[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/22/2003 5
14 PM chipmunn wrote:
Zephyr:
Zephyr said: "What you don’t get is that they are using the same arguments against you that you used against them. And by the way, you are now singing the same tune that they were singing back then. And the ironic part is that the medicine you dished out (give up your buddy to save your job), has been served in larger doses to ALPA than any other union."
Chip comments: Zephyr, I disagree. Every group took a restructuring agreement and modified restructuring agreement cut, but nobody except the pilots has taken a third cut with their retirement this year or has been asked for a devastating fourth cut.
I wholeheartedly supported the first two rounds of cuts because we all sacrificed to save the airline, but then things changed.
As stated above, ALPA then took a third cut when LOA 83 was MEC ratified with the company holding a loaded gun to the MEC’s head, to lower the company's pension obligation, but did any other group? Now management wants ALPA to take a fourth cut, but it appears it's not going to happen in the current form, regardless of what happens to the company.
ALPA has made concessions to lower US Airways' pension obligation while retirement fund market values have been reduced, by nobody else has. In fact, the other seven defined benefit plans have gone down by about $500 million with no non-ALPA employee retirement concessions to fund the other defined benefit pensions.
The fact is every employee except the pilots have only taken the initial and modified restructuring agreement cuts, where ALPA has already taken the additional LOA 83 retirement cut. Now management is seeking to have only the pilots have their pension terminated. Even the FSA and CSA employees cannot make the claim their pension was terminated and all of their benefits eliminated.
I recognize life is not always fair, but the January 21 ALPA code-a-phone said the RSA testimony centered on its financing agreement with US Airways. The RSA representative admitted after making numerous evasive statements under cross-examination that there are potentially other ways to satisfy the final DIP investment conditions, other than to terminate the pilots’ pension plan. He testified that RSA was "deeply skeptical" that the pilots pension plan could not be terminated, and when asked if RSA was using or going to use its DIP financing agreement to apply negotiating leverage against ALPA and the US Airways pilots, the RSA representative testified "no."
Well Mr. Siegel and Mr. Glass' fast track restructuring is at risk and yesterday Mr. Butler told the court liquidation is imminent. Well if true and the pension is the only major item holding up bankruptcy emergence, then if RSA says "(there are) other ways to satisfy the final DIP investment conditions" I suggest that management and RSA find those alternatives.
In my opinion, either an acceptable alternative to ALPA is found or Mr. Siegel and Mr. Glass will see their restructuring fail.
Zephyr, this is ALPA's fight and I do not want to see anybody lose anything else, but with all due respect, I strongly disagree with your comments above because the facts prove different.
When you or any other group take three pension cuts and is asked for a fourth devastating cut, then you would have an argument to support your comments above. Until then, I believe your comparison and thoughts are invalid.
Sincerely,
Chip
----------------
[/blockquote]
Chip,
With all the givebacks the entire employee groups have given back and the $$ from GE, do we really need the 200 million from B? That seems to be a pittance for all we are giving up. Can't we get rid of that L**CH. I am asking you because you seem to have some information that isn't shared with the rest of us. Respectfully, Stewbear
