AA overreached

[Super FLUF]

The pilots have the ability to kill the airline and lose their jobs.

I have no doubt we will eventually lose this battle, bu the question becomes, what will AA do after the judge grants them permission to do it? Will they go nuclear and just implement EVERYTHING? Will it be some, and resemble the LBFO? Will we have a new management team in place and ink a deal with them? Who knows.

I agree this place will melt down if they go nuclear on us. We have now been pushed to the point of "nothing to lose". Nobody wants to work here under the term sheets. Most are old enough to retire, and many have side businesses or can fall back on military careers or live off of spousal careers. For many, this would be a very tough pill to swallow, but for most AA has made the pill not so hard to swallow. Personally, I am actively applying at a couple of other airlines that are hiring and paying much much more than AA. If it works out great. If not, fight to the death with AA for a reasonable deal. (Note, not an "industry leading deal) If that doesn't pan out, my family is prepared for us to work off the wife's income alone.

Nobody wants to destroy this airline. All we are asking for is a reasonable deal. AA has tried to use the bankruptcy process to overreach and punish. They are making a grave error in assuming we will just say aw shucks and go fly the jets. Even the most milquetoast pilots I am familiar with are now applying war paint. The company shall get the union it deserves.

 

[FWAAA]

Nobody wants to destroy this airline. All we are asking for is a reasonable deal. AA has tried to use the bankruptcy process to overreach and punish. They are making a grave error in assuming we will just say aw shucks and go fly the jets. Even the most milquetoast pilots I am familiar with are now applying war paint. The company shall get the union it deserves.

Honest question for you: Is it the 17% cost reduction that you find unreasonable or is it the particulars that could be re-arranged to result in a "reasonable" contract that reduces pilot costs by 17%?

Reason I ask is that except for the two fantasy demands by AA in the term sheet (unlimited codeshares and unlimited furlough potential), the Judge just ruled that everything else in the 20% term sheet is reasonable. If it wasn't reasonable, the Judge would have said so, like he did with the codesharing and furlough issues.

I realize that you probably couldn't care less what the judge thinks is "reasonable," but he isn't management and he isn't a pilot - he's an outside neutral who has invested more in this case than many other people.

If "reasonable" just requires re-arranging things to get to a 17% reduction, then there's hope. But if "reasonable" means something like 10% or smaller, then might as well shut it down.

 

[eolesen]

Playing things out way further, let's assume there's an impasse, and a PEB is called.

If the judge found this reasonable, who in their right mind would expect differently from a PEB?...

I suspect the truth is that NMB also viewed the company's progress with all three unions as reasonable, but that won't ever be documented...

 

[Jacobin777]

Bob, you are absoloutely correct.

The pilots have the ability to kill the airline and lose their jobs.

It will be interesting seeing the outcome of this.

Just as I've been stating for a while, its a shame a few thousand people have the ability to "ruin it" for all of the other hard working people at AA.

 

[Super FLUF]

Is it the 17% cost reduction that you find unreasonable or is it the particulars that could be re-arranged to result in a "reasonable" contract that reduces pilot costs by 17%?

1. The 17% cost reduction is based upon AA management's numbers. Things that AA placed a SUBSTANTIAL monetary value on they now miraculously valued at $0. This was on multiple items that added into the BILLIONS of dollars. The items that they did monetize were all monetized LESS than AA's previous estimates. The cost reduction is WAY, WAY beyond 17%.

2. The LBFO did not have complete contractual language, making this a "fill in the blank" contract for AA management. If you were going to sign up for Dish network for your TV, and the contract was one sentence that said "I agree to pay for Dish network TV service for a rate and contract duration to be determined later", would you sign the document? That is for TV service. We are being asked to sign on to a document that controls our careers and livelihood. No thanks.

3. Many of the key items (pay and quality of life issues) we well BELOW what other bankrupt carriers have or had, making the "industry average" clause laughable.



Like I said before, let me make a powerpoint presentation and I will be able to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that you make more money and work less than any other of your peers in the industry. It is a phony presentation for a rigged game.

I saw what our negotiators proposed and it was nothing more than an averaging of the bankrupt carriers contracts. Many in our ranks were up in arms that the union would propose such drastic cuts but they were industry average. What AA proposed went way, way beyond this threshold.

 

[WorldTraveler]

The difference between AA and Eastern, Pan Am, and others is that AA is in relatively decent financial shape right now and has a number of valuable key industry assets.

It is hard to know what the APA is thinking - apparently the TWU and APFA are not at the same point - but the pilots may very well believe that the cost of ending up on the bottom of the industry is too high compared with the risk that they might have to go to work for another airline or walk away from the industry.

There are enough AA employees, including pilots, who have not accepted being labeled as part of a failed carrier for which you have no choice but to accept bottom of the barrel wages in order to keep the airline alive - and then history shows that isn't for long.

Given that the BK judge basically said that AA overreached even on a couple items, it only adds to the perception that AA is attempting to gouge its employees via the BK process. Despite the fact that it is all borrowed money, they will look to the $5 or 6 billion AMR has as evidence.

Compound this with the fact that AA is restructuring while other carriers are passing out pay raises and the chance of AA convincing many AA employees that givebacks are really necessary is very difficult.

That is just the difficult AA has in dragging out its restructuring process over 10 years and in trying to act on the one hand like a top tier airline but on the other in a completely different manner.

I will dramatically revise my estimate of AA's ability to emerge as a standalone carrier downward if the pilot's contract is terminated and even lower if both the pilot and FA contracts are terminated.

 

[Ifly2]

Just as I've been stating for a while, its a shame a few thousand people have the ability to "ruin it" for all of the other hard working people at AA.

It is a shame...

Those "few", residing in nice corner offices at centreport, who are responsible for "ruining" AA, did so deliberately. For nine years they wasted a golden opportunity when they had BK contracts, without the BK, and, at least initially, the employees totally engaged in saving the airline.

They chose to concentrate thier efforts at beating labor out of the dollars to pay themselves hugely for failure, while waiting for other airlines to go out of business, rather than running an airline and competing.

They blew it.

It is even more of a shame that, even after Lorenzo blatantly used BK to destroy labor at CAL, the protections against that being done again - Section 1113, are so watered down and business friendly that they serve as nothing more than mildly inconvenient hoops to jump through. Besides, of course, being mechanisms for enriching more lawyers.

Just because some (you? do you even work here? ) are willing to
'lie back and enjoy it", or to just hand the bully thier lunch money without a fight, doesn't mean everyone should.

Good day,

 

[Captain Reality]

You call just voting no-fighting? When I see "us" pilot's out there with picket sign in one hand and a baseball bat in the other,then you can call it fighting back.

 

[Ifly2]

just gettin' warmed up...

 

[Overspeed]

Thats what you dont seem to be hearing, we would accept parity with UA or DL, AA is asking us to accept onerous terms that nobody ever agreed to.

That's where you overreach. Parity is not the issue, the total cost of the contract is. APA pilots may not be the lowest paid but they are definitely in the lower tier. If AA is stating they need 20% cost reduction then it can be done by either jobs, wages, benefits, or work rules. The current CBA that was just ratified achieves the cost reductions in M&R with the language in outsourcing, work rules, and pay. You have to trade one for the other and if you want UA wages then you need to give UA outsourcing which is all AO outsourced. Want DL wages the you also need to outsource all AO. You just don't get it Bob unless your goal was to have Judge Lane do (abrogate and have most of AO outsourced) that you couldn't through negotiations. Of course you can circulate AMFA/AMP cards and try their way (NW, WN, AS, and UA).

 

[Overspeed]

We all know what the appointed, unaccountable ones in the international will say. "You voted yes!"

Now, the failed contract in 2010 was peddled as the world will end if you vote no. The membership voted no the world did not end.

The first t/a was peddled as if you vote no the judge will screw you worse. The membership voted no and we got a reshuffled t/a.

The second t/a was peddled as if you vote no the judge will screw you worse. There were 48 votes that swung the vote to a yes and everyone in M&E will pay the price for that cowardice as well as the rest of the industry.

The pilots voted no and the judge screwed them worse. OH! WAIT!!! The twu doesn't represent the pilots! They have a CRAFT and DEMOCRATIC union! The membership voted no and the judge told the company to renegotiate.

Hey, hewitt, don, bobby, gary! This this new developement kinda makes you look inept doesn't it? It also makes the alias loving, yes voting cowardly twu supporters on this web site look very stupid.

Ken you need to take your meds. The Judge specifically gave AA a road map to screw them and that has never been done before. The decision states that AA cannot ask for unlimited RIFs because the current agreement provides for up to 2,000 RIFs and that meets AA's need currently to RIF 400 now. The unlimited code sharing has to be pulled but since the ASM cap is unlimited under the term sheet they can move flying to AE whenever they want.

The judge affirmed AA's arguments in court in the decision and that labor costs are too high. So our arguments in court did not sway Judge Lane and we would have most certainly had more overhaul work outsourced. Voting yes did reduce the amount of RIFs. The APA did not win. Read the APFA letter today they know that if they vote down their LBFO they will get screwed as well. Face it Ken, the vote no strategy was BS yet now you get to puff out your chest and say that we don't know and you know what? I am glad we don't know for sure that we would have gotten screwed.

Go scrounge so more bust money from the ARSA or AA Corporate and sell out the memory of Charles Taylor. It's what you are good at, selling out and running away.

 

[Overspeed]

OK it doesnt force them (where in the quote does it say force?) but they have to change the term sheet and resubmit if they want abrogation, so what would be imposed is pretty much what they rejected, which is an improvement over the term sheet, but if they had accepted it they would be stuck with it for six years. In other words the deal that they impose while negotiations continue is not going to be as bad as the term sheet. They will go into abrogation with 95% of their guys having furlogh protection while we agreed to a six year deal with no system protection.

This was a gain for the pilots.

20%. Don, we went over this already, so you are saying that next year the Delta pilots will be making 20% more than AA's pilots are now, not including any increases they may negotiate in between, while we are making 20% less than what UAL mechanics are NOW, not next year, NOW and they start negotiations in September.

No it was a loss for the APA. Lane stated the unlimited provision cannot be implemented but the current language allows for RIFs of 2,000 and the Company is targeting 400. If you call unlimited to 2,000 I guess that's a big win.

Only the unlimited code share and unlimited RIFs cannot be implemented yet everything else can. That means all the new pay bands and no ASM cap can. That's not a win Bob/Gary/Ken/Chuck/Dave.

Bob, maybe you should not have told us to vote no on a deal that would have paid all of us more than UA. You gave everyone bad advice and now we are suffering for it and you are blaming Don? Uh, no. You own this Bob, all of it. BK was not a scare tactic. Look at the pay bands on the APA website, on NBs they will be near the bottom. I don't know what discussion that you had with Don but I am sure you spanked you and that's why you chose to spout your nonsense here on the internet away from people that can point out your inaccuracies. Face Bob, the TA has passed and now you are left to whine about how your grandiose plans to screw overhaul over will have to be postponed.

And I am most certainly not Don but nice try. Keep guessing though.

 

[Buck]

Reality Check is there something wrong with your eyesight?

 

[riceweevil]

Just as I've been stating for a while, its a shame a few thousand people have the ability to "ruin it" for all of the other hard working people at AA.

Yeah, a few thousand people on Amon Carter BLVD who are called AA executives have "ruined it" for the workforce at AA. You don't even have a clue if you think the APA members taking a possible job action against AA mangement is the problem at AA. Keep rolling over for management and see where that gets you.

 

[DNTULSA]

Ken you need to take your meds. The Judge specifically gave AA a road map to screw them and that has never been done before. The decision states that AA cannot ask for unlimited RIFs because the current agreement provides for up to 2,000 RIFs and that meets AA's need currently to RIF 400 now. The unlimited code sharing has to be pulled but since the ASM cap is unlimited under the term sheet they can move flying to AE whenever they want.

The judge affirmed AA's arguments in court in the decision and that labor costs are too high. So our arguments in court did not sway Judge Lane and we would have most certainly had more overhaul work outsourced. Voting yes did reduce the amount of RIFs. The APA did not win. Read the APFA letter today they know that if they vote down their LBFO they will get screwed as well. Face it Ken, the vote no strategy was BS yet now you get to puff out your chest and say that we don't know and you know what? I am glad we don't know for sure that we would have gotten screwed.

Go scrounge so more bust money from the ARSA or AA Corporate and sell out the memory of Charles Taylor. It's what you are good at, selling out and running away.

overspeed,

you remind me of a book I once read "Doctor Heckel and Mister Snyde"!