A promise to the NO voters !

flyonthewall

Member
Aug 19, 2002
56
0
www.usaviation.com
If one group believes that by voting no they will get a free ride, they may have to rethink that concept. Think about this: Assume we get 3 out of 4 ratifying. The remaining group will face the bankruptcy court and the judge would definitely rule in favor of the company. The judge is not about to allow one group to get a free ride when everyone else is sacrificing so much. Even though there is this so called 1113 protection, if the choice is between liquidation or having the judge save the airline, what do you think is going to happen?
1. The airline industry is in an unprecedented depression.
2. Unfortunately, the tragic plane crash will have some adverse impact on bookings. Doesn't anyone remember what happened to us back in the mid-90s when we had the series of incidents?
3. The best options are unemployment insurance, Home Depot, Walmart or some other similar position. None of them pay fleet or CWA wages or benefits, even after the cuts. Even the jobs that pay $13 bucks hour outside the industry, doesn't offer the flight and vacation benefits. Remember, that each employee group will participate in the profit sharing plan. This is a WIN-WIN situation for every employee.
4. Do you want to be unemployed when we go to war with Iraq, which certainly appears inevitable? A 5% reduction in salary is much better than being without a job. A war will Iraq could have an adverse reaction towards many industries and occupations.
The grass is never greener on the other side. People need to get smart very quickly, before it's too late. It's okay to be angry as long as you ultimately think rationally!
This is not a threat, but just stating the hard facts that face each employee. For the employees who want to gamble with Judge Mitchell, go ahead, but I PROMISE that your group will lose and the cuts COULD be deeper. Hopefully the rational minds will prevail on Friday.
 

oldiebutgoody

Veteran
Aug 23, 2002
2,627
945
www.usaviation.com
[BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/9/2003 6:21:52 PM Tim Nelson wrote: [BR][BR]I agree with you that management wants every t/a ratified and that liquidation is not in the forefront.[BR]If by some way US AIRWAYS can get the judge to establish a first in chapter 11 by throwing out a contract then it will be a terrible blow to investors. Investors want signed contracts, not work forces that are free to resort to legal "self helps" at any time. [BR]Volitility is not in the best interest of the company. A more reasonable and almost always historical conclusion would put the company and the IAM at the negotiating table to hammer out the issues.[BR]Employees like me, management, and the union all want a fair deal.[BR][BR]regards,[BR][BR]Tim Nelson[BR]IAM Local Chairman 1487[BR]215-440-6392----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]Any group that participates in "self-help" in this environment would be committing suicide. As many unemployed and underemployed people that could be used to "contract out" the work that are available right now U would have no trouble replacing anybody. Remember, it IS LEGAL for the company to hire replacement workers. If your jobs go away (and many would) then recalls would be SLOW, maybe nonexistent. Anybody thinking that an 1113 letter will protect their positions in front of the judge is WAY misinformed. A lot of firsts have occurred in the past year and a half, and I would bet money that the precedent of overturning an 1113 letter will be one real soon if these are voted down. You're right, I'll bet with all the good effort that management will go to the judge before liquidation, but I'll bet you take way bigger hits from the judge when your entire contract is thrown out. Then, no seniority, no benefits, no severance, NADA! Not saying it WILL happen, just saying it's a strong possibility! Also, then maybe everybody makes express pay, not just the folks at express stations!
 

Tim Nelson

Veteran
Jan 5, 2003
10,919
4,871
Bartlett
www.usaviation.com
I agree with you that management wants every t/a ratified and that liquidation is not in the forefront.
If by some way US AIRWAYS can get the judge to establish a first in chapter 11 by throwing out a contract then it will be a terrible blow to investors. Investors want signed contracts, not work forces that are free to resort to legal "self helps" at any time.
Volitility is not in the best interest of the company. A more reasonable and almost always historical conclusion would put the company and the IAM at the negotiating table to hammer out the issues.
Employees like me, management, and the union all want a fair deal.

regards,

Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman 1487
215-440-6392
 

iamagent

Newbie
Nov 27, 2002
4
0
www.usaviation.com
I for one don't post that often, I usually just read. But it seems that everyone has already decided how they are going to vote. Most are not going to change their point of views now, later or ever. It doesn't matter what you vote as long as you vote. All Union paying members have a right to voice there opinion by voting "for" or "against" the new proposals. Life will continue to go on either way, you might just have to adjust your lifestyle temporarily until you get back on your feet. Human's are a victim of complacency. Once we get comfortable with what we are doing, we are reluctant to change. It is an understandable trait but a downfall of our society. This country as a whole bases whether or not we've suceeded in life by how much money and materialistic items we have accrued. Change is sometimes a good thing and is inevitable. Some of you would be suprised with the things you'd accompish if forced too. Some of those changes might also be better in the long run. I just hope that either way, everyone comes to an informed decision and vote's what they feel is right for them. No one else has the right to tell you how to vote, why to vote and the consequances of such a vote. Truth be told, NO ONE has a clue what will happen either way. And to say any different is speculation, which we already have enough of in this country with CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC and FOX news. Good luck in the future to all who vote.......
 

autofixer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,804
241
www.usaviation.com
jobs.....

If you make your own way and own business--even if you are making far less money than your are at U, It is 1000 times better. To heck with the "job market", make your own job! My motto is, If I screw it up it is my fault, there is no-one else to blame. It all depend on if you are willing to take responsibility for yourself. The end of U is not the end of YOU.

If U tanks this year there are other things to do out there. True, the money may not be as good or even half. But the rewards can be much greater. More time with family...your wife can work with you...or your kids can work with you. Again, the end of U is not the end of YOU. Good luck tomorrow!
 

diogenes

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
2,515
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/9/2003 8:54:39 PM chipmunn wrote:

CCY, I agree with your comment of “The management team desires that ever union will ratify their T/A.” I also believe you’re correct that the “last course of action would be liquidation.”

Fly is right when he said, “The judge is not about to allow one group to get a free ride when everyone else is sacrificing so much. Even though there is this so called ‘1113 protection,’ if the choice is between liquidation or having the judge save the airline, what do you think is going to happen?”

If any union fails to ratify, it could get very interesting next week. Cav is right with the job market so tight, the current TA’s, regardless of how bad they are, the concessionaire contracts offer better jobs than what’s available from other sources.

Chip
----------------
[/blockquote]
-----------------------------------------------------------

What I'm getting from this is the 1113 protections that many on this board touted as a giantkiller in the last round of concessions is not worh the ink it took to write it. This implies the company and the unions mislead us with regards to the protections the 1113 letters provided.

What would stop them from misleading us again?

Or am I missing something?
 
C

chipmunn

Guest
CCY, I agree with your comment of “The management team desires that ever union will ratify their T/A.†I also believe you’re correct that the “last course of action would be liquidation.â€

Fly is right when he said, “The judge is not about to allow one group to get a free ride when everyone else is sacrificing so much. Even though there is this so called ‘1113 protection,’ if the choice is between liquidation or having the judge save the airline, what do you think is going to happen?â€

If any union fails to ratify, it could get very interesting next week. Cav is right with the job market so tight, the current TA’s, regardless of how bad they are, the concessionaire contracts offer better jobs than what’s available from other sources.

Chip
 

Res

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
361
1
www.usaviation.com
I agree, the judge will not let one group get a free ride..In CWAs case, each job classification and location will influence each vote. It sad both reservations and ATO's are group together when each group has such different needs that need to be addressed. Everyone of us wants the company to survive, and grow stronger although a yes vote for some may mean voting yourself or a fellow coworker out of a job. I still believe the CWA vote will be a strong yes vote.
 

deltawatch

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
887
0
www.usaviation.com
Most CWA members do not have a problem giving the company the dollar amount they've ask for, we object to open ended language that allows the company to eliminate jobs by allowing express employees to work mainline flights. We want to know were our reservations work is going in the future and to be able to negotiate for the work. The company went for the jugular in this TA and thought we were to stupid to realize it. This is not about a group not wanting to pitching in, we love this company. We just want to be treated fairly. I bet many posting on this board, especially ALPA members have no idea how the current language could and would have been used against us.

Last I heard the nay’s have it.
 
C

chipmunn

Guest
In the UAL vs. IAM case, today Judge Wedoff agreed with the airline that changes to the IAM's collective bargaining agreements were "essential, at the present time, to continue United Air Lines Inc.'s business and to avoid irreparable damage to its estate."

If any US union rejects their TA, the precedent has now been set for court imposed changes. In fact, US management could seek deeper cuts, terminate pensions, or liquidate. At this point, from Bill Freiberger's and the TWU attorney's comments posted on this board, with the UAL vs. IAM decision it wouldn't surprise me to see the company take the funds planned for IAM/AFA pension restoration and use them to help fund the pilots retirement plan, and seek a S.1113 hearing to impose contract changes, if either union with a defined benefit retirement plan or the CWA fail to ratify their TA's.

Chip
 

deltawatch

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
887
0
www.usaviation.com
Chip said: "it wouldn't surprise me to see the company take the funds planned for IAM/AFA pension restoration and use them to help fund the pilots retirement plan, and seek a S.1113 hearing to impose contract changes, if either union with a defined benefit retirement plan or the CWA fail to ratify their TA's".

Dear Judge, Now Chip wants you to use IAM, AFA and CWA money to fund his pension. But your honor, we (CWA) have already given him our retirement several years ago. Whether or not this company makes it sir we plan to retire on Social Security if it's still available when we reach 75!
 

insp89

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,286
6
CLT
Visit site
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/10/2003 9:27:13 AM chipmunn wrote:
[P]In the UAL vs. IAM case, today Judge Wedoff agreed with the airline that changes to the IAM's collective bargaining agreements were "essential, at the present time, to continue United Air Lines Inc.'s business and to avoid irreparable damage to its estate."[BR][BR]If any US union rejects their TA, the precedent has now been set for court imposed changes. In fact, US management could seek deeper cuts, terminate pensions, or liquidate. At this point, from Bill Freiberger's and the TWU attorney's comments posted on this board, with the UAL vs. IAM decision it wouldn't surprise me to see the company take the funds planned for IAM/AFA pension restoration and use them to help fund the pilots retirement plan, and seek a S.1113 hearing to impose contract changes, if either union with a defined benefit retirement plan or the CWA fail to ratify their TA's.[BR][BR]Chip [/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P] Chip, What exactly is your intention on posting such nonsense about the pension plans ?? Are you attempting to widen the gulf even further between the pilots and other workers on the property ?? Please remember,, after all this mess is behind us,, We STILL have to work together!!!! And you my friend,, are doing nothing but driving the wedge even further..
 

W:EXCH:INVOL

Advanced
Aug 20, 2002
171
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/10/2003 10:27:54 AM deltawatch wrote:

Chip said: "it wouldn't surprise me to see the company take the funds planned for IAM/AFA pension restoration and use them to help fund the pilots retirement plan, and seek a S.1113 hearing to impose contract changes, if either union with a defined benefit retirement plan or the CWA fail to ratify their TA's".

Dear Judge, Now Chip wants you to use IAM, AFA and CWA money to fund his pension. But your honor, we (CWA) have already given him our retirement several years ago. Whether or not this company makes it sir we plan to retire on Social Security if it's still available when we reach 75!

----------------
[/blockquote]
According to another thread, Chip says, "That is not what I said or implied."

?

INVOL
 

insp89

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,286
6
CLT
Visit site
[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/11/2003 1:22:26 PM W:EXCH:INVOL wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/10/2003 10:27:54 AM deltawatch wrote:

Chip said: "it wouldn't surprise me to see the company take the funds planned for IAM/AFA pension restoration and use them to help fund the pilots retirement plan, and seek a S.1113 hearing to impose contract changes, if either union with a defined benefit retirement plan or the CWA fail to ratify their TA's".

Dear Judge, Now Chip wants you to use IAM, AFA and CWA money to fund his pension. But your honor, we (CWA) have already given him our retirement several years ago. Whether or not this company makes it sir we plan to retire on Social Security if it's still available when we reach 75!

----------------
[/blockquote]
According to another thread, Chip says, "That is not what I said or implied."

?

INVOL
----------------
[/blockquote]
Chip,, Now that everyone voted in ROUND 2 concessions, Do you still believe your statement concerning the pensions ?