TWU T-shirts - Slogans - Whine Rally

[TWU informer]

Nice try, but it wasn't a bailout. It was restitution for the government imposed shutdown of airspace.

Every Major News Reporting Service on the planet called it a "Bailout" and you show up here to parse words and call it restitution. Everytime I think you are gaining credibility with your postings you go and make some bonehead defense like that when management is subjected to negative comments.

While management types defend those bonus awards, it is clear employee groups grow more and more angered by this, and management just ignores those concerns. AMR will be headed for Bankruptcy first, then the employee anger will grow to scorched earth levels and we will all be watching and needing governement restitution as AA management/employee battles will make Eastern Airlines look like childs play.

Let the Jack Asses bring it on!

We will give them MORE than they are asking for!

Here is more good reading on the Airline BAILOUT:

Airline bailout criticized
Libertarians: 'It was a $15 billion mistake'

Dasbach said Libertarians understand the compassion behind wanting to help the ailing airline industry out of its jam. But he warned that by doing so, other industries may follow.

"If Congress bails out the airline industry, who's next?" Dasbach said.

Other groups also shared the Libertarian Party's concerns that related industries would appeal for government funding.

"The whole thing is so transparent. There are so many groups and interests lining up, wrapping themselves in the flag, arguing they need to be rescued," said Ron Utt of the Heritage Foundation in Washington yesterday.

"It's pushed as either disaster relief or national security, or if those arguments don't work, it's being pushed as economic stimulus," he told Reuters.

"Libertarians don't support corporate welfare. But if Congress is determined to spend our money, they should spend it for something they consider to be a genuine emergency – rather than for their usual assortment of handout-hungry corporate clients," Dasbach declared.

Eric,

Shouldn't the Labor Unions get "restitution" to compensate for loss of dues base since the numbers of union airline workers has eroded since 9/11?

Shouldn't my family enjoy some "restitution" for the loss of standard of living?

Instead the "restitution" idea has now flourished to Banks, Insurance Companies, Auto Makers, ect.

Who is going to give the US Citizen "restitution" when the Federal Government goes Bankrupt and Freedom Loving American's are suffering from a conversion to Socialism?

More Good Reading from the Airline Bailout Reporting Days

This policy is based on two premises: (1) that the airlines should be compensated for losses due to federal action; and (2) that the airlines should be compensated for losses due to the decrease in demand after the terrorist attacks. Neither are true.

First, the airlines grounded themselves before the federal government took any action. American and United both ordered all their flights to land at the nearest airport before the Federal Aviation Administration extended that policy to all airlines. Indeed, at this point United discovered a fourth plane that was hijacked when that plane did not respond. The federal government arguably would not have taken action so quickly had the airlines not led the way themselves.

Even assuming arguendo that the action is a taking, the airlines would have great difficulty proving damages. For example, a constitutional taking may have occurred if the government deprived the airlines of all economically viable use. But in order to recover damages, the airlines must prove that they, in fact, had some economically viable use on those days. Similarly, the government action is arguably a taking if it deprived the airlines of legitimate, investment-backed expectations. The airlines, however, did not have such a well-founded expectation in the wake of the terrorist attacks. To portray the FAA's order as a taking, one must believe that air traffic would have resumed its normal patterns on September 12.

Second, the legislation directly compensates the airlines for reduction in passenger demand. Decreases in demand, like hijackings and crashes, are fundamental known business risks. Although the terrorist attacks involved an unusual risk from a quantitative perspective, from a qualitative perspective they are indistinguishable from the normal, garden-variety risk that airlines face on a daily basis.

Why, then, should the federal government pay for the grounding of the airlines? On September 11, the airlines, not the government, were responsible for security. When terrorists breached that security, the airlines, not the government, should pay the consequences. Any reimbursement to the air carriers is a meritless transfer of wealth from the taxpayers to the airline shareholders.

One vocal critic is Senator Peter Fitzgerald, a Republican from Illinois who was the sole senator to vote against the airline bailout. "Other industries don't have the raw political clout the airlines have," he told a group of travel industry executives and labor leaders who came to Congress last Friday to seek aid. "The payouts to the airline industry were grossly excessive," Fitzgerald added. "The only people who got bailed out were the shareholders. The one million airline employees were left twisting in the wind."

 

[TWU informer]

Here is another example of top management with their head in the sand when in comes to employee anger over the bonus awards.

Quote of the day

From the Star-Telegram Article
American Airlines union protests executive bonuses

http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/1317344.html


Jeff Brundage, who heads human resources for American, said the contract talks were the prime reason for the demonstration.

"This is a typical thing you see during negotiations," Brundage said. "It’s part of the union experience."

Go ahead and keep dismissing the anger Mr. Brundage, and see where that attitude takes your airline. I don't see where the protest will change anything, but Mr. Brundage should not under estimate the anger in the work force as a whole. My anger regarding this has nothing to do with my worthless union and my experience with that problem. And I refuse to accept that union members are taking the time to protest at HDQ simply to be part of the "Union Experience".

Of course since the TWU is back under managements desk today and diligently working together, I can see why he dismisses the protest to having any relevance.

 

[eolesen]

Dave, just because the media or a couple politicians label the reimbursement a bailout doesn't make it one.

Case law shows that restitution can be paid to businesses for lost revenues during the time their business were closed, as long as it can be determined such closing was directly caused by a defendant’s conduct.

There's never been any suspension of an entire business in any other industry that I can think of, so all of the examples I find were directly related to criminal activity. Maybe FWAAA knows of other examples.

You can argue about how much each airline should have received as restitution, but what was reimbursed didn't come anywhere close to covering the actual expenses incurred.

However convenient it is, to call the 2001 payments a bailout is simply ignorant.

 

[TWU informer]

Eric,

Shouldn't the Labor Unions get "restitution" to compensate for loss of dues base since the numbers of union airline workers has eroded since 9/11?

Shouldn't my family enjoy some "restitution" for the loss of standard of living?

Instead the "restitution" idea has now flourished to Banks, Insurance Companies, Auto Makers, ect.

Who is going to give the US Citizen "restitution" when the Federal Government goes Bankrupt and Freedom Loving American's are suffering from a conversion to Socialism?

Lastly,

Is it your position that AA and UAL did not begin grounding their aircraft before the FAA did?

That is not what my reading of the situation concludes.

And would the airlines have not grounded their fleet without Government Mandate until the safety factor was resolved? I can just see it now, AA-UAL flying the next three days without an understanding of what had taken place. You think the Government was the "defendant" in this situation?

 

[FWAAA]

The ultimate defendants were Osama bin Laden and his gang of al-Qaida garbage, but getting $5 billion from them would have been somewhat difficult. So the US Treasury (like a well-to-do parent) stepped in to reimburse airlines for their loss of revenue and their continuing expenses for the week of September 11, 2001.

Still, reasonable people can differ about whether the terrorist attacks really required that all air traffic be shut down for three days. Had the President and Norm Minetta not grounded all traffic, would AA and UA have grounded all their planes for three days? I dunno. Was it absolutely necessary or was it hypercautious over-reaction by politicians in over their heads? I'm not smart enough to decide.

 

[TWU informer]

The ultimate defendants were Osama bin Laden and his gang of al-Qaida garbage, but getting $5 billion from them would have been somewhat difficult. So the US Treasury (like a well-to-do parent) stepped in to reimburse airlines for their loss of revenue and their continuing expenses for the week of September 11, 2001.

Still, reasonable people can differ about whether the terrorist attacks really required that all air traffic be shut down for three days. Had the President and Norm Minetta not grounded all traffic, would AA and UA have grounded all their planes for three days? I dunno. Was it absolutely necessary or was it hypercautious over-reaction by politicians in over their heads? I'm not smart enough to decide.

I like the way you answer questions directed to Eric, almost as if you are.....

Oops, Moderator alert! Cannot finish that comment without getting more time off from the....

Oops cannot finish that comment either without time off...

That means You win, I cannot express my true feelings here.

 

[FWAAA]

If the two of you were having a private discussion, then you should take it to private message or email. I doubt that my post angered eolesen - but even if it did, I couldn't care less. My post didn't constitute a personal attack on anyone nor did it belittle anyone's posts.

I was under the mistaken impression that grown-ups were simply posting to a public board. My bad.

 

[eolesen]

Maybe you should go research the boundries of restitution, Dave. It's only related to the time that business was closed due to the government closing off airspace.

If you were paid in full for that timeframe, you didn't have a material loss of income which was directly related. As far as I know, welding wasn't prohibited during the airspace closure, and the bases stayed open and operational. If you were sent home without pay, you'd have an argument for restitution.

Your claims for wage loss, etc.? Please... You're more likely to get a check from Obama reimbursing you for the loss in value on your house or 401K.

And would the airlines have not grounded their fleet without Government Mandate until the safety factor was resolved? I can just see it now, AA-UAL flying the next three days without an understanding of what had taken place. You think the Government was the "defendant" in this situation?

If the government wanted to, they could rightfully omit the expenses related to the flights grounded voluntarily by AA and UA. But once the government order was in place, the meter started running.

You seem to live in an alternate universe at times, Dave. Your fantasy view is AA somehow got paid 100% of what they lost in terms of revenue, or expended in terms of overtime in the call centers and airports to deal with this, hotel costs, bag delivery expenses, etc. It didn't come even close. The claims paid out were pennies on the dollar to the actual costs for those three days.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VpdWOVsM0o

 

[frontline]

I agree with the sentiment. Let's put our energies into getting a contract. Idiot TWU didn't like AA's first two offers, well I doubt they are going to get much better as long as unemployment is heading toward 10%. I'm sure there are plenty of scabs out there willing to jump in if we walk. Short term contract with some forward movement is the way to go right now, not useless marches.

 

[Hackman]

I agree with the sentiment. Let's put our energies into getting a contract. Idiot TWU didn't like AA's first two offers, well I doubt they are going to get much better as long as unemployment is heading toward 10%. I'm sure there are plenty of scabs out there willing to jump in if we walk. Short term contract with some forward movement is the way to go right now, not useless marches.

Of course you agree Flatline, any display of discontent might make your management friends angry, and you might have to tuck your tail under further than it is.

The twu are idiots agreed, but they finally did the right thing rejecting another major concessionary contract. Did you read the proposals from the company? They were worse than it's ever been. In your brainless mind any contract is a good one. As long as you keep your pension and your paycheck, screw anyone else or the future of the profession.

You shouldn't talk about scabs Flatline, because of all the indications you've given, you would more than likely would be one of them.

 

[Hopeful]

I agree with the sentiment. Let's put our energies into getting a contract. Idiot TWU didn't like AA's first two offers, well I doubt they are going to get much better as long as unemployment is heading toward 10%. I'm sure there are plenty of scabs out there willing to jump in if we walk. Short term contract with some forward movement is the way to go right now, not useless marches.

That's the problem with pro company sorts like you, you see a paltry monetary offer and think it's the "end all." It was a lump sump that did not increase your salary, but pensionable.
Are you aware of the other little goodies in that contract? One biggie was the company wouldve have started putting NON LICENSED mechanics in the line stations.
The company wants that very badly and if they insist, then I can guarantee you the mechanics will shut this place down. But unlike the debacle at NWA, we won't strike, we will keep planes on the ground LEGALLY.

 

[Deleted member 14439]

I am an AMT. Is it just me or did t-squared and the boys look a little foolish? I mean c`mon jumping up and down yelling and screaming? That is not the image I want the public to have of us, we are better than that. A bunch of loudmouths acting like spoiled children is counterproductive. Guys claim to be "professional" and then act like that? We will get what we deserve...NOTHING. You idiots need to start acting like grown men and not spoiled little children.I `m embarrassed for the entire profession.
When is the last time any of you went to a crew meeting and it stayed professional? How about a 'town hall" meeting with members of management? You do not see the pilots acting this way do you. Torres-torres you re one of the worst. All of you loudmouth ricans shut up and stay out of the way. I am just sick to death of guys shooting off their mouths and then can`t back it up on the floor or line. I am a professional AMT on bay 2 AFW and I approve this post !!!

 

[Bob Owens]

Serious question: Should the receipt of federal money restrict companies from ever paying out bonuses?

If so, then better get ready to repay that $800 every AA employee received in late 2007 in lieu of profit sharing (when AA misssed the target but paid out $64 million to the employees anyway).

Sure, take it out of the $120,000 we had to give up.

 

[Bob Owens]

Eric,
Who is going to give the US Citizen "restitution" when the Federal Government goes Bankrupt and Freedom Loving American's are suffering from a conversion to Socialism?

Socialism, economic and social system under which essential industries and social services are publicly and cooperatively owned and democratically controlled with a view to equal opportunity and equal benefit for all. The term socialism also refers to the doctrine behind this system and the political movement inspired by it.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761577990/Socialism.html

Corporate bailouts are not Socialism.

What we have going on now is something entirely new. It is the public underwriting of private assetts where the interests of the many are subordinate to the interests of the owners of Corporations.

We (the public) are not aquiring assetts, we are aquiring liability.

We are headed towards a Corporatocracy, not Socialsim.


Corporations are the dominant forces in our society. They have no moral or social plan, their sole purpose is the enrichment of their owners. So it shouldnt suprise us when our government cuts welfare for human beings and then provides bailouts to corporations who then dole out millions in bonuses to its executives, it shouldnt suprise us when the government does nothing as energy corporations double the prices that they charge(and post record profits) and Federal Judges confiscate the labor of airline workers, slash wages and benifits so Airlines (other corporations) can continue to function despite the greed of the energy corporations.

Government, at the behest of corporations has decided to impose decreased working conditions and payrates on workers, restricting their rights to act in their best interests, but has allowed Corporations, and the people running them, to continue to act in their own best intrerests regardless of the effects on the people and the Nation. With the airlines the government rewrote labor contracts but allowed the oil companies to continue to charge as they pleased.

With no intent to start a debate about the merits and drawbacks of Socialism, Socialism is supposed to benifit society and provide continuous improvement in living standards for the entire population. Nobody is claiming that the bailout of corporations will do that, instead they are threatening that if we dont bail them out that things will get worse for us.


With our move towards Corporatocracy -the merger of State and Corporate power, the welfare and freedom of the people and even the Nation is subordinate to the interests of corporations. We are all expected to sacrifice for the benifit of corporations. We saw a clear example of that with the surge in energy corporate profits and the government mandated reductions in pay and benifits for airline workers. Clearly the increase in Fuel prices is a driving factor in airline finaincial woes yet the workers were forced to take cuts, as worker compensation was slashed, fuel costs, and energy corporate profits, went up even further. Instead of going after the energy corporations who were clearly profiting from the surge in prices the government went after the airline workers even though the workers were'nt the source of the airlines woes.


In the meantime the right wing side of the Corporate media will claim we are moving towards Socialism(which most Americans confuse with authoritarianism) and the left side will claim we have to bail out the Rich to prevent even further suffering for the working class. Both sides are the voice of Corporatism because it all comes from Corporations. ABC, FOX, CNN, MSNBC are all incorporated. All are commercial enterprises dedicated to act in the interests of its owners, which could be other corporations. None of them are a public service or non-profit dedicated to acting in the public interests.

Either way this is a far cry from what the founding fathers had in mind. To them while entreprenuralism was to be encouraged, Corporations were something that needed strict regulation. Corporations were suspect because of the idea of limited liability. Corporations could not own other corporations or sue anyobody. Only individuals could. After the Civil War corporations used amendments to the Constitution that gave ex-slaves the rights of human beings to give a Corporation the status as "A person" in that they could do everything a human being could do except become a citizen. The corporate media provides just enough cleavage, violence and scandal to keep the publics interest.

Few people would argue that the Federal Reserve isn't the most powerful Institution in the United States, even less realize that its a Corporation owned by other Corporations.