Carty Claims AA not in trouble?

RV4

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,885
80
www.usaviation.com
Maybe this is all a big scheme to extract concessions so AA can buy up pieces af UAL soon?

Maybe hiring the high power Bankruptcy Lawyer is for guidance of purchase of others assets.

Or maybe Carty was just telling big lies back then?
 

Hopeful

Veteran
Dec 21, 2002
5,998
347
Bottom line is AA and the other carriers are going to finally put labor in its place. First, they want the government to strip us of our rights to strike and force contracts down our throats. Second, they will have a bankruptcy judge change, and in some case, void our labor agreements.

The airlines believe that since airfares are basically fares of the 60's and 70's, so should our wages.
 

Bob H

Member
Mar 8, 2003
15
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/16/2003 8:07:50 AM Hopeful wrote:

(edit)

Second, they will have a bankruptcy judge change, and in some case, void our labor agreements.

(edit)
----------------
[/blockquote]

For clarification;

A BK Judge cannot "CHANGE" a labor contract.

The BK process regarding labor contracts is "defined". For examples of the process you can read many of the public statements regarding UAL & Usair.

After BK and barring a "pre-pack", labor and management (not the judicial system) have a specified time period to **RE-NEGOTIATE* contracts.

If no negotiated agreement can be concluded between labor and management (not the judge).. THEN the company; As appears the case with UAL's plan to file as early as tomorrow.

Will file an {1113}.. In {1113} the [bold]entire[/bold] contract is voided, not just selective bits and pieces. After another specified time period, which can be used for negotiating an acceptable labor/management agreement.. The Judge will THEN determine whether or not to grant management's petition to terminate the existing RLA labor agreement and enter the company's NEW labor plan.

Note: There are 9 specific items that labor/management must comply with BEFORE the judge can terminate the RLA labor agreement.

Each labor group is independent. In other words an {1113} filing is specific for each separate labor group.

Bob H
 

JBLU007

Newbie
Dec 19, 2002
12
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/16/2003 7:33:30 AM 1AA wrote:

Back in October Don Carty made it clear that American was not in financial trouble and that we had a good balance sheet.
So what went wrong? Who at AA is running the finances? Below is the link, read the article for yourselves.

http://www.nbc5i.com/news/1715033/detail.html

[/blockquote]
Aloha AA1,

Just like TWAs management, AMRs have no idea what they are doing and have no grasp of their finacial situation. Just like when Carty said he would avoid bankrupcy. AMR will be going bankrupt very soon. Carty doesnt have a clue how to run a profitable airline in todays market. he is old school and doesnt want to learn anything new.

ALOHA, 007
 

JBLU007

Newbie
Dec 19, 2002
12
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/16/2003 8:44:48 AM Bob H wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/16/2003 8:07:50 AM Hopeful wrote:

(edit)

Second, they will have a bankruptcy judge change, and in some case, void our labor agreements.

(edit)
----------------
[/blockquote]

For clarification;

A BK Judge cannot "CHANGE" a labor contract.

Bob H

Aloha Bob H,

Just like your calls for TWAs turn around you are wrong here again. UAL & Mech did not reach an agreement so UAL went to the bankrupcy Judge and ask for THE JUDGE to change the Mech. contract and lower their pay. The Judge agreed and change the pay in the Mech contract. Thus changing their contract.

ALOHA, 007
 

Bob H

Member
Mar 8, 2003
15
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/16/2003 3:44:59 PM JBLU007 wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/16/2003 8:44:48 AM Bob H wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/16/2003 8:07:50 AM Hopeful wrote:

(edit)

Second, they will have a bankruptcy judge change, and in some case, void our labor agreements.

(edit)
----------------
[/blockquote]

For clarification;

A BK Judge cannot "CHANGE" a labor contract.

Bob H

Aloha Bob H,

Just like your calls for TWAs turn around you are wrong here again. UAL & Mech did not reach an agreement so UAL went to the bankrupcy Judge and ask for THE JUDGE to change the Mech. contract and lower their pay. The Judge agreed and change the pay in the Mech contract. Thus changing their contract.

ALOHA, 007
----------------
[/blockquote]

I found the best course of action on the old PB board was to ignore Mr. Bohn's childish antics.. I will continue to do so here.

For those who are interested in facts..

The judge did not "CHANGE" the UAL labor contracts as inaccurately stated by Mr. Bohn above.

In early January at the request of **UAL Management** The BK judge granted UAL a motion under Section 1113(e) which pertains to *emergency* changes to CBA's for the expressed purpose of keeping the doors open.

The {1113(e)} is **TEMPORARY** AND RELATES TO PAY ONLY until either a re-negotiated agreement is completed between the separate labor groups and management or the judge rules on the full {1113} based on the following 9 specific issues.

===========

A collective bargaining agreement remains in effect, and the collective bargaining process continues, after the filing of a bankruptcy petition "unless and until" the company complies with the provisions of Section 1113. Accordingly, before the court may authorize the rejection of a collective bargaining agreement the company must prove to the court that the following nine (9) requirements have been met:

1. The company must have made a proposal to the union.

2. The proposal must be based upon the most complete and reliable information available at the time of the proposal.

3. The modifications must be necessary to permit reorganization.

4. The modifications must provide that all affected parties are treated fairly and equitably.

5. The company must provide the union with such relevant information as is necessary to evaluate the proposal.

6. The company must have met with the collective bargaining representative at reasonable times subsequent to making the proposal.

7. The debtor must have negotiated with the union concerning the proposal in good faith.

8. The union must have refused to accept the proposal without good cause.

9. The balance of the equities must clearly favor rejection of the agreement.

If the court agrees that the company has met these conditions, it may authorize the rejection of the collective bargaining agreement.

Bob H
 

Hopeful

Veteran
Dec 21, 2002
5,998
347
As far as i'm concerned, when a BK judge forces a paycut on employees, that judge has changed the contract!
 

limit

Senior
Jan 3, 2003
347
18
Who is Mr. Bohn?
Is this someone's real name?

Just like Bill said: define ...........
Then again he was only doing Monika on a temporary basis.

TEMPORARY** AND RELATES TO PAY ONLY:
Duration and degree of change can not be found bellow.


change (ch³nj) v. changed, chang·ing, chang·es. --tr. 1.a. To cause to be different. b. To give a completely different form or appearance to; transform. 2. To give and receive reciprocally; interchange. 3. To exchange for or replace with another. 4.a. To lay aside, abandon, or leave for another; switch. b. To transfer from (one conveyance) to another. 5. To give or receive the equivalent of (money) in lower denominations or in foreign currency. 6. To put a fresh covering on. --intr. 1. To become different or undergo alteration. 2. To undergo transformation or transition. 3. To go from one phase to another, as the moon or the seasons. 4. To make an exchange. 5. To transfer from one conveyance to another. 6. To put on other clothing. 7. To become deeper in tone. --change n. 1. The act, process, or result of altering or modifying. 2. The replacing of one thing for another; substitution. 3. A transformation or transition from one state, condition, or phase to another. 4. Something different; variety. 5. A different or fresh set of clothing. 6. Abbr. chg. a. Money of smaller denomination given or received in exchange for money of higher denomination. b. The balance of money returned when an amount given is more than what is due. c. Coins. 7. Music. A pattern or order in which bells are rung. 8. A market or exchange where business is transacted. --phrasal verb. change off. 1. To alternate with another person in performing a task. 2. To perform two tasks at once by alternating or a single task by alternate means. --idioms. change hands. To pass from one owner to another. change (one's) mind. To reverse a previously held opinion or an earlier decision. change (one's) tune. To alter one's approach or attitude.

You are wrong on this one.
But to be fair to all, here is my version.
- It was temporarily changed.-
Gee!!
 

Bob H

Member
Mar 8, 2003
15
0
My apology if I confused the information/message I was attempting to provide.

That was: Based on current and historical cases; The *judge* does not make labor contract changes.

The *judge* approves or denies motions. In the above motion, {1113(e)} by UAL Management and within the limitations noted above.

It is because of the expected "consequences" for the AA employees that I ask and encourage you to learn about the potential of an ESOP/EO IF/after AA files chapter 11. I have provided some information in the threads I started for "AA Employee information",

For support I refer you to the following web site;


http://law.vanderbilt.edu/lawreview/vol556/miller.pdf


(an excerpt from that site with **highlights noted in asterisks**)

Thanks for taking the time to read.

Bob H

==============

2006 VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW [Vol. 55:1987

IV. OBSTACLES TO SUCCESSFUL REORGANIZATION

A. Limitations on the Bankruptcy Court’s Power Under Chapter 11, the debtor and its creditors largely determine the extent and mode of a debtor’s reorganization.

**The Bankruptcy Code was designed to give the court a limited role.**

The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 contemplated that the formulation of a plan of reorganization should be the result of negotiation among the parties holding the economic interests in the debtor. The bankruptcy judge was intended to determine cases and controversies—not to be involved in the administrative aspects of a Chapter 11 case.

**Thus, the court is not involved in the formulation of a plan of reorganization.**

Further, in prepackaged reorganizations, the bankruptcy court has little or no opportunity to influence the outcome of the case.

Although the Bankruptcy Code requires the court to assess the feasibility of a plan before it is confirmed,58 in many cases the court has only limited authority, ability, resources, and expertise to make such a determination.

**Bankruptcy judges must rely on the parties to produce proof and evidence of their contentions.**

Bankruptcy judges are not investment bankers and may not possess the financial expertise or the independent resources to determine plan feasibility. If the debtor and the creditors support a plan, and there is no objection to confirmation, it is unlikely that a bankruptcy judge will deny confirmation.

If the financial advisors for the debtor and the financial advisors for the creditors attest to a plan’s feasibility based upon complex financial models, and no one challenges the advisors’ conclusions,

****the court is all but incapable of mounting its own challenge.****

While the court may ask questions, it will not have had the opportunity to make, nor could it undertake, an independent analysis of the substantive provisions of a plan. In addition, the number of cases assigned to bankruptcy judges is a factor that precludes such a lengthy, independent analysis.59

------
 

RV4

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,885
80
www.usaviation.com
I believe AA on January 1st launched a big fare sale?

And then later added a $10 per flight surcharge for fuel.

Are you saying the $10 per flight and the Fare Sale combined left us in a deficit situation? Who would be responsible for that?

That whole scenario sounds a little suspicious for some reason.