Closing Arguments

[RUKDNME]

Jack Butler Committee of Unsecured Creditors

"I'm going to close on one other point.
The form of the order that your Honor
enters, if your Honor grants relief we
think should be very different than the
order that was proffered by the debtors.
First the committee believes it
should authorize the debtors to
reject the contracts if that's what
your Honor finds, but not directed
at that moment in time. There's a
distinction there and it's been
true to other cases, because having
the authority but not the direction
to immediately abrogate the
contracts provides and oftentimes
enhances continued negotiations
between the labor organizations and
the debtors, which is really what
this all rolls back to, all roads
lead there.
Second, we absolutely believe
a portion of the order that
suggests that your Honor ought to
approve or ratify or in any way
weigh in on what is to be imposed
by the debtors should be eradicated
from the order, it has no place in
the order, it's not what 1113 asks
the court to do."

 

[tuljetmech]

So he thinks that the unions will be more willing to negotiate if our contracts are abrogated or, it would be in the debtors best intrest to start over from 0

 

[Bob Owens]

So he thinks that the unions will be more willing to negotiate if our contracts are abrogated or, it would be in the debtors best intrest to start over from 0

There was more to the arguement. He used the movie War Games in an analogy. Saying that where we are headed if they abrogate is into a game were nobody wins.

 

[Overspeed]

There was more to the arguement. He used the movie War Games in an analogy. Saying that where we are headed if they abrogate is into a game were nobody wins.

Which is why he recommended a judge to drive home a deal. I strongly suspect, even over your objections, that another deal is coming and will be very similar to the 4/26 deal. You will recommend to vote no again because a better deal is coming even though Judge Peck will mostly likely inform you guys that abrogation is not the way to go and yes something similar to the 3/22 term sheet will be implemented shortly thereafter. As 700UW has stated, the term of the new deal, voted in or not will most likely be six years in length.

Of course we can speculate ad infinitum however we will both know for sure June 22nd and the argument will be moot.

 

[TWU informer]

Which is why he recommended a judge to drive home a deal. I strongly suspect, even over your objections, that another deal is coming and will be very similar to the 4/26 deal. You will recommend to vote no again because a better deal is coming even though Judge Peck will mostly likely inform you guys that abrogation is not the way to go and yes something similar to the 3/22 term sheet will be implemented shortly thereafter. As 700UW has stated, the term of the new deal, voted in or not will most likely be six years in length.

Of course we can speculate ad infinitum however we will both know for sure June 22nd and the argument will be moot.

FEAR!

 

[olderguyAMT]

Check it out. Transcripts of court discussions at the Flight Attendants website, apfa.org

Once again we have to go to other union for information. Why? Oh, we know the answer to that.

In the closing arguments, the judge seems to rely a lot more on the co. atty.Gallagher to help his understanding of the issues. Is this because of the courts bias ?? Can we predict the judges decision about abrogation based on his questions in court?
Can we read him like an open book, or......is he really unpredictable?

 

[aapitbull]

Which is why he recommended a judge to drive home a deal. I strongly suspect, even over your objections, that another deal is coming and will be very similar to the 4/26 deal. You will recommend to vote no again because a better deal is coming even though Judge Peck will mostly likely inform you guys that abrogation is not the way to go and yes something similar to the 3/22 term sheet will be implemented shortly thereafter. As 700UW has stated, the term of the new deal, voted in or not will most likely be six years in length.

Of course we can speculate ad infinitum however we will both know for sure June 22nd and the argument will be moot.

You are a disgrace, men died fighting for the right to unionize the middle class was built by those who dared to challenge the status quo all you can do is spread fear and talk about the odds against us, yes there is risk in this direction but the fact is if we fold or fail it's time to look for a job.There is life after AA just like there was after Pan Am, Eastern, and yes Northwest grow a pair and quit your whining.

GO AMFA!!

By the way it is time for the law to change in our favor and the only way that happens is if we say NO MORE.

 

[TWU informer]

FEAR IS A LIAR!

 

[TWU informer]

Which is why he recommended a judge to drive home a deal. I strongly suspect, even over your objections, that another deal is coming and will be very similar to the 4/26 deal. You will recommend to vote no again because a better deal is coming even though Judge Peck will mostly likely inform you guys that abrogation is not the way to go and yes something similar to the 3/22 term sheet will be implemented shortly thereafter. As 700UW has stated, the term of the new deal, voted in or not will most likely be six years in length.

Of course we can speculate ad infinitum however we will both know for sure June 22nd and the argument will be moot.

Well I will go ahead and get it started now then, since you are convinced we will face another FEAR FACTOR ballot.

VOTE NO!!

 

[RUKDNME]

You are a disgrace, men died fighting for the right to unionize the middle class was built by those who dared to challenge the status quo all you can do is spread fear and talk about the odds against us, yes there is risk in this direction but the fact is if we fold or fail it's time to look for a job.There is life after AA just like there was after Pan Am, Eastern, and yes Northwest grow a pair and quit your whining.

GO AMFA!!

By the way it is time for the law to change in our favor and the only way that happens is if we say NO MORE.

+1
.
GO AMFA!!!!!

 

[Bob Owens]

Which is why he recommended a judge to drive home a deal. I strongly suspect, even over your objections, that another deal is coming and will be very similar to the 4/26 deal. You will recommend to vote no again because a better deal is coming even though Judge Peck will mostly likely inform you guys that abrogation is not the way to go and yes something similar to the 3/22 term sheet will be implemented shortly thereafter. As 700UW has stated, the term of the new deal, voted in or not will most likely be six years in length.

Of course we can speculate ad infinitum however we will both know for sure June 22nd and the argument will be moot.

The Judge recommended we allow a Judge to mediate. If another deal comes back like 4/26 then we must reject it again.

BK or not there is no reason why we should acceopt a deal that does not bring us up among our peers. We should not drive down the standards again.

Please explain your reasoning on the legal arguement that would support your claim that if the Judge abrogates the contract that the company could impose a six year deal on us. The fact is there is no term, negotiations continue.

Now lets look at abrogation. We have been told that we should fear abrogation. That if the deal gets abrogated that there is nothing we can do and must accept the companies terms and we will languish in sect 6 forever. Well I would hope that the leadership of the Union, in fact the entire AFL-CIO would step up and challenge this, after all isnt that why we pay dues and some of those dues go to the AFL-CIO?

If you are a Rail worker under the RLA, Sect 1167 of C-11 ststes that your contract can not be abrogated. PERIOD, they must go through Sect 6. If you are a worker under the NLRA, which covers the rest of private sector workers who are not covered under the RLA they can abrogate but the union is free to strike. Abrogation is merely a shortcut to opening the contract.

So for the rest of the private sector workers in this country you either are held to status quo until both sides are released to self help such as under the RLA or both sides are released, NLRA. Airline workers however are held to an arbitrarily different standard. No other creditor is held to the same standard and each and every party is given the right to defend their interests EXCEPT airline workers. Its not the abrogation that I object to, its the position the court is taking where they release the company from its obligations under the contract but hold airline workers accountable. Its as if in the arena of collective bargaining the court is throwing us into the ring but tying our hands behind our backs. Allowing the company to throw their punches but legally prohibiting us from hitting back. Clearly its not a fair contest. Clearly we are not being treated fairly by the courts. Unions have to take the position that regardless of what the courts declared if they hit us we will hit back. If our terms are altered as described in the RLA we will respond as the RLA says we can. We must make this a civil rights issue. If airlines are crucial to the economy then fine, extend 1167 to cover airline workers, but they better do it before June 22. Otherwise we are morally justified, and ethically compelled to defend our interests just as every other worker and every other creditor can. If the courts turn around and tell the Oil companies that they are ripping us their contracts with AA and they have to provide fuel to AA at below 2003 prices and if the rip up the leases and tell the airports that they have to accept payments for rents and landing fees at below 2003 prices because its more important for AA to post profits than it is to allow the market to set prices then they may be able to justify what they are saying to Airline workers, mind you they dont say that to rail workers or the Trck Drivers at Hostess or any other workers in this country.

 

[Overspeed]

The Judge recommended we allow a Judge to mediate. If another deal comes back like 4/26 then we must reject it again.

BK or not there is no reason why we should acceopt a deal that does not bring us up among our peers. We should not drive down the standards again.

Please explain your reasoning on the legal arguement that would support your claim that if the Judge abrogates the contract that the company could impose a six year deal on us. The fact is there is no term, negotiations continue.

Now lets look at abrogation. We have been told that we should fear abrogation. That if the deal gets abrogated that there is nothing we can do and must accept the companies terms and we will languish in sect 6 forever. Well I would hope that the leadership of the Union, in fact the entire AFL-CIO would step up and challenge this, after all isnt that why we pay dues and some of those dues go to the AFL-CIO?

If you are a Rail worker under the RLA, Sect 1167 of C-11 ststes that your contract can not be abrogated. PERIOD, they must go through Sect 6. If you are a worker under the NLRA, which covers the rest of private sector workers who are not covered under the RLA they can abrogate but the union is free to strike. Abrogation is merely a shortcut to opening the contract.

So for the rest of the private sector workers in this country you either are held to status quo until both sides are released to self help such as under the RLA or both sides are released, NLRA. Airline workers however are held to an arbitrarily different standard. No other creditor is held to the same standard and each and every party is given the right to defend their interests EXCEPT airline workers. Its not the abrogation that I object to, its the position the court is taking where they release the company from its obligations under the contract but hold airline workers accountable. Its as if in the arena of collective bargaining the court is throwing us into the ring but tying our hands behind our backs. Allowing the company to throw their punches but legally prohibiting us from hitting back. Clearly its not a fair contest. Clearly we are not being treated fairly by the courts. Unions have to take the position that regardless of what the courts declared if they hit us we will hit back. If our terms are altered as described in the RLA we will respond as the RLA says we can. We must make this a civil rights issue. If airlines are crucial to the economy then fine, extend 1167 to cover airline workers, but they better do it before June 22. Otherwise we are morally justified, and ethically compelled to defend our interests just as every other worker and every other creditor can. If the courts turn around and tell the Oil companies that they are ripping us their contracts with AA and they have to provide fuel to AA at below 2003 prices and if the rip up the leases and tell the airports that they have to accept payments for rents and landing fees at below 2003 prices because its more important for AA to post profits than it is to allow the market to set prices then they may be able to justify what they are saying to Airline workers, mind you they dont say that to rail workers or the Trck Drivers at Hostess or any other workers in this country.

Then we reject and see what happens. I suspect it will not be much different than those that have gone before us.

You don't get raises in 1113c proceedings. I have not read about anyone getting a raise through 1113c and/or abrogation. The new UA the US deal that raises their pay came more than six years after BK.

Did you discuss your legal arguments with Ms Levine? I am sure in all her years of practicing law she has never considered these angles that the Local 562 President has and your masterful interpretation of BK law.

 

[TWU informer]

Then we reject and see what happens. I suspect it will not be much different than those that have gone before us.

You don't get raises in 1113c proceedings. I have not read about anyone getting a raise through 1113c and/or abrogation. The new UA the US deal that raises their pay came more than six years after BK.

Did you discuss your legal arguments with Ms Levine? I am sure in all her years of practicing law she has never considered these angles that the Local 562 President has and your masterful interpretation of BK law.

Why don't you just sit back hiding under the TWU FEAR FACTOR rock and let those that are ready to take a stand do so?
We have already proven that the TWU Lies or at lease twisting the facts to manipulate with fear.

AA Management has clearly stated that upon abrogation that AA and TWU have agreed that ALL contractual issues other than the 1113 term sheet changes will remain status quo.

In addition this from the Dallas Morning News
"But, as Lane reminded the airline and its unions, a rejection wouldn’t mean American would operate long without labor contracts. It would mean that the two sides would resume negotiations to find contract terms acceptable to both."

So if we are not to be long without contracts, and everything other than the 1113 term sheet modifications are to remain status quo. What the hell is it that you are so damn afraid of?

 

[aapitbull]

Why don't you just sit back hiding under the TWU FEAR FACTOR rock and let those that are ready to take a stand do so?
We have already proven that the TWU Lies or at lease twisting the facts to manipulate with fear.

AA Management has clearly stated that upon abrogation that AA and TWU have agreed that ALL contractual issues other than the 1113 term sheet changes will remain status quo.

In addition this from the Dallas Morning News
"But, as Lane reminded the airline and its unions, a rejection wouldn’t mean American would operate long without labor contracts. It would mean that the two sides would resume negotiations to find contract terms acceptable to both."

So if we are not to be long without contracts, and everything other than the 1113 term sheet modifications are to remain status quo. What the hell is it that you are so damn afraid of?

He is afraid of the fight and afraid of what might happen if he pisses off his masters in the Intl and at centerport. The fear is so great that it blinds him to what has to be done no matter the outcome.

 

[Buster CRC]

Overspeed must have rewatched the Hewitt video and got skeered all over again....LOL