Is Bankrupcty a better option?

[ual747mech]

Bob:

Looks like your the dumb one buddy. Sounds like you don't know the situation here at UA but you're trying to advice us on what to do. It's funny, you only mentioned names of airlines that didn't make it out of bankruptcy. How come you didn't mention Continental (and others), they filed bankruptcy 2-3 times and now they're one of strongest airline financially. Employees gave and gave in those airlines, some made and some didn't, theres no guarantee a company will survive out of bankruptcy. If you do your research you will see that the consequences of bankruptcy is a lot worse than negotiating your fair share of concession, old law or current law. Again, the ATSB is the reason why we didn't have any clause for snapback, all employee groups don't have it. All recovery plan agreement is contingent on the ATSB loan approval. If the ATSB deny the loan then all concessionary agreement are null and void. What do you think UA will do if they don't get the loan. I think you know the answer to that one, you're a smart guy. If you want to know more about our agreement it's in our unions web site site, yahooooo it.. or other search engine iam141m and you will find it, k big guy. Learn the facts before you open your ya know what next time, k bud Also you should go to the ATSB's web site to get a feel of their criteria of getting the loan. There, you will see all the airlines who's applying for a loan. You will see who got approved and who got denied and who's still pending. Later, I'm outta here.

 

[atabuy]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/27/2002 8:38:52 PM Bob Owens wrote:

atabuy
The whole point was that 6 years of concessions is unreasonable. ual747mechanic says blame it on the ATSB. Well I guess mechanics are as dumb as some here have said. Blame it on the ATSB when they are making huge profits off your givebacks, and you cant do anything about it. When you complain that the concessions are no longer needed you will be told "You agreed to it". So go ahead if it makes you feel better and blame it on the ATSB.

USAir mechanics rejected the agreement , when they had to revote on it how many were so fustrated that they did'nt bother voting again? I doubt that many minds were changed, most probably just gave up. Thats how they will probably approach their daily work and many flights will end up being needlessly cancelled, so where is the savings?

If UAL has enough supervisors to do the work then its no wonder the airline is in such bad shape. Farming out all the heavy maintenance? Who keeps their capacity high enough to handle all that work, all at once? Its not a simple as you try to make it sound.

"Experience is the best teacher, but a fool learns no other way."

Its ironic that you should use this quote. EAL workers gave and gave, it still was not enough and they still came back for more. Pan Am workers gave and gave until the job was just not worth it anymore and they had trouble hiring people. The poor morale led to ever decreasing productivity and eventually it dissappeared. TWA workers gave and gave but it too failed. USAR workers gave and now they are being hit up again. Uniteds savings will all end up being on paper, but in reality they will be losing more than they are saving. They will scratch their heads wondering why things are not going like they planned. At AA, when the raise went into effect productivity rose dramatically along with On time departures. The raise really didnt cost the company anything. Since mechanics were being paid fairly there was no reason to make OT. The end result; less overtime and better performance. UAL may have been successful at bullying their workers to accept cuts. Many workers may buy into the Crusade like propaganda that the company spews out but probably not the mechanics. They tend to be naturally cynical, its one of the reasons why we have never formed a strong union like the pilots. They will need to make up for their lost earnings. The only way to do that is by fixing them on OT. Why hurry? To make even less? I think that you are looking at the wrong end of the company when you are questioning who fails to learn by experience. Gordon Bethune said it very well in his book.You dont want to get your mechanics mad at you because if you do they will not fix it. They will work on it all night but not fix it. And there isnt much you can do about it.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Bob,
You seem to have the notion that the airlines are in business for you and all the other mechanics.
The name is Ual and American airlines. Not IAM or AMFA airlines!!
A fair wage is all you can expect from a company. What you can't expect is for a company to pay you a wage they cannot afford at this time.
There might be many reasons for this as I have posted before. Within Ual all the unions formed a coalition with the help of Glenn Tilton to find ways to cut wages and costs among all groups to keep Ual out of BK.
It is very simple, revenues will not support the present wage scale, and ticket sales at higher amounts will decrease the amount of customers to levels lower than we can go.
It isn't about making money right now as much as it is about not losing as much each day.
If you refuse to see that even your airline is in trouble, you better get a better prospective on what your company is doing and what it will do in the future to decrease the losses.

You see Bob, you saying BK might be the best thing for us hurts you just as much as taking the concessions out of BK. Your domino theory is going to fall in your airline either way. You will be taking cuts or going BK yourself. When that comes about I will visit your board and see what you are saying then. You might still be deluded enough to think it is best for you too. Your interests are not protected here. AA should have put in for the loan instead of realizing later they made a mistake and started crying unfair. Do you think your management might have made a mistake and are trying to cover.

You speak of U as being to disinterested to vote the second time. Is this something you know as fact, or just an assumption.

Some airlines did give and give and could not come back. Don't compare them with Ual. AA might be the biggest now, but Ual has a network AA would love to have. How is TWA fitting in to your overall plan now?

We have dedicated employees who will keep Ual going no matter where we might have to dig ourselves from.
I consider the 9% I am giving up as an investment in my future. Not a concession.
It's all about prospective.

 

[DCT JVL]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/27/2002 103 PM Bob Owens wrote:

DCTJVL;
Obviously you did not learn your lesson at PAA.
----------------
[/blockquote]

You're right, I should never have taken a job at an airline with the IAM on the property. I should have known they'd vote no. Thanks, all of you. I hope you didn't take out a loan with your retro pay as collateral.

 

[Bob Owens]

ual747mech;
Looks like your the dumb one buddy.
I think you know the answer to that one, you're a smart guy.

Cant you make up your mind?

If you do your research you will see that the consequences of bankruptcy is a lot worse than negotiating your fair share of concession, old law or current law.

OK, show me what you have to support your claim.

Again, the ATSB is the reason why we didn't have any clause for snapback, all employee groups don't have it. All recovery plan agreement is contingent on the ATSB loan approval.

Thats the whole point of the Topic, the ATSB requirements are too onerous on labor.

What do you think UA will do if they don't get the loan.

Do like American, Delta, Continental, TWA, Eastern and all the others and raise their Capital needs through conventional methods, outside the ATSB. It seems that the only advantage of going through the ATSB is that its a handy, government backed excuse to extract huge long term concessions from labor.

Also you should go to the ATSB's web site to get a feel of their criteria of getting the loan. There, you will see all the airlines who's applying for a loan. You will see who got approved and who got denied and who's still pending.

I have and I read the Act. Did you?

 

[Bob Owens]

ATABUY;
You seem to have the notion that the airlines are in business for you and all the other mechanics.

No. Not at all. You seem to have the notion that the employees are there souly for the benifit of the company instead of it being a mutual exchange. We work, and they pay us a fair value for that work. When the company rolls into good times its ok for them to keep it all for them selves but when the hard times come the employees should be willing to sacrifice for the company. What, are corporations the New gods? People should make sacrifices to them?

A fair wage is all you can expect from a company.

And I beleve that the wage they are recieveing is what the PEB determined was fair.

What you can't expect is for a company to pay you a wage they cannot afford at this time.

So when the company can afford to pay more will they? In the past they never did. Do you really think they will change? Is there such a provision in the rejected agreement that states that if the company returns to profitability they will restore wages and pay as much as they can?

You speak of U as being to disinterested to vote the second time. Is this something you know as fact, or just an assumption.

Its an assumption because I was unable to find the actual numbers of votes cast. But after being in this industry for twenty years I've got a pretty decent feel on how my fellow mechanics think and act.

How is TWA fitting in to your overall plan now?

I didnt realize that I had an overall plan involving TWA. Maybe you should pose that question to Don Carty.

I consider the 9% I am giving up as an investment in my future. Not a concession.

Its a good thing your not a financial advisor. By the way we have a bridge in Brooklyn that you can make an investment in also. Interested?

It's all about prospective.

Ah yes, and Hard Drugs.

 

[atabuy]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/29/2002 7:49:57 PM Bob Owens wrote:

ATABUY;
"You seem to have the notion that the airlines are in business for you and all the other mechanics."

No. Not at all. You seem to have the notion that the employees are there souly for the benifit of the company instead of it being a mutual exchange. We work, and they pay us a fair value for that work. When the company rolls into good times its ok for them to keep it all for them selves but when the hard times come the employees should be willing to sacrifice for the company. What, are corporations the New gods? People should make sacrifices to them?

"A fair wage is all you can expect from a company."

And I beleve that the wage they are recieveing is what the PEB determined was "fair".

"What you can't expect is for a company to pay you a wage they cannot afford at this time."

So when the company can afford to pay more will they? In the past they never did. Do you really think they will change? Is there such a provision in the rejected agreement that states that if the company returns to profitability they will restore wages and pay as much as they can?

"You speak of U as being to disinterested to vote the second time. Is this something you know as fact, or just an assumption."

Its an assumption because I was unable to find the actual numbers of votes cast. But after being in this industry for twenty years I've got a pretty decent feel on how my fellow mechanics think and act.

"How is TWA fitting in to your overall plan now?"

I didnt realize that I had an overall plan involving TWA. Maybe you should pose that question to Don Carty.

"I consider the 9% I am giving up as an investment in my future. Not a concession."

Its a good thing your not a financial advisor. By the way we have a bridge in Brooklyn that you can make an investment in also. Interested?

It's all about prospective."

Ah yes, and Hard Drugs.

----------------
Bob,
Your self interests are not Most of Uals' employees. There is a small group of unhappy mechanics who think Ual has done them wrong and don't trust them to do any different later. You feed them with your nonsense.
Just because the contract doesn't end until 2008, does not mean we cannot make more money.
When all concessions and the business plan is in place, we will start to come out of this hole dug for us by the economy and 9/11.

We as employees have much more at stake here than you do at AA. It is nice to give advice to another carrier, or is it competitor? Personally I do not trust your motives here.

Profit sharing and options are in place if Ual starts to do better.
We can easily make up all lost wages if the airline turns around. Maybe we will start doing your maintenence over at AA to get your company out of trouble too. You interested in a job?

The problem with you is you think you are special and no one can do your job. Wrong Bob. There are people out there waiting if AA goes on strike.

All I can say to the employees at Ual is they should really leave if they do not trust the company to bargain in good faith. Why work for a company you can't trust and who pays bad.

 

[mastermechanic]

Sure wasn't to save it...

 

[Busdrvr]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/29/2002 1048 PM mastermechanic wrote:

Was more than just a few mechanics Jim...and we are leaving, why do you think we turned it down???
----------------
[/blockquote]

If YOU are leaving, please don't ruin MY company in the process. But you are prob right, if this takes us into BK, I've got an informed hunch that the 13,000 141M members will become around 3,500. Glenn Tilton is no Jim Goodwin.


Uh Oh, Better get TRAMCO!!

 

[mastermechanic]

Was more than just a few mechanics Jim...and we are leaving, why do you think we turned it down???

 

[ual747mech]

On 11/29/2002 7:27:54 PM Bob Owens wrote:

ual747mech;


"If you do your research you will see that the consequences of bankruptcy is a lot worse than negotiating your fair share of concession, old law or current law."

OK, show me what you have to support your claim.

Check this out Bob.

What happened to the Flight Attendant contracts in the Continental Airlines and TWA bankruptcies?
Continental Airlines filed for bankruptcy protection in 1983 and 1991. In the first bankruptcy, Continental eliminated the collective bargaining agreement and replaced it with unilaterally created work rules. Wages were cut by 60%, and vacation, sick and other benefits also were drastically reduced. These actions were taken before Section 1113 was added to the bankruptcy code when there were no special procedures in place relating to a debtor's rejection of a labor contract. A year after the second bankruptcy filing, the flight attendants were able to negotiate their first collective bargaining agreement in nine years. That contract, however, primarily incorporated most of the then existing work rules which management had imposed. Wages were increased but remained at 50% of what they were in 1983, before the first bankruptcy filing. Under that agreement, the highest wage rate in the contract's first year was $14.00, vacation peaked at 21 days after 10 years and there were no rigs.

Prior to its purchase by American Airlines, TWA had undergone three bankruptcies - in 1992, 1995 and 2001. At the time of the first bankruptcy, the flight attendants had not negotiated a contract since their strike in 1986. In August 1992 the flight attendants reached an agreement with management that deferred wage increases until 1995. However, by August 1994, it had become clear that because of the carrier's financial condition it would not be able to pay for the scheduled wage increases. Instead, flight attendants along with the other labor groups negotiated a second concessionary contract that remained in place until 1999. One and half years later, in January 2001 TWA again sought bankruptcy protection. As part of the transaction with American, the unions agreed that their contracts could be changed so as to mirror the equivalent provisions in the American labor agreements. Also American demanded that the scope and successorship provisions in the TWA collective bargaining agreements be eliminated.

Bob, as you can see that the concessionary agreement,even though it doesn't show the terms, is still a lot better than the contract that got voided.

Here's What Section 1113 says

Subsequent to filing a petition and prior to filing an application seeking rejection of a collective bargaining agreement, the debtor in possession or trustee (hereinafter in this section ''trustee'' shall include a debtor in possession), shall -

(A)

make a proposal to the authorized representative of the employees covered by such agreement, based on the most complete and reliable information available at the time of such proposal, which provides for those necessary modifications in the employees benefits and protections that are necessary to permit the reorganization of the debtor and assures that all creditors, the debtor and all of the affected parties are treated fairly and equitably; and (the rest is posted on this board if u want to read it.)

Per this guideline I believe United is showing the Union's it's current financial condition to come up with an agreement

"What do you think UA will do if they don't get the loan."

Do like American, Delta, Continental, TWA, Eastern and all the others and raise their Capital needs through conventional methods, outside the ATSB. It seems that the only advantage of going through the ATSB is that its a handy, government backed excuse to extract huge long term concessions from labor.

No one will loan United any money unless its guaranteed by the government. Too high risk.

 

[ForkTime2002]

[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 11/27/2002 11:39:36 PM ual747mech wrote:
[P] How come you didn't mention Continental (and others), they filed bankruptcy 2-3 times and now they're one of strongest airline financially----------------[BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Check your information re: Continental and precieved financial strength.Not to mention the guy named Lorenzo who took them into 11 the first time with a billion and change in cash.Continental is leveraged almost to the hilt,not to mention they make less than across the board than all the groups at UA [EM]even after[/EM] give backs.CO is also highly leveraged.Don't believe it? the info is readily available,dig around.[BR]how about the others that filed? TWA sure is doing great these days aint they? Look how good we;re doin at U.If U is still around in Feb I'll be shocked.[BR]You dont want 11 at UA.Trust me,better yet,read the crap on the U board and see how great it is for us.[/FONT][/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]

 

[ual747mech]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/27/2002 2:51:03 PM ual747mech wrote:

Hey Bob,

That's just it, there is no better deal out there.
(My response to you when u said Vote no and hold out for a better deal)


C I told u Bob, there is no better deal, check out what they are saying

United CEO Glenn Tilton made the following statement this morning regarding the results of the IAM vote. We will immediately begin talks with the IAM 141M leadership to ensure that a contract proposal consistent with the coalition's framework is brought before the membership as soon as possible.

Special Message from MEC President Greg Davidowitch (Nov 28)
The mechanics may conduct a vote in a single day and if they are to vote on a new proposal, their allocation of participation will not change. The recovery plan will only work if each group participates with their defined allocation.

Maybe they'll pay us our vacation days and bump up the percentage of give back. I think a lot of people would rather have it this way.

 

[ual747mech]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/29/2002 1048 PM mastermechanic wrote:

Was more than just a few mechanics Jim...and we are leaving, why do you think we turned it down???
----------------
[/blockquote]

I think there was a lot of no shows that probably would've voted yes, also people thought they could do better with the bk judge, not so. Also people are angry but when they realize the consequences of bk they will change. I know a few people that will vote it down no matter what though, lol.

 

[mastermechanic]

Busdvr, Busdvr, Busdvr...you know, this is the reason why we are here in the first place. This attitude is why your career and investment is going to blow up in your face. Fine, farm it out my man. Why your at it, you probably are going to be able to find really cheap pilots on the market too. See, its a win, win for everybody. BTW, I'll make it under that 3500 cap..been here awhile my man

 

[atabuy]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/29/2002 1048 PM mastermechanic wrote:

Was more than just a few mechanics Jim...and we are leaving, why do you think we turned it down???
----------------
[/blockquote]
That must be the royal we since you say you will be under the 3500.
I doubt you even work at Ual.