twuer said:
Stop the Bus..I Want Off! said:
If AMFA sent everyone a letter in the mail who works for AA and told them to vote NO on our concessions package, you would have thrown it in the trash. To think this is what they did at UAL is nothing but absurd!! As close of a comparison as you can come to is that the AMFA advocates wanted the membership to look at both sides of the coin, UAL and AA. The unions at the time were already rolling over and dying. The iam did not leave the AMFA with much to work with at UAL, just like whats going to happen at AA with the twu negotiated fiasco.
Northwest has laid off people................ AMFA is in Arbitrations.
Alaskan Airlines............Head counts up under AMFAs negotiated contract.
AA........People on the street, twu..........shining their coffin.
UAL has people on layoff's...............AMFAs trying to find something in the IAM negotiated contract they can help members with.
Southwest.........Headcounts up since AMFA came on the property.
USAir...........IAM trying to fight but they don't have the scope or contract language to prevail.
I see a trend, AMFA is fighting for their members and other airlines are knocking on their door for representation. The AA/twu union is next to go out the door. Next....Fed-EX then Continental....
Here's to the twu........
Nothing more than an AA prostitute........
Cheers........
To think this is what they did at UAL is nothing but absurd!!
Oh please, everyone know that is exactly what happened at UAL. With amfa's influenced UAL went soaring into bankruptcy.
Does this not ring a bell to you Bus. . .
NO CONCESSIONS, NO CONCESSIONS, NO CONCESSIONS!!!
NOT ON OUR WATCH!!!!
Give me a break!
Below is a thread of E-mails between Jim Little, myself and others. Color editing added by me. Notice Jims promise at the end about no permanent concessions.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Little
To: Alex Garcia ; Bobby Gless ; Chuck Schalk ; Cindy Winslow ; Curtis Gentry ; Don Videtich ; Duke Hingley ; Garry Drummond ; Gary G. Peterson ; Jack Maddish ; James C. Little ; Jeff Ortegren ; Jim Brinker ; Joe Gordon ; John Conley ; John Orlando ; John Plowman ; Keno Carr ; Mark Rasco ; Mike Chiafolo ; Pat Noonan ; Paul Cassidy ; Paul McCormick ; Randy McDonald ; Rick Rodriquez ; Russ Bataglia ; Tim Gillespie ; Todd Woodward
Cc: James C. Little
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 9:02 AM
Subject: Overview of bankruptcy procedings.
Thought this would be of some assistance in explaining the process to the members.
Later!
Jim
Director's Update
Directors Update: 02-23-03
In answer to a number of members questions regarding Bankruptcy and the impact on a CBA... OVERVIEW
NORMAL ENVIRONMENT
UNDER CHAPTER 11
All current provisions can be opened, by either mutual agreement or by virtue of Sections II or VI of the Railway Labor Act (RLA) for negotiations or renegotiation of any section or issue with the company
Deal with Judge, whose primary role is to protect the creditors and the corporate entity
In the hands of the stockholders and the management who have a vested interest in the company and a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders
Initially in the hands of the Debtor in possession (current management), with the permission of the creditors and the Judge. After a period of exclusivity (180 days) anyone can propose an alternative plan of reorganization, which could be adopted with the support of the creditors committee. The group(s) or individual(s) providing Debtor-in-Possession (DIP) financing typically extract enormous control in return for the high-risk financing they are providing. This is the natural habitat for "corporate raiders"
All avenues to assure contractual compliance or adherence are available, including grievances and, if necessary for egregious behavior, injunctions or restraining orders.
All grievances and litigation is "stayed" or frozen by the Judge. There is no litigation or grievance process except before the Bankruptcy Judge.
Continue to have the potential value of the instrument or plan
Basically become worthless as common stock and linked equity instruments such as options or warrants have value only after or behind; Priority claims, Secured creditors, Unsecured creditors and then any residual monies would be distributed to common stockholders in a liquidation. More likely is a full restructuring and replacement of all equity instruments.
Vacations and similarly earned and accrued benefits remain a financial obligation to the company
All accrued employee liabilities, including wages earned to date and accrued vacations, furlough pay, etc. are considered unsecured liabilities or claims and pooled with all other unsecured creditors, with the exception that the first $2,000 of employees claims are considered priority claims and take precedence over all other claims
An obligation that is required and protected by various State and Federal laws
Employee claims are secured only to the limits of "Employee priority claims" of a maximum of $2,000 dollars. This would include wages, accrued vacation pay, grievance awards and any other monies due from the corporations. Company must receive permission from the Court to resume paying wages.
Funding compliance required by various Federal laws and would include both payments for Defined Benefit Plans and Defined Contribution Plans
Contributions would cease and resumption subject to the plan of reorganization. The PBGC gets a seat on the creditor's committee by virtue of the funding obligations and has the power to "Distress Terminate" the Plan(s) if their evaluation would show funding insufficient to cover accrued obligations to the level of the PBGC minimums.
Completely negotiable and would become part of the CBA. If in the form of equity, would become part of the capital structure of the company
None
James C. Little
Director Air Transport Division
International Administrative Vice President.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Owens
To: Jim Little ; Alex Garcia ; Bobby Gless ; Chuck Schalk ; Curtis Gentry ; Don Videtich ; Duke Hingley ; Garry Drummond ; Gary G. Peterson ; Jack Maddish ; Jeff Ortegren ; Jim Brinker ; Joe Gordon ; John Conley ; John Orlando ; John Plowman ; Keno Carr ; Mark Rasco ; Mike Chiafolo ; Pat Noonan ; Paul Cassidy ; Paul McCormick ; Randy McDonald ; Rick Rodriquez ; Russ Bataglia ; Tim Gillespie ; Todd Woodward
Cc: James C. Little
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: Overview of bankruptcy procedings.
You left out that once the contract is abrogated we are free to use self help. This is a powerful deterrent for both the Judge and the company to keep them from going too far. If the Union movement had a pair like they do in Europe then perhaps Union workers would not find themselves continually going backwards like we do. If we play by their rules we are destined to lose. But then again people earning six figures usually don't feel an urgency to revolt against injustices that are not perpetrated against them directly. If the union movement was this lethargic since its inception we would still be working 16 hrs a day, with no benefits, along side our children and parents. You are our leaders, the question is where are you leading us? The safe way to submission and slavery or the risky way to financial liberty and justice? We don't want to see the company go bankrupt but by opening our agreements we are saying that management is right, that we are the cause of the state of the industry. Spreading doom and gloom such as this without falling back on the founding principles of unionism such as the withholding of labor, is a tactic that the members should expect from the company not their union. The union should look to improve worker living standards not preserve a good business arrangement between a corporation and a representational organization. To all the Presidents out there, you can take this in and recommend that we cower before the company's threats of bankruptcy, but in two years when the industry has recovered, and your members followed your leadership and gave concessions, all they will remember is that you failed to lead.
From: Jim Little
To: Alex Garcia ; Bobby Gless ; Chuck Schalk ; Cindy Winslow ; Curtis Gentry ; Don Videtich ; Duke Hingley ; Garry Drummond ; Gary G. Peterson ; Jack Maddish ; James C. Little ; Jeff Ortegren ; Jim Brinker ; Joe Gordon ; John Conley ; John Orlando ; John Plowman ; Keno Carr ; Mark Rasco ; Mike Chiafolo ; Pat Noonan ; Paul Cassidy ; Paul McCormick ; Randy McDonald ; Rick Rodriquez ; Russ Bataglia ; Tim Gillespie ; Todd Woodward
Cc: James C. Little
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: Overview of bankruptcy procedings.
Bob,
I do not disagree in principle, and you raise a good point of adding the self help. Then on the opposite side we need to add PEB. Especially, under this darn administration. Growing up in the UK in a Union household
you already know my position on AFL-CIO action or lack of.Bob, where I disagree is that we are playing by our rules. The APA is negotiating and the APFA may be negotiating, but we are NOT. I am also not spreading doom and gloom as you put it.
I believe we need to prepare and educate our members. It is not a matter of if the company will file it is when and the timeline is rather short. What I can assure you is that this ATD administration does not take the task at hand lightly, and preservation of our members working rights is our Goal.I cannot speak for all of the Presidents.
I will also not agree to any permanent changes, as you know we have been there and done that. I remember when I took over as AA System Coordinator and meeting with the Company to discuss a wage reopener during the time when AA was at the prime earnings. I was told sorry we have an agreement in place! I have no disagreement that we can just say No that is easy, but it is not leading. When we feel strongly about something, we will lead, we will act, even if others are not prepared to join us.
As Always,
Fraternally,
Jim
As you can see from this response it is every one elses fault that we do not act, PEB, this darn administration, the AFL-CIO etc. This is a classic TWU tactic. They talk about "leadership, Solidarity and Union POwer but when the time comes to act all they can produce is excuses.
From this reply you can also see the contradiction of Jim Littles position. He sent us all a pamplet saying that the Number ONE reason for staying with the TWU is the AFL-CIO and here he is obviosly criticizing the AFL-CIO. Jim and I had prior discussions where he blasted the AFL-CIO, basically calling it a bloated do nothing beuracracy. In reality Jims charecterization was unfair, the AFL-CIO will act, but only upon the call of its members. Unlike the TWU the AFL-CIO is actually controlled by its members. Jim was counting on the fact that I would do like most people and take his word for it and not follow up. The fact is that as these guys become more and more desperate they will point blame any where they think that they can get away with, even to the point of blaming each other as I have personally witnessed. Little blames Hall, Hall blames those under him, Little etc and when all else fails they blame the members.
Jim claimed that "we need to prepare and educate our members" but all he did was give us the company's side of the story. He did not have any plan whatsoever to fight the concessions. Basically out of one side of his mouth he was saying that we are completely powerless. What kind of a position is that to take! As long as employers need our labor, and we act as one, no matter what the circumstances are, no matter who is in office, a united workforce is not powerless as Jim Little and the TWU claim, all they need is leadership with a pair of balls.
Not only does Jim just tell one side of the story but he even expands upon it. In his comment "It is not a matter of if the company will file it is when and the timeline is rather short". he made a pretty definite statement. He said that the company WILL file. So once again in his own web of lies he entraps himself. They followed this up with if we give concessions now the Judge will go easy on us in Bankruptcy. Well of course he would, we gave up more than those who went bankrupt did! When the Union sensed that they were losing the membership they even went further by saying that the company might not file for reorganization but go directly into liquidation, a preposterous statement that was nothing but a blatent attempt by the International to foster fear among the members. Clearly the International, none of whom were going to be directly effected by these massive concessions desperately wanted us to accept the most concessionary contract in the history of the labor movement.
The last highlighted statement reveals another contradiction from Little. Note that he wrote "I will also not agree to any permanent changes, as you know we have been there and done that." Ironically the statement that preceeded this was "I can not speak for all of the Presidents. In fact he did both. He signed in permanent concessions and basically spoke for all the Presidents. He did so when he signed in the "modified" agreement without further ratification.
Jims closing statement was particularly pathetic. "When we feel strongly about something, we will lead, we will act, even if others are not prepared to join us."
The question is if they did not feel strongly about losing pay, vacation, sick time, holidays, overtime, doubletime, medical coverage, layoffs, uniforms, and all sorts of other language what would they feel stongly about? Maybe if THEY were losing all those things too they would have felt differently! Maybe if the company had insisted that the Union pay the Presidents instead of the company they would have been willing to fight! Maybe if the company had decided to no longer do checkoff the union would have felt it was worth it to fight! The fact is we know that this union, the TWU gave the most mnassive concessions in the history of labor to a company that has seen a 300% increase in the value of their stock. They have taken our money and put it into the pockets of stockholders. They have consistantly sold out current members in order to get new members without having to work for them. They have made themselves unaccountable as they get for themselves what they tell us is unreasinable for us.
