Why is TWU the first to give up

[olderguyAMT]

Why the big push to decide in a couple of weeks with a yes or a no???

Why is the TWU the first to CRY UNCLE and give up the court battle?

Has the Co. proved all NINE of the section 1113 points, without doubt?
And, if there is doubt, why did J Little give up that fight?

Has any company exited chap. 11 BK without consential union agreements?

What if the TWU gets a big YES to that crappy TA, which becomes the new contract, then the merger with US happens?
How will our AMT pay compare with IAM brother AMT pay at US/AA????

Where did the Local 514 get those layoff numbers from?
Will 25% OSM on the docks, making $22k less per year, be more that 334 total at the overhaul bases?

Why the OPEN language on the $39k incentive offer? What excactly are we voting for here?

With Local 514 stating to the members that a NO vote will shred the entire contract,
where is the legal precedent for that opinion? Is that really true?

A YES vote will make a new contract, and end all negotiations?

These are questions to ponder seriously. and J Little has not given us much time to get it all figured out.
hurry up and vote? Lets slow down and THINK.

 

[dfw gen]

Cause they can do that brother!

 

[Frank Szabo]

Why the big push to decide in a couple of weeks with a yes or a no???

Why is the TWU the first to CRY UNCLE and give up the court battle?

Has the Co. proved all NINE of the section 1113 points, without doubt?
And, if there is doubt, why did J Little give up that fight?

Has any company exited chap. 11 BK without consential union agreements?

What if the TWU gets a big YES to that crappy TA, which becomes the new contract, then the merger with US happens?
How will our AMT pay compare with IAM brother AMT pay at US/AA????

Where did the Local 514 get those layoff numbers from?
Will 25% OSM on the docks, making $22k less per year, be more that 334 total at the overhaul bases?

Why the OPEN language on the $39k incentive offer? What excactly are we voting for here?

With Local 514 stating to the members that a NO vote will shred the entire contract,
where is the legal precedent for that opinion? Is that really true?

A YES vote will make a new contract, and end all negotiations?

These are questions to ponder seriously. and J Little has not given us much time to get it all figured out.
hurry up and vote? Lets slow down and THINK.

Speaking with a fellow last night explained a lot, if it's true.

He was telling me there is a requirement that our supposed representation (twu) be "active" employees. Per his story, if the extreme cuts were implemented as the result of a "no" vote, many of our darling twu officers would be laid off, necessitating their vacating their offices. He said little jimmy would be caught up in the mess as well as Sam Cirri, Jenni Proctor, and a few others. I've no clue re: this myself - just passing on an interesting conversation.

If true, it's rather interesting, ain't it? Could this little snippet be why the twu has already tapped out - to save THEIR jobs?

 

[TWU informer]

TWU has caved becuase if the RIF's happen as planned by AA, being able to negotiate those jobs back to the payroll is nearly impossible.

This is simply about saving some jobs in exchange for making what used to be a profession into just another regular job.

Concessions for jobs has been tried more than once, and proven not to be the answer more than once.

 

[aapitbull]

Speaking with a fellow last night explained a lot, if it's true.

He was telling me there is a requirement that our supposed representation (twu) be "active" employees. Per his story, if the extreme cuts were implemented as the result of a "no" vote, many of our darling twu officers would be laid off, necessitating their vacating their offices. He said little jimmy would be caught up in the mess as well as Sam Cirri, Jenni Proctor, and a few others. I've no clue re: this myself - just passing on an interesting conversation.

If true, it's rather interesting, ain't it? Could this little snippet be why the twu has already tapped out - to save THEIR jobs?

Jim LIttle and most of the upper levels of the TWU have retired from AA and are currently double dipping pay from the international and drawing their pensions being laid off has nothing to do with them as far as local folks go I have no Idea. and as far as the topic at hand goes do not forget we are in a election year and Jim and the boys want to go play they do not want to spend millions on representing their members interest they say take the easiest path save a few dues payers for a year or so claim victory and go back to living the high life.

 

[Duke787]

I was talking with my union reps, and they are saying this is not a consensual agreement, but I'm not sure why we're voting on something that our negotiators don't agree with.

 

[Buck]

I was talking with my union reps, and they are saying this is not a consensual agreement, but I'm not sure why we're voting on something that our negotiators don't agree with.

In all my years, I cannot recall the TWU leadership ever truly agreeing with any proposal, but they must save face. If the membership votes yes, then the vote is consensual without the leadership losing face.

 

[AA89]

I was just looking at my copy of the 2003 concessions packet where the union clearly endorses a yes vote because otherwise we would have the contract voided through bankruptcy. I scanned it but for the life of me I cant see how to attach a copy in this new format.

I remember too the 1995 contract packet urged a yes vote. Ed Koziatek came to a membership meeting and explained how the unions own economists were predicting a down cycle for the airlines and so the 1995 contract was the best we could expect. We all remember the billions in profit that followed.

 

[Buck]

I was just looking at my copy of the 2003 concessions packet where the union clearly endorses a yes vote because otherwise we would have the contract voided through bankruptcy. I scanned it but for the life of me I cant see how to attach a copy in this new format.

I remember too the 1995 contract packet urged a yes vote. Ed Koziatek came to a membership meeting and explained how the unions own economists were predicting a down cycle for the airlines and so the 1995 contract was the best we could expect. We all remember the billions in profit that followed.

So in 2003 the leadership stepped forward with fear in their pocket to protect the international. Now stepping forward again what is the purpose in promoting a yes vote.

 

[767 mechanic]

Tommorow is the vote yes cook out in Tulsa(The Internationals phrase). Little,Fat Don V and Drummond are going to be there. Jim Little said in his letter that he was not going to tell the membership to vote yes or no. Then why is he going to Tulsa and not to any other stations? This smells of 2003 all over again. The twu is doing nothing more than than carrying the companys water.

 

[Mr Red]

The best thing that could happen is NOBODY SHOW UP !!!! VOtE NO !!!

 

[Mr Red]

They are not welcome at line stations!

 

[Buck]

The best thing that could happen is NOBODY SHOW UP !!!! VOtE NO !!!

Yes, but I do not believe you have any idea what you are suggesting, if you have never worked at TUL.