mechanics may be free to strike by Sept 17th
- Thread starter sabre
- Start date
- Status
Jetmechline:
Jetmechline, thanks for posting the link to the bankruptcy code. It was interesting reading and validated the information received from ALPA's General Counsel.
I have two questions for you:
1. The Texas Pacific Group (TPG), Credit Suisse First Boston (CSFB), and Bank of America (BOA) debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing second tranche requires the $154 IAM-M concession. Without the concession, the DIP financing and successful reorganization are at risk. How will the airline obtain the financing and continue to operate without the IAM taking what Dave has called its fair share of concessions?
2. If the IAM or CWA reject their restructuring proposals, do you think the judge, who has agreed to virtually every company motion, will put the company at risk and keep either contract intact or abrogate the agreements?
Again, what many people have confused is this is not a traditional RLA act negotiation, its a bankruptcy proceeding where the rules change. I agree the IAM or CWA can not report to work if the court cancels the current contract(s), but if the agreement is abrogated the company can impose terms, furlough out of seniority, terminate employees, temporarily suspend operations, hire replacements, or liquidate the company.
Again, Siegel is not the hammer, it's about what cuts are required by the investors and the ATSB to obtain financing.
A no vote by either the IAM or CWA = the company seeking no contract.
Simply put, Siegel has no options and he must have the cuts. Another words, he must have the $154 million IAM and $70 million CWA concessions per year or there will likely be no DIP or Emergence financing as well as no loan guarantee. To my knowledge, there are no other options.
It's appears the IAM/CWA leadership and the union financial/legal advisors fully understand the issue and lack of options.
Chip
Jetmechline, thanks for posting the link to the bankruptcy code. It was interesting reading and validated the information received from ALPA's General Counsel.
I have two questions for you:
1. The Texas Pacific Group (TPG), Credit Suisse First Boston (CSFB), and Bank of America (BOA) debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing second tranche requires the $154 IAM-M concession. Without the concession, the DIP financing and successful reorganization are at risk. How will the airline obtain the financing and continue to operate without the IAM taking what Dave has called its fair share of concessions?
2. If the IAM or CWA reject their restructuring proposals, do you think the judge, who has agreed to virtually every company motion, will put the company at risk and keep either contract intact or abrogate the agreements?
Again, what many people have confused is this is not a traditional RLA act negotiation, its a bankruptcy proceeding where the rules change. I agree the IAM or CWA can not report to work if the court cancels the current contract(s), but if the agreement is abrogated the company can impose terms, furlough out of seniority, terminate employees, temporarily suspend operations, hire replacements, or liquidate the company.
Again, Siegel is not the hammer, it's about what cuts are required by the investors and the ATSB to obtain financing.
A no vote by either the IAM or CWA = the company seeking no contract.
Simply put, Siegel has no options and he must have the cuts. Another words, he must have the $154 million IAM and $70 million CWA concessions per year or there will likely be no DIP or Emergence financing as well as no loan guarantee. To my knowledge, there are no other options.
It's appears the IAM/CWA leadership and the union financial/legal advisors fully understand the issue and lack of options.
Chip
Joesy:
Joesy said: You guys are talking without knowledge. Anyone that even suggest that the mechanics can't walk off the job is ignorant on the situation.
Chip comments: Joesy, please refer to the Legal Brief filed by Skadden & Arps posted on this message board under the thread titled, US Airways Legal Brief filed with the Bankruptcy Court Says, The RLA Would Not Allow US Airways' Employees to Strike. This Legal Brief was provided to the CWA & IAM Legal Advisors and has been filed with the bankruptcy court.
Chip
Joesy said: You guys are talking without knowledge. Anyone that even suggest that the mechanics can't walk off the job is ignorant on the situation.
Chip comments: Joesy, please refer to the Legal Brief filed by Skadden & Arps posted on this message board under the thread titled, US Airways Legal Brief filed with the Bankruptcy Court Says, The RLA Would Not Allow US Airways' Employees to Strike. This Legal Brief was provided to the CWA & IAM Legal Advisors and has been filed with the bankruptcy court.
Chip
Pitguy:
The company does not want a fight, who does? But, Siegel has no option but the get the cuts. It will be interesting to see how this IAM-M vote turns out. If 7.1 percent of the no votes convert to yes votes, and the previous yes votes -- vote to ratify the deal, the agreement will be implemented.
If the membership does not ratify the restructuring deal, a deal which is required by the government and investors to obtain necessaary financing, it will be interesting to see how many people take the imposed contract and report to work. In today's economy with thousands of AMT's furloughed, we may be surprised at how many furloughed mainline and Express mechanics want to work at US.
Chip
The company does not want a fight, who does? But, Siegel has no option but the get the cuts. It will be interesting to see how this IAM-M vote turns out. If 7.1 percent of the no votes convert to yes votes, and the previous yes votes -- vote to ratify the deal, the agreement will be implemented.
If the membership does not ratify the restructuring deal, a deal which is required by the government and investors to obtain necessaary financing, it will be interesting to see how many people take the imposed contract and report to work. In today's economy with thousands of AMT's furloughed, we may be surprised at how many furloughed mainline and Express mechanics want to work at US.
Chip
Chip,
In today's economy with thousands of AMT's furloughed, we may be surprised at how many furloughed mainline and Express mechanics want to work at US.
What may surprise you even more is how many NEVER come back. I spent years getting my A&P. What I am realizing is that it is a skilled profession and in demand outside the commercial aviation market.
These are not pilots, in most cases they do not care about seniority. I have run into countless fellow graduates who say to me, leaving this best business is the best thing I ever did(he left engine overhaul for an elevator repair man, I have another who left line maint for commericial air conditioning, I could go on):
No weekends
No swing or grave yard shift
No working out doors in the winter
No hoidays
No bidding for vacation
Yada Yada.
It's alot different on that side of the fence. Pilots are not going to make the same salary anywhere else. A&P's can make equivalent wages on the outside and in most cases improve quality of life. You don't just look at what other airlines are paying, you are competing with the outside market place and this is something that most CEO's, including Dave, seem to forget. These guys will only cut so far and then say, screw it, I can make the same money doing XXXX. Why put up with this business, especially today when you can buy a positive space ticket for the price of Non reving.
Dave needs to go back to the table or start thinking about finding his cuts someplace else or he better start getting his resume up to date. His problem is just like yours, to think that he will be able to find enough qualified Techs to run an airline is a bit absurd. So what if Delta/U/UAL is not hiring, Otis elevator is, and the bennies are better working for a division of United Technologies.
In today's economy with thousands of AMT's furloughed, we may be surprised at how many furloughed mainline and Express mechanics want to work at US.
What may surprise you even more is how many NEVER come back. I spent years getting my A&P. What I am realizing is that it is a skilled profession and in demand outside the commercial aviation market.
These are not pilots, in most cases they do not care about seniority. I have run into countless fellow graduates who say to me, leaving this best business is the best thing I ever did(he left engine overhaul for an elevator repair man, I have another who left line maint for commericial air conditioning, I could go on):
No weekends
No swing or grave yard shift
No working out doors in the winter
No hoidays
No bidding for vacation
Yada Yada.
It's alot different on that side of the fence. Pilots are not going to make the same salary anywhere else. A&P's can make equivalent wages on the outside and in most cases improve quality of life. You don't just look at what other airlines are paying, you are competing with the outside market place and this is something that most CEO's, including Dave, seem to forget. These guys will only cut so far and then say, screw it, I can make the same money doing XXXX. Why put up with this business, especially today when you can buy a positive space ticket for the price of Non reving.
Dave needs to go back to the table or start thinking about finding his cuts someplace else or he better start getting his resume up to date. His problem is just like yours, to think that he will be able to find enough qualified Techs to run an airline is a bit absurd. So what if Delta/U/UAL is not hiring, Otis elevator is, and the bennies are better working for a division of United Technologies.
I forgot to mention we the tech has the least to lose. We can replace our wages buy doing many things. From working for the gov. (they need experienced aircraft tech. like they never needed before. in specialty fields like composite,sheetmetal, and engine building).or to working for the local Gm dealer. Buy the way who wants to hire a bus driver for 150000 a year when you cant even really drive the bus the computer does and who takes care of that computer, not the driver
G4G5
you are speeking for a lot of tech. When does The Glory of avation leave you. It leaves you when the meter reader for your local utility makes more than you, works mon. thru fri. steady daylight and gets all holidays off. you can only push us so far down then we are fed up
you are speeking for a lot of tech. When does The Glory of avation leave you. It leaves you when the meter reader for your local utility makes more than you, works mon. thru fri. steady daylight and gets all holidays off. you can only push us so far down then we are fed up
Itrade...Vanguard may not be in the Ex-catagory for long?...I saw on the local news tonight, that the CEO of the Hooters restuarant chain , is still most interested in buying Vanguard. I know this has been tossed around over the last 30 days...but it could become reality as easily as not. I'll bet they will have some really gorgeous F/A's too!!! I wonder what the in-flight meal service will consist of?
ITRADE
Veteran
JFK Fleet Service
Veteran
Jetmech said†â€Texas Pacific Group ,according to a recent Time magazine article, was intent on using the bk court to restructure US AIRWAYS even though Dave preferred not to. TPG set all the rules and condition for the (DIP) financing, maybe they should re-visit that and make some changes.
Chip answers: Jetmech, I agree with your point, but with TPG adamant about the filing, and with corporate raider investors like Marvin Davis seeking to be the DIP/Emergence investor, Siegel said TPG was the best offer. TPG doe not care how much you, I or anybody else makes. In fact, they would likely prefer our pay and benefits be reduced further so the company’s EPS increases, and thus the new issue stock appreciation.
Jetmech said: â€Dave's idea of fair surely applied in your case.( 20% ownership of the company for your parity Our parity wasn't even taken into consideration and we had to come up with another 6.8% on top of that!! To add insult to injury, he gutted every article of our contract, everything that was won over the last 40 + years was sacrificed . Maybe Dave could reconsider his idea of fairness and look at it from the mechanics point of view.
Chip responds: Jetmech, I disagree with your comment about the pilot sacrifices, but that’s not the point and is irrelevant to both the CWA and IAM-M options. You have to convince the company what is fair, but to change other labor agreements kicks in the “me too†issue. The company cannot afford to try re-open other union contracts and has show no willingness to do so. The options for those unions without ratified agreements are to ratify the current agreement or when the court’s bankruptcy orders so far are used as a benchmark, make is very possible those unions without a deal will likely see their CBA agreement abrogated, a contract imposed with much deeper cuts, and the potential for multi-million financial penalties imposed on the union and it’s members.
Jetmech said: â€Dave said he could not reach any agreement with the lessors or creditors , so he had to filed for bk. If that's true, let him go after them and push them a little more for the $$$$. We are not looking for a free ride, we just want what is really fair!â€
Chip comments: Jetmech, we all want what’s fair and there are probably 40,000 opinions of what is fair. My $75,000 per year cut in W-2, not the other cuts imposed as well, hardly seems fair and will impact my family forever. So will your cut as well. I hate this situation we are in, but those unions without a deal have to look at their options. There are two: The current deal or most likely have one much worse imposed. In regard to the lenders taking a greater haircut, this was already done. When the company lowered the employee concessions to 85 percent of the original planned concession, the company went and obtained greater lessor and creditor givebacks. This was part of the plan to eliminate obligation on the 67 aircraft spare engines, and facility leases.
Jetmech said: â€Chip, If he does abrogate our contract, it will be a precedent setting decision. No contract has been abrogated in the U.S bk courts since Frank Lorenzo forced congress to change the laws in the early eighties.â€
Chip comments: Jetmech, you’re correct. Every other union has provided concessions (in the history of commercial aviation) and it will be a legal precedent to have a contract imposed. The difference between Lorenzo and Siegel is that CO unilaterally cut pay and benefits in half and Siegel is complying with federal law per the U.S. Bankruptcy Code Section 1113.
Nobody likes this situation, but we all need to move past our anger, look at the options available, and in my opinion limit the pain.
Chip
Chip answers: Jetmech, I agree with your point, but with TPG adamant about the filing, and with corporate raider investors like Marvin Davis seeking to be the DIP/Emergence investor, Siegel said TPG was the best offer. TPG doe not care how much you, I or anybody else makes. In fact, they would likely prefer our pay and benefits be reduced further so the company’s EPS increases, and thus the new issue stock appreciation.
Jetmech said: â€Dave's idea of fair surely applied in your case.( 20% ownership of the company for your parity Our parity wasn't even taken into consideration and we had to come up with another 6.8% on top of that!! To add insult to injury, he gutted every article of our contract, everything that was won over the last 40 + years was sacrificed . Maybe Dave could reconsider his idea of fairness and look at it from the mechanics point of view.
Chip responds: Jetmech, I disagree with your comment about the pilot sacrifices, but that’s not the point and is irrelevant to both the CWA and IAM-M options. You have to convince the company what is fair, but to change other labor agreements kicks in the “me too†issue. The company cannot afford to try re-open other union contracts and has show no willingness to do so. The options for those unions without ratified agreements are to ratify the current agreement or when the court’s bankruptcy orders so far are used as a benchmark, make is very possible those unions without a deal will likely see their CBA agreement abrogated, a contract imposed with much deeper cuts, and the potential for multi-million financial penalties imposed on the union and it’s members.
Jetmech said: â€Dave said he could not reach any agreement with the lessors or creditors , so he had to filed for bk. If that's true, let him go after them and push them a little more for the $$$$. We are not looking for a free ride, we just want what is really fair!â€
Chip comments: Jetmech, we all want what’s fair and there are probably 40,000 opinions of what is fair. My $75,000 per year cut in W-2, not the other cuts imposed as well, hardly seems fair and will impact my family forever. So will your cut as well. I hate this situation we are in, but those unions without a deal have to look at their options. There are two: The current deal or most likely have one much worse imposed. In regard to the lenders taking a greater haircut, this was already done. When the company lowered the employee concessions to 85 percent of the original planned concession, the company went and obtained greater lessor and creditor givebacks. This was part of the plan to eliminate obligation on the 67 aircraft spare engines, and facility leases.
Jetmech said: â€Chip, If he does abrogate our contract, it will be a precedent setting decision. No contract has been abrogated in the U.S bk courts since Frank Lorenzo forced congress to change the laws in the early eighties.â€
Chip comments: Jetmech, you’re correct. Every other union has provided concessions (in the history of commercial aviation) and it will be a legal precedent to have a contract imposed. The difference between Lorenzo and Siegel is that CO unilaterally cut pay and benefits in half and Siegel is complying with federal law per the U.S. Bankruptcy Code Section 1113.
Nobody likes this situation, but we all need to move past our anger, look at the options available, and in my opinion limit the pain.
Chip
Chip, I don't know what the answer to that question is , however, I have a some suggestions:
1.Texas Pacific Group ,according to a recent Time magazine article, was intent on using the bk court to restructure US AIRWAYS even though Dave preferred not to. TPG set all the rules and condition for the (DIP) financing, maybe they should re-visit that and make some changes.
2.Dave's idea of fair surely applied in your case.( 20% ownership of the company for your parity ) Our parity wasn't even taken into consideration and we had to come up with another 6.8% on top of that!! To add insult to injury, he gutted every article of our contract, everything that was won over the last 40 + years was sacrificed . Maybe Dave could reconsider his idea of fairness and look at it from the mechanics point of view.
3.Dave said he could not reach any agreement with the lessors or creditors , so he had to filed for bk. If that's true, let him go after them and push them a little more for the $$$$. We are not looking for a free ride, we just want what is really fair !
Chip,
If he does abrogate our contract,it will be a precedent setting decision.No contract has been abrogated in the U.S bk courts since Frank Lorenzo forced congress to change the laws in the early eighties.
1.Texas Pacific Group ,according to a recent Time magazine article, was intent on using the bk court to restructure US AIRWAYS even though Dave preferred not to. TPG set all the rules and condition for the (DIP) financing, maybe they should re-visit that and make some changes.
2.Dave's idea of fair surely applied in your case.( 20% ownership of the company for your parity ) Our parity wasn't even taken into consideration and we had to come up with another 6.8% on top of that!! To add insult to injury, he gutted every article of our contract, everything that was won over the last 40 + years was sacrificed . Maybe Dave could reconsider his idea of fairness and look at it from the mechanics point of view.
3.Dave said he could not reach any agreement with the lessors or creditors , so he had to filed for bk. If that's true, let him go after them and push them a little more for the $$$$. We are not looking for a free ride, we just want what is really fair !
Chip,
If he does abrogate our contract,it will be a precedent setting decision.No contract has been abrogated in the U.S bk courts since Frank Lorenzo forced congress to change the laws in the early eighties.
Chip responds: Jetmech, You have to convince the company what is fair, but to change other labor agreements kicks in the “me tooâ€issue.
____________________________________________________________
I agree, we have to convince the company what is fair. Our only way of doing this is through our vote. The fighting machinist has proven to all of us that they are worthless slugs looking for their next payoff!!!! No more comments on this subject I'M VOTING NO.
____________________________________________________________
I agree, we have to convince the company what is fair. Our only way of doing this is through our vote. The fighting machinist has proven to all of us that they are worthless slugs looking for their next payoff!!!! No more comments on this subject I'M VOTING NO.
[blockquote]
----------------
Chip comments: Joesy, please refer to the Legal Brief filed by Skadden & Arps .................The RLA Would Not Allow US Airways' Employees to Strike". This Legal Brief was provided to the CWA & IAM Legal Advisors and has been filed with the bankruptcy court.
Chip
----------------
[/blockquote]
Way way too simplistic. Dont believe everything you read. Remember 50% of all lawyers loose during motions/trial. Frankly here we have a contridiction between two provisions of the law. This is simply the arguement put forward by the Debtors attorney. They say you cant strike, labor says they can. This is out of the jurisdiction of the BK court and a strike would need to be enjoined by the US District Court, before eventually being fully adjudicated.
Frankly, to see it on this board means that the atty's are doing a good job by 'trial of public opinion', and trial by fear. I would hope my attorney would do the same if needed.
----------------
Chip comments: Joesy, please refer to the Legal Brief filed by Skadden & Arps .................The RLA Would Not Allow US Airways' Employees to Strike". This Legal Brief was provided to the CWA & IAM Legal Advisors and has been filed with the bankruptcy court.
Chip
----------------
[/blockquote]
Way way too simplistic. Dont believe everything you read. Remember 50% of all lawyers loose during motions/trial. Frankly here we have a contridiction between two provisions of the law. This is simply the arguement put forward by the Debtors attorney. They say you cant strike, labor says they can. This is out of the jurisdiction of the BK court and a strike would need to be enjoined by the US District Court, before eventually being fully adjudicated.
Frankly, to see it on this board means that the atty's are doing a good job by 'trial of public opinion', and trial by fear. I would hope my attorney would do the same if needed.
- Status
