Is this quote true?

[NYer]

Is this quote true? If so, why were we told to vote no? :huh:

Chuck Schalk, vice president of the TWU, said he doesn't have much hope that Lane will rule in favor of the workers.

"This court is very favorable to business, so we don't expect anything less than a favorable ruling to business," Schalk said.

 

[Tex-Mech]

I think it is exactly what they have been saying, but they also said that negotiation would take place before it got to a judges ruling, and if the judge ruled to throw out the contract, we would continue to negotiate. Nothing shocking in the statement to me. We all know that the courts are owned by the corporations. For me, it was a matter of standing up for what is right, or rolling over and just taking it.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Many of those statements were made before it became obvious by attorneys' questioning that assets were being hidden and the company was not exactly living up to its duties to negotiate in good faith in addition to asking for far more than it actually requires to restructure itself successfully. The judge's ruling is still up in the air.

It's fairly evident what the company expects to occur, however, when it and its pet union are busily repackaging their turd of a deal.

 

[CMH_GSE]

Many of those statements were made before it became obvious by attorneys' questioning that assets were being hidden and the company was not exactly living up to its duties to negotiate in good faith in addition to asking for far more than it actually requires to restructure itself successfully. The judge's ruling is still up in the air.

It's fairly evident what the company expects to occur, however, when it and its pet union are busily repackaging their turd of a deal.

I missed that part, do you have a link?

 

[olderguyAMT]

Many of those statements were made before it became obvious by attorneys' questioning that assets were being hidden and the company was not exactly living up to its duties to negotiate in good faith in addition to asking for far more than it actually requires to restructure itself successfully. The judge's ruling is still up in the air.

If it was so easy to make a ruling in favor of the company, then why did Judge Lane fly his distress flag and call for backup?
Obviously, the arguments of the union lawyers have given him a need to be taking megadoses of tylenol as he was not just going to ignore the unions and accept the debtors arguments etched into granite.

And that is good for us, no?

 

[Frank Szabo]

I missed that part, do you have a link?

Early on in the proceedings, it was tweeted (my recollection) that when asked about assets not reported in the Chapter 11 filing, Brundage claimed 5th Amendment privilege. I do not have a link but I remember reading that item amongst the many tweets or something very similar. One would have to re-read everything but I believe that's what I read. It was back when the hearings began.

That may account for his sudden removal/retirement/cashiering to non-corporate officer status.

 

[Mr Red]

Is this quote true? If so, why were we told to vote no? :huh:

Chuck Schalk, vice president of the TWU, said he doesn't have much hope that Lane will rule in favor of the workers.

"This court is very favorable to business, so we don't expect anything less than a favorable ruling to business," Schalk said.

Wow, If your in NY why don't you ASK HIM !

 

[Frank Szabo]

Early on in the proceedings, it was tweeted (my recollection) that when asked about assets not reported in the Chapter 11 filing, Brundage claimed 5th Amendment privilege. I do not have a link but I remember reading that item amongst the many tweets or something very similar. One would have to re-read everything but I believe that's what I read. It was back when the hearings began.

That may account for his sudden removal/retirement/cashiering to non-corporate officer status.

I looked and can't find what I thought I read - can't back it up.

 

[olderguyAMT]

Is this quote true? If so, why were we told to vote no? :huh:

Chuck Schalk, vice president of the TWU, said he doesn't have much hope that Lane will rule in favor of the workers.
"This court is very favorable to business, so we don't expect anything less than a favorable ruling to business," Schalk said.

Is every BK exactly the same? When was the last time a backup judge was called to duty?
Did every bankrupt airline file with over 4 billion in cash?

Consider that the president and chairman of maint. of Local 514 were pushing the Yes vote in their tours of the hangars prior to voting deadline, and you know the outcome of that !!!!.

Chuck is VP of Local 562. and has a defeatist opinion. I'll try not to have a defeatist opinion until I am rolled over and defeated; and, It ain't over 'til it's over and over here it ain't over yet..... Over.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

Why do you need to be "told" how to vote? Can't think for yourself? Pathetic

 

[olderguyAMT]

Is this quote true? If so, why were we told to vote no? :huh:

Chuck Schalk, vice president of the TWU, said he doesn't have much hope that Lane will rule in favor of the workers. "This court is very favorable to business, so we don't expect anything less than a favorable ruling to business," Schalk said.

Hey, check out this logic.
OK, that dang court is favorable to business.
But, even a court with that kind of record has to listen to and consider a valid argument, and if it is ignored in favor of a predetermined outcome, that makes a great case for appeal. It ain't over 'til its over.

....Question here, about the appeals process: The first appeal goes to the District Court, and the 2nd appeal goes to the Appeals Court? anybody know for sure?

 

[FWAAA]

....Question here, about the appeals process: The first appeal goes to the District Court, and the 2nd appeal goes to the Appeals Court? anybody know for sure?

Correct. Appeals from Bankruptcy courts are heard by the District Court and appeals from the District Court would go to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

 

[amtide]

Chuck opinion is based in previous BK cases. Nothing wrong with that.

I voted NO not because I were told to do so, I voted NO because the offer was terrible. I voted NO because it was the right thing to do on my opinion. I will continue to defend our craft with the tool of my vote, I will continue to vote NO until the company offer a fair deal.

I know we are in BK, we are not asking for an industry leading contract just something average until AA get to a better position (AA last in compensation for the AMTs is not acceptable).

 

[High Speed Steel]

Is this quote true? If so, why were we told to vote no? :huh:

Chuck Schalk, vice president of the TWU, said he doesn't have much hope that Lane will rule in favor of the workers.

"This court is very favorable to business, so we don't expect anything less than a favorable ruling to business," Schalk said.

Wow. Talk about a let down. Try to absorb the content of what Schalk has said here. He encouraged many to reject earnings that would have in fact been of benefit to the membership. He promoted a "Vote No" on the 2010 TA which has cost many over $20,000.00 plus and he promoted "Vote No" on the LBO. Wow, the LBO included up to $40,000.00 for some who may have elected for an early out. Those members could have very well exceeded $60,000.00 in earnings but Chuck said "NO" guess he missed the part where within the LBO he could have protected his "OWN JOB".... :huh:

 

[Buck]

I know we are in BK, we are not asking for an industry leading contract just something average until AA get to a better position (AA last in compensation for the AMTs is not acceptable).

Brother, brother, brother!

You are being paid average when you average all the TWU members except the TWU International.