to abrogate or not to abrogate?

[dfw gen]

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2012/08/unsubstantiated-rumor-time-is-jetblue-airways-the-no-1-target-of-american-airlines.html/

ok in this article if it fails by a little we will renegotiate.

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2012/08/american-airlines-will-ask-judge-to-toss-out-labor-contracts-if-unions-turn-down-their-deals.html/

in this one we will defintelly abrogate

well what will it be? last best final offer III?

do they know what they want? and why is jim rheem still here?

why you would vote yes i have no idea. i guess we will know next week.

 

[aapitbull]

This comes right off the companys website read this and pay attention to the underlined parts!!



What if a Consensual Agreement Isn't Reached? Now that proposals have been made, the company will spend time bargaining in good faith with the unions to reach consensual agreements that will position American to regain its position as an industry leader. Our company bears an extraordinary responsibility to do this right. The approach we take will be respectful, open and we're focused on forging a path that treats people fairly.

While American believes it is in the best interest for everyone involved that consensual agreements be reached, sometimes that isn't the outcome. If a consensual contract agreement is not reached, the company may file a motion to reject any collective bargaining agreements (CBA) under section 1113 of the Bankruptcy Code, and the court determines whether the company proposals satisfy the requirements of that section as set forth below.

If a Motion to Reject is filed, Section 1113 sets a strict timetable, subject to potential modification by the Judge.

• The court schedules a hearing within 21 days after the motion is filed. At that hearing, the Judge hears arguments related to the fairness and equity of the company's offers. Both the company and unions offer testimony related to the proposals.
  
  
  
• Within 30 days from the beginning of the hearing, the Judge will decide whether to permit the employer to reject the existing CBA and implement the proposals it made to the union.

What Must the Company Prove?
For the court to approve the company's 1113 motion, five conditions must be met:

• Necessary: Proposed modifications must be necessary to permit the company's reorganization. In most courts this means the CBA changes are reasonably necessary to successful reorganization in the long term. Changes can be proposed in pay, scope, work rules, or benefits, as long as collectively, the changes can be justified as necessary to the reorganization.
  
  
  
• Bargaining in Good Faith: The company must bargain in good faith with the unions. It should take into consideration any alternatives the unions suggest for reaching the necessary financial savings.
  
  
  
• All Parties Treated Fairly: Proposed modifications must assure that all affected parties are treated fairly and equitably, including all the union and non-union employees, management, creditors, shareholders and vendors. All employee groups must bear their fair share of reductions.
  
  
  
• Union Must Have Refused to Accept the Proposal Without Good Cause: The union does not have good cause to disagree with proposals simply because the 1113 proposal entails sacrifices.
  
  
  
• The Balance of Equities Must Clearly Favor Rejection; Courts consider:
  • The likelihood and consequences of liquidation if rejection was not permitted;
    
    
    
  • the likely reduction in the value of creditor's claims if the CBA remained in force;
    
    
    
  • the likelihood and consequences of a strike if the CBA was voided;
    
    
    
  • the impact the changes will have on the collective bargaining unit as a whole and the individuals in the unit, including a consideration of those employees' wages and benefits compared to those of others in the industry; and
    
    
    
  • the good or bad faith of the parties in dealing with the company's financial dilemma. If the judge believes the company may liquidate absent rejection of the CBA, the court may favor rejection.

What Happens When the Judge's Decision Is Made?
If the court permits the employer to terminate the CBA, the company's proposed contract changes are implemented. The company may implement only those proposals made during the 1113 negotiations - it cannot make changes outside of those proposals.

• The duty to bargain continues and the parties return to negotiations for a new agreement.
  
  
  
• A union is permitted to strike only if released from bargaining by the NMB.
  If the Judge rules that the company's 1113 proposal is not both fair and equitable and reasonably necessary for the company's reorganization, the current CBA remains in force. Other (More...)

 

[Strake]

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2012/08/american-airlines-will-ask-judge-to-toss-out-labor-contracts-if-unions-turn-down-their-deals.html/


An American Airlines spokesman confirmed Friday afternoon that the carrier will ask U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane to toss out the collective bargaining agreements of unions that turn down the company’s latest contract proposals.
Earlier Friday, John Hale, American Airlines vice president of operations, told pilots that American will ask Lane to let the carrier abrogate the labor contracts if pilots turn down a tentative agreement.
Subsequently, the American spokesman confirmed that yes, American will also move to reject the contracts of any union that turns down the deal sitting before its members.
That removes the uncertainty lingering about the airline’s intentions, although it introduces a fear grenade into the situation.
Here’s the timetable:
– Two Transport Workers Union groups are voting on two tentative agreements, covering mechanics and related employees and maintenance stock clerks. Voting ends at 11:59 p.m. Tuesday, with results released Wednesday.
– The Allied Pilots Association members are voting on a tentative agreement. Voting ends at noon Wednesday, with results released soon afterward. The APA board of directors come into Fort Worth on Tuesday for meetings, and will be in session when the voting is tabulated.
– The Association of Professional Flight Attendants are voting on American’s “last, best and final offer,” with the union’s board declining to adopt it as a tentative agreement but deciding to send the proposal to members. Their voting ends at 10 a.m. Aug. 19.
– Between the TWU/APA votes and the APFA vote, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane is set to rule Aug. 15 on American’s March 23 motions to reject its unresolved union contracts. It’s up to American to ask the judge to delay that decision until after the APFA results come in, if American so desires.
Precipitating the public pronouncements was a report out of Los Angeles by a pilot who attended a July 26 meeting with Hale and Hale’s boss, senior vice president of operations Jim Ream. According to the report that’s been widely circulated among American Airlines employees, the executives left the impression that American really needs a labor deal and a no vote by APA members would bring a better deal.

 

[AC Tynker]

I have a question that myself and a few others have been talking about, maybe someone familiar the RLA can answer and point me to where it is written. The way I had Abrogation explained to me in a compressed version is the CBA is thrown out per-say and you are left with guidelines of employment and the term sheet. What would keep the company from proving that laying off out of seniority while in BK would be better for making the plan successful by ridding itself of employees that have proven to be a liability in terms of having problems following company rules ie: cr1s, 1st step, 2nd step, pre signed undated letters of resignation etc. to mitigate losing the lower senior employees that are not topped out or have just not had the problem that others have had that have had the Union to help keep them gainfully employed ?

 

[NYer]

I have a question that myself and a few others have been talking about, maybe someone familiar the RLA can answer and point me to where it is written. The way I had Abrogation explained to me in a compressed version is the CBA is thrown out per-say and you are left with guidelines of employment and the term sheet. What would keep the company from proving that laying off out of seniority while in BK would be better for making the plan successful by ridding itself of employees that have proven to be a liability in terms of having problems following company rules ie: cr1s, 1st step, 2nd step, pre signed undated letters of resignation etc. to mitigate losing the lower senior employees that are not topped out or have just not had the problem that others have had that have had the Union to help keep them gainfully employed ?

Nothing. The key is that they wouldn't have to prove anything, they would be not be bound by any current contractual obligations. It would be up to the airline to dictate if they would or would not abide by the current language while a new CBA is negotiated. That's what the lawyers for all three unions have been saying and it's consistant with what other mechanics have been saying from other airlines that went through this process.

 

[AC Tynker]

Thank You NYer I guess I missed that somehow.

 

[700UW]

That is wrong, the only thing that changes in the CBA is what the company files in the Section 1113 motion to change and impose.

 

[AC Tynker]

That is wrong, the only thing that changes in the CBA is what the company files in the Section 1113 motion to change and impose.

So they would have to file that and get it approved by the Judge while in BK and could do what they want basically outside of BK right?

 

[TWU informer]

This is what the AA Restructuring Website has to say:

What Happens When the Judge's Decision Is Made?
If the court permits the employer to terminate the CBA, the company's proposed contract changes are implemented. The company may implement only those proposals made during the 1113 negotiations - it cannot make changes outside of those proposals.

• The duty to bargain continues and the parties return to negotiations for a new agreement.
• A union is permitted to strike only if released from bargaining by the NMB.

If the Judge rules that the company's 1113 proposal is not both fair and equitable and reasonably necessary for the company's reorganization, the current CBA remains in force.

Log into JetNet go to the Restructuring Website and then click on "What if a Consensual Agreement Isn't Reached?"

The TWU and the YES VOTERS are either Liars or Ignorant.

 

[TWU informer]

Nothing. The key is that they wouldn't have to prove anything, they would be not be bound by any current contractual obligations. It would be up to the airline to dictate if they would or would not abide by the current language while a new CBA is negotiated. That's what the lawyers for all three unions have been saying and it's consistant with what other mechanics have been saying from other airlines that went through this process.

Complete LIE

 

[AC Tynker]

Complete LIE

Why don't you lighten up with the LIE and LIAR crap, he gave an answer that I am sure to mislead wasn't his intent.

 

[AC Tynker]

This is what the AA Restructuring Website has to say:

What Happens When the Judge's Decision Is Made?
If the court permits the employer to terminate the CBA, the company's proposed contract changes are implemented. The company may implement only those proposals made during the 1113 negotiations - it cannot make changes outside of those proposals.

• The duty to bargain continues and the parties return to negotiations for a new agreement.
• A union is permitted to strike only if released from bargaining by the NMB.

If the Judge rules that the company's 1113 proposal is not both fair and equitable and reasonably necessary for the company's reorganization, the current CBA remains in force.

Log into JetNet go to the Restructuring Website and then click on "What if a Consensual Agreement Isn't Reached?"

The TWU and the YES VOTERS are either Liars or Ignorant.

That really doesn't answer my question when you get down to it.

 

[TWU informer]

Why don't you lighten up with the LIE and LIAR crap, he gave an answer that I am sure to mislead wasn't his intent.

Give me another definition for Lie or Liar and I will use that one.
But in the English Language there are certain words for certain actions.

Just because you do not care for them is not my problem, and you have no right to attempt to stop the truth using some emotional victim claim.

 

[TWU informer]

That really doesn't answer my question when you get down to it.

Of course not. It was the truth and not what you wanted to hear.

 

[AC Tynker]

Ok you are right and everyone is 100% wrong. I'll wait for someone halfway intelligent to finish answering.