Us Airways, Attendants Reportedly Near Pact

[DCAflyer]

You are exactly correct.

[post="227940"][/post]​

Is there any argument against sending it out for a straw vote. I think it would be a good strategic move with nothing to lose. I have to believe that the company would simply sign off on AFA's last offer if AFA were going for a straw vote. If it didn't drop the motion at that point the company has more to lose than we do. We can still do the CHAOS thing if the for some reason the company doesn't drop the motion and the judge grants it (which I think he would be reallly hard-pressed to grant it because AFA would just tie the whole thing up in the appeal process).

 

[UseYourHead]

DCA,

Like our RC4, the AFA can send out the document now as a TA, they simply have to agree that it is one. The company already said that they are not moving the other 10 million that direction...The AFA could also agree to the full amount and send it out.

My guess is, they know it will pass as it is a much better deal than a 100% paycut or getting fired for an illegal job action.

The cowards way out is to not give it to the membership to decide. A coward is afraid to stand up and say we did the best we could do, here it is, vote as you see fit.

If I were an FA, I would demand that and be on the phone tonight doing so. They are about to take your job away from you over anger and lack of any sane actions...remember Eastern? They showed them who was boss, right?

Then remember Continental, they ate crow for a decade, and now reap the benifits that could be you!

These kind of actions are going to put you right next to EAL in the history books!

Good luck to us all!

Pitbull, can AFA send its last proposal (the $10M short proposal) to the membership for ratification? That way, if it gets ratified and the company still tries to abrogate the contract, we can say "look, we negotiated in good faith, we came only $10M short, the membership ratified and the company still said no. Certainly, there can be a very meritorious "good faith" argument against the company if this new one gets ratified.

Any thoughts?

DCAflyer

P.S., if it came to being ratified, I can't imagine that the company wouldn't just take what it can get and drop the abrogation matter.

[post="227932"][/post]​

 

[ITRADE]

Will the "real Itrade" please stand up....

I thought you were a pax, and that you didn't work for U???? h34r:

Let's see...might that be a "lie"?

[post="227908"][/post]​

Ummm, it is possible for passengers to have business matters to attend to at the Crystal Palace....

 

[jimntx]

DCA,

Like our RC4, the AFA can send out the document now as a TA, they simply have to agree that it is one. The company already said that they are not moving the other 10 million that direction...The AFA could also agree to the full amount and send it out.

[post="227967"][/post]​

Spinning! Spinning! I'm getting dizzy! The AFA situation is NOT like the pilot/RC4. Your company stooges wanted to do an unconstitutional end-around on your own negotiators by sending out a company proposal that your negotiators did not agree to.

The AFA has made a best effort to negotiate with the company. It is the company that is refusing to agree. By the way negotiate is not a synonym for roll over and play dead.

Because you will still be making in excess of $100,000/yr, you think everyone should just give in to preserve your standard of living--even if the peons like the flight attendants, res and gate agents will qualify for food stamps under their new pay scales. I suspect that ain't gonna happen this time.

GO AFA!

 

[PITbull]

Ummm, it is possible for passengers to have business matters to attend to at the Crystal Palace....

[post="228075"][/post]​

No. And mighty "far fetched"! :down:

Try again...

 

[USA320Pilot]

As I have repeatedly said, GECAS and the other financiers are requiring labor to fully participate in the new business plan. In this case, the AFA must reach the cost cut target or management will have no choice but to ask the court to impose at least $157 million in cost cuts, which could become even larger next week.

Today the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review commented on what I have been saying all along. The newspaper reported GE Capital recently agreed to lower lease terms that provide US Airways with $136 million a year in additional cash flow and 100 percent refinancing of 39 regional jets, Seabury Group CEO John Luth said. In return, it wants the company to achieve all of its $1 billion in labor savings by Jan. 14 and to exit bankruptcy court by June. Luth indicated that GE Capital was the driving force behind US Airways' decision to raise its labor demand from $800 million to almost $1.1 billion since its Sept. 12 bankruptcy filing.

The GE demands are no different than what ALPA faced during the debate on the LOA 91 RJ agreement last summer.

See Story

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

How many times are you going to post the same rhetoric and the same links to the same stories?

Non one cares anymore.

 

[ClueByFour]

I'm amazed that the management stooges on this board seem to think it's somehow incumbent upon groups to hit these mythical "targets." Give me a freaking break. I've yet to see a justification for any of these mythical "targets."

ALPA is foolish for "hitting the ask."

 

[USA320Pilot]

ALPA exceeded the target. The RC4 controlled MEC was the first MEC in the history of ALPA to exceed the "ask". The 3 TWU unions and the CWA met the "ask" and the AFA will likely too.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[SpinDoc]

I'm amazed that the management stooges on this board seem to think it's somehow incumbent upon groups to hit these mythical "targets." Give me a freaking break. I've yet to see a justification for any of these mythical "targets."

ALPA is foolish for "hitting the ask."

[post="228141"][/post]​

The AFA and IAM obviously don't have vision
to see the long term. The company is trying to
dismantle the huge debt structure that has sent
it into bankruptcy 2 times. Without restructuring
the debt (which includes labor costs)
the company cannot continue to survive. The
goal is to lower costs to LCC levels, or slightly
lower which will allow the company to start
building up cash to pay down the debt and
expand. With expansion and cash in the bank,
some of the money that is being taken away
right now can be returned to the union members
in the form of profit sharing or salary increases.

 

[700UW]

Ahh, the ignorance is bliss on the boards.

Your "ask" was exceeded to pay for your 10% DCP, pay for the retiree medical and to pay your lump sum in the latter years of the contract.

Go back and ask your Negotiating Committee, the company readily provided this information to the other unions and their negotiating committees.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Ahh, the ignorance is bliss on the boards.

Your "ask" was exceeded to pay for your 10% DCP, pay for the retiree medical and to pay your lump sum in the latter years of the contract.

Go back and ask your Negotiating Committee, the company readily provided this information to the other unions and their negotiating committees.

[post="228154"][/post]​

Don't muddy USA320pilot's arguments with fact!

He doesn't like it and it makes him repeat himself.

 

[ITRADE]

No. And mighty "far fetched"! :down:

Try again...

[post="228132"][/post]​

Sorry, you're asking me to prove the negative.

Not my job.

 

[USA320Pilot]

The company asked for $295 million per year in cost cuts, ALPA provided $300 million in the first year and an average of over $360 million per year for the duration of the contract. Furthermore, if the RC4 had sent out the September 6 proposal, instead of roll calling it down by a 4 to 8 margin, which was a decision made against the advice of every advisor and officer, the final deal would have been better.

Since that point the 279 fleet count, minimum block hours, CAR's, fragmentation, MDA displacement rights, and 40% of the DC Plan were lost and other productivity changes were made.

Yes siree, "ignorance is bliss on the boards", especially when one is about to be "imposed".

By the way, speaking of the ALPA's RC4, do not be surprised if they lose control of the MEC on January 31.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[SKY HIGH]

DCA,Like our RC4, the AFA can send out the document now as a TA.
My guess is, they know it will pass as it is a much better deal than a 100% paycut or getting fired for an illegal job action.
The cowards way out is to not give it to the membership to decide. A coward is afraid to stand up and say we did the best we could do, here it is, vote as you see fit.


Skyhigh states: Cowards at U? The ''LAST'' TA barely passed in several bases and was VOTED DOWN in Pittsburgh. Now, tell these F/A's that they have to UP their flying AGAIN, loose their flying options and have 50% LESS VACATION?
21 DAYS for a predominately female workforce who have "family and children" OBLIGATIONS??? You've just pissed OFF thousands of frontline workers who spend the most time with the customer.

where do you buy those CHAOS t-shirts?