Big question for all AA unions

[BoeingBoy]

My point was not that the court will take from the groups that ratified but upon abrogation it will not allow M&R/Stores to receive less..

That's the law in at least the 2nd Circuit, established by the Appeals Court in the Frontier bankruptcy. Each group has a chance to negotiate different concessions instead of the term sheets - think of it as Joe Blow asking if you want to share the cost of a lottery ticket and you decline so Joe buys one without you and wins...you don't get to claim part of Joe's winnings.

However, like I said before, I suspect that AA will be able to say that those who ratified concessions are giving up close enough to the same as those who didn't to withstand the "equal treatment" standard because it doesn't require equal concessions to the penny. Just look at the negotiations going on over lease/EETC rates on planes - those agreements are filed under seal as they're reached so those that are being negotiated with don't know how much others agreed to (or turned down). So it will easily result in one plane's lease/EETC rates being less than another's - where's the equality in that? The equality comes in being equally able to negotiate.

Jim

 

[Buck]

I guess the "ME TOO" clause only works in one direction
If the judge abrogates our contract we work under the original term sheet no raises no profit sharing etc. As we continue to negotiate a deal the title groups that voted yes get what we negotiate also...
Got to love it...

I have been informed that there is no relationship between the 5 TWU groups and the 2 that did not. The reference to other groups refers to the pilots, flight attendants and non union company groups.

 

[Bob Owens]

That's the law in at least the 2nd Circuit, established by the Appeals Court in the Frontier bankruptcy. Each group has a chance to negotiate different concessions instead of the term sheets - think of it as Joe Blow asking if you want to share the cost of a lottery ticket and you decline so Joe buys one without you and wins...you don't get to claim part of Joe's winnings.

However, like I said before, I suspect that AA will be able to say that those who ratified concessions are giving up close enough to the same as those who didn't to withstand the "equal treatment" standard because it doesn't require equal concessions to the penny. Just look at the negotiations going on over lease/EETC rates on planes - those agreements are filed under seal as they're reached so those that are being negotiated with don't know how much others agreed to (or turned down). So it will easily result in one plane's lease/EETC rates being less than another's - where's the equality in that? The equality comes in being equally able to negotiate.

Jim

Are lessors being told they have to let AA hold on to the planes under rates they did not agree to? Airline Unions are being told they cant strike when the court allows the company to impose new terms. Airline workers are the only creditors that are forced to continue to provide under terms they did not agree to. No other industrys workers and No other creditors are put in this spot. Where's the equality in that?

 

[BoeingBoy]

We've been around this merry-go-round before Bob. The Judge will not order you to work under terms you don't agree to just like he won't tell an aircraft lessor they have to let AA have a plane on terms the lessor doesn't agree to. The lessor is free to take the plane and lease it to someone else and you're free to take your talents and sell them to someone else. There's no difference despite how much you want there to be a difference.

Jim

 

[cf6mech]

Back to the original question posted by OP,....my opinion is after mounting pressure from creditors and unions the present bastards in charge will step down and we will emerge before this finishes out under new leadership and merge with US air.