What I Want To See

CWA reps said in INT last night, they were flying back up to CCY on Monday to start new negotiations, hold on, further pain still to be incurred.

My question is the Fat Lady has started singing, how long is her song?
 
The company is not going to negotiate anything that will take less out of your pockets. They may move the furniture around the room, but the bottom Dollar losses will be the same. They may not take 21% out of your wages, but they will cut some benefits to make up the difference. Does anyone here think that the Company EVER wanted to strike a deal with any Union? Why waste the time when the Judge can do it all at once for them. This is why they tossed such far fetched offers to the unions in the first place. They knew that nobody ( Except US320) would vote for them anyway. BK was the plan all along, with the 1113 filing to squeeze everyone one more time.
 
Did I understand the rules correctly that after this interm pay cut expires, the company has the option to continue to negotiate with the unions who have not signed agreements, or at their option, force a contract upon labor and if they dont like it, there nothing they can do? If that is the case, then the company really has nothing to gain by making any realistic negotiations. After the contract is imposed on labor, is that where the "self help" option kicks in? To include, pickets, strikes, etc?
 
We have some in reservations with less than five years they'll be down to around 9.00 an hour for four months.....that's pitiful....working nights weekends and holidays, I'm sure most will be leaving..not worth staying anymore...Walmart or Costco pays more.
 
wings396 said:
The company is not going to negotiate anything that will take less out of your pockets. They may move the furniture around the room, but the bottom Dollar losses will be the same. They may not take 21% out of your wages, but they will cut some benefits to make up the difference.
[post="191728"][/post]​

Wings,

You succently pointed out the error made by those who say a negotiated settlement will be better than this decision.

In seeking interim relief, the company sought about $38 million in monthly savings - equivalent to $458 million per year. In long term negotiated savings, they originally wanted $800 million per year and now say they need $950 million per year - more than double the interim relief. As you say, the paycut may be less but will be more than offset elsewhere. The only factor that would partially mitigate this is that some of the pain of a negotiated agreement would be borne by those who lose their jobs (100% paycut), and those in or very near retirement (loss of medical coverage). That's why it's not surprising that those who hold the "negotiated is less painful" view are not at the bottom facing furlough and not at or in retirement.

Likewise, those who foolishly say "We could have had a better deal if we'd reached agreement earlier" are equally mistaken. They have convinced themselves that an earlier agreement would have been sacrosanct in BK, that the greater need professed by the company would somehow pass them by. Past history demonstrates otherwise.

Jim
 
It is very sad because the CWA union put proposals in that would have saved the company $33 milllion dollars, up form the $30 million dollars the company was asking from CWA members....The company arogantly ignored them...had union busting in mind....(Thank you Mr Bush)

Sounds like to me alot of Rez reps are looking to leave now....Everyone has lost trust in Mgt to be believable and fair in the future...They should offer voluntarily furloughs... so you can either take it or leave it....

Mr Lakefield said he wasn't gonna take a cut in his pay of $400,000 a year because he said he would only do it if it saved the airline....

So, I guess my $2.66 a hour cut from $12.65 to $9.99 is gonna save the airline, huh? Yeah right... The nerve!
 
WestCoastGuy said:
Did I understand the rules correctly that after this interm pay cut expires, the company has the option to continue to negotiate with the unions who have not signed agreements, or at their option, force a contract upon labor and if they dont like it, there nothing they can do? If that is the case, then the company really has nothing to gain by making any realistic negotiations. After the contract is imposed on labor, is that where the "self help" option kicks in? To include, pickets, strikes, etc?
[post="191730"][/post]​
No, that is not quite correct. The imposition of permanent cuts through abrogation of the current contracts does not automatically follow this temporary cut.

As I understand it...
1. The company has to file an 1113 requesting permanent abrogation of the contracts.
2. The company and the unions then enter a court-imposed negotiation period--60 days, I think.
3. If a negotiated settlement is not reached within the specified time period, the company must go back to the court and say that they have negotiated in good faith, the union has rejected a reasonable offer without good cause, and relief is needed to protect the interests of the creditors.

Now to paraphrase Pres. Clinton, define good faith, reasonable, and relief. :lol:
 
I think a big sick out is probably coming from most groups since it is cold and flu season
 
If you don't by now know what is really going on. It is now time that you wake up and look around the airline industry. With all three houses in control of the Republicans, corporations have been engaged in none other than union busting while they have the power to do so. The big rush to get things restructured now in these bankrupt companies as soon as possible after the election, is because if the Democrats pick up control of the Senate or the House, the restructuring of the American economy at the hands of the big oil companies will be pretty much over. Their unfettered power since Bush came into office will come to an end or, in the very least, become significantly diminished. It will become much more difficult to get any republican legislation passed through congress. If Bush gets elected, he will become a lame duck President. If Kerry gets elected, labor will benefit, but they couldn't possibly begin to undo the damage to labor and the airline industry by February. So the strategy should be to delay or drag out any decisions until in the very least Spring.

Any comments?
 
novaqt said:
If you don't by now know what is really going on. It is now time that you wake up and look around the airline industry. With all three houses in control of the Republicans, corporations have been engaged in none other than union busting while they have the power to do so. The big rush to get things restructured now in these bankrupt companies as soon as possible after the election, is because if the Democrats pick up control of the Senate or the House, the restructuring of the American economy at the hands of the big oil companies will be pretty much over. Their unfettered power since Bush came into office will come to an end or, in the very least, become significantly diminished. It will become much more difficult to get any republican legislation passed through congress. If Bush gets elected, he will become a lame duck President. If Kerry gets elected, labor will benefit, but they couldn't possibly begin to undo the damage to labor and the airline industry by February. So the strategy should be to delay or drag out any decisions until in the very least Spring.

Any comments?
[post="192024"][/post]​

Yes. What you wrote above is idiotic. U's problems have nothing to do with either political party and neither party is going to save U.
 
novaqt said:
If you don't by now know what is really going on. It is now time that you wake up and look around the airline industry. With all three houses in control of the Republicans, corporations have been engaged in none other than union busting while they have the power to do so. The big rush to get things restructured now in these bankrupt companies as soon as possible after the election, is because if the Democrats pick up control of the Senate or the House, the restructuring of the American economy at the hands of the big oil companies will be pretty much over. Their unfettered power since Bush came into office will come to an end or, in the very least, become significantly diminished. It will become much more difficult to get any republican legislation passed through congress. If Bush gets elected, he will become a lame duck President. If Kerry gets elected, labor will benefit, but they couldn't possibly begin to undo the damage to labor and the airline industry by February. So the strategy should be to delay or drag out any decisions until in the very least Spring.

Any comments?
[post="192024"][/post]​




“Theyâ€￾ are watching you :eek:

For the definition of paranoia see this post… :rolleyes:


Lions Tigers and Bears, OH NO!
 
Jim,

I disagree-are you surprised? :)

We have had the 279 aircraft minimum as a part of 1113 protection from restructing 1, and it is something the company has had to deal with, finding place to fly mainline aircraft profitably.

This has driven Island flying and Saterday only new city pairs, and this morph continues to happen. So the fact is that the company has honored 1113 protections.

The pension was not taken by the company or the judge, rather, it was surrended to prevent liquidation...which is why you have a job today.

BoeingBoy said:
Wings,

You succently pointed out the error made by those who say a negotiated settlement will be better than this decision....

Likewise, those who foolishly say "We could have had a better deal if we'd reached agreement earlier" are equally mistaken. They have convinced themselves that an earlier agreement would have been sacrosanct in BK, that the greater need professed by the company would somehow pass them by. Past history demonstrates otherwise.

Jim
[post="191744"][/post]​
 

Latest posts

Back
Top