New Vote o Video from Local Presidents

[devil505]

I have 18 years in the military. I just reenlisted for 6 years last Monday.

Vote NO

It's better to die upon your feet than to live upon your knees! Emiliano Zapata

 

[Ghost tech]

Gratz. I retired with 22 1/2 years. My hats off to you!

 

[devil505]

Gratz. I retired with 22 1/2 years. My hats off to you!

Thanks Buddy!

Semper Fi!

Vote NO

Save our Profession

 

[Bob Owens]

What about Lawyers and an Economist saying there is a 99% chance there will be no additional offers ?

The same ones that said that by June 6 our contract would be abrogated if we didnt vote YES, So much for the "Experts".

If they did say that can you produce any proof they said that?

 

[Ghost tech]

When this is all done it's going to be like a bad hangover.

 

[Bob Owens]

Some of you have or were in the military. Do you not find it strange that AA gave us LBO2. Then a day or two later stated how much money they were making. They are using our own anger against Us. They know it will make most if not all mechanics mad. Once you become mad all reasoning goes out the door. If this last offer is voted down, who really wins? The judge won't care that they offered 15%. This 5 year contract has turned out to be a nine year one. How does the mechanic benefit? The company will get everything they want from a no vote. After the fall out from the base layoffs, the company will probably look at each line stations performs. Then determine which one they out source. I look forward to the feed back and no my feelings won't be hurt by any harsh words.

They did the same thing in 1995, but we still accepted concessions.

The company will get everything they want with a YES vote. If they really wanted abrogation why have they agreed to three extensions on the Judges decision?

 

[Flying low]

They did the same thing in 1995, but we still accepted concessions.

The company will get everything they want with a YES vote. If they really wanted abrogation why have they agreed to three extensions on the Judges decision?

To look good in the eyes of the judge, and make us look bad when this gets turned down again?? Company, will say, we've sweetened the pot, and our mechanics still said NO.

 

[FWAAA]

To look good in the eyes of the judge, and make us look bad when this gets turned down again?? Company, will say, we've sweetened the pot, and our mechanics still said NO.

The abrogation decision is based on the negotiating that occurred before the motion was filed, so negotiations after the motion was filed don't make either side look better or worse.

IMO, the company keeps offering slightly better LBOs so that the ultimate outcome will be blamed, in part, on the slight majority that votes "yes," by those who voted "no" and thus, not all the blame will be on the company, as it would be if the motion to abrogate is approved. If about half of your workforce blames the other half for the concessions, there's slightly less hatred toward the company.

 

[Ghost tech]

Good point.

 

[Overspeed]

You have made this claim numerous times, still waiting for the proof.



So you are saying that LBO-2 is worse than LBO1 and LBO 1 is worse than the MAR 22 Term?

I posted some time back pages upon pages of your BS. I'm not doing it again and many people said they got the point, you are way off the mark when it comes to reality. Look up all the comments your self. You specifically called BK a scare tactic by the Int'l and AA and guess what? Now we are in it so we are not scared anymore because it happened didn't it?

The situation in a nutshell is this, we all strongly believe we deserve more for the quality of work. No question. The problem is we are not in normal negotiations right now. Yes we could vote no and eventually return to normal negotiations but our contract will have already been abrogated. Almost all of us agree that will happen. So now if AA has the even greater work rule and contractual changes they want imposed on us after the 8/15 what is the likelihood we will get that work back? Are we going to strike for the right to get it back? Won't they already have negotiated agreements with MROs to take that work? And you argument about a shortage of mechanics is in conflict with your argument when we get new airplanes they will require less work anyway. Less work required means less AMTs required right? Of course it does. So where is the mechanic shortage leverage.

What you are asking for is us to vote no for the right to "fight" for a better contract in the future. When will that "future" be? Next month? Not likely. The NMB will slam on the brakes while we all wait the outcome of the BK and POR to be approved. So we are looking at not even having a first meeting until mid 2013. Then we start all over again. Well you guys started "all over again" in July 2010 didn't you? Of course you did and now we are no closer to an agreement than we were right up until Nov 29, 2011. So we vote no, wait one to two years then maybe we get your wish again and get released and then what? Strike? Sure let's do that after AA already has a two relationship with MROs to pick up more work. Then let's not forget the other curveball, a merger with US. How's that integration of contracts going over there since over the last five to six years? Uh not so good which is why there is a US East and West.

Yup, let's vote no and look forward to two more years before your "release" end game happens while we all continue to make $34 and 4,500 jobs get outsourced.

LBO v1 versus LBO v2? In the immortal words of your master of prose J. Ruiz, "It's a turd sandwich." (Why did you put him in the video? That guy brings what to the video? Couldn't he have actually raised some real points instead of whining? Whatever.)

 

[Overspeed]

To look good in the eyes of the judge, and make us look bad when this gets turned down again?? Company, will say, we've sweetened the pot, and our mechanics still said NO.

Bingo!

 

[Overspeed]

The same ones that said that by June 6 our contract would be abrogated if we didnt vote YES, So much for the "Experts".

If they did say that can you produce any proof they said that?

The judge only pushed back the date due to the APA and AA coming to terms on a TA. They still say it will most likely get abrogated and most on this board expect that as well. You can concede the point that if we vote no abrogation is 99.9% going to happen.

 

[Overspeed]

The abrogation decision is based on the negotiating that occurred before the motion was filed, so negotiations after the motion was filed don't make either side look better or worse.

IMO, the company keeps offering slightly better LBOs so that the ultimate outcome will be blamed, in part, on the slight majority that votes "yes," by those who voted "no" and thus, not all the blame will be on the company, as it would be if the motion to abrogate is approved. If about half of your workforce blames the other half for the concessions, there's slightly less hatred toward the company.

Company most likely doesn't care about blame. If it wasn't for the 1113c process they would have long since screwed us over more than we already are.

 

[Ghost tech]

I voted No in 2010 and here it is 2 years later and still no increase in pay. While the cost of everything else went up.

 

[FWAAA]

Didn't AA offer the mechanics a two year deal in 2008 with a small lump sum offer for both years (no structural increase)? If I recall, the negotiators didn't even bring that back to the membership for a vote. I think that was back in the "restore and more" days.