TWU's side of the rejection!

Hopeful

Veteran
Dec 21, 2002
5,998
347
The TWU media relations is non-existent!!! AA couldn't possibly explain how it offered its worst proposal to date after the Union reduced its proposal to meet the company in the middle. Obviously, it's a story the TWU doesn't want to tell.
******************************
TWU explains why it turned down American Airlines contract offer
Terry Maxon

More details have come out on American Airlines' offer to the Transport Workers Union, rejected by the TWU last week. Here are some broad observations.
1 American appears serious about not putting forward anything that would increase its cost structure.
It proposed a lump sum of 5 percent of an employee's base pay at date of contract signing and another 3.5 percent a year later. That would mean more extra pay of $5,500 to $6,000 for mechanics and related employees.
But those increases are not built into the pay rates, but are one-time payments. So an employee making $68,000 a year before the 2 ½-year contract would still be making $68,000 a year afterward.
That's important for the next contract, because the two sides would start out discussing what to do about that $68,000 rate of pay rather than $73,900, as it would have been if the 5 percent increase and 3.5 percent increase had been built into the pay rates.
To repeat American's hotline message after TWU rejected its latest offer last week:
American is trying to balance the union's requests for improvements in pay, holidays, sick leave and vacation with the fact it has the highest labor costs in the industry. To offset that disadvantage, American needs improvements in overall work rules to close the gap between the company and its competitors.
2. The union appears serious about not giving any concessions this time around.
Differing TWU committees represent different groups of employees. Although each committee put it a different way, their hotline messages resembled what the committee representing stores employees put out to members late Friday:
This Proposal did contain additional concessions in which the Company implies are to help remain competitive with the rest of the Industry. The Stores Sub-Committee is not interested in entertaining a Proposal which is concessionary in nature.
According to the union, American wants to stop paying retiree medical insurance for new hires; not allow new hires into the defined-benefit pension plan; and would not match the new-hire employees' contribution to the 401(k) plans for the first year of employment.
A ground worker told me that the company's proposal would allow them to out-source ground handling at airports with 15 or fewer American flights a day - leading to speculation that it would allow American to get rid of thousands of its ground workers and use lower-cost contract labor instead.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As if we didn't give enough back in 2003.

I wonder what concessions the company is considering for the executives?...Maybe a $10 co-payment to the annual country club dues?
 
Let's try to be honest for a moment: do any of you seriously think that meeting the stated demands of TWU, APA and APFA wouldn't push the company into Chapter 11? You might gain for a few months, until the court guts your contract, but you'd lose far more in the long run (including pensions). How does this make any logical sense?
 
To be totally honest, reimbursed private club memberships and lease cars for management went away while Carty was still at the helm. I'm sure there's probably something else that replaced it in terms of base salary, but the perks aren't what they used to be when Crandall and Gunn were around.

The only perks left that I know of for 8's and above are Admirals Club memberships and reserved space flying, and the fair market value of personal flying is computed as taxable income when load factors hit a certain level...

If AA hits the skids, you'll be wishing you thought twice about this turd of an offer... right about the time you see what the S1113 terms turn out to be.
 
I notce no mention of the TWU taking our retirement medical via VEBA.

This is a concession no matter how you want to add it up.

Jim Little is dead set on getting his hands on that medical plan so he can charge over inflated premiums and skim the extra money to politicians.

TWU Taking on any of more of my insurance needs that leads directly to increased payroll deduction is a not starter in my mind.
 
If AA hits the skids, you'll be wishing you thought twice about this turd of an offer... right about the time you see what the S1113 terms turn out to be.


True enough, but if oil drops further and the banking bailout happens, we could also quickly be looking at record profits and reliance on fuzzy math bean counters to calcualte our profit sharing.

Besides the Pilot will dictate our future rather we think twice about this turd or not.

So please be fair and objective when spewing management fear tactics upon us.
 
TWU informer said:
I notice no mention of the TWU taking our retirement medical via VEBA.


I have no faith in the ability of the TWU to administer a lemonade stand,much less a retirement medical program.Although considering we're about to toss almost a trillion dollars(AIG,Fannie,Freddie) at the mess the Wall Street whiz kids made, retirement may well come on the day you die.


GM and the VEBA


In fact, another VEBA that was negotiated with the UAW not too long ago has already gone south. Earthmoving-equipment maker Caterpillar established a VEBA to manage its retirees’ health care costs in 1998, paying a reported $32.3 million into it. That VEBA ran short in 2004, after just six years, and has now spawned a rash of lawsuits, with retirees suing to keep Caterpillar from increasing their share of health care costs and Caterpillar in turn suing the UAW.


AMA's Take on the VEBA

In fact, a union's takeover of benefits has sometimes resulted in even more aggressive cost-cutting efforts than when the benefits remained under corporate control.

"Instead of saying, 'GM, you'd better give us this, this and this,' now [the union says], 'It's our money.' "
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #8
l...

If AA hits the skids, you'll be wishing you thought twice about this turd of an offer... right about the time you see what the S1113 terms turn out to be.


AA hasn't hit the skids yet and they're offering garbage. If they truly hit the skids, all they have to do is re-use the 2003 playbook and threaten bankruptcy and the unions will fold like cheap suits once again and take even more away, unless, of course, you're in upper management.

By the way, I am glad that the Congress is looking hard at greedy executive pay while the taxpayers are going to foot the $700 billion - $1 trillion dollar Wall Street Bailout.

I can't wait until it his the airlines.
 
By the way, I am glad that the Congress is looking hard at greedy executive pay while the taxpayers are going to foot the $700 billion - $1 trillion dollar Wall Street Bailout.

I can't wait until it his the airlines.

It already has -- you just haven't noticed yet.

One of the largest aircraft leasing companies (ILFC) is wrapped up in this, as they're wholly owned by AIG.

Then there's travel.... the companies collapsing make up a significant portion of AA's NYC corporate accounts. Lehman and Merrill were top accounts for AA. I'm not as certain about Barclays and B of A, who are their new owners.

AA's been able to ride out the loss of leisure pax who couldn't affort expensive vacations anymore, but I don't think they'll be able to make up as easily for the loss of Wall Street traffic.
 
It already has -- you just haven't noticed yet.

That's what I've been hearing. As expected, USA-LHR yields were already suffering earlier this year once everyone was permitted to fly to Heathrow. This spring, Arpey told investors that all other transatlantic destinations were picking up the slack in late spring, but obviously many of those were leisure passengers.

Now, with the investment bank meltdown, the availability of unsold F and J seats BOS/NYC-LHR is gonna balloon. Great for non-revs, not so good for profitability.

My prediction is that oil can drop to $50/bbl again and profits won't be there. The tanking economy will take care of that.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #12
It already has -- you just haven't noticed yet.

One of the largest aircraft leasing companies (ILFC) is wrapped up in this, as they're wholly owned by AIG.

Then there's travel.... the companies collapsing make up a significant portion of AA's NYC corporate accounts. Lehman and Merrill were top accounts for AA. I'm not as certain about Barclays and B of A, who are their new owners.

AA's been able to ride out the loss of leisure pax who couldn't affort expensive vacations anymore, but I don't think they'll be able to make up as easily for the loss of Wall Street traffic.

I was specifically referring to the executive pay issue. When companies need a bailout from the government or seek bankruptcy protection, which, in either case, is bankrolled by the taxpayer, then the greedy executives need to be reigned in.
Since a CEO's first and foremost priority is shareholder value, then he or she needs to bear brunt of this.. Part of what we are seeing now is corporate greed and excess to maximize shareholder value coming home to roost.

I know pro company, pro management folks like yourself subscribe to the "greed is good" mantra, but tell me now, how is it good?
 
My prediction is that oil can drop to $50/bbl again and profits won't be there. The tanking economy will take care of that.

You may be correct on that one, especially if this blasted bailout goes through as designed.

All it will do is delay the inevitable financial meltdown until the next president's term (regardless of who that might be) and further enrich a few already filthy rich individuals.

I read just a while ago a piece about an alternate plan. The person figured if this money were distributed to the citizens, it would amount to approx. $297,000 per adult, double that for a family.

This would wipe out most debt of the citizens and almost every attendant financial problem would be solved except for the poor executives who might be reduced to eating beans and rice for a few years. Too damned bad.

Since the present economy model is designed to operate on debt, a new economy would have to emerge.

Sounds good to me.
 
You may be correct on that one, especially if this blasted bailout goes through as designed.

All it will do is delay the inevitable financial meltdown until the next president's term (regardless of who that might be) and further enrich a few already filthy rich individuals.

Agreed, the 20 year trend of socializing risk while privatizing profits for the benifit of the few, coupled with the decline in real wages for the masses, will inevitably lead to overall financial decline. Its happened to many great powers before us.

The S&L crisis, LTCM, a few others in between and now the granddaddy of them all, $700 billion of taxpayer funds to bail out the rich. Its all part of a process to undo the transfer of wealth that followed the New Deal and its working very well, each time the figures get bigger and bigger. The tax burden gets shifted away from the rich then the taxes that remain are used to bail them out. Social programs that put food on the tables of the poor are gutted and replaced by social programs that guarantee the rich against financial loss.

Inflated housing values extended credit and allowed people to continue to buy when they really couldnt afford it. Easy credit helped lower wages, well sooner or later the shortfall becomes critical.

So far I dont see that much of a decline in air travel though. Non-revving is still no picnic.
 
You may be correct on that one, especially if this blasted bailout goes through as designed.

All it will do is delay the inevitable financial meltdown until the next president's term (regardless of who that might be) and further enrich a few already filthy rich individuals.

Completely agree. I still don't comprehend why the taxpayers are gonna buy up all the junk mortgages these thieves wrote.

I read just a while ago a piece about an alternate plan. The person figured if this money were distributed to the citizens, it would amount to approx. $297,000 per adult, double that for a family.

This would wipe out most debt of the citizens and almost every attendant financial problem would be solved except for the poor executives who might be reduced to eating beans and rice for a few years. Too damned bad.

I'm curious about the numbers in that article. $750 billion divided by $297,000 would only fund 2.5 million people. If "the citizens" refer to all the adults in the USA, it would require more like $594 trillion (Approx 200 million adults x $297k = $594 trillion). It would take years to print that much money. :D

If only 2.5 million get the $297k, who decides which families hit the jackpot?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top