Will the employees agree to permanent wage and benefit cuts?

  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #16
UAL has not made permanent reductions. I don't think we will drag our feet, to the point of chapter 11. I can say though, it will take some time to work this out. AA and APFA must meet to decide how and where the cuts should come and what the overall value is. Then there is a 30 day period for voting.
 
Like UA and US taking paycuts prior to Ch11 did nothing to stop them from going into Bankruptcy. I would love to see AA come out of this, but I don't see how they can. I'm paying off as much debt as I can now while I have full pay. If there are major cuts after bankruptcy I will probably be out of a job. I will survive this just like I did after Braniff.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 10:14:10 AM FA Mikey wrote:

UAL has not made permanent reductions. I don't think we will drag our feet, to the point of chapter 11. I can say though, it will take some time to work this out. AA and APFA must meet to decide how and where the cuts should come and what the overall value is. Then there is a 30 day period for voting.


----------------
[/blockquote]

There are no meetings needed between APFA and AMR. That meeting took place the other day and the amount of the cut was specified. It's up to APFA to determine what mix of work rule/pay/vacation/holidays and headcount will result in the required level of reduction.
Voting?! It better be a quick one. It's like taking a vote to leave a burning building.....hang around vote and perish, or take the needed action and be glad you got out alive!
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 11:33:46 AM desertfox wrote:

There are no meetings needed between APFA and AMR. That meeting took place the other day and the amount of the cut was specified. It's up to APFA to determine what mix of work rule/pay/vacation/holidays and headcount will result in the required level of reduction.
Voting?! It better be a quick one. It's like taking a vote to leave a burning building.....hang around vote and perish, or take the needed action and be glad you got out alive!
----------------
[/blockquote]

Arpey (President/COO) himself said this morning that the numbers are always negotiable. Why do you think mgmt is asking non union employees for 10-12% and union employees for 30%. I would bet that the company gets somewhere areound half what they're asking for. There will probably be some mix of pay conscessions with snapbacks and a few of the permanent productivity enhancements they're looking for thrown in. What they've done is really put a floor on the employees expectations so that when the unions come back to the membership with only 900,000,000 in concessions it will look like a good deal.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #20
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 11:33:46 AM desertfox wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 10:14:10 AM FA Mikey wrote:

UAL has not made permanent reductions. I don't think we will drag our feet, to the point of chapter 11. I can say though, it will take some time to work this out. AA and APFA must meet to decide how and where the cuts should come and what the overall value is. Then there is a 30 day period for voting.


----------------
[/blockquote]

There are no meetings needed between APFA and AMR. That meeting took place the other day and the amount of the cut was specified. It's up to APFA to determine what mix of work rule/pay/vacation/holidays and headcount will result in the required level of reduction.
Voting?! It better be a quick one. It's like taking a vote to leave a burning building.....hang around vote and perish, or take the needed action and be glad you got out alive!
----------------
[/blockquote]
The amount specified is what AA wants. It remains to be seen if any or all the unions will agree to the full amounts management has requested. They have scheduled meeetings for friday, to discuss the business plan. How they came up these numbers for each work group, and How the money will be used.
 
TWA mechanics were making somewhere around $21 per hour before AA. Now they are making somewhere around $35 per hour. That is a huge raise. They could take the paycut, and STILL come out ahead of where they were with TWA. To make things fair, I suggest all TWAer's go back to their former payrate, THEN take the paycut.

They way I look at it is that Carty spent nearly $1 billion to buy TWA, took on $3 billion in debt and leases, and it's now a $1 billion a year drag on AMR. This Mr. Carty did to put a feather in his cap so that he could say he is CEO of "the world's largest airline." He stabbed his own employees in the back (especially the TWU) in doing so, and now he wants us to finance his mistake. I don't think so.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 11:50:48 AM AA80Driver wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 11:33:46 AM desertfox wrote:

There are no meetings needed between APFA and AMR. That meeting took place the other day and the amount of the cut was specified. It's up to APFA to determine what mix of work rule/pay/vacation/holidays and headcount will result in the required level of reduction.
Voting?! It better be a quick one. It's like taking a vote to leave a burning building.....hang around vote and perish, or take the needed action and be glad you got out alive!
----------------
[/blockquote]

Arpey (President/COO) himself said this morning that the numbers are always negotiable. Why do you think mgmt is asking non union employees for 10-12% and union employees for 30%. I would bet that the company gets somewhere areound half what they're asking for. There will probably be some mix of pay conscessions with snapbacks and a few of the permanent productivity enhancements they're looking for thrown in. What they've done is really put a floor on the employees expectations so that when the unions come back to the membership with only 900,000,000 in concessions it will look like a good deal.
----------------
[/blockquote]

If we're going to take cuts lets do it right the first time. I don't want to do a TWA or US deal where they just nibble around the edges, Co keeps going down the toilet, and we are constantly going back to the table for more give backs. I'd just as soon take my medicine now, get it over with and hope things turn for the better.
 
They can pound sand. I'll take my chances with a BK judge. If they want to pay sub-Southwest compensation, I want SWA quality management . . . . and Carty and Arpey ain't it.
 
I find it intresting that when AA was making record profits thanks to the 95 contract and we said " Hey how about rewarding the employees that made it happen" they said "No way,we got a contract". Now they come to us to bail their butts out from their bad management decisions and ask us to give up money and benefits that they finally gave us or face the loss of their favorite lap dog union.


All I got to say is.


WE GOT A CONTRACT!!!!!
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 9:18:15 PM Winglet wrote:

They can pound sand. I'll take my chances with a BK judge. If they want to pay sub-Southwest compensation, I want SWA quality management . . . . and Carty and Arpey ain't it.
----------------
[/blockquote]

I couldn't agree more. I liked the observation above that when times were good (really good!!) AA wasn't interested in raises because they "have a contract" but when times are bad, it's "pay the piper".

No doubt it will be necessary to "pay the piper", but why should those leaders who put the company in such dire straights not be booted as a consequence? It makes NO SENSE to give concessions to the management that mismanaged the company into desperately needing those concessions. And that includes the union contracts that THEY negotiated!

The whole system is screwed up. If they went to a profit sharing model like Southwest uses, there would be more incentive and less need to constantly maneuver for pay increases. For the most part the major airlines are being led by dinosaurs.

9/11 isn't the cause, it's only a symptom of a much bigger problem that has been festering underneath for a long, long time. And management is in charge. They have not been willing to address the problem. Now, they want to fix the monster they created on the backs of the employees. Southwest hasn't done that because they have competent management. The same management that had the pundits at the majors predicting they wouldn't last six months, when they first started flying. Today their market cap EXCEEDS all the other majors COMBINED!!!!
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 9:15:52 PM The Dissident wrote:

WE GOT A CONTRACT!!!!!
----------------
[/blockquote]
Hey Lucy,
Can you bring me some more of those TWA/IAM contract books, I just ran out of toilet tissue.

For those of you who advocate a SW type model for AA on a grand scale, you're crazy. AA is an international carrier first, a domestic carrier second. That's the game plan, get used to it.

AA will be the best and largest international carrier, or we'll die trying.

Except for our pay-scales, there's no going back.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 9:18:15 PM Winglet wrote:

They can pound sand. I'll take my chances with a BK judge. If they want to pay sub-Southwest compensation, I want SWA quality management . . . . and Carty and Arpey ain't it.
----------------
[/blockquote]

No one's asking you to take a pay cut. If you want your (marginal) premium over Southwest wages, then increase your productivity. UA just asked for a 39% improvement in pilot hours; if AA did that you'd still be working more than 10% LESS than WN pilots. They just can't have both.

And no, I don't have exact figures for the other unions, although it's reported that AA FA's are the 2nd lowest productive union. After UA, of course.
 
The mechanics at UA decided to take their chances with the BK judge. After rejecting UA's proposal for a modest 7% paycut, the BK judge imposed an immediate 14% paycut. Judge Wedoff ruled the paycut was "necessary to prevent harm to the estate". Translation: The court doesn't give a rats a$$ about your contract or inept management. The courts sole responsibility is to preserve the company and protect the creditors. If UA's unions do not have ratified restructured labor agreements in place by mid May, UA management will proceed with their Sec. 1113 motion to abrogate the CBA's. The dedicated professional folks at AA still have the opportunity to make their own career choices. Don't relinquish that choice and rely on the BK court to make your decisions. Consult your friends at UA, they will tell you BK is painful, costly and demoralizing. That's my rant. Good Luck
 
I am just going to guess here, but I guess that the mechanics at AA and the mechanics at Southwest work 40 hours a week?
 
Back
Top