Why I Voted Yes
- Thread starter Strake
- Start date
- Status
Tulsamechanic9
Advanced
- Jul 14, 2012
- 133
- 26
- Banned
- #317
Wow I finally found someone who voted for the 2003 concession of course were using aliases is why, I actually voted against the 2003 concession because at the time no Airline had filed bk so I thought they were bluffing, knowing what I know now I would have voted for it, so I guess we are swapping this time.
Yep, and the jobs that are simply eliminated, thanks to giving up system protection, do not affect the amount of jobs they can outsource. Now we know that the company will find a way to get rid of people it doesnt need but wouldnt we be better off to have system protcetion so they have to offer a package at least?
VOTE NO
Then you havent learned much.
You have the best quote at the bottom of your posts. I have a daughter that's a teacher and she is going to use it with her students. haha
Just the Facts II
Member
- Aug 20, 2010
- 49
- 18
I don't believe that the current owners want a maintenance base either!
High Speed Steel
Veteran
- Feb 14, 2004
- 1,375
- 136
Yeah Don V. did a good job. One of my favorite parts of the 565 Peterson letter is in the 3rd paragraph where the company told the line presidents they were through talking to them.....I get a chuckle out of that every time I read it, and they want to vote no and get a deal in 7 day's....lmao
TWU informer
Veteran
- Nov 4, 2003
- 7,550
- 3,731
Keep Laughing
High Speed Steel
Veteran
- Feb 14, 2004
- 1,375
- 136
I do believe you are on to something there.
Rcvd from DFW AMT
APFA vice president endorses American Airlines’ last, best and final offer to flight attendants
By tmaxon
[email protected]
10:35 am on August 1, 2012 |
August 1, 2012
Dear Fellow Flight Attendants,
My initial reaction to the Company’s Last Best Final Offer (LBFO) was, “Oh, hell no!” and at first I thought I could never endorse this for membership ratification. But after careful study of the potential harm and future devastation which would occur if the offer were rejected, and the clear improvements to the 1113 term sheet, my position changed. Among the key points for me was the scheduling provisions which will be lost forever with a vote to reject. The more I read and understood the offer and the realities we face as a union, the easier my YES vote became to make and recommend.
I want more than anything to see a merger with USAirways take place during bankruptcy. It is the best plan for the flight attendants and our company. According to USAirways’ CEO Doug Parker, the fastest way to accomplish a merger is by approving this offer. Having said that, the LBFO represents the best insurance policy available to us in the event that we do not achieve a merger. The absolute worst case scenario will be realized if we reject this offer and Horton keeps control of the Company. We simply cannot afford that.
In virtually all previous airline bankruptcies, labor groups secured agreements similar to our LBFO and as you will read below there is an important reason for this. If we deliver a NO vote, the judge has two options: rule in our favor on the Company’s Section 1113 motion, or grant the Company their motion and legal permission to abrogate our contract. History shows that Courts favor the bankrupt companies in these motions almost 100 percent of the time.
If American exits bankruptcy we will resume negotiations with management. But where will we start? Since the Court will likely allow the Company to gut our entire contract, will we be starting from scratch, using the Section 1113 term sheet from March 22, the LBFO, or our pre-bankruptcy numbers? The Company has said they want to stick with the March 22 term sheet, which as you remember was an insult to our profession. But, there is no law that says they can’t sink even lower than the term sheet and knowing their tactics and the money they’ve been shelling out to bankruptcy lawyers, management can probably can stretch this argument for at least a few years. Let me repeat that: if we reject the LBFO and the Court grants the Company’s 1113 motion, management may be able to impose a contract even worse than the March 22 term sheet. All they would need is a decent economic reason, like a sudden spike in oil prices, to make the argument that more cuts are needed. We’d fight it in court, but the system favors companies like American so heavily that we can’t afford the risk. There is a better option and it is the LBFO.
If we reject the LBFO, and the Court grants the Company’s motion, our contractual status will closely resemble our Agents’. If we reject the LBFO, and the Company exits bankruptcy, we will be without a contract, without an agreement, and living under implemented language.
More to the point, we all know how effectively management dragged their feet during negotiations for the four years leading up to bankruptcy. Count on this behavior continuing as they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. To make matters worse, although we were once at the top of the National Mediation Board’s priority list, we have now been bypassed by other airlines’ labor groups and their negotiations.
On the other hand, our colleagues at TWU have ratified an agreement similar to our LBFO and no matter what the Company cannot later alter it. Their deal may be concessionary and tough for them to swallow, but it is still a ratified agreement and like our LBFO, it is a whole lot better than the term sheet they were handed in March.
If we reject the LBFO, you and I are at the mercy of the Company. Based upon our history and management’s behavior and actions I say, “Oh, hell no!” to this option and will vote YES for the Last Best Final Offer.
In Unity,
Marcus Gluth
Flight Attendant, IMA
Vice President, APFA
APFA vice president endorses American Airlines’ last, best and final offer to flight attendants
By tmaxon
[email protected]
10:35 am on August 1, 2012 |
August 1, 2012
Dear Fellow Flight Attendants,
My initial reaction to the Company’s Last Best Final Offer (LBFO) was, “Oh, hell no!” and at first I thought I could never endorse this for membership ratification. But after careful study of the potential harm and future devastation which would occur if the offer were rejected, and the clear improvements to the 1113 term sheet, my position changed. Among the key points for me was the scheduling provisions which will be lost forever with a vote to reject. The more I read and understood the offer and the realities we face as a union, the easier my YES vote became to make and recommend.
I want more than anything to see a merger with USAirways take place during bankruptcy. It is the best plan for the flight attendants and our company. According to USAirways’ CEO Doug Parker, the fastest way to accomplish a merger is by approving this offer. Having said that, the LBFO represents the best insurance policy available to us in the event that we do not achieve a merger. The absolute worst case scenario will be realized if we reject this offer and Horton keeps control of the Company. We simply cannot afford that.
In virtually all previous airline bankruptcies, labor groups secured agreements similar to our LBFO and as you will read below there is an important reason for this. If we deliver a NO vote, the judge has two options: rule in our favor on the Company’s Section 1113 motion, or grant the Company their motion and legal permission to abrogate our contract. History shows that Courts favor the bankrupt companies in these motions almost 100 percent of the time.
If American exits bankruptcy we will resume negotiations with management. But where will we start? Since the Court will likely allow the Company to gut our entire contract, will we be starting from scratch, using the Section 1113 term sheet from March 22, the LBFO, or our pre-bankruptcy numbers? The Company has said they want to stick with the March 22 term sheet, which as you remember was an insult to our profession. But, there is no law that says they can’t sink even lower than the term sheet and knowing their tactics and the money they’ve been shelling out to bankruptcy lawyers, management can probably can stretch this argument for at least a few years. Let me repeat that: if we reject the LBFO and the Court grants the Company’s 1113 motion, management may be able to impose a contract even worse than the March 22 term sheet. All they would need is a decent economic reason, like a sudden spike in oil prices, to make the argument that more cuts are needed. We’d fight it in court, but the system favors companies like American so heavily that we can’t afford the risk. There is a better option and it is the LBFO.
If we reject the LBFO, and the Court grants the Company’s motion, our contractual status will closely resemble our Agents’. If we reject the LBFO, and the Company exits bankruptcy, we will be without a contract, without an agreement, and living under implemented language.
More to the point, we all know how effectively management dragged their feet during negotiations for the four years leading up to bankruptcy. Count on this behavior continuing as they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. To make matters worse, although we were once at the top of the National Mediation Board’s priority list, we have now been bypassed by other airlines’ labor groups and their negotiations.
On the other hand, our colleagues at TWU have ratified an agreement similar to our LBFO and no matter what the Company cannot later alter it. Their deal may be concessionary and tough for them to swallow, but it is still a ratified agreement and like our LBFO, it is a whole lot better than the term sheet they were handed in March.
If we reject the LBFO, you and I are at the mercy of the Company. Based upon our history and management’s behavior and actions I say, “Oh, hell no!” to this option and will vote YES for the Last Best Final Offer.
In Unity,
Marcus Gluth
Flight Attendant, IMA
Vice President, APFA
Be Careful What You Wish For.
Veteran
- Dec 23, 2006
- 2,269
- 571
Sorry to interject, being US, but you are now in the driver seat of raising the bar as high as possible since US is now sitting on our contract til YOU come to a decision.
Choose wisely - we all depend on it.
Thanks
Choose wisely - we all depend on it.
Thanks
Ken MacTiernan
Veteran
You mean the same don v who will not take a pay or benefit cut when the membership does?
You mean the same don v who promotes a yes vote/roll call vote when it benefits the twu?
It would take someone who is held accountable by the membership they were elected by in order to have any credibility when they "tear a new one" of someone who is elected by the membership and is held accountable by the membership and actually writes/speaks the truth.
- Status
