual agreement prior to BK. Unfortunately we didn't get one. The dilemma is that we have two options 1) vote yes for the LBO or 2) vote no to reject and then take our chances that the motion to reject will not be granted or that Judge Lane will force the parties back in to talking. As I stated before 33 out of 33 motions to reject have been granted in the last decade. I hope we have a good hitter coming to bat. So far the labor union slugging percentage is not that good. In this situation maybe we should got a runner on and try to move him around. The home run option looks bad.

I am not sure about the Local 514 seniority. There is no super seniority clause for officers anywhere. MCIE officers were either laid off or bumped and the Local was closed. Now as far as whether they can stay in office, as long as a member is in good standing they can hold office regardless of their employment status. Local 562 had a President who was retired and served his full term of office with pay from the Local.

And Local 563 ORD issued a letter that he did not endorse the video and does not recommend either way except that you need to read the information.

 

[Tex-Mech]

You are right, the attorney did advise to vote for a consensual agreement prior to BK. Unfortunately we didn't get one. The dilemma is that we have two options 1) vote yes for the LBO or 2) vote no to reject and then take our chances that the motion to reject will not be granted or that Judge Lane will force the parties back in to talking. As I stated before 33 out of 33 motions to reject have been granted in the last decade. I hope we have a good hitter coming to bat. So far the labor union slugging percentage is not that good. In this situation maybe we should got a runner on and try to move him around. The home run option looks bad.

I am not sure about the Local 514 seniority. There is no super seniority clause for officers anywhere. MCIE officers were either laid off or bumped and the Local was closed. Now as far as whether they can stay in office, as long as a member is in good standing they can hold office regardless of their employment status. Local 562 had a President who was retired and served his full term of office with pay from the Local.

And Local 563 ORD issued a letter that he did not endorse the video and does not recommend either way except that you need to read the information.

YAWN....

 

[Rogallo]

I think you may see quite a few yes votes at the line stations as well. There are people looking for the early out there too.

The Company maintains discretion as to the number of employees provided this Early Out incentive allowance .....


It ain't happening, just another carrot to get some yes votes. I know at my station we can't afford to lose anyone.