Results Of Fa Strike Vote?
- Thread starter Rampman
- Start date
spacewaitress
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2002
- Messages
- 468
- Reaction score
- 0
Last day to vote is either the 31st or 30th, can't remember which.
your new tentative has done more to guarantee a heavy vote in favor of chaos than anything afa could have......ualdriver said:
reminds me of animal farm..... what was it the pigs wrote on the barn??
oh yeah...
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others
oink
Burn the house down Blues! How dare ALPA negotiate a tentative! That will teach us! You go girl! (or boy!) Burn it to the ground!
Back to reality. What was the % of voter turnout and the actual strike result by AFA over at US Air? It's curious that they didn't publicly post the actual results as a strong membership turnout AND vote for a job action would only embolden the AFA's position over there.
Back to reality. What was the % of voter turnout and the actual strike result by AFA over at US Air? It's curious that they didn't publicly post the actual results as a strong membership turnout AND vote for a job action would only embolden the AFA's position over there.
spacewaitress
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2002
- Messages
- 468
- Reaction score
- 0
No one begrudges anyone negotiating what they can...but to do it on the backs of the other employee groups is about as low as (even) ALPA can go. You guys must really have a lotta faith in your worth these days!
spacewaitress
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2002
- Messages
- 468
- Reaction score
- 0
My gut is a strong YES vote. It seems everyone is getting to the point where enough is enough. I've been polling a lot, and listening to everyone's points of view. As time goes by and people are getting informed and the word is getting out, the momentum is definitely building for a yes.Rampman said:
ualdriver said:
i have never mentioned burning down anything, much less the house, however you
cannot be naive enough to believe it's the tentative and not the terms of it that raise ire...
and not only that of the other employee groups that this affects, but the ire of the PBGC, and if the resultant suits and possibly punitive legislation cause us all harm down the road , remember who poured on the gasoline
United pilots silent on pension objection
Federal pension agency questions giveback accord
By Carla Mozee, CBS MarketWatch
Dec. 18, 2004
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- The union representing United Airlines pilots refused Saturday to discuss reports that a federal pension agency might oppose a cost-cutting plan.
After the Air Line Pilots Union leadership approved cuts, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. issued a statement saying that the agreement could set a dangerous precedent and that the agency may take action against it, according to news reports.
Dave Kelly, a spokesman for United pilots, told CBS MarketWatch he had seen the pension agency's letter but refused to comment on it. Another union spokesman did not return a message asking for comment.
The union negotiated a tentative contact agreement Thursday that would cut pay by about 15 percent through 2009 and accept termination of a pension plan. After leadership approved the plan Friday, it awaits ratification by 6,400 United pilots.
But the contract, which also needs approval from a federal bankruptcy judge, could face a legal challenge from the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, according to news reports Saturday.
In exchange for the agreement, bankrupt United, owned by UAL Corp. (UALAQ: news, chart, profile), said it will make higher contributions to a retirement plan for its active pilots. The plan has a similar structure to a 401(k) plan and does not cover United's retired pilots, according to the New York Times.
Bradley Belt, executive director of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., said United is "making generous new pension promises even as it is refusing to honor its old pension promises." The Washington Post said Saturday that United's unfunded liabilities for all it unions' pensions could add $6.4 billion to the PBGC's rising deficit. The agency was created to ensure that pensions do not leave retirees in the lurch when companies default.
United said it sees no problem with the latest accord. "We believe the tentative agreement is appropriate under all applicable law," Jean Medina, a spokeswoman for United Airlines, said Saturday. "We look forward to ratification from the pilots and presenting it to the bankruptcy court for approval."
Medina said the agreement could be reviewed by the bankruptcy court by early January.
The pension agency also said it was concerned that the pilots union insisted on the termination of the pension plans for other United employees.
The agreement states that the deal will be called off if United continues the existing defined-benefit pension program for any other employee group, in a cautionary move aimed at preventing United from saying that the pilots' concessions are enough, AP said.
Union leader Mark Bathurst said in a Thursday letter to union members that the decision to approve the agreement was not "reached lightly, and it came only after the group realized that a negotiated settlement -- not a litigated outcome -- best serves you and your career."
In addition to the higher contributions to the separate benefit plan, United said it will issue to the pilots $550 million worth of notes that can be converted to company shares six months after the airline exits from Chapter 11 bankruptcy status.
The financial adviser for United's pilots, Stephen Presser, told the New York Times that it had been difficult for the airline and the union to agree on an acceptable way to terminate the pension plan and that if it's allowed, the agreement could become a model for other financially strapped companies to follow.
The pilots' deal is the first of several that United is trying to negotiate with its unions as it tries to cut expenses by another $725 million a year. United last month raised its savings goal to $7 billion, up from $5 billion.
Richard Turk, spokesman for the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association Local 9, said he understands the pilots' move to protect what's left of their retirement plan. "They don't want to be the only ones out there on an island," he said. "But if we don't agree to anything, that's bad for the pilots and for the company. But that doesn't put any pressure on us."
Turk also said the tentative agreement "makes us realize that this company is in the mood to compromise." The AMFA will continue its negotiations with United on Monday in Chicago.
The unions have already agreed to $2.5 billion in concession since the airline filed for bankruptcy in December 2002
spacewaitress said:
Space,
How is ALPA negotiating on the backs of others?
I will assume that you refer to the clause regarding the continuation of pensions for any and all groups. Section 16, "Termination rights", subsection C. It nothing more than a "me too" clause. If any other employee group, including management (if i read it correctly), keeps any sort of Defined Benefit plan (pension) then ALPA has the right to terminate this new agreement. Its protection/equal treatment for ALPA.
Why should ALPA have to lose their pension only to see others keep theirs?
How is that wrong?
DC
767jetz
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 3,286
- Reaction score
- 2,779
You know, it's very interesting to note that early in 2004 there was some discussion about ALPA's DB pension plan being better funded than anyone else's and therefore costing the company the least.
It was suggested that UA could save the most by terminating all pensions except ALPA's. I remember the outlash by those like spacewaitress who said "if our pension goes, everyone's pension will go, or else this place will burn to the ground." Funny how those same people change their tune when ALPA takes that stance.
You are all a bunch of hypocrits.
And by the way... ALPA is not insiting that anyone's pension be cancelled. They are saying that we will not be the sacrificial lamb. If the anyone else maintains a pension, then we keep ours as well. That is all.
It was suggested that UA could save the most by terminating all pensions except ALPA's. I remember the outlash by those like spacewaitress who said "if our pension goes, everyone's pension will go, or else this place will burn to the ground." Funny how those same people change their tune when ALPA takes that stance.
You are all a bunch of hypocrits.
And by the way... ALPA is not insiting that anyone's pension be cancelled. They are saying that we will not be the sacrificial lamb. If the anyone else maintains a pension, then we keep ours as well. That is all.
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
767jetz said:
Exactly why the AFL-CIO affiliation does not mean sqaut.
When 'Unions' add 'cross picket' language into their contracts they should not be a member of the 'AFL-CIO'!!!
ALPA has become a group of 'Pilot Management' and should be removed as being considered a 'Unionized organization'!!!!
The 'membership by numbers' rhetoric is now a dues donation comercial.
IMHO,
B) UT
UALDC737 said:
then by your logic anything we negotiate should also contain "me too " clauses, including a b and c fund as well as convertible notes and any other concession the company has given alpa commensurate with the ratio of our salary to yours
ie 9% b fund ,a 6%c fund ,added raises of the percentages included in your agreement and the same poison pills and rights to terminate the other agreements on the property if our needs are not equally met, to say nothing of the convertible notes .... me too is a nice concept spread evenly
spacewaitress
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2002
- Messages
- 468
- Reaction score
- 0
Actually, the pension issue is, for me, a dead horse. I'm resigned that it'll go.UALDC737 said:
What bothers me is this:
THEREFORE the parties to this Letter of Agreement hereby agree as follows:
paragraph 16...termination rights:
d. failure of the Company to implement, through binding agreement
or final judicial order effective no later than January 31, 2005, revisions to (i) the labor
contracts of the Company's other unionized employees and (ii) the wages, benefits and
working conditions of the Company's salaried and management employees so that the
aggregate revisions in (i) and (ii) are reasonably projected to produce at least $500
million in average annual savings for the Company from January 1, 2005 through and
including January 1, 2010, unless such action is cured to the reasonable satisfaction of the
Association within twenty (20) days of the Termination Notice;
e. termination or impairment of UAL’s exclusive right to file a plan
of reorganization in the Bankruptcy Cases under 11 U.S.C. §1121;
f. the filing by UAL or United of, support by UAL or United for, or
judicial confirmation or approval of (as the case may be), a plan of reorganization or a
proposed disclosure statement which (i) contains any material term that is materially
inconsistent with the Revised 2003 Pilot Agreement or this Letter of Agreement or (ii)
proposes or confirms a capital structure or ownership structure that is not reasonably
acceptable to the Association unless, in either case (i) or (ii), such action is cured to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Association within twenty (20) days of the Termination
Notice;
g. appointment of a trustee in the Bankruptcy Cases under 11 U.S.C.
§1104 or conversion of any of the Bankruptcy Cases into a proceeding under Chapter 7
of the Bankruptcy Code; or
h. any other material breach of the Company's or UAL’s obligations
under this Letter of Agreement unless such breach is cured to the reasonable satisfaction
of the Association within twenty (20) days of the Termination Notice.
In the event of such termination, (A) the Administrative Claim shall be paid on the Exit
Date, ( this Letter of Agreement shall otherwise become null and void in its entirety,
and © the parties shall thereafter be governed by the 2003 Pilot Agreement (including
the A Plan) and without regard to this Letter of Agreement.
Who has the final say on who's figures are relevant. Is it ALPA?
If so, we and the rest of the employees are negotiating with ALPA essentially. To me that's crossing the line, big time!
Sad that the flight attendant group was supposed to come up with an additional $191 million (or something close to that) and ALPA has upped that on us to $500 million. Thanks guys! Essentially we need to agree to everything United asked for and then some to reach that number.
