Why no 1114 decision, months after hearing?

[TWU informer]

What is your best guess why Judge Lane has still not ruled on the 1114 Retirement Medical issue? Every other decision has been rendered relatively quickly, this one lingers for months on end.

 

[iluvaa]

And we are supposed to believe he is neutral. But truth is i don't think AA wanted him to rule yet for some reason. To bad the fools voted yes on a contact that tied our refund to his ruling

 

[MCI transplant]

The question in my mind is, why should a company ,who claims bankruptcy, want to strip it's retirees of benifits earned, when it has over six billion dollars $$$ in the bank? ------- Now what's wrong with this picture?

 

[Bob Owens]

The question in my mind is, why should a company ,who claims bankruptcy, want to strip it's retirees of benifits earned, when it has over six billion dollars $$$ in the bank? ------- Now what's wrong with this picture?

Why not?

Those benefits were paid for, not just earned.

The delay simply shows what a farce Judge Lane has allowed the BK process to become. If he truly had an iota of jurisprudence in him he would have thown the entire case out after the Nov 29 filing and instructed AA to not have the court fight its battles with its workers, That if they wanted to screw their employees and pay below market rate that they were on their own. But then again allowing such farces to continue keeps him employed.

It will be interesting to see where in the corporate world Judge Lane will land in a few years for his payback.

 

[MCI transplant]

Why not?

Those benefits were paid for, not just earned.

The delay simply shows what a farce Judge Lane has allowed the BK process to become. If he truly had an iota of jurisprudence in him he would have thown the entire case out after the Nov 29 filing and instructed AA to not have the court fight its battles with its workers, That if they wanted to screw their employees and pay below market rate that they were on their own. But then again allowing such farces to continue keeps him employed.

It will be interesting to see where in the corporate world Judge Lane will land in a few years for his payback.

Come on Bob! You know, and I know, "the good ol' boy club" is still alive and well!----- But could the merger be a facture in his timing? I know the merger can't happen until he makes a decision and AA exits B/K!------ Hmmm!---- This may get interesing!

 

[eolesen]

It's far more likely that items on the docket involving unsecured creditors and contracts/issues which survive the reorganization are taking a higher priority. Those all need to be resolved before the merger.

Retirees? To be blunt, they aren't that significant to the process.

But it's also a little less cut & dry of a decision, thanks in large part to Obamacare.

Why continue to subsidize retirees if they can get access to healthcare at "affordable" rates thanks to the government's takeover assistance?

Obamacare also removes the tax advantages provided to companies to provide prescription drug plans for retirees, and many major companies are considering dropping that coverage, not just airlines in bankruptcy. One estimate has S&P 500 companies facing a $4.5B hit because of this. AT&T alone says it will cost them an additional $1B to maintain prescription coverage for retirees.

Moral issues aside, if a solvent company like 3M or AT&T can jettison retiree coverage, there's no legal justification for requiring an insolvent one to do so.

I know, Bob would rather blame a crooked judge than the Administration he voted for, or the Representatives and Senators who jammed this bill thru in 2010 without even reading it first, let alone understanding all of the implications of poorly thought-out legislation.

But this is a perfect definition of "unintended consequences"... I think we may have even had this discussion back in 2010, long before the bankruptcy filing.

 

[700UW]

The judge is not impartial, his job is to ensure the company emerges chapter 11 with a successful POR and the creditors get the most return on what they are owed.

No responsibility to the employees or retirees, the whole system is corrupt.

 

[TWU informer]

It's far more likely that items on the docket involving unsecured creditors and contracts/issues which survive the reorganization are taking a higher priority. Those all need to be resolved before the merger.

Retirees? To be blunt, they aren't that significant to the process.

But it's also a little less cut & dry of a decision, thanks in large part to Obamacare.

Why continue to subsidize retirees if they can get access to healthcare at "affordable" rates thanks to the government's takeover assistance?

Obamacare also removes the tax advantages provided to companies to provide prescription drug plans for retirees, and many major companies are considering dropping that coverage, not just airlines in bankruptcy. One estimate has S&P 500 companies facing a $4.5B hit because of this. AT&T alone says it will cost them an additional $1B to maintain prescription coverage for retirees.

Moral issues aside, if a solvent company like 3M or AT&T can jettison retiree coverage, there's no legal justification for requiring an insolvent one to do so.

I know, Bob would rather blame a crooked judge than the Administration he voted for, or the Representatives and Senators who jammed this bill thru in 2010 without even reading it first, let alone understanding all of the implications of poorly thought-out legislation.

But this is a perfect definition of "unintended consequences"... I think we may have even had this discussion back in 2010, long before the bankruptcy filing.

The judge is not impartial, his job is to ensure the company emerges chapter 11 with a successful POR and the creditors get the most return on what they are owed.

No responsibility to the employees or retirees, the whole system is corrupt.

Both valid points. But doesn't change the fact that he could easily rule in favor of the company, and we move forward. I believe that TWU and AA are working together to come up with and alternate volunteer "buy-in" plan and that is the delay. Some middle ground plan that would require us to volunteer our refund to "buy-in". If they resolved it now, gave us our refund, many would spend it and not opt into the new plan.

 

[700UW]

There is a difference between AA, AT&T and 3M as at AA it is a contractual issue that AA has to provide healthcare for retirees and they are unilaterally trying to change that.

Is AT&T and 3M trying to do that to its unionized workers or non-union, big difference when you have a CBA versus being an employee at will.

This is what happened between the UAW and the big three, interesting information and a possibility.

http://www.uawtrust.org/

 

[OldGuy@AA]

Both valid points. But doesn't change the fact that he could easily rule in favor of the company, and we move forward. I believe that TWU and AA are working together to come up with and alternate volunteer "buy-in" plan and that is the delay. Some middle ground plan that would require us to volunteer our refund to "buy-in". If they resolved it now, gave us our refund, many would spend it and not opt into the new plan.

I would have to question the intelligence of anyone who would want to "Buy-in" on anything with AA due to their track record of screwing every hourly worker that ever worked for them. On another note, it is always fun to see E's spin on everything. Jacklegs like him are the ones responsible for the entire destruction of the middle class in America.

 

[Bob Owens]

It's far more likely that items on the docket involving unsecured creditors and contracts/issues which survive the reorganization are taking a higher priority. Those all need to be resolved before the merger.

Retirees? To be blunt, they aren't that significant to the process.

Moral issues aside, if a solvent company like 3M or AT&T can jettison retiree coverage, there's no legal justification for requiring an insolvent one to do so.

Well that might hold water if he hadn't heard the arguments yet, but he did, so all the higher priority stuff was heard already, now the stuff thats coming up has to do with the merger.

The fact is, as you pointed out, employers jettison retiree health coverage all the time, without going BK. Health care is not protected under ERISA and employers take advantage of that all the time. So why the delay?

I agree that its more complicated but not because of Obama care, but because of the fact that these employees paid for the coverage, so if they do cancel it they have to determine the value of what they lost and give them equity like all the other creditors, so everyone else gets less. Judge Lanes golf buddies probably wouldn't like that.Whatever the retirees get dilutes the value of what they are stealing.

Nobody has ever kept retiree coverage through BK so what excuse could he use to not grant the motion but with the caveat that since they paid for this coverage they are creditors?

The arguments were heard, all he has to do is announce his decision.

 

[Bob Owens]

Both valid points. But doesn't change the fact that he could easily rule in favor of the company, and we move forward. I believe that TWU and AA are working together to come up with and alternate volunteer "buy-in" plan and that is the delay. Some middle ground plan that would require us to volunteer our refund to "buy-in". If they resolved it now, gave us our refund, many would spend it and not opt into the new plan.

Then they can rip them off like they did to all the folks that opted in for the Supplemental Medical Plan they were selling, AA walked away with around $70 million on that deal. Seems AA is better at making money selling bogus insurance to their employees than they are at making money flying .

 

[TWU informer]

Then they can rip them off like they did to all the folks that opted in for the Supplemental Medical Plan they were selling, AA walked away with around $70 million on that deal. Seems AA is better at making money selling bogus insurance to their employees than they are at making money flying .

And along with every other insurance the TWU has negotiated away and then started selling.

 

[Bob Owens]

True, but other than getting the Insurance Company to kick back enough to pay one of the ATD staff I don't think they were as successful in making a profit from it.

 

[TWU informer]

True, but other than getting the Insurance Company to kick back enough to pay one of the ATD staff I don't think they were as successful in making a profit from it.

Maybe the profit or premium overcharges were redirected to the Democratic Party like what happened in the state of Washington with the Teachers Union that was exposed by the Evergreen Foundation. Who Knows?