which will it be? the ta or term sheet?

[Hopeful]

This sounds absurd.

The Term Sheet is what the Judge is ruling on. How can "they" deviate from that unless we agree by ratification of deviated terms.
The changes in the 1113 Law were to protect the contract, not make it worse. I do not believe for one minute that abrogation means NO contract or Cancelled contract. It means modified to the terms of the 1113 term sheet presented to the court.

The way I understand it is yes, the voted on last best offer is going to be better than the term sheet, as it pertains to job loss and early out provisions.

For those of us that are not going to be RIF's and are not old enough to leave, then we have no reason to vote yes, because it will cost us the company match from the prefund reserves. Basically I am being asked to give up $8,000.00 in reserves refund to save someone else a job or let someone else leave early.

The question is, did the TWU and AA do their homework in adding the numer of yes voters.

In my opinion they cannot.

Because if the lower pay rate is based on percentage of head count, then as more take the early out, and/or volunteer to be RIF'd another employee who thought he was safe now becomes the one needing to take the paycut. how would like to vote YES thinking you were safe and your pay was safe, only to find out you really voted yourself right into a paycut because the numbers change based on who stays or leaves.

What a Cluster

I hope we don't see a repeat of the "I GOT MINE" factor that was effective in selling the 1995 6% over 6 year contract where the proposal included the early out package taken by quite a few senior folks. Talk about subsidizing.

 

[TWU informer]

I hope we don't see a repeat of the "I GOT MINE" factor that was effective in selling the 1995 6% over 6 year contract where the proposal included the early out package taken by quite a few senior folks. Talk about subsidizing.

You've got to be kidding right?

Of course you are going to see that. Which is the only reason for the incentive to begin with.

You dont plan to see someone say, "well that's a great offer for me, and I can leave with 40K in my pocket. but since it is screwing somone esle, I will just stay put"

Are you kidding?

Think about what you are hoping for compared to what will happen.

 

[Hopeful]

You've got to be kidding right?

Of course you are going to see that. Which is the only reason for the incentive to begin with.

You dont plan to see someone say, "well that's a great offer for me, and I can leave with 40K in my pocket. but since it is screwing somone esle, I will just stay put"

Are you kidding?

Think about what you are hoping for compared to what will happen.

Geez, Informer, don't you know sarcasm when you read it....OF COURSE I KNOW I AM GOING TO SEE JUST THAT.

 

[CMH_GSE]

I must have missed something.

What is this talk about prefunding reserves, and company match being used to fund an early out?

 

[Hopeful]

I must have missed something.

What is this talk about prefunding reserves, and company match being used to fund an early out?

Rumor is that if the TWU would not fight for the company match if abrogation occurs, they can offer a early out to fund it.Early out saves jobs.

 

[CMH_GSE]

The key part of your answer was : "rumor is".

I think I'll wait to see the text before I have a cow on an internet forum.

 

[TWU informer]

Rumor is that if the TWU would not fight for the company match if abrogation occurs, they can offer a early out to fund it.Early out saves jobs.

What? Explain what you are thinking or spreading here?

 

[Mr Red]

Rumor is that if the TWU would not fight for the company match if abrogation occurs, they can offer a early out to fund it.Early out saves jobs.

At our meeting friday we were told a different story.We were told the company does not contest the pre fund match money being returned
they are going to let the judge decide if its returned to participents or kept to continue paying current retirees medical.As far as I'm concerned I want my match
back.As usual the TWU is probably the problem!!!

 

[TWU informer]

At our meeting friday we were told a different story.We were told the company does not contest the pre fund match money being returned
they are going to let the judge decide if its returned to participents or kept to continue paying current retirees medical.As far as I'm concerned I want my match
back.As usual the TWU is probably the problem!!!

What meeting Friday?

So they dont contest it, but they will take it to the Judge? The contract is clear and the term sheets do not allow for change here.
If AA wanted my trust account to be part of the 1113 process, then they should have placed it in the term sheet for contract modification.

Can you say Paradox.

The fund reserves are in a Trust in mine and yours name, they don't even belong to AA to being with.

 

[700UW]

My information comes from Sharon Levine, go ask her Bob.

 

[CMH_GSE]

What meeting Friday?

So they dont contest it, but they will take it to the Judge?

Can you say Paradox.
The fund reserves are in a Trust in mine and yours name, they don't even belong to AA to being with.

I believe you are correct on this Informer.
There are very strict rules as to the use of this money, that is why I am very sceptical of the "rumors" of it being used for anything but our medical coverage. If it isn't used for that, it must be returned to us, with interest.

 

[TWU informer]

My information comes from Sharon Levine, go ask her Bob.

I actually think you and her are correct on this issue.

 

[TWU informer]

I believe you are correct on this Informer.
There are very strict rules as to the use of this money, that is why I am very sceptical of the "rumors" of it being used for anything but our medical coverage. If it isn't used for that, it must be returned to us, with interest.

I dont have the language either but was under the assumption that AA was making it clear in the last best offer that it would be used for previous retirees or soon to be retirees medical. So, yes we should wait and see the language. Except it appears to be not agreed on because AA is apparently manipulating the language....as usual. Which goes back to my point about how stupid is was for James C Little to give a May 14th deadline for results via Lawyers in Court before the Judge.

 

[Hopeful]

What? Explain what you are thinking or spreading here?

Not spreading anything here. This is from Bob Owens post #161 on this topic

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.

 

[Hopeful]

I dont have the language either but was under the assumption that AA was making it clear in the last best offer that it would be used for previous retirees or soon to be retirees medical. So, yes we should wait and see the language. Except it appears to be not agreed on because AA is apparently manipulating the language....as usual. Which goes back to my point about how stupid is was for James C Little to give a May 14th deadline for results via Lawyers in Court before the Judge.

Maybe Clarence Little Darrow thinks he will have some kind of leverage by that date. Isn't that the date where unions present their case?

Bottom line is, the TWU is petrified.