Voting Yes

[Hopeful]

If AA's fortunes improve (and I hope they do) I'll be right there in line to take my share. I've always said we should get it all back and more. Just a question of when. If the company were making big profits I wouldn't put up with this stuff, but since it is losing big money I'm willing to go along for a short duration contract.

There is no SHORT DURATION CONTRACT...Our TA is for a 5 year agreement, 2 years of which passed and there is NO retro pay. Maybe you think "OH WELL, ONLY 3 MORE YEARS TO GO AND WE'LL GET EM THEN."

WRONG!!!!!!. Since there will be no retro pay next time, the company will stall another 2 years, maybe 3 and before you know it, if you add up all the years from 5/2008, you could have a 7 year contract.

 

[1AA]

If AA's fortunes improve (and I hope they do) I'll be right there in line to take my share. I've always said we should get it all back and more. Just a question of when. If the company were making big profits I wouldn't put up with this stuff, but since it is losing big money I'm willing to go along for a short duration contract.

IATA Expects GLOBAL profits from the Airline Industry

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

If AA's fortunes improve (and I hope they do) I'll be right there in line to take my share. I've always said we should get it all back and more. Just a question of when. If the company were making big profits I wouldn't put up with this stuff, but since it is losing big money I'm willing to go along for a short duration contract.

Frontline,

You state above that we should get it all back and more. Then you add it is a question of when. No arguement intended here but you seem to be indecisive.

The question of when is NOW! I do not trust the company or Intl. The Intl. will continue to receive dues regardless if they are Eagle or AA AMTs so they come out a winner. The company wins because they get what they want if we do not fight for it.

You say the company is losing money yet executives have stock options going through 2013 that will make them even richer (greedier) than ever. The company has ALWAYS, (and I mean ALWAYS) argued we are losing money, gas is too high, other airlines went into BK and we are at a disadvantage, etc.. DON'T TRUST THE COMPANY!

Okay, the company is losing money but we need to continue this experiment in one way shAAred sAAcrifice. Well, we already gave at the office. The right thing needs to be done. If the current management team is unable to turn a profit while working with only one hand, (the other hand is reaching into the Black Chalice of Greed grasping for continued bonuses), then this team needs to be let go and real airline executives need to take over. If this company claims to continue to lose money it is NOT the employes fault. I will not allow the watering down of my craft because of lack of leadership.

A "short duration contract" sounds like another company/twu slogan. Slogans do not work. Leadership does. Okay here is one slogan we can use if slogans are the tool to use: "Got Leadership?"

 

[FWAAA]

For those who see the TAs as too concessionary, that might not be such a terrible result. Besides, AA's fortunes might actually improve in 6-12 months, making it easier to justify pay raises.

AMR's fortunes may be turning around right now. UA just reported that May's unit revenue was up about 25% over May of last year and was even up several points over May 2008; if AA has been able to match UA's prices, it's not impossible for AA to return to profitability in the next few months as long as oil prices cooperate. I would not be in any rush to sign a concessionary contract just as things appear to be getting better.

 

[Tex-Mech]

AMR's fortunes may be turning around right now. UA just reported that May's unit revenue was up about 25% over May of last year and was even up several points over May 2008; if AA has been able to match UA's prices, it's not impossible for AA to return to profitability in the next few months as long as oil prices cooperate. I would not be in any rush to sign a concessionary contract just as things appear to be getting better.

When the pro-management posters say Vote No, I do have to think if this is pscyhological warfare to get me to vote yes, or its an honest assessment of just how bad of a deal this is? :unsure: :unsure:

 

[Boomer]

When the pro-management posters say Vote No, I do have to think if this is pscyhological warfare to get me to vote yes, or its an honest assessment of just how bad of a deal this is? :unsure: :unsure:

Perhaps it is just a sign that even AMR pro-management types understand that you can reach for, "A Bridge Too Far," in that your attempt at closing the circle may well leave you occupying a position that is not sustainable.

Or, it could be a reading of the political "tea-leaves," in that the upswell of opposition to TWU/AFL-CIO incompetence creates soo much uncertainty that no one is willing to bankroll anything until things settle down and the water becomes a little clearer.

If you earn your dollar by the hour, keep the water muddy upstream from whatever opposition faces you.

Orwell, Animal Farm, "All animals are created equal, some animals are more equal than others."

Animal Farm, Chapter 10
"...Years have passed, and many of the animals are dead. Only Clover, Benjamin, Moses and some of the pigs remember the days before the rebellion. Clover is by now very old, well past retirement age, except that no animal has actually managed to retire yet.
The windmill has finally been completed. It is used for milling corn, rather than for generating electricity, and brings a good profit to the farm. Another windmill is now being built to generate electricity. There is no more talk of the three-day week, or any of the other luxuries that Snowball originally promised would accrue from the windmill.
The farm is growing richer, but the animals themselves do not seem to benefit much from it. There are many pigs and dogs on the farm now. The pigs are all involved in the bureaucracy of running the farm, and are not available to do any actual work, though Squealer makes it clear to the others that what the pigs do is of vital importance to the farm. Squealer continues to impress everyone with detailed figures of how everything has improved on the farm, but deep down the animals are unable to reconcile this with the lack of improvement in their own conditions. Nonetheless, Animal Farm remains the only farm in England to be owned by the animals, and the animals remain enormously proud of this..."
"...The chance to protest is gone. Clover goes to the gable wall and brings Benjamin with her. She asks Benjamin to read for her what is on the gable wall. All the commandments are gone, and all that is written there now is “All animals are equal, But some animals are more equal than others.”"

 

[Boomer]

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Union May Waive Employee's Rights to Litigate Discrimination Claims in Federal Court

Union Letter of Agreement May Prohibit Court Challenge to Age Discrimination Federal Lawsuits

"...In a close 5 to 4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that when a union contract clearly requires employees to resolve their discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) in arbitration, the employee must use the grievance and arbitration procedure of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the union and the employer to resolve those claims and may not bring a lawsuit in federal court to do so..."

The TWU International, by Federal Court Ruling following the Concessions Negotiations Lawsuit in 2003, owns the contract and is able to amend it at will.

The current TA of the M&R CBA is subject to any letter of agreement the TWU International wishes to sign between the period that "final language" from the current tentative agreement is sent to the membership and a "symbolic vote" by the membership is conducted.

 

[TWU informer]

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Union May Waive Employee's Rights to Litigate Discrimination Claims in Federal Court

Union Letter of Agreement May Prohibit Court Challenge to Age Discrimination Federal Lawsuits

"...In a close 5 to 4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that when a union contract clearly requires employees to resolve their discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) in arbitration, the employee must use the grievance and arbitration procedure of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the union and the employer to resolve those claims and may not bring a lawsuit in federal court to do so..."

The TWU International, by Federal Court Ruling following the Concessions Negotiations Lawsuit in 2003, owns the contract and is able to amend it at will.

The current TA of the M&R CBA is subject to any letter of agreement the TWU International wishes to sign between the period that "final language" from the current tentative agreement is sent to the membership and a "symbolic vote" by the membership is conducted.

Yeah and what is really amazing is that we don't vote on those letters of agreement, and one always seems to appear to quelch any given issue that arises. And of course back dated.

 

[Large Grey]

I realize I and many others have said otherwise, but stop and consider for a sec ...

If we (the M&R portion of the workers) end up voting "NO" enmasse and eventually get released to strike, what can we do to the company while off the property other than carry signs, yelling and screaming at those going through the lines, and getting more hateful with our comments while ensuring the company's cost will drop?

Answer - absolutely nothing of consequence.

It would be far more advantageous to our cause and definitely not to the company's advantage at all if they and their pet union get what they want with us on the inside insuring, of course, the new contract and GPM are followed to the letter.

I do see similarities in the "logic" being used by both the union and company similar to the sales pitch in 2003 and everything they were going to do replete with code names except, this time, nobody is using the "B" ( bankruptcy) word.

As far as making a firm decision as to my up or down vote on this mess, I will reserve that until the full text is available. I must say, however, I don't expect much after reading the continuing "lowlights" being put out by PrAAvdAA (a play on the old Soviet Newspaper, Pravda) as I refer to the joint TWU/AA propaganda machine. It ain't lookin' too good for their side, however.

This, coupled with a group of people in the local who will deep-six the "Working Together" crap, thereby making the company do their own dirty work , may be to our best advantage rather than getting off the property willingly (striking) so the company needn't pay severance and unemployemt benefits should there be a layoff afterwards.

Just thoughts - only alternative logic.

The only way to convey is be ready to walk away. Nobody will take you serious otherwise. And then there's home. . . I would not want some arsonist burning me down because I crossed a picket line. Bad things happen to scabs. I saw it during the FA strike.

 

[frontline]

There's no indecision here at all. I do want it all back. I also think that getting it all back right now would be counterproductive. There's nothing inconsistent about that. Where you are advocating taking everything in one leap, I am talking about several steps. Steps that depend on how healthy our company is.

No one has ever been able to respond to my argument that pushing for it all now would ultimately cost us more. If we push, and receive (along with APFA and APA) then we'll likely see AA go into bankruptcy within six months to a year. Then we get our shiny new contracts GUTTED by a judge. So if the choice is standing pat or ending up worse off a year from now, I'll take standing pat.

 

[toroshark]

There's no indecision here at all. I do want it all back. I also think that getting it all back right now would be counterproductive. There's nothing inconsistent about that. Where you are advocating taking everything in one leap, I am talking about several steps. Steps that depend on how healthy our company is.

No one has ever been able to respond to my argument that pushing for it all now would ultimately cost us more. If we push, and receive (along with APFA and APA) then we'll likely see AA go into bankruptcy within six months to a year. Then we get our shiny new contracts GUTTED by a judge. So if the choice is standing pat or ending up worse off a year from now, I'll take standing pat.

Then stand pat by voting NO. This T/A gives back more than we gain.

 

[The Goose]

The only way to convey is be ready to walk away. Nobody will take you serious otherwise. And then there's home. . . I would not want some arsonist burning me down because I crossed a picket line. Bad things happen to scabs. I saw it during the FA strike.

... wouldn't consider crossing a line - EVER.

To explain AGAIN, I took the unpopular side of a debate argument as a way to learn but it's rather evident most here haven't done that before and would rather make sideways threats such as you did.

Unless there are many things changed within it, I can assure all of my NO vote - my attitude hasn't changed a bit since this TA was returned.

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

There's no indecision here at all. I do want it all back. I also think that getting it all back right now would be counterproductive. There's nothing inconsistent about that. Where you are advocating taking everything in one leap, I am talking about several steps. Steps that depend on how healthy our company is.

No one has ever been able to respond to my argument that pushing for it all now would ultimately cost us more. If we push, and receive (along with APFA and APA) then we'll likely see AA go into bankruptcy within six months to a year. Then we get our shiny new contracts GUTTED by a judge. So if the choice is standing pat or ending up worse off a year from now, I'll take standing pat.

Then stand pat and vote no.

If we vote no and are put on ice so what? We are better off waiting then accepting moe concessions. THAT would be counterproductive.

Rest assured management would still receive their bonuses before filing for any bk in the possible future.

 

[High Speed Steel]

Then stand pat and vote no.

If we vote no and are put on ice so what? We are better off waiting then accepting moe concessions. THAT would be counterproductive.

Rest assured management would still receive their bonuses before filing for any bk in the possible future.

Some may say that we have been on ice since the supposed 2006 early openers and are tired of the games and will vote yes for this POS. When are you going to tell us what we will gain with a no vote?

 

[Tex-Mech]

No one has ever been able to respond to my argument that pushing for it all now would ultimately cost us more. If we push, and receive (along with APFA and APA) then we'll likely see AA go into bankruptcy within six months to a year. Then we get our shiny new contracts GUTTED by a judge. So if the choice is standing pat or ending up worse off a year from now, I'll take standing pat.

What is about union members that are concerned about the company filing for bankruptcy when the company hasn't even mentioned a possible filing? As long as this company is spending the way they are by doubling, or even tripling its managment ranks in some stations in the past year, I wouldn't worry about bankruptcy. Aprey and the boys aren't worried about bankruptcy when bonus time comes, so why should you.