which will it be? the ta or term sheet?

[devil505]

The difference is that if you vote YES you are stuck with it for 6 years, if you vote NO you are not.
We need to vote NO, we continue to negotiate until we get a deal.
You have to remember that the International does not have to live under the deal. If we vote YES they no longer have to spend all the money they are spending on Lawyers economists etc and their dues flow is secure for another six years. If the contract is abroigated then they have no way of knowing who will continue to pay dues and no way to enforce it,So from their perspective a bad deal for us is better than no Article 38.

Expect the TWU to give you every reason to vote YES then say they arent telling you what to do.

You have to live under it VOTE NO.

 

[devil505]

Thanks Bob! You're a good man. Keep up the good work!

 

[Bob Owens]

There is a communication on 514's we site that explains what I just said.

The terms presented to the court will be used when the judge rejects AND they are worse than the LBO because the LBO Was put together AFTER the court proceeding began.

But you have to live with it till 2018, whereas if we reject it we continue to negotiate.
There are some improvements but not enough to make it worth accepting for the next six or more years.
The International deliberately dragged out negotiations by never putting forward any real effort for a release. Those of us who were pushing for it were rebuffed time and time again. The first time we agreed to ask the International told the mediator that we are asking to be released but we really dont want to be released. If the contract is abrogated I would expect the TWU to put maximum effort into getting a deal , including demanding a release if the company stonewalled because members would pay only as long as they felt like it. In other words they would really have to work for the members even if iot costs them their A-5 travel privileges.

We are at the bottom of the industry, if any group stands a chance of not getting their contract rejected its M&R, but we have to agree to freezing the pension, which is in there, retireee medical, in there but they are also grabbing our prefunding match-unacceptable, and allowing them to outsource at the same rates as other carriers, the new langauge allows more than other carriers, but in return we should get similar pay, not in there, similar benefits, holidays, vacation, sick time etc, not in there, and equity and a better 401k match.

Even if they do abrogate our deal we should not settle before the Pilots. After the company settles with the Pilots they may be more reasonable, they even admitted that our deal was "rediculously bad" but they would not enhance it because then all the other groups would want the same.

Remember this the International stands to lose more with an abrogation than we do and they do not have to live under it.

 

[700UW]

The whole contract isnt abrogated, the term sheet replaces the items the company wants to change and your CBA with the modified terms are in effect.

There is no do over.

 

[Bob Owens]

Okay....I wouldn't think with everything that is at stake, the TWU would post the wrong information. Like the company, I would hope they are following the expert advice of their counsel.
So if it is true that the LBO is better than the term sheets, AND it does save jobs AND only jobs, I think it is safe to say that the TWU will be pushing for a yes vote. And understandably, those in jeopardy of losing their job will assess their personal situations and options and vote yes.

As far as jobs there is no System or station protection any more. They can outsource up to 35% above current practices which is around 10%, so that makes it 45%, if Rolls opts out of Tasel it goes to 55%. There is no cap on Eagle ASMs. So if the company cuts a deal with the pilots that puts all domestic flying under Eagle they could pretty much dump everyone except the top 1000 or so since the widebodies are to be outsourced as well.

There really is no reason to vote yes. Sure they are promising to keep jobs but then why still have the language that allows it to be outsourced?

By the way eagle is TWU.

 

[CMH_GSE]

I guess we will have to wait to see the actual language of the LBO, which is changing daily, apparently.

What day this week will we get the PDF of it, any guesses?

I say Thursday afternoon.

 

[Birdman]

The whole contract isnt abrogated, the term sheet replaces the items the company wants to change and your CBA with the modified terms are in effect.

How do you know this?

There is no do over.

What do you mean?

 

[Hopeful]

There really is no reason to vote yes. Sure they are promising to keep jobs but then why still have the language that allows it to be outsourced?

I agree.....But we have to hear from those who are losing thier jobs for sure.

 

[Bob Owens]

Frank, the only problem is, if the judge refuses to reject our contracts , it will be the FIRST time in 34 court cases that has happened.

so it has happened, like he said they overstepped their wants.
AA had over $4 billion when they enterred bk, has that ever happened before?
Our mechanics are at the bottom of the industry and have agreed to the terms thaty could be considered onerous, the pension, retiree medical, work rules that require more staff than competitors, in all the other areas we lag the industry. lets take on example, vacation. AA is the only carrier where new employees only get one week of vacation for the first five years and we are a week behind everyone else up till 30 years where we pass some carriers with a max of six weeks. so from one to thirty years we have a week less than everyone else, so we may pass others after 30 but how many years are left? most dont put in more than fourty years, so over a 40 career the AA guy would get at least 20 less weeks than anyone else, he would have to put in 60 years to break even, now they want to eliminate the 6th week. holidays is another example, 5 days at half pay extra if worked, comes out to 20 hours extra pay for working al;l the holidays, compare that to even usair with 10 holidays at doubletime, that comes out to an extra 80 hours pay per year. So even if our wages were the same with just holidays and vacation we would have to work an extra three weeks a year for the same money.

AAs business plan calls for them earnig $3 billion a year in profits. nobody has presented such an ambitiouys plan in bk before that i know of.

AA did not go in with DIP either.

There are a lot of unique things about this BK.

Do you really think we should consider giving up $1.25 billion in concessions to a company that is looking at making $1.75 billion in profits without them?

 

[Bob Owens]

A question, If we vote down the negotiated contract proposal, then the company will go to the judge to have an imposed contract that will be worse then the negotiated contract proposal, but we will go back to negotiations after we emerge from BK? which will give uncertanty for AA's future labor costs.

If we vote in the negotiated contract proposal we have the contract for 6 years and based on AA's F you negotiating style, we will have that negotiated contract proposal for an additional 4 years which makes it a 10 year contract. Does that sound accurate?

No there is no negotaited contract, one is the term sheet they told the Judge they need to reorganize, the other includes some modifications that they hope will get them a 50% plus one vote. To say which one is worse depoends on how you look at it. Under either proposal you will not get a raise this year, under one its temporary until we negotiate a deal, under the other we are stuck with it for at least another six years. I prefer the temporary one. One allows 40% more outsourcing, the other 35% more, but the company isnt likely to be able to find places to do all that work that quickly anyway.

Well six years in addition to the four we already put in plus 4 more at the end would make it a 14 year contract.

 

[Bob Owens]

I agree



I agree

The only difference might be layoffs.

The "New Deal" is suppose to give some potential RIF's the chance to agree to a paycut to stick around.

Once the abborgation happens, the section 6 negotiations might lead to a different direction.

So
If you are going to be laid-off and instead want to stay and take a paycut, then you might vote YES.

Otherwise, unless an ealry out retirement is also attached, I see no reason to vote YES.

I am in neither group.
VOTE NO!

There is an Early out but its funded by giving up the company match from prefunding. Some of the older guys have more in the fund than the early out would givve them.

 

[700UW]

Someone is selling you a bag of a magic beans.

Explain if the new amendable date is 2018 if the term sheet is implemented and Section 6 negotiations take place 60 days prior to the amendable date how are negotiations going to occur?

 

[Bob Owens]

Currently base pay is $27.20, so a $3 cut.
If it meant I could stay at my current station and not have to dislocate from my family , which is on the horizon for me, then yes.

Moving to another station, leaving wife and kids behind, would cost me at least that much, so yes, I wouldn't like it, but I would do it.

Mechanics bumping to OSM lose their license pay and go to the OSM chart rate as well so you are probably looking at more than a $10hr cut. You have to remember OSMs are on a 10 year progression, so if you are a five year AMT you would go from a base pay of $27.20, plus licenses to the five year OSM rate of $13.51 and no licenses. Thats from $32.20 to $13.51, thats a cut of $18.61 an hour. My guess is most will quit, which is what AA wants. AA has been going around to A&P schools telling kids they are getting ready to hire. So you vote in the deal, find out you are losing $18.61 an hour, quit, they hire a kid from school at $9.58. They go from paying someone $32.20 to $9.58 and you voted in favor of it.Of course thats an extreme example, if you have 10 years or more you would only take an $11 hour cut in pay.

 

[Frank Szabo]

I know this is off-topic but take a look at this thread. I would be interested in your views/knowledge on this Frank.

My link

I saw the show on TV also - it's a very interesting way of getting around the foundry/pattern/flask way of doing things.

I had seen the use of 3D paper printers and the laser/liquid plastic processes for making patterns before but this was interesting in that capillary action was used to suck the brass into the porous stainless pattern.

It's some of that stuff I'd love to play with. I see what they did and can see the potential of the process but no hands-on time at all.

 

[Bob Owens]

The warning from the union BK lawyer, she said the best choice is the consensual agreement. I usually take advice from experts in their fields. But really how much worse can it get. But of coarse that depends if you are getting laid off.

I'm not interested in paycuts for jobs, we tried that one already.
I'm not interested in paycuts for early buyouts.
I'm not interested in paycuts to supplement the flight crews health benefits (we pay double what the flt crews pay)

I only take advice from experts that I hire. Never go by the advice of somebody elses lawyer