Why a NO vote is good for US Airways.

[repeet]

With all of this negativity I thought I would put a positive spin on this situation. Let''s look at a couple of points that would be advantages for the company if a no vote causes the judge to abrogate the Mechanics and Related contract.
1) Big money hates Unions. Having a large integral part of the work force as employees at will will give the company the greatest flexibility at being lean, mean, and efficient (work rules). This would make US Airways a better investment.
2) The 80% rule says that 20% of a group does 80% of the work. By allowing the managers and forman to handpick whom they lay off, they can get 100% of the work done with 50% fewer people. This results in a smaller payroll and a less combative work environment.
3) Being without a contract, the company can negotiate a new one from scratch, without all of the legacy pork in it.
Of course you could always vote yes. That would mean the smallest amount of change for everyone.
This Tuesday we get to decide just how much change we are willing to endure.

 

[Lynx_plyr02]

Employees at will dosnt mean we are without a union .It means we are free to strike , and that SIR, is the biggest threat.Dont believe it wont happen.We may out of a contract ,but we will still be a union.

 

[willnotworkforfree]

Na..still going to vote NO.

 

[AgtN3]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/16/2002 12:59:24 AM repeet wrote:

With all of this negativity I thought I would put a positive spin on this situation. Let's look at a couple of points that would be advantages for the company if a "no" vote causes "the judge" to abrogate the Mechanics and Related contract.

1) Big money hates Unions. Having a large integral part of the work force as "employees at will" will give the company the greatest flexibility at being lean, mean, and efficient (work rules). This would make US Airways a better investment.

2) The "80% rule" says that 20% of a group does 80% of the work. By allowing the managers and forman to handpick whom they lay off, they can get 100% of the work done with 50% fewer people. This results in a smaller payroll and a less combative work environment.

3) Being without a contract, the company can negotiate a new one from scratch, without all of the legacy pork in it.

Of course you could always vote "yes". That would mean the smallest amount of change for everyone.

This Tuesday we get to decide just how much change we are willing to endure.



----------------
[/blockquote]
1. Q. Why does big money hate Unions?
A. Because without them they would be bigger money

2. Too bad mgmt and foremen are not all in the 20% bracket.

3. Company must like to eat pig they brought along the legacy. Let them Eat porridge just like US Vote NO

 

[cavalier]

We may out of a contract ,but we will still be a union.



Without contract no seniority rights

Without contract no protection of any kind other than an outside attorney bought and paid for by that individual employee

Without contract no job description at which point you must perform any and all duties asked

Without a contract the IAM is even more unless than people are screaming they are now, but maybe that is a good thing because people will not have the IAM to blame at that point for working conditions they can‘t tolerate

Without a contract that manager you always loved so much can dump you for just about any reason one can think of

Without a contract you must actually work the entire time you are there, IF, you are there

 

[lindy]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/16/2002 1:27:16 AM Lynx_plyr02 wrote:

"Employees at will" dosnt mean we are without a union .It means we are free to strike , and that SIR, is the biggest threat.Dont believe it wont happen.We may out of a contract ,but we will still be a union.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Yes, a union headed by 141-M. A union that you do not like. A union that has agreed to have you vote twice, because they think it is in your best interests. A union that will represent you before the Judge after being rejected by their membership. If you think that is a union, you are sadly mistaken. Is it not wise to get the best deal you can at the present, keep the money flowing, preserve jobs, and then work to oust the IAM?

You are battling a two front war. You are going to lose. Is it not better to retrench, focus on one goal at a time and limit your losses? There maybe some jobs at SWA and UPS, but not for everybody. There are mechanics from AAL who are losing their jobs as the F-100 fleet gets parked.
If one does get hired, you will start on the bottom, graveyard shift, no holidays, minimum vacation, and garbage work assignments. You will be responsible for re-locating your family with no assistance from the new company. Your house will be one of many on a bloated real estate market.

 

[ITRADE]

[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 9/16/2002 1:27:16 AM Lynx_plyr02 wrote:
[P]Employees at will dosnt mean we are without a union .It means we are free to strike , and that SIR, is the biggest threat.Dont believe it wont happen.We may out of a contract ,but we will still be a union.  [/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]Sure, and out of a job. [/P]

 

[UAL777flyer]

I think that given US Airways present situation, to delude yourself into thinking that the threat of a strike is leverage against the company, is useless and naive. The only thing that a strike will get you is guaranteed unemployment and the probable shutdown/liquidation of your company. So if you're intent is to shut your company down, than go ahead and strike. This isn't a normal labor/senior mgmt showdown. Ch.11 changes the game. If either the IAM or CWA vote no tomorrow, the pressure will significantly increase for a liquidation of US Airways because their access to ATSB loan money and DIP financing won't be there. So the creditor's committee will be putting pressure on the judge. And, if by some stroke of good fortune, US manages to navigate that mess and get the judge to toss out the contracts and your groups then elect to strike, I would think that the creditors committee would lose whatever patience they had left and US Airways would cease to exist.

 

[Steiner]

Q: What are you willing to give up for this contract?
A: The IAM.

Vote No and Vote Often!

 

[sabre]

Hello, I have $500 Million to invest as long as you take care of home. What, you have 6,000 mechanics that can walk off at any time...in a BK???
Hmmmm, let me call you back.

 

[us10]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/16/2002 4:58:33 PM sabre wrote:

Hello, I have $500 Million to invest as long as you take care of home. What, you have 6,000 mechanics that can walk off at any time...in a BK???
Hmmmm, let me call you back.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Hello, I have $500 Million to loan and the ATSB will back $900 Million.We just require you to cut your expenses so maybe just maybe we'll get our money back.What every employee group went along but you were forced to let the mechanics slide.....Hmmmm, let us call you back.