VOTE YES !

[Blueweng48]

Just out of curiosity where in the proposal can I read all about the job security or jobs guaranteed besides unelected (Fat Cats ) making three figures ? We should add a article for free buffets for unelected union officials that "fight like Hell " for us. Now that is funny right there I don't care who ya are.

Wheather you vote YES or NO the "JOB PROTECTION " is GONE!
I never said it was a good contract, what i did say is "I BELIEVE IT'S THE BEST YOUR GONNA GET" in todays market.
If you believe you can do better somewhwere else then the smart thing to do would be to take the early out and start working somewhere that is better.Art least you would have mopney that your not going to have if you get laid off with a no vote.Just an idea, I'm not trying to be funny.

 

[Rogallo]

Funny stuff, I guess you forgot to read the proposal ? Basically there are two choices
1. Willingly give everything away by voting yes.
2.making them take it away by voting no.

This twu propaganda that this saves jobs is pure bs try reading the proposal and think on your own. if you cannot read possibly you can find someone to read it to you ?

P.s. the only jobs it sAAves is unelected twu officials (Fat Cats) and some are really fat possibly we can get a new article in the contract for personal trainers and free gym membership fo all unelected union (Fat Cats). Some are so fat they can hardly fit in their free Buicks.

Two thumbs up..!!

 

[Plane Sense]

I also have read the proposal. Better than what the Court will impose on us. So it's a yes! I've already given up over 20k as a Line Mech since the 2010 T/A was voted down. And that is a fact.

 

[amt66]

I also have read the proposal. Better than what the Court will impose on us. So it's a yes! I've already given up over 20k as a Line Mech since the 2010 T/A was voted down. And that is a fact.

Well said!

 

[amt66]

Wheather you vote YES or NO the "JOB PROTECTION " is GONE!
I never said it was a good contract, what i did say is "I BELIEVE IT'S THE BEST YOUR GONNA GET" in todays market.
If you believe you can do better somewhwere else then the smart thing to do would be to take the early out and start working somewhere that is better.Art least you would have mopney that your not going to have if you get laid off with a no vote.Just an idea, I'm not trying to be funny.

Job protection? You want job protection get out of the airline industry no job protection here! Taking the early out and giving up 22 years to work somewhere else

 

[Blueweng48]

Job protection? You want job protection get out of the airline industry no job protection here! Taking the early out and giving up 22 years to work somewhere else

I WAS BEING FACETIOUS, LOL
My point was i don't think anybody would be better off somewhere else, so VOTE YES

 

[Rogallo]

I WAS BEING FACETIOUS, LOL
My point was i don't think anybody would be better off somewhere else,

In Tulsa?

 

[1AA]

There still has not been one person answer my origanal question, how is a NO VOTE going to benifit me over a YES VOTE?

Well if you read through the other threads on voting No and Voting Yes and so on related to the vote your answers will all be there. Unfortunately you would rather start a new thread about voting yes to get your answer instead of doing a little bit of searching on your own. Educate yourself and you will get all the answers you are looking for.

 

[TLW]

When i say a simple answer, i mean reason!
vote no is not a reason

VOTE YES !

I AM VOTING NO!!!!!
Is that simple enough for YOU!!!!!

 

[Overspeed]

Panick mode is running through the twu faithful. Two days before the count and they know this t/a is going down! Funny how more self proclaimed yes voters have to use an alias.

No panic here Ken. If the TA gets voted down then the pressure is really on the vote no coalition. When the people get their WARN letters and start asking you guys what happens now what will you tell them? That they are casualties for the cause? What cause? Your pipe dreams?

Like I said, I am voting yes (if that was ever a question) and it is because the alternative is bad, very bad. You guys had your chance. We are now in the BK that was scare tactic. Ken you have proven yourself to be part of the mob, not the union. A union sticks up for all of its members not just a select group in your case the higher seniority line guys. You are willing to risk thousands of overhaul, facilities, automotive, and other non-line AMT jobs for your personal causes. That's not unionism brother, that's selfish.

You are blinded by an elitist concept (and all AMT union) that cannot be. The NMB dictates class and craft not AMFA/AMP and the only way that an all AMT union can happen at AA is if the contract gets abrogated and those jobs are outsourced which is exactly what will happen if we vote down the TA. The 3/22 term sheet is 40% maintenance spend on top of existing outsourced work. That means more than 50% in maintenance spend will go outside with no cap on line outsourcing. Maybe SAN will get outsourced to CAS or Menzies. Say goodbye to the beach Ken and hello DFW.

How's betraying Charles Taylor's legacy going Ken? I noticed you don't have the balls to own up to accepting what a hypocrite you truly are. You say your are fighting for the profession but you have done more to hurt it than anyone person ever has.

 

[Blueweng48]

I AM VOTING NO!!!!!
Is that simple enough for YOU!!!!!

I respect your vote just not the same as mine, have a wonderful life

 

[1AA]

SO again i ask how is a NO VOTE going to chage that? Lets say you are right (which i don't think youm are) you just want to lay these people off two years earlier? What a good UNION BROTHER.
Rheem said in his meeting that the lay offs would be 400 with a YES VOTE and 2000 with a NO VOTE.
Those 1600 people would probably like to have the chance to find out what the next two years will bring, don't you think?

Amazing how he tells one story in Tulsa and a completely different one at the line stations. Over 600 have left since the BK filing. So minus that from the 1600 leaves about 1000. So now we are down to 1000 layoffs. AA originally filed with a 4000 number. So what has changed? The company keeps changing its numbers to pass this LBO. The union is pushing for a Yes vote. Desperate times call for desperate measures. The company and the TWU are desperate for different reasons. With no Article 42 and nothing in writing about future work how can you say there will be less layoffs and believe it?

 

[Overspeed]

American Airlines unions face decision on concessionary contracts
By TERRY MAXON
Staff Writer
[email protected]
Published: 05 August 2012 08:48 PM
For most of American Airlines Inc.’s history, the outcome of union votes usually swung on whether the contracts provided enough pay raises and other sweeteners to persuade employees to approve the deals.

But for the past decade, the question has been whether the employees could stomach the concessions they were forced to make. And that’s the decision facing members of American’s three unions right now.

Even union leaders who support American’s proposals are doing so while holding their noses. The fear is that American will give them something far worse if the carrier’s offers are turned down.

“It’s the great unknown,” Allied Pilots Association president Dave Bates said last week. “There’s a high level of risk and a great deal of uncertainty. Whereas, if you vote yes, you know where you stand.”

The bankruptcy case of American, now in its ninth month, reaches some key milestones in the next two weeks.

On Wednesday, the APA and Transport Workers Union will announce the result of contract votes by their members. A week later, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane is scheduled to rule on American’s motion to reject its unresolved labor contracts — unless he decides to wait to learn the results of the flight attendants’ contract vote, due Aug. 19.

Section 1113 of the federal bankruptcy code permits a company to abrogate its old labor contracts. American has to meet a number of legal requirements to win its case, but judges rarely turn down a bankrupt company’s request.

As they consider how to vote, union members are being warned that they’ll likely face the terms outlined by American on March 22 if the judge lets the airline toss their existing contracts. Those terms include far more draconian cuts than the deals the airline and its unions have since worked out.

To remove any doubt, an American executive told pilots Friday that if allowed by the judge, the company would toss out the old APA contract and impose the tougher term sheets. A company spokesman then added that the same would be true for any union that turns down its proposal.

The offers on the table still require more than $800 million in cost-cutting annually from American’s unionized workforce, as well as thousands of job cuts. But the deals being voted on are an improvement on the $990 million in annual cost cuts that American originally sought, and the number of jobs to be eliminated has shrunk.

Contract hearing
American and its unions squared off in Lane’s court in April and May for three weeks of hearings on the Section 1113 motion. The airline argued that it needed to reject the contracts to reorganize its affairs, while the unions said the company asked for too much and didn’t meet the law’s requirements.

But the advisers for the APA, TWU and the Association of Professional Flight Attendants are telling members that there’s not much chance that the judge will let them keep their current contracts.

“If the contracts aren’t ratified, then we’re in a position of having the 1113 term sheet if the judge rules against us. I think everyone is fairly confident that’s the way it’s going to play out,” APFA president Laura Glading said last week in an interview.

“I think we have a chance, but it’s a small chance, of having the judge ruling in our favor. But even then, it’d be a short-lived victory, I believe,” she said.
If the judge does reject the contracts, “then we’re sort of without contracts and we have to begin a negotiating process,” Glading added. “But where’s our leverage?”

Sharon Levine, TWU’s outside counsel in the 1113 hearings, and Tom Ward, a TWU expert witness in the case, both offered grim assessments of what will happen if the membership turns down American’s offer.
In a video recorded for TWU members, Ward warned that the union would lose the better terms it negotiated that lessened some of the damage of the March 22 term sheet. At best, he said, those March terms would likely be imposed instead.

“At the minimum, there’ll be a massive job reduction — 4,600 positions will be eliminated. Make no mistake about it. They will not be retrievable in [normal] negotiations,” said Ward, president of the Labor Bureau Inc., a consulting company that advises labor groups in collective bargaining talks.

In her video, Levine cautioned members not to make the mistake of thinking that these negotiations are anything like the usual negotiations that are governed by the Railway Labor Act. They aren’t, she said.

“Bottom line, we’re in bankruptcy court. We’re not in a labor court. We’re in a court that’s designed to help the debtor reorganize by cutting its costs and restructuring its business operations. It would be a very difficult ‘ask’ to go into this bankruptcy court and ask the judge not to give American Airlines labor concessions,” she said.

“Please remember that a vote on this tentative agreement is not the same as the simple vote on whether it’s an acceptable or unacceptable contract,” she said.
She also warned that the TWU, which began labor talks in the fall of 2007, likely would face several more years of contract talks if the judge allows the airline to throw out the existing contract.

Five TWU units approved a “last, best and final offer” from American in May. The two units that turned down those deals, the mechanics and related employees and the maintenance stock clerks, are voting on revised offers. The vote concludes at 11:59 p.m. Tuesday.



Union leaders
Meanwhile, the presidents of some union locals have put out their own video and sent letters to members spelling out the reasons members should vote no on the six-year agreement.
“Some are saying that if we vote this down, there will be massive job losses,” wrote Bob Owens, president of TWU’s New York mechanics’ local, “and yes, over the next several years, that’s probably true. But the same is true if we vote yes.”
“Either way it won’t happen next month, or even next year,” Owens wrote. “It will take time, and as time goes on, attrition will eat up most of the reductions. If we vote yes, we give them six years to outsource as much as they can while we stay at the bottom of the industry.”
Gary Peterson, president of the TWU’s Dallas/Fort Worth mechanics’ local, told members in a July 19 letter why they needed to vote down the offer.
“Now is not the time to give up, but rather it is time to dig in further for what we deserve comparative to the industry,” he wrote, adding “Remember, that no deal is better than a bad deal.”
Peterson’s letter prompted an unusual response Wednesday from a top TWU official who disputed his conclusions.

As Levine did in her video, TWU international representative Donald Videtich said labor talks in bankruptcy are “far different” that traditional labor talks.
“Your failure to understand this threatens to expose our members to the far greater concessions which will inevitably be imposed in the event our contract is abrogated if the membership follows your advice,” Videtich wrote.

The what-ifs
A key question, of course, is whether American will indeed throw out its labor contracts if Lane grants the carrier’s motion, despite Friday’s tough talk by vice president of flight John Hale and an airline spokesman. Asked about it last week, American chairman and chief executive Tom Horton shrugged off the question.
“I’m not going to comment on it. We’ve been so focused, at the company and I think the unions, too, on trying to get to consensual agreements after many years of trying and now in the construct of bankruptcy have reached those. I think the focus should be on ratification and moving the company forward,” he said.
The decision from Lane is scheduled to come by Aug. 15, a week after both the TWU and the APA count their votes. However, with the flight attendants voting past that date, he may delay his decision, as he did several times earlier this summer.

At road shows to explain the contract, members are peppering union officials with a lot of what-ifs: What if we turn it down? What if we approve it and we’re not successful in merging with US Airways Inc. (as all three unions have endorsed)? What if the company rejects our contracts?
The effort to sell the contract was undercut by a letter from a Los Angeles-based pilot late last week that indicated the airline was eager for a deal and would negotiate a better one if the current offer is voted down.
Bates, who is voting for the APA’s proposed contract, acknowledges that it is not the deal pilots would want.

“There are a lot of things in this tentative agreement that pilots aren’t happy with, [that] they consider very distasteful. There’s this tendency to want to vote no because you don’t like it. But then, you’re not going to get something better, you’re going to get something worse if you do vote no,” he said.

While Glading hasn’t told flight attendants to vote for the agreement, she’s told them why they should.

One, rejecting the vote opens the likelihood that American will throw out the contract, she said. In addition, settling the labor issues is the best way to move onto the next step, which she and the other union leaders hope is a merger with US Airways.

“Am I voting yes? Absolutely,” she said. “Do I want to see this accepted? Yeah, I do. I really think that’s going to be the best path for us.”

I noticed after reading this there is the perception that AA is going to throw out the labor agreements. They have never said that. They are asking the judge to abrogate them so they can impose their terms. All other provisions by the parties (TWU) have been TA'd and AA will honor those. It is only specific areas that are going to be changed per the term sheet. AA does not want anarchy in contrast to the vote no coalition. It is the anticipation of anarchy that the vote no coalition wants ven though they won't get it. The judge is not going to let that happen. AA will get a TRO and the fines will come, maybe even Bob will get served up. The NMB is going to hold off until after the BK is done and the curveball of a merger still looms further stalling any hope of self help.

Bob is being played and the uninformed are just following along while the paychecks get smaller and the work goes to China.

 

[1AA]

Job protection? You want job protection get out of the airline industry no job protection here! Taking the early out and giving up 22 years to work somewhere else

22 years? You might be looking for another job in due time.

 

[luvthe9]

VOTE NO AND LET'S WORK TOGETHER TO STOP THIS MERGE!!!!!