Afa 10/18/04 Update

us10

Advanced
Sep 11, 2002
138
0
AFA US Airways MEC for October 18, 2004

Talk of a Strike

Any talk of a strike under the current circumstances at US Airways is reckless nonsense. In a normal situation, a strike (or more accurately, the threat of a strike) is designed to put economic pressure on management to agree to a settlement that is favorable to the union's members. Threatened with the economic consequences of a strike, management in a normal situation would weigh the costs of a strike against the costs of a favorable settlement. When the costs of the threatened strike outweigh the costs of a settlement, that creates leverage. We know this well because in the last 12 years we've carried out the most effective strikes in the history of the airline industry.

On a superficial level, this dynamic would seem to apply at US Airways. The threat posed by a strike is great: a strike would force the liquidation of the company. If this were a normal labor dispute against a company with the resources to pay the cost of a favorable settlement, being able to credibly threaten the company with liquidation would generate all the leverage we would need for a favorable settlement.

It's not clear what those who talk of a strike would view as a favorable settlement. No concessions? Reduced concessions? Pay raises? It is clear however, that the company does not have the financial resources for what we would normally think of as a "favorable" settlement. All the financial analysts agree that the company is very low on cash and very much at risk of liquidation. If, as it appears, the company lacks the resources to fund a favorable settlement, then such a settlement would simply force the company into liquidation. Faced with two scenarios (strike vs. unaffordable settlement) both of which result in liquidation, management will have no choice but to liquidate the company.

Leverage does not work in a vacuum. We could have all the leverage in the world (like the ability to threaten the certain destruction of the company) but it would be of no value if the cost of a settlement would have the same effect. An armed robber uses a gun to threaten the victim in order to take the victim's money. If the victim has no money, the threat is rendered useless. The robber may still kill the victim, but the robber ends up with no money.

The current situation is actually worse. The mere talk of a strike (never mind the threat of a strike, or an actual strike action) may be enough to tip the company into liquidation. If that occurs we will have, by reckless talk of a strike, denied our members the possibility of keeping their jobs, and of negotiating the best agreement possible under very difficult circumstances. The talk of a strike adds nothing, and risks everything.

There are some who would say that this analysis somehow reflects fear; that people who are against threatening to strike are somehow afraid to 'take the company on.' This attitude is simply not supported by the facts. A pointless strike (or threat of a strike) that drives the company into liquidation is not in the best interests of anyone. To rule out such an nonsensical strategy reflects only a carefully reasoned analysis of the situation we find ourselves in. AFA has struck companies before, and will do so again, without fear. But we never have and never will strike without a strategy that makes sense. That would be an invitation to disaster and we owe our members the thoughtful leadership, and reasoned strategy that will avoid such an irrevocable blunder.

Since we cannot and should not strike under the current circumstances, our focus should be on what we can do. Just because we can't strike is no reason to let the company have complete control. We have seen many times that, but for our strenuous opposition at the bargaining table, management would impose far more severe terms. We can and will continue to make a difference at the bargaining table (and in court if necessary).

We can and should continue to fight the company every step of the way when management overreaches, demanding more from us than is right or fair. We can play an important role in the survival of the airline, and the shaping of its future, and our future. We will face difficult decisions and we need to work through those decisions together.

The most important decision may be the balance between jobs and work rules. We all want to preserve jobs and to preserve work rules. But the balance between those two items will determine the quality of life for those working in the jobs that remain. Should we give up more in pay and work rules in order to preserve more jobs? Or, should we try to keep pay and work rules from falling too far, even though that may force the company to cut more jobs to make up the difference? There is no 'right' answer to these questions, but achieving the proper balance is a crucial factor in trying to preserve our careers.

Everyone is angry that management has brought this situation on the airline. They've essentially forced the company to the brink of collapse. If the company survives, we will be here long after the current management team is gone. It is imperative, therefore, that we engage in constructive efforts that will preserve our airline and our careers. No one would wish to be put in these circumstances, but this is where we find ourselves. It's counterproductive to engage in reckless talk of a strike at this point. Rather than risk the destruction of our airline, we should focus instead on finding solutions.

Perry Hayes
MEC President
Association of Flight Attendants - CWA, AFL-CIO
 
us10 said:
AFA US Airways MEC for October 18, 2004

Talk of a Strike

Any talk of a strike under the current circumstances at US Airways is reckless nonsense.


Rather than risk the destruction of our airline, we should focus instead on finding solutions.

Perry Hayes
MEC President
Association of Flight Attendants - CWA, AFL-CIO
[post="192751"][/post]​


Very refreshing and very sensible. Good luck to you all.
 
Perry,

I'm a little confused. Are you telling the Company that AFA-CWA is powerless? Is this what you want the Company to know before you sit down to negotiate? That you will now agree to anything submitted? If so, why didn't you just take the last proposal? They want more money this time.Fuel is higher. They want your members to pay for court costs of chapter 11 AND take more of a cut to pay for fuel.




You don't appear to be leading your group in an effective way. What am I missing here?



Regards

PS - I am not advocating a strike.Just curious why you are now sitting at the table without any teeth.
 
Father,

I'm not disputing the reasoning behind AFA International's letter. It does make sense, however, Perry has this delusion that we will be able to strike some kind of balance between workrules and jobs. Anyway, that is what he wants everyone to believe.

Whatever proposal is put before the f/as they will be the only ones who will determine what the job is worth to them, and if it has value now and going into the future with this company. Most folks do not determine their vote on what someone else wants or needs, they make a rational choice and vote on how thier life will be effected. He still does not have a clear definition of "self help". He some how tends to equate it with nothing but "strike"..on the brain.

For Perry, elections for MEC President is in 3 weeks. He may not even be sitting President when we take this vote. B)
 
I have a feeling your wrong!!!! Its called "common sense" You talk of a stupid strike when we are so close to the edge and other airlines are in the same boat???????????? You are way way out there now. What is your function? Do you not have enough pupils to talk to anymore in pit?
 
Hey Schumko!!!!!


Who talked about a strike???

Do you mean a "strike" like walk out" or do you mean "self help" like in picketing?

Do you know what "self help" actions are?

Perry is the only Union Rep that spoke of a STRIKE.
 
Careers ARE gone! It's just a job now. Talk of getting the best deal now is ridiculous. What could be a good deal? Management will take what they want when they want until there is nothing left. This is it. It is not ever going to get any better only worse. What is there left to fight for? Either you keep taking the crap management dishes out and hating every moment or hope for the end. At least if the end comes it will force everyone to move on and they will finally be forced to lose that fear of the outside world and see that there is life after US. If anyone thinks it will get better they are completely nuts. From here on out life at US will be one long bad trip.
 
Pitbull, your the one who continued to use words like shut it down if.... and now your trying to undermine Perry. Are your true colors shining? Frankly, i think more than just Perry will leave, it will be AFA and its presence on this property!
 
PITbull said:
Get to know him in 3 weeks cause that is all he has left.
[post="192792"][/post]​
Oh who's your OTHER CHOICE...deleted HELLO NO! Remember something..The MEC represents the ENTIRE F/A group, not just the bitter PIT f/as. WAKE UP PITBULL the co's and OUR jobs- you know money, insurance, security are on the line. This is no time to pretend we have sum silly little power. Remember Vickie Frankovich at TWA- circa 1985? Did'nt the BK judge say it all. O WAIT u were the one who believed the judge would be more reasonable. WAKE UP GIRL!!!!!!
 
NAPAUS said:
Oh who's your OTHER CHOICE...Teddy "im out of my mind" Xidas.....
[post="192875"][/post]​

NAPAUS,

Look out NAP, you have now "kicked the dawg and stirred the hornet's nest."
Can't wait to read the venom to be spewed as the Bull defends Teddy.

Lindy
 
PIT,
Get Off your high horse! Why are you SO negative all the time? Perry's letter is exactly what needs to be said at this time, and it was said well. Pittsburgh is no longer the driving force for our union. Get Over It!!
 
Sounds like a fair and balanced dose of reality. Most FA's I talk to on my 18-19 days a month feel like this, they do not like it but realize we-r-where-we-r.

The numbers of irrational folks are dwindling, and those left are just getting louder trying to compensate.

IMHO, it is long past time for AFA to get the best agreement they can, and renegotiate in the years to come.

us10 said:
AFA US Airways MEC for October 18, 2004


Everyone is angry that management has brought this situation on the airline. They've essentially forced the company to the brink of collapse. If the company survives, we will be here long after the current management team is gone. It is imperative, therefore, that we engage in constructive efforts that will preserve our airline and our careers. No one would wish to be put in these circumstances, but this is where we find ourselves. It's counterproductive to engage in reckless talk of a strike at this point. Rather than risk the destruction of our airline, we should focus instead on finding solutions.

Perry Hayes
MEC President
Association of Flight Attendants - CWA, AFL-CIO
[post="192751"][/post]​