Isnt that what a YES vote does?
Summary of Judge Lane's Ruling
- Thread starter eolesen
- Start date
Isnt that what a YES vote does?
Furthest thing from the truth. If everyone thinks the pilots are going to do something better, let them try to fix it on their own. I'd rather take the lesser of the 2 evils and live another day. If the APA succeeds, then APFA wins with the "me too". I'm amazed at your backwards thinking. I have yet to hear you or your followers say anything that makes any sort of rational sense about the LBFO votes.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
If the pilots do not sign but the TWU and APFA do, it could end up that the FAs and TWU represented employees receive BK claims including equity as well as remain on the UCC while the pilots might be removed.
I believe it would be unprecedented for pilots at a US airline not to have an equity position while other employee groups would.
777 / 767 / 757 Love
Advanced
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2012
- Messages
- 204
- Reaction score
- 188
Wow......just when you thought you have read it all.......god I hope that is sarcasm.
Cheers,
777 / 767 / 757
777 / 767 / 757 Love
Advanced
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2012
- Messages
- 204
- Reaction score
- 188
LMFAO!!!!! Course the fact that you have to say that pretty much sums it all up.......too funny.....
Cheers,
777 / 767 / 757
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
Except that the Judge did pick between abrogation of all sections of the APA contract management wanted or none - he picked none. His reason for doing so may have been because of only two proposed changes, but he didn't abrogate certain sections and not others. Contract abrogation is generally an all or nothing decision. The Judge was unsatisfied with two provisions so abrogated nothing..
Jim
Hopeful
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
- Messages
- 5,998
- Reaction score
- 347
Yes, you either abrogate or you don't.
The fact that he denied abrogation based on TWO provisons affects the outcome to an extent.
What if these TWO provisons were the two deal breakers in the first place?
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
A different sugject but it doesn't matter at this point. AA will file again with the changes the Judge wants and be allowed to abrogate. If the two changes were the only reason anyone voted against the LBO, the pilots will be satisfied anyway, if not the pilots will still be unhappy. Either way abrogation is the end result.
Jim
Jim
Hopeful
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
- Messages
- 5,998
- Reaction score
- 347
I agree. But understand many of us find satisfaction in that the request simply wasn't rubber stamped.
The judge cited his reasons. Abrogation is now inevitable as negotiations are not a condition. Modify the provisions, he grants request to abrogate. the next step will be to watch and see what gets imposed and how long it takes to get a consenual agreement.
Hopeful
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
- Messages
- 5,998
- Reaction score
- 347
Seems to me like M&R will exceed the 20% due to outsourcing and layoffs alone!
Next for American Airlines: Flight attendants’ contract offer vote ends Sunday
​
By SHERYL JEAN
Staff Writer
sjean@dallasnews.com
Published: 16 August 2012 09:27 PM
It’s no secret that Laura Glading, president of the union representing flight attendants at American Airlines Inc., plans to vote yes on the carrier’s last contract proposal.
“The flight attendants know that,” she said after speaking to about 150 of them Thursday at an informational meeting held by the Association of Professional Flight Attendants at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Flight attendants vote through Sunday morning on American’s “last, best and final” contract offer.
If flight attendants reject the offer, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane could let American throw out its existing contract and impose new terms — the same issue that American and its pilots are going through.
Lane on Wednesday denied American’s request to toss out its contract with pilots, a week after they rejected a tentative agreement with the airline.
Glading called the ruling a “scathing” decision for labor. While Lane said the carrier’s proposals for unlimited furloughs and changes to its flight codesharing were too aggressive, he agreed with virtually all of the airline’s other arguments for its business plan and is letting it revise and resubmit its request.
“At first we — and others — saw it as a denial, but when you got down to the nitty-gritty in the 111 pages [of the ruling], there was no win for labor here,” APFA spokeswoman Leslie Mayo said. “It was aligned with every other bankruptcy in the airline industry.”
Faced with a similar prospect, the APFA is making a last-minute attempt to clarify issues for the more than 16,000 flight attendants at American it represents. “This is a crystal ball we’ve been handed,” Mayo said.
American and its parent, AMR Corp., filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in November and are trying to reduce labor costs as part of their reorganization. The companies say they need about $1 billion in annual labor savings, including $842 million from its unions, to be competitive.
Pilots’ status
American on Thursday presented the Allied Pilots Association with revised proposals on codesharing and furloughs. The airline plans to file its revised request to toss its pilots’ contract under Section 1113 of the bankruptcy code on Friday.
The airline has not attempted to restart negotiations, American spokesman Bruce Hicks said Thursday. “We’re moving forward with the 1113 process at this point … so we can get the cost certainty that we need,” Hicks said.
American’s unsecured creditors’ committee said in a statement that it supports the carrier’s plans and expects its revised proposal will be “sustained” by the bankruptcy court.
“Our only hesitation is that in bankruptcy court, it’s not always that easy to turn around a filing of such a contentious nature,” Michael Derchin, an airline analyst for CRT Capital Group in Stamford, Conn., wrote Thursday in a research note. “Delay seems inevitable.”
In a letter to members on Thursday, the APFA made it clear that Lane’s decision regarding the pilots’ contract was based on two specific arguments — unlimited codesharing capabilities and unlimited furloughs — that are unique to the pilots’ group.
Most of the other arguments that were rejected were identical to the flight attendants’ arguments, the APFA said.
In the APA’s case, Lane was not persuaded by the union’s arguments on two issues that were also raised by the flight attendants — convergence (a proposal that would put workers below standard industry wages) and a union request for certain information from the airline.
“Given the fact that most of our arguments have already been dismissed in this ruling … we do not expect the court’s 1113 ruling to go in our favor should we vote to reject the [contract offer],” the APFA said.
“If the flight attendants vote ‘yes,’ we can accomplish a lot more,” Glading said. “If no, the fight continues but it will be a distraction to manage furloughs and other things.”
She was referring to American’s ability to furlough up to 2,300 flight attendants if the tentative offer is rejected and Lane allows the airline to abrogate its existing contract. If both happen, American could impose the tougher terms for flight attendants that it outlined on March 22.
Examining the offer
American hopes flight attendants “take a very careful look at the issue before them,” Hicks said.
“We believe the last, best and final offer that they’re voting on is the right thing in that it provides a number of things for the flight attendants that would not be there in the March 22 term sheet, including the early-out option that would save the jobs for several thousand people, the signing bonus, the raises, the equity claim,” he said.
Tina Krugler, a 26-year flight attendant in North Texas, said she voted for the contract.
“I voted yes mainly because of the early-out option, which I really feel will save a lot of jobs,” Krugler said. “It’s the lesser of two evils.”
Co-worker Jay Narey said he’ll vote no mainly because “I don’t want to give the company a ratified agreement while it’s still in the exclusivity period” to file a plan of reorganization by Dec. 28.
Glading said the APFA’s goal has not changed.
“The goal is to merge with US Airways and protect our rights,” she said. “I believe the way to do that is to vote yes on the last, best and final offer. Some people want to amplify the pilots’ message to management with a no vote.”
American is reviewing its strategic options, including a possible deal with US Airways, as part of its bankruptcy restructuring. In April, leaders of American’s three unions announced that they supported a merger with US Airways.
American spokesman Andrew Backover said Monday that the company plans to finish that review by or in the fall.
“Ideally, in my opinion, the merger partners should work something out in bankruptcy,” said Vaughn Cordle, managing partner of Airline Forecasts in Washington, D.C. “There’s more value to be shared by stakeholders in bankruptcy.”
​
By SHERYL JEAN
Staff Writer
sjean@dallasnews.com
Published: 16 August 2012 09:27 PM
It’s no secret that Laura Glading, president of the union representing flight attendants at American Airlines Inc., plans to vote yes on the carrier’s last contract proposal.
“The flight attendants know that,” she said after speaking to about 150 of them Thursday at an informational meeting held by the Association of Professional Flight Attendants at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Flight attendants vote through Sunday morning on American’s “last, best and final” contract offer.
If flight attendants reject the offer, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane could let American throw out its existing contract and impose new terms — the same issue that American and its pilots are going through.
Lane on Wednesday denied American’s request to toss out its contract with pilots, a week after they rejected a tentative agreement with the airline.
Glading called the ruling a “scathing” decision for labor. While Lane said the carrier’s proposals for unlimited furloughs and changes to its flight codesharing were too aggressive, he agreed with virtually all of the airline’s other arguments for its business plan and is letting it revise and resubmit its request.
“At first we — and others — saw it as a denial, but when you got down to the nitty-gritty in the 111 pages [of the ruling], there was no win for labor here,” APFA spokeswoman Leslie Mayo said. “It was aligned with every other bankruptcy in the airline industry.”
Faced with a similar prospect, the APFA is making a last-minute attempt to clarify issues for the more than 16,000 flight attendants at American it represents. “This is a crystal ball we’ve been handed,” Mayo said.
American and its parent, AMR Corp., filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in November and are trying to reduce labor costs as part of their reorganization. The companies say they need about $1 billion in annual labor savings, including $842 million from its unions, to be competitive.
Pilots’ status
American on Thursday presented the Allied Pilots Association with revised proposals on codesharing and furloughs. The airline plans to file its revised request to toss its pilots’ contract under Section 1113 of the bankruptcy code on Friday.
The airline has not attempted to restart negotiations, American spokesman Bruce Hicks said Thursday. “We’re moving forward with the 1113 process at this point … so we can get the cost certainty that we need,” Hicks said.
American’s unsecured creditors’ committee said in a statement that it supports the carrier’s plans and expects its revised proposal will be “sustained” by the bankruptcy court.
“Our only hesitation is that in bankruptcy court, it’s not always that easy to turn around a filing of such a contentious nature,” Michael Derchin, an airline analyst for CRT Capital Group in Stamford, Conn., wrote Thursday in a research note. “Delay seems inevitable.”
In a letter to members on Thursday, the APFA made it clear that Lane’s decision regarding the pilots’ contract was based on two specific arguments — unlimited codesharing capabilities and unlimited furloughs — that are unique to the pilots’ group.
Most of the other arguments that were rejected were identical to the flight attendants’ arguments, the APFA said.
In the APA’s case, Lane was not persuaded by the union’s arguments on two issues that were also raised by the flight attendants — convergence (a proposal that would put workers below standard industry wages) and a union request for certain information from the airline.
“Given the fact that most of our arguments have already been dismissed in this ruling … we do not expect the court’s 1113 ruling to go in our favor should we vote to reject the [contract offer],” the APFA said.
“If the flight attendants vote ‘yes,’ we can accomplish a lot more,” Glading said. “If no, the fight continues but it will be a distraction to manage furloughs and other things.”
She was referring to American’s ability to furlough up to 2,300 flight attendants if the tentative offer is rejected and Lane allows the airline to abrogate its existing contract. If both happen, American could impose the tougher terms for flight attendants that it outlined on March 22.
Examining the offer
American hopes flight attendants “take a very careful look at the issue before them,” Hicks said.
“We believe the last, best and final offer that they’re voting on is the right thing in that it provides a number of things for the flight attendants that would not be there in the March 22 term sheet, including the early-out option that would save the jobs for several thousand people, the signing bonus, the raises, the equity claim,” he said.
Tina Krugler, a 26-year flight attendant in North Texas, said she voted for the contract.
“I voted yes mainly because of the early-out option, which I really feel will save a lot of jobs,” Krugler said. “It’s the lesser of two evils.”
Co-worker Jay Narey said he’ll vote no mainly because “I don’t want to give the company a ratified agreement while it’s still in the exclusivity period” to file a plan of reorganization by Dec. 28.
Glading said the APFA’s goal has not changed.
“The goal is to merge with US Airways and protect our rights,” she said. “I believe the way to do that is to vote yes on the last, best and final offer. Some people want to amplify the pilots’ message to management with a no vote.”
American is reviewing its strategic options, including a possible deal with US Airways, as part of its bankruptcy restructuring. In April, leaders of American’s three unions announced that they supported a merger with US Airways.
American spokesman Andrew Backover said Monday that the company plans to finish that review by or in the fall.
“Ideally, in my opinion, the merger partners should work something out in bankruptcy,” said Vaughn Cordle, managing partner of Airline Forecasts in Washington, D.C. “There’s more value to be shared by stakeholders in bankruptcy.”
I would think that if a yes vote gets you more than what the judge/company is going to ram up your bum, then a no vote would be more like digging it. The question really comes down to:
1. how quickly section 6 negotiations will be settled, in the event of abrogation,
and
2. can you get any more than you will lose during the period of abrogation/imposement.
if the answer is not very quickly and no, then i would think a no vote would actually be more like the company digging a hole for you 6 feet deep, and you jumping in and digging it another 4.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
Abrogation probably is inevitabel unless either the APA leadership can approve an agreement without membership vote (I have no idea) of an agreement is reached and AA doesn't abrogate pending a membership vote on an agreement. Remember that the Judge only approve/disapproves abrogation - it's AA's decision when to abrogate after getting the Judge's approval. But time for a consensual agreeement definitely is getting short.
Jim
What if the two points where a issue for the pilots. They may have voted it in with those changes. what they voted on was something different . To say that if those where sticking points for the pilots and they would now be happy is incorrect, do to the fact they will have the 1st term sheet imposed. What will stop AA from trying to get those things back in further talks if the judge abrogates and they are out of BK? When AA changes the terms for the pilots that the judge drew out for AA the the pilots should at least get to vote again. In this age, it should only take a matter of a couple weeks and easly less than a month
Similar threads
