Top Ten Reasons to Vote NO

[Hopeful]

ANY company's greatest asset is the employees.

That's only used for slogans and bumber stickers.

 

[Chuck Schalk]

In New York, I showed the company LBO proposal to several different union employees from different unions(non-airline) and explained that my union is pushing for a "yes" vote.

The unanamous response was collectively;

Are they out of their Fu*#ing minds! They said only a company union would try to pass that garbage. (not my words)

They also asked me why the union would even bring it back for a vote?

their final collective statement was, you wil be working under a non-union contract with the language in place.


Needless to say I was embarrassed and ashamed to hear it but I wanted their opinion so I did not think it was just me voting against it.

 

[High Speed Steel]

In New York, I showed the company LBO proposal to several different union employees from different unions(non-airline) and explained that my union is pushing for a "yes" vote.

The unanamous response was collectively;

Are they out of their Fu*#ing minds! They said only a company union would try to pass that garbage. (not my words)

They also asked me why the union would even bring it back for a vote?

their final collective statement was, you wil be working under a non-union contract with the language in place.


Needless to say I was embarrassed and ashamed to hear it but I wanted their opinion so I did not think it was just me voting against it.

Well sure the union folks you showed that LBO to would have a negative opinion because you only showed them what you wanted them to see. What you should have done was first inform them that you work for a company that is already in bankruptcy then show them the March 22 Term Sheet side-by-side to the LBO and explain to them the LBO mitigates the total impact of the term sheet. It is in fact a blend of the 2003 TWU/AA agreement, the failed 2010 TA and the march 22 term sheet. The LBO is the best you have in front of you and the best Bob and the negotiating committee could come up with. Then you could've told those folks. Hey, I want to vote this down this isn't good enough for me we are in bankruptcy and I could care less. Tell them you would rather let the judge throw out the contract and allow the company to outsource your work, lay off your friends and coworkers, close facilities and impact the communities for years to come.

If you had properly represented yourself to these folks and showed the all of the facts you would have not taken the time to talk about it here because they probably would have had a different viewpoint and offered advice for you to re-think your situation and make the best decision for you and your family....Just my 2 cents

 

[Chuck Schalk]

High Speed

I told them we were in bankruptcy and the saving jobs theory.

That was their response to it

 

[High Speed Steel]

Bankruptcy and theory's have room to clash, but bankruptcy and facts tell the whole truth....wouldn't you agree?

 

[TWU informer]

Well sure the union folks you showed that LBO to would have a negative opinion because you only showed them what you wanted them to see. What you should have done was first inform them that you work for a company that is already in bankruptcy then show them the March 22 Term Sheet side-by-side to the LBO and explain to them the LBO mitigates the total impact of the term sheet. It is in fact a blend of the 2003 TWU/AA agreement, the failed 2010 TA and the march 22 term sheet. The LBO is the best you have in front of you and the best Bob and the negotiating committee could come up with. Then you could've told those folks. Hey, I want to vote this down this isn't good enough for me we are in bankruptcy and I could care less. Tell them you would rather let the judge throw out the contract and allow the company to outsource your work, lay off your friends and coworkers, close facilities and impact the communities for years to come.

If you had properly represented yourself to these folks and showed the all of the facts you would have not taken the time to talk about it here because they probably would have had a different viewpoint and offered advice for you to re-think your situation and make the best decision for you and your family....Just my 2 cents

You really need to get a handle on the truth. First the real negotiations do not officially begin until abrogation occurs. This LBO is only on the table because James C Little was stupid and/or manipulative enough to say we would vote on the LBO once a consensual agreement is not reached prior to court hearings on the company motion to abrogate. What reason from that point did AA have to reach an agreement other than attempt to rape us with fear? The sellout idea was to just throw the LBO out there and between Jim Little and Jim Ream the pajama party sleepover kings would sell the POS together. If it passes, great for AA, if it fails, soon the real work begins.

You keep ignoring that a YES vote meant 6 years of the worst contract ever, and a NO means we return to negotiations and hopefully James C Little will be keep pie hole shut and not put us into this situation again.

This deal is the last best chance to sell concessions for jobs. Nothing more, and nothing less.
AA will begin the RIF's in June/July, and real serious Negotiations will then begin.
No assurances that it gets better, No assurances that it gets worse.
But accepting another concessions for jobs program that cuts this deep and has already proven to fail is the LAST THING any union man on AA property should be doing.

YES the LBO is the best you have in front of you right now if you want to sell your soul to the Devil.
But the only reason you even have this in front of you for a vote is because James C Little is a company sellout idiot and couldn't keep his mouth shut.

But remember, we have not even reached the official negotations process yet.
Still more to come so calm down and stop running scared and making an ass of yourself and other fellow machinist. You guys already have a severe shortage of replacement for your skill and you are running with the chicken. WTF!

You never have wondered why the Pilots and Flight Attendants are not running scared? They are probably hoping like hell this POS passes, they stand to take in every dime and more that you are so easily willing to give up. Your lack of courage after the "kick over the bee hive" threat of the past if you did not get skill premium parity is amazing.

You need to learn that if someone places a valid business plan in front of you to accept then look into it.
If someone is sellling you a POS and having to use fear to sell it, then you should re-evaluate your relationship with that salesman.

 

[TWU informer]

Bankruptcy and theory's have room to clash, but bankruptcy and facts tell the whole truth....wouldn't you agree?

Where does SELLING A OF POS using FEAR fall into that statement or question?

And where does "tapping out of the fight" before the first round of negotiations in the Bankruptcy Process even ends fall into that statement or question?

I would claim that Selling Out or Tapping Out, both fall into the "Theory" side, because the FACT is we have not even started or been afforded good faith negotiations to date.

The ruling to aborgate has not even been handed down and you are acting as if we are in the final round of this fight and we are so far behind on the score cards we need a knockout so you want to throw in the towel. Why?

 

[High Speed Steel]

Informer. This is one thing that sticks in my mind.There is a thread here in which you started about the Section 1113 and within that thread is the procedure to renegotiate to create a "NEW" status quo after abrogation. I engaged you within that thread over the Duty to re-negotiate under the authority of the Railway Labor Act because it speaks to no timeline to create a new status quo only that the parties do have a duty to meet and I pointed that to you. I as well encouraged you to participate in the meeting at the Spirit Event Center and bring your argument forward. As the floor was opened to discussion the microphones remained silent as to your theory of what to expect in future negotiation because you knew it was only your presumed "THEORY" not represented by fact as you continue to do here! Why didn't you appear Informer, you had your chance to shine? So instead you choose to remain here on this forum and spread what I see as half truths supported only in theory. The paper tiger is obviously your MO....

 

[Frank Szabo]

Informer. This is one thing that sticks in my mind.There is a thread here in which you started about the Section 1113 and within that thread is the procedure to renegotiate to create a "NEW" status quo after abrogation. I engaged you within that thread over the Duty to re-negotiate under the authority of the Railway Labor Act because it speaks to no timeline to create a new status quo only that the parties do have a duty to meet and I pointed that to you. I as well encouraged you to participate in the meeting at the Spirit Event Center and bring your argument forward. As the floor was opened to discussion the microphones remained silent as to your theory of what to expect in future negotiation because you knew it was only your presumed "THEORY" not represented by fact as you continue to do here! Why didn't you appear Informer, you had your chance to shine? So instead you choose to remain here on this forum and spread what I see as half truths supported only in theory. The paper tiger is obviously your MO.... lol

Fixed your post for you ... in red.

 

[TWU informer]

Informer. This is one thing that sticks in my mind.There is a thread here in which you started about the Section 1113 and within that thread is the procedure to renegotiate to create a "NEW" status quo after abrogation. I engaged you within that thread over the Duty to re-negotiate under the authority of the Railway Labor Act because it speaks to no timeline to create a new status quo only that the parties do have a duty to meet and I pointed that to you. I as well encouraged you to participate in the meeting at the Spirit Event Center and bring your argument forward. As the floor was opened to discussion the microphones remained silent as to your theory of what to expect in future negotiation because you knew it was only your presumed "THEORY" not represented by fact as you continue to do here! Why didn't you appear Informer, you had your chance to shine? So instead you choose to remain here on this forum and spread what I see as half truths supported only in theory. The paper tiger is obviously your MO....

And so you want to sell the farm for 6 years and beyond, because there is no specified timeline to reach agreement, but you do agree negotiations will continue? Did I get that right?

You admit that negotiations will resume, but because you cannot find a timeline spoken of in the law you run scared like a chicken facing the butcher.

Well I can tell you the timeline on this POS offer, it is six years and then right to back to unspoken timeline negotiations.

So this could actually be much more than a six year agreement. Just as the current 2003 signed agreement we still have today was amendable in 2008. You are damn fool and cannot apply your own thoughts to the past or the future because you are so ate up with fear at the present moment.

The way I see it, your lack of spoken timeline in RLA Negotiations is more of a reason to VOTE NO not yes.
You want a 6 year deal with an unpsoken timeline at amendable.
I say start the unspoken timeline NOW, or more accurately continue the unspoken timeline we have been suffering since 2008.

I have no desire to attend a Local 514 meeting as long as cowards and idiots run the show. And your post here, combined with the included fact that you have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee is all one needs to know about why I refuse to attend any Local 514 function.

No Timeline NOW, No Timeline 6 years from now....correct?

But it is true that to emerge with a viable plan approved by the creditors, consensual agreements will be needed. You, Hewitt, Muillings, Goremanns, are all concession peddlers. I have an idea, lets have a vote where you guys that want to give concessions for jobs can do so until your heart is fullfilled, and the rest of us can maintain what we have. In other words, lets allow those that want to fund jobs with givebacks volunteer to work for less than those that do not maintain current status. Just like United Way, you can sign up and give all the charity you want, but don't force me to give.

 

[Bob Owens]

. The LBO is the best you have in front of you and the best Bob and the negotiating committee could come up with.

Knew that woulnt take too long. Who said that its comong back for a vote no matter what? Not me, that was Jim Little. I said "anything less than what UAL got is unacceptable" which brought all sorts of responses from the International.

Once the International put it out that it was going to a vote no matter what the company could concentrate on a deal that would split up the membership and get them 50% +1 of the vote, "Bob and the negotiating committee" had nothing to do with that. Like I say, foolow the pilots because whatever they decide to do determines the fate of the company anyway.

The LBO may be "the last best you have in front of you" but we can also say NO till they come back with something better.

 

[Strake]

There is nothing positive about letting the judge decide our fate no matter how others here may spin it. If you have any common sense at all, you will vote yes. Don't let your ego get in the way. Think logically and vote YES. You still have time to do the right thing.

 

[TWU informer]

There is nothing positive about letting the judge decide our fate no matter how others here may spin it. If you have any common sense at all, you will vote yes. Don't let your ego get in the way. Think logically and vote YES. You still have time to do the right thing.

MORE FEAR!

And begging everyone else to be afraid too.

OMG

The Judge is NOT GOING to decide our fate.
Negotiations will resume.
Don't allow your FEAR to prevent you from understanding the truth.

 

[Tex-Mech]

There is nothing positive about letting the judge decide our fate no matter how others here may spin it. If you have any common sense at all, you will vote yes. Don't let your ego get in the way. Think logically and vote YES. You still have time to do the right thing.

So what you are saying is that you have no confidence in your union negotiating a better deal once the actual 1113c negotiations begin on Tuesday and end before June 6th, or you just don't want to fight if the agreement is abrogated, or you have no clue as to how the process works?

 

[Buck]

There is nothing positive about letting the judge decide our fate no matter how others here may spin it. If you have any common sense at all, you will vote yes. Don't let your ego get in the way. Think logically and vote YES. You still have time to do the right thing.

It is really simple. After 20+ years of voting yes on what have been concessionary contracts, just vote no. There is no shame at being wrong your entire career but you can change.