PLEASE POST AND DISTRIBUTE TO YOUR CO-WORKERS
Additional stories are on www.CWA.net
10/13/2004
CWA'ers present their case in bankruptcy court...
On Thursday, October 7, and again yesterday, Tuesday, October 12, CWA'ers argued their case against management's emergency pay and benefit cut demands in bankruptcy court. There will be additional testimony on Thursday and, in the opinion of our attorney, a decision will be rendered pretty soon after that.
CWA attorney Dan Katz began our case on Thursday with an effective cross-examination of company officers that allowed the judge to see that management pay cuts would only be about 5% and in fact, managers had received a 4% pay raise earlier this year. In effect, they are making a 1 percent sacrifice, compared to the 23% pay cut demanded of other employees.
Next, CWA's expert industry analyst gave a lengthy testimony in which he disputed the company's attempt to use America West as a "Low Cost Carrier" model for US Airways passenger service salaries and benefits. CWA's analysis included numerous points, including that Southwest is a more suitable Low Cost Carrier comparator to US Airways because of its size, its profitability, its level of competition to US Airways, and especially its threat to the PHL hub. That comparison is much more relevant and more favorable to passenger service employees in terms of salary and benefits.
On Tuesday, Dan Katz cross-examined the company's expert witness and brought out several facts that seemed to weaken the company's testimony - including that the expert tried to show US Airways salaries are much higher than the simple average salary at five low cost carriers (Southwest, America West, AirTran, JetBlue, Independence Air). Dan pointed out that Southwest, with the highest salaries, is larger than all the other four airlines combined, so a weighted average for those five airlines would be more accurate and show a much higher average salary for those airlines than management claimed.
Then each of the CWA staffers and research analysts took the stand to testify on several issues.
They disputed the company's assertion that seniority is a "problem" in the passenger service workforce, giving numerous examples showing that the senior, experienced workforce provides not only the effective and reassuring service customers desire in times of disruption, cancellation and delay, but also the professional quality day-to-day delivery of service customers expect when they pay upwards of $250 for a product. It was very effective testimony.
They explained the history and the meaning of CWA's 1113 letter obtained in the last round of concessions negotiations, in which the company committed in writing not to again file a 1113 bankruptcy motion against the CWA passenger service group. The CWA'ers testified to the events that led to this letter and why it was a different letter from, for example, the ALPA letter that was limited to the year 2002.
They explained the recent bargaining with management about the "emergency cuts" management was demanding, and showed why our 6% pay cut offer combined with other financial cost cuts and credits equaled about $33 million - exactly in the ballpark of what management was demanding, but without the 23% cut in pay.
They introduced to the court the "before and after paystub" flyer we have put out showing that take-home pay today is about $430 a week and with a 23% pay cut, take-home goes down to about $295 a week because the fixed deductions do not decrease.
They demonstrated and defended our costing and analysis of our proposals, and challenged many of the company's costing assumptions.
They spelled out numerous other examples showing that the company's demands were unfair and inequitable to the lower paid work groups.
Other unions put on excellent testimony as well:
An AFA flight attendant witness testified to the economic devastation that she would suffer if her pay were cut 23% as management has demanded. She explained her mortgage, car payments, living expenses, travel expenses, and the effort she currently makes to support herself and her young son, and showed she stood to lose it all if her pay were cut 23%. All the employees in the courtroom wanted to give her a big thank you for finally saying plainly how devastating management's demands are.
The IAM research department made a very effective presentation showing previous employee concessions defending against subcontracting.
We will keep you informed as we move forward.
CWA Local Officers and Staff
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.cwa.net
Tell-a-friend!
Additional stories are on www.CWA.net
10/13/2004
CWA'ers present their case in bankruptcy court...
On Thursday, October 7, and again yesterday, Tuesday, October 12, CWA'ers argued their case against management's emergency pay and benefit cut demands in bankruptcy court. There will be additional testimony on Thursday and, in the opinion of our attorney, a decision will be rendered pretty soon after that.
CWA attorney Dan Katz began our case on Thursday with an effective cross-examination of company officers that allowed the judge to see that management pay cuts would only be about 5% and in fact, managers had received a 4% pay raise earlier this year. In effect, they are making a 1 percent sacrifice, compared to the 23% pay cut demanded of other employees.
Next, CWA's expert industry analyst gave a lengthy testimony in which he disputed the company's attempt to use America West as a "Low Cost Carrier" model for US Airways passenger service salaries and benefits. CWA's analysis included numerous points, including that Southwest is a more suitable Low Cost Carrier comparator to US Airways because of its size, its profitability, its level of competition to US Airways, and especially its threat to the PHL hub. That comparison is much more relevant and more favorable to passenger service employees in terms of salary and benefits.
On Tuesday, Dan Katz cross-examined the company's expert witness and brought out several facts that seemed to weaken the company's testimony - including that the expert tried to show US Airways salaries are much higher than the simple average salary at five low cost carriers (Southwest, America West, AirTran, JetBlue, Independence Air). Dan pointed out that Southwest, with the highest salaries, is larger than all the other four airlines combined, so a weighted average for those five airlines would be more accurate and show a much higher average salary for those airlines than management claimed.
Then each of the CWA staffers and research analysts took the stand to testify on several issues.
They disputed the company's assertion that seniority is a "problem" in the passenger service workforce, giving numerous examples showing that the senior, experienced workforce provides not only the effective and reassuring service customers desire in times of disruption, cancellation and delay, but also the professional quality day-to-day delivery of service customers expect when they pay upwards of $250 for a product. It was very effective testimony.
They explained the history and the meaning of CWA's 1113 letter obtained in the last round of concessions negotiations, in which the company committed in writing not to again file a 1113 bankruptcy motion against the CWA passenger service group. The CWA'ers testified to the events that led to this letter and why it was a different letter from, for example, the ALPA letter that was limited to the year 2002.
They explained the recent bargaining with management about the "emergency cuts" management was demanding, and showed why our 6% pay cut offer combined with other financial cost cuts and credits equaled about $33 million - exactly in the ballpark of what management was demanding, but without the 23% cut in pay.
They introduced to the court the "before and after paystub" flyer we have put out showing that take-home pay today is about $430 a week and with a 23% pay cut, take-home goes down to about $295 a week because the fixed deductions do not decrease.
They demonstrated and defended our costing and analysis of our proposals, and challenged many of the company's costing assumptions.
They spelled out numerous other examples showing that the company's demands were unfair and inequitable to the lower paid work groups.
Other unions put on excellent testimony as well:
An AFA flight attendant witness testified to the economic devastation that she would suffer if her pay were cut 23% as management has demanded. She explained her mortgage, car payments, living expenses, travel expenses, and the effort she currently makes to support herself and her young son, and showed she stood to lose it all if her pay were cut 23%. All the employees in the courtroom wanted to give her a big thank you for finally saying plainly how devastating management's demands are.
The IAM research department made a very effective presentation showing previous employee concessions defending against subcontracting.
We will keep you informed as we move forward.
CWA Local Officers and Staff
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.cwa.net
Tell-a-friend!
