Haven't Heard About the Extra 4% in Equity to be Held Aside?

[MetalMover]

What Judge gives a Court Order because a "defendant" wants it? An action like that doesn't make sense.

If the 14% wasn't held the plaintiffs were looking for an injunction to prevent all distributions. That would have meant we wouldn't of received anything last week. Those were the two choices 0% distributed or holding 14%.

I am speaking of the percentage. It is possible the TWU came up with the percentages of 5%, 5%, and 4%.....ANd the judge ok'd the percentages. 
You can have the last word on this topic because the way you convey the workings of the court, it sounds like you were in the courtroom arguing the case before the judge yourself.

 

[NYer]

I am speaking of the percentage. It is possible the TWU came up with the percentages of 5%, 5%, and 4%.....ANd the judge ok'd the percentages. 
You can have the last word on this topic because the way you convey the workings of the court, it sounds like you were in the courtroom arguing the case before the judge yourself.

Wasn't there, but I've read the lawsuits and the Court Order. The original 5% was based on past Equity distributions and it seemed that was a safe number. The additional 5% & 4% were brought up by the plaintiffs as that was their belief of how much they're supposed to receive if they won the case.

Obviously, most on these pages wants and expects the TWU to be wrong, however in this case the facts don't support the rhetoric.

 

[WeAAsles]

Are you sure about that? Are you sure the TWU did not present what they wanted to Judge and he simply signed off on it?

Oh this one is a classic. The TWU now has the Judge in pocket. Well in that case they really are pretty stupid as they should have just had the Judge sign an order that the TWU get's to keep the entire equity to themselves rather than give it to anyone at all. Or heck give the EBO people there share and keep the rest? 

A guy last week was going around with a Petition that he didn't think the TWU should "Hold" any of "Our" shares for the lawsuit. Yep how about we present that one to the Judge. 

Maybe the TWU could have told the BK Judge that we don't want to go through BK either? SMH.

 

[chilokie1]

 
Good questions. Are you submitting these to the local in writing? If they don't answer I would think a DFR complaint against the local is in order.
 
To your question on the 14% hold back, I am asking about the if all the stock was issued to the TWU to hold including the 14%, then we should get the same stock distribution had the lawsuit never been filed. That is if the lawsuit fails.

My Local? At what point in this giant cluster ---- has any local had any 
part of the decision making? The DFR? Not sure what that acronym stands
for, but I am pretty sure the D stands for department which means a Fed
agency, "NO THANKS". I have a better plan, cut my losses and sign an
AMFA card.

 

[WeAAsles]

My Local? At what point in this giant cluster ---- has any local had any 
part of the decision making? The DFR? Not sure what that acronym stands
for, but I am pretty sure the D stands for department which means a Fed
agency, "NO THANKS". I have a better plan, cut my losses and sign an
AMFA card.

Archie Bunker. Good choice probably?

 

[exs]

Archie Bunker. Good choice probably?

"Whatever their personal motivations are especially if they want other people to follow them you would think especially as adults they could do a lot better than resorting to name calling?"

Hey WeAAsles, This was your quote.

What Happened?

 

[WeAAsles]

"Whatever their personal motivations are especially if they want other people to follow them you would think especially as adults they could do a lot better than resorting to name calling?"
Hey WeAAsles, This was your quote.
What Happened?

A photo of Carroll O'Conner in character as Archie Bunker is his avatar. How do you equate me pointing that out as being name calling? Now if I had called the man "Meathead" that would be name calling I would think.

My comment was I guess however you wanted to interpret it? So how did you interpret it?

 

[MetalMover]

Oh this one is a classic. The TWU now has the Judge in pocket. Well in that case they really are pretty stupid as they should have just had the Judge sign an order that the TWU get's to keep the entire equity to themselves rather than give it to anyone at all. Or heck give the EBO people there share and keep the rest? 

A guy last week was going around with a Petition that he didn't think the TWU should "Hold" any of "Our" shares for the lawsuit. Yep how about we present that one to the Judge. 

Maybe the TWU could have told the BK Judge that we don't want to go through BK either? SMH.

How much does the TWU pay you to be their personal press secretary?

 

[WeAAsles]

How much does the TWU pay you to be their personal press secretary?

$0.00. I pay them actually. 2 times my base rate per month. I'm not even a Shop Steward in case you're interested. I hold no title and have no chair.

 

 

[Overspeed]

My Local? At what point in this giant cluster ---- has any local had any 
part of the decision making? The DFR? Not sure what that acronym stands
for, but I am pretty sure the D stands for department which means a Fed
agency, "NO THANKS". I have a better plan, cut my losses and sign an
AMFA card.

 
The equity committee was made up of local presidents who made the decisions regarding the distribution formulas and who gets stock. GP stated many times during the roadshows that they, the committee, would make the final call on who gets stock. If he and his fellow committee members can answer your questions then they are failing to represent you which is a failure of your rights as a union member under the law. The local officers are bound by their Duty of Fair Representation (DFR) to provide us all with representation to the best of their ability in good faith. If GP and the local cannot answer your questions they they are really incompetent which might be the "best" of their abilities or they are acting in bad faith.

 

[Vortilon]

 
The equity committee was made up of local presidents who made the decisions regarding the distribution formulas and who gets stock. GP stated many times during the roadshows that they, the committee, would make the final call on who gets stock. If he and his fellow committee members can answer your questions then they are failing to represent you which is a failure of your rights as a union member under the law. The local officers are bound by their Duty of Fair Representation (DFR) to provide us all with representation to the best of their ability in good faith. If GP and the local cannot answer your questions they they are really incompetent which might be the "best" of their abilities or they are acting in bad faith.

 
 
Duty bound?  For what? Oh yeah, screwing the AMTs at AA!  DFR? What a joke - we haven't had fair representation in my 28 years at AA.  Only a TWU suckup would attempt to defend the TWU's actions over the last 28 years!

 

[scorpion 2]

That's a very good point.   When were the old AAMRQ (old AMR stock) shares cashed out in the 401k accounts?   
 
Who got that old stock?   It was sold in the open market over the counter to any speculator who gambled (correctly, as it turns out) that the old stock would not be cancelled without any value (as usually happens) but instead would share in dividends upon emergence from Ch 11.
 
Turns out the bondholders were fully repaid AND may have received an equity kicker (bonus) in addition to their 100% repayment, adding insult to injury for the mistreatment of the AA employees.   I said "may" because it was discussed in a Fortune magazine article this week about Horton's role in ensuring that the old AMR stockholders got to share in the wealth when AA emerged on December 9.   Might be poor writing and may not be true, but if it is true, then the employees were really screwed, as their claim didn't appear to have any bonus component.   Here's the article:
 
http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/04/10/the-untold-story-of-american-airlines-big-payout/

Shortly after the filing the shares were cashed out of the 401 accounts. No notice whatsoever on the company's part that the shares would be confiscated.  Who had purchase orders in when these shares became available? If the SEC were to do an investigation it would be very interesting to see whos relatives and or associates of senior execs had placed orders for bankrupt shares at the time the employees shares were wiped out.
 
.   

 

[scorpion 2]

Has anyone put out a graph or chart to show how the other unions at AA 
handled their stock in relation to the TWU?
My problem is the formula  that was given out at the roadshow was just
a best guess estimate of the value of the company when it exits bankruptcy.
When we received our first allocation of shares why were we not given the 
total dollar value of the remaining shares on that day?
We all knew the value of AA stock would climb, who was actually issued the
stock? I am guessing it was the TWU,  my account says value of shares. We
were told they distributed the stock over 120 days as not to dilute the value 
of the stock, but who benefited $14 to $17 dollar a share increase on the 
final dispersement? The TWU? AA?  "NOT ME"
What happens if the stock should tank and the TWU loses the lawsuits?
Will I have another line in the after tax area of my paycheck titled,
 CHECKOFF- TWU/UNDERFUNDED RETIREE LAWSUIT----$xxx.xx (sucker)

 If the unions would have had control of all the stock but held them for disbursement over the 120 day allocation period the employees would have seen all the gain but as it turned out holders of the old old equity got the windfall of the increase. Minus employees who had stock in their 401's of course

 

[Overspeed]

 
 
Duty bound?  For what? Oh yeah, screwing the AMTs at AA!  DFR? What a joke - we haven't had fair representation in my 28 years at AA.  Only a TWU suckup would attempt to defend the TWU's actions over the last 28 years!

 
So your solution is to not hold the leadership responsible, dump the TWU, get AMFA, and when they screw up then what? Blame them? Great plan.
 
The theme on this blog seems to blame everyone for the last ten years. It was the same on the-mechanic.com years before that. How has all the complaining on the internet worked out for you?

 

[WeAAsles]

If the unions would have had control of all the stock but held them for disbursement over the 120 day allocation period the employees would have seen all the gain but as it turned out holders of the old old equity got the windfall of the increase. Minus employees who had stock in their 401's of course

It was not allowed to be done this way with ANY creditor. All unsecured creditors who received equity had it dispersed under the same 120 day method.