Whine Lover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2005
- Posts
- 1,497
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
AA Contract UPHELD!!
- Thread starter Iflyamouse
- Start date
- Watchers 26
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
Whine Lover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2005
- Posts
- 1,497
" ...at least we are fighting and delaying it as much as we can - UNLIKE almost every other pilot group before us, who all took negotiated deals. Sorry, but our negotiated deal was a death sentence. " - aa73
BINGO. My point exactly.
A gunman walks up to you and hands you a pistol and says " your choice, I'm going to shoot you, or you can pull the trigger yourself. "
Every other pilot group faced with an 1113c has said " Oh here , let me help you with that!" and voted yes, sealing their fate.
American pilots at the very LEAST had the cajones to say " Ya' know what? F.U. Do your own work. " and voted no.
THAT, my friends is the simple point of my argument.
I am under no illusions that American pilots will now go skipping merrily down the street from here because they voted no.
On the contrary, I agree with many of you, AMR will in all likelihood be handed the 1113c and the contract will be abrogated.
So, in effect, the pilots will be in somewhat the same position that they would have been had they voted yes ( actually a much better position considering a proposed 10 year length of contract ) ....However, they will at least have their pride intact and will not have been so weak as to assist someone in their own demise because they were weak and fearful of the alternate outcome.
Additionally, they have preserved the right to negotiate something much better, much sooner, than 10 years from now.
I say again - " Good for you Ladies and Gentleman of the American Airlines Pilot group."
Whine
BINGO. My point exactly.
A gunman walks up to you and hands you a pistol and says " your choice, I'm going to shoot you, or you can pull the trigger yourself. "
Every other pilot group faced with an 1113c has said " Oh here , let me help you with that!" and voted yes, sealing their fate.
American pilots at the very LEAST had the cajones to say " Ya' know what? F.U. Do your own work. " and voted no.
THAT, my friends is the simple point of my argument.
I am under no illusions that American pilots will now go skipping merrily down the street from here because they voted no.
On the contrary, I agree with many of you, AMR will in all likelihood be handed the 1113c and the contract will be abrogated.
So, in effect, the pilots will be in somewhat the same position that they would have been had they voted yes ( actually a much better position considering a proposed 10 year length of contract ) ....However, they will at least have their pride intact and will not have been so weak as to assist someone in their own demise because they were weak and fearful of the alternate outcome.
Additionally, they have preserved the right to negotiate something much better, much sooner, than 10 years from now.
I say again - " Good for you Ladies and Gentleman of the American Airlines Pilot group."
Whine
Last edited:
What BoilerUP said.
This victory is small, and we will surely take it in the shorts.
But for the first time ever - Labor is taking a stand and making management accountable, and a BK judge is noticing. That's huge. We'll take it, no matter how small.
Despite what some may say, AMRs refiling and the judge's re evaluation is gonna take a lot longer than some think. I would not be surprised if the judge orders us to renegotiate in that time period.
If anything, we'll be known for fighting to the end.
Think of the leverage and motivation this gives other pilot groups should they find themselves in BK in the future.
Glad to do our part!
This victory is small, and we will surely take it in the shorts.
But for the first time ever - Labor is taking a stand and making management accountable, and a BK judge is noticing. That's huge. We'll take it, no matter how small.
Despite what some may say, AMRs refiling and the judge's re evaluation is gonna take a lot longer than some think. I would not be surprised if the judge orders us to renegotiate in that time period.
If anything, we'll be known for fighting to the end.
Think of the leverage and motivation this gives other pilot groups should they find themselves in BK in the future.
Glad to do our part!
Whine Lover
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2005
- Posts
- 1,497
Bringupthebird
Grumpy? Who-Me?
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2006
- Posts
- 2,182
The former AWA pilots are working under an agreement known as Contract 2000 which was ratified in 2004. You never know how long you'll be stuck with a contract especially after a shotgun wedding (where technically the shotgun is used only as a threat, but in our case we got both barrels as a wedding gift ).
Dornier 335
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2005
- Posts
- 1,089
American denied request to reject pilot contract
source
American denied request to reject pilot contract
By: Edward Russell Washington DC
20 hours ago
The US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York denied American Airlines' request to reject its pilots contract, in a decision released after the close of business today.
Judge Sean Lane says that the Fort Worth, Texas-based Oneworld carrier did not make a sufficient argument for its proposed changes to furlough and domestic codeshare practicies in its section 1113 request, in his decision.
American has the ability to furlough up to 2,000 pilots under its existing contract with the APA but has only outlined a need to furlough 400 under the business plan it outlined with the court, says Lane. He adds that a force majeure clause in the contract also allows American to furlough additional pilots due to unexpected events.
The airline's proposal to enter into unlimited domestic codeshares is greater than the industry norm, writes Lane, but he notes that American did establish why it needs the ability to expand its current agreements in the US.
"Given the significance of these two provisions collectively to American's proposal, the court finds that American has not shown that the proposal is necessary as required by section 1113," says the judge.
American can submit a new section 1113 application with modified arguments on furloughs and codeshares within the next three days, says Lane.
"We appreciate judge Lane's thoughtful consideration of our Section 1113 motion regarding the pilots' contract," says American. "We will adjust those [two] elements, resubmit the term sheet to APA [Allied Pilot Association] and, as the court suggested, renew our 1113 motion for our pilots by Friday."
The airline had hoped to achieve significant cost savings by rejecting its labour contract with its pilots, who are represented by the APA. It was widely expected to implement layoffs and significant pay cuts if the request was approved.
Keith Wilson, president of APA, says the ruling is a "rare chapter 11 victory" for labour, in a letter to the carrier's pilots. "Your APA leadership is committed to securing a consensual, industry-standard contract that respects your sacrifices and recognises your true worth as professionals," he says.
The union supports a merger with US Airways and has already reached a tentative agreement with the Tempe, Arizona-based Star alliance carrier if a merger were to take place.
American's pilots rejected a tentative agreement between the carrier and the union by an 11-percentage point margin, with 61% voting against the contract and 39% for it in a vote that closed on 8 August.
The six-year contract included an at least 15% increase in base pay during the period, a significant increase in the number of regional jets that American could operate and would have allowed the airline to enter into unlimited domestic codeshare agreements with other carriers.
source
American denied request to reject pilot contract
By: Edward Russell Washington DC
20 hours ago
The US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York denied American Airlines' request to reject its pilots contract, in a decision released after the close of business today.
Judge Sean Lane says that the Fort Worth, Texas-based Oneworld carrier did not make a sufficient argument for its proposed changes to furlough and domestic codeshare practicies in its section 1113 request, in his decision.
American has the ability to furlough up to 2,000 pilots under its existing contract with the APA but has only outlined a need to furlough 400 under the business plan it outlined with the court, says Lane. He adds that a force majeure clause in the contract also allows American to furlough additional pilots due to unexpected events.
The airline's proposal to enter into unlimited domestic codeshares is greater than the industry norm, writes Lane, but he notes that American did establish why it needs the ability to expand its current agreements in the US.
"Given the significance of these two provisions collectively to American's proposal, the court finds that American has not shown that the proposal is necessary as required by section 1113," says the judge.
American can submit a new section 1113 application with modified arguments on furloughs and codeshares within the next three days, says Lane.
"We appreciate judge Lane's thoughtful consideration of our Section 1113 motion regarding the pilots' contract," says American. "We will adjust those [two] elements, resubmit the term sheet to APA [Allied Pilot Association] and, as the court suggested, renew our 1113 motion for our pilots by Friday."
The airline had hoped to achieve significant cost savings by rejecting its labour contract with its pilots, who are represented by the APA. It was widely expected to implement layoffs and significant pay cuts if the request was approved.
Keith Wilson, president of APA, says the ruling is a "rare chapter 11 victory" for labour, in a letter to the carrier's pilots. "Your APA leadership is committed to securing a consensual, industry-standard contract that respects your sacrifices and recognises your true worth as professionals," he says.
The union supports a merger with US Airways and has already reached a tentative agreement with the Tempe, Arizona-based Star alliance carrier if a merger were to take place.
American's pilots rejected a tentative agreement between the carrier and the union by an 11-percentage point margin, with 61% voting against the contract and 39% for it in a vote that closed on 8 August.
The six-year contract included an at least 15% increase in base pay during the period, a significant increase in the number of regional jets that American could operate and would have allowed the airline to enter into unlimited domestic codeshare agreements with other carriers.
I am one the 400 on the bottom, so this was a major victory for us bottom feeders. Hopefully this is a bridge us to a merger or new and improved contract by next summer after BK. I believe at this point if AMR doesn't commit to not furloughing the Judge will maintain his position not to grant AMR with there 1113. I don't now this for sure, but I think AMR has to file a new 1113, giving the first one was denied. That being said it could take a month and hopefully APA can convince the UCC to push for a consensual releatic contract to vote on. Worst case no furloughs and a little Code share restriction until BK exit. Still beats the yes vote for ten years without any hope. Still can't believe 39 percent wanted us 400 plus on the street again and the lowest pay rates in the industry.
Dornier 335
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2005
- Posts
- 1,089
American pilots decision largely favours airline
source
ANALYSIS: American pilots decision largely favours airline
By: Edward Russell Washington DC
6 hours ago
American Airlines is the likely benefactor of a bankruptcy court's 15 August decision to deny American's request to reject its pilots contract.
Judge Sean Lane of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York agreed with the Fort Worth, Texas-based Oneworld carrier's section 1113 request to reject the labour agreement on all but two points - furloughs and codeshares. He gave American three days to submit a revised request, which the airline says it will file by 17 August.
"[The decision] is a rather limited objection by the court," says Robert Mann, an airline industry analyst at RW Mann & Company. "Remedying those objections won't change the economics of the restructured company."
American sought 20% cost reductions from all of its labour groups with the request, according to court documents. This equals about $370 million in annual savings from its pilots.
"Judge Lane could indeed allow AMR [American's parent company] to put in place cost saving measures that exceed its competition on several counts," says Michael Derchin, an analyst at CRT Capital, in a report today.
The judge largely discounted arguments from the Allied Pilots Association (APA), which represents the airline's more than 10,000 pilots. These included an argument that the court should focus on a possible merger instead of a standalone business plan, and a suggestion to limit American's ability to expand its scope to fly regional jets.
"It is appropriate - and indeed necessary - for American to formulate a stand-alone business plan at this point in time," said Lane in the decision. "Such a business plan serves as a basis for comparing all of the business options available to a debtor to maximise the value of the estate for all stakeholders."
He quashed the union's argument that the court should instead focus on a potential merger with US Airways or another carrier. "Put simply, there is no merger for the court to consider," said Lane.
On regional jets, Lane said that American needs an increased number of the aircraft with 88 seats or less in order to compete with other domestic mainline carriers and to generate additional revenue.
American outlined plans for up to 255 (or 50% of the total narrowbody fleet, whichever is greater) of jets with 51 to 88 seats and for up to 110% of the narrowbody fleet of jets with 50 seats or less in its business plan, according to the decision. This is up from a limit of 47 jets with 70 seats, and 110% of the narrowbody fleet for jets with 50 seats or less today.
"He [Lane] came out strongly supporting the company on one of its most important goals, namely, changes to the scope clause that will allow American to fly larger jets at the regional level," says Derchin.
"We think it should be clear to the pilots that they are likely to lose on this issue," he adds.
Neither the court nor American has released the business plan cited by Lane in his decision. The airline has until 28 December to file a final reorganisation plan.
Lane found that American's arguments to remove furlough restrictions and for unlimited domestic codeshares were not sufficient. The airline is able to furlough up to 2,000 pilots under its current agreement but only outlined a case for 400 furloughs in its business plan, Lane said.
The codeshare request was beyond the established industry norm and American did not establish why it needs the blanket authority, writes Lane.
"I don't imagine that it's going to make a whole lot of difference," says Bob McAdoo, an airline analyst at Imperial Capital, on the decision's impact on American's request to reject the contracts.
Separately, a vote by American's Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA)-represented flight attendants on the carrier's last, best and final offer is scheduled to conclude on 19 August.
"[The] ruling postpones the inevitable abrogation of the pilots' contract," says APFA in a letter to its members on 15 August. "Given the fact that most of our arguments have already been dismissed in this ruling, and that our LBFO addresses our arguments that are left outstanding, we do not expect the Court's 1113 ruling to go in our favour."
source
ANALYSIS: American pilots decision largely favours airline
By: Edward Russell Washington DC
6 hours ago
American Airlines is the likely benefactor of a bankruptcy court's 15 August decision to deny American's request to reject its pilots contract.
Judge Sean Lane of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York agreed with the Fort Worth, Texas-based Oneworld carrier's section 1113 request to reject the labour agreement on all but two points - furloughs and codeshares. He gave American three days to submit a revised request, which the airline says it will file by 17 August.
"[The decision] is a rather limited objection by the court," says Robert Mann, an airline industry analyst at RW Mann & Company. "Remedying those objections won't change the economics of the restructured company."
American sought 20% cost reductions from all of its labour groups with the request, according to court documents. This equals about $370 million in annual savings from its pilots.
"Judge Lane could indeed allow AMR [American's parent company] to put in place cost saving measures that exceed its competition on several counts," says Michael Derchin, an analyst at CRT Capital, in a report today.
The judge largely discounted arguments from the Allied Pilots Association (APA), which represents the airline's more than 10,000 pilots. These included an argument that the court should focus on a possible merger instead of a standalone business plan, and a suggestion to limit American's ability to expand its scope to fly regional jets.
"It is appropriate - and indeed necessary - for American to formulate a stand-alone business plan at this point in time," said Lane in the decision. "Such a business plan serves as a basis for comparing all of the business options available to a debtor to maximise the value of the estate for all stakeholders."
He quashed the union's argument that the court should instead focus on a potential merger with US Airways or another carrier. "Put simply, there is no merger for the court to consider," said Lane.
On regional jets, Lane said that American needs an increased number of the aircraft with 88 seats or less in order to compete with other domestic mainline carriers and to generate additional revenue.
American outlined plans for up to 255 (or 50% of the total narrowbody fleet, whichever is greater) of jets with 51 to 88 seats and for up to 110% of the narrowbody fleet of jets with 50 seats or less in its business plan, according to the decision. This is up from a limit of 47 jets with 70 seats, and 110% of the narrowbody fleet for jets with 50 seats or less today.
"He [Lane] came out strongly supporting the company on one of its most important goals, namely, changes to the scope clause that will allow American to fly larger jets at the regional level," says Derchin.
"We think it should be clear to the pilots that they are likely to lose on this issue," he adds.
Neither the court nor American has released the business plan cited by Lane in his decision. The airline has until 28 December to file a final reorganisation plan.
Lane found that American's arguments to remove furlough restrictions and for unlimited domestic codeshares were not sufficient. The airline is able to furlough up to 2,000 pilots under its current agreement but only outlined a case for 400 furloughs in its business plan, Lane said.
The codeshare request was beyond the established industry norm and American did not establish why it needs the blanket authority, writes Lane.
"I don't imagine that it's going to make a whole lot of difference," says Bob McAdoo, an airline analyst at Imperial Capital, on the decision's impact on American's request to reject the contracts.
Separately, a vote by American's Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA)-represented flight attendants on the carrier's last, best and final offer is scheduled to conclude on 19 August.
"[The] ruling postpones the inevitable abrogation of the pilots' contract," says APFA in a letter to its members on 15 August. "Given the fact that most of our arguments have already been dismissed in this ruling, and that our LBFO addresses our arguments that are left outstanding, we do not expect the Court's 1113 ruling to go in our favour."
This gives LCC more leverage if the court imposes conditions on the pilots. The company will have a very tough time doing well if the pilots are so mad they want don't care anymore. While it's true that the union can't sanction any type of job action there's nothing to stop a large percentage of the pilots from acting individually in many small ways to impede the success of the company. You can only push people so far before they start to push back. When the retirements get going and the training needs increase the company is going to need the pilots on board to make things work. If the creditors are smart they will realize that their eventual equity stake won't be worth much if the company can't function. This is going to be a showdown that had to happen in this industry sooner or later, let's see how a large major airline functions with thousands of angry, unmotivated pilots who had substandard terms of employment crammed down their throats. This is sure to get interesting soon. Good luck to the AMR crews, you have been through enough and this is one step too far on the part of the company.
I would also add that if age 65 holds AMR is going to end up with an airline that nobody wants to fly for and a bunch of RJ's without pilots because the better companies will steal them to staff their mainline operations as retirements get going. These guys are attempting to reorganize a company without looking forward and the judge and creditors are letting it happen, it will not end well. It's not enough to build a cheap company, they need to build a good company and this is not how you do it.
I would also add that if age 65 holds AMR is going to end up with an airline that nobody wants to fly for and a bunch of RJ's without pilots because the better companies will steal them to staff their mainline operations as retirements get going. These guys are attempting to reorganize a company without looking forward and the judge and creditors are letting it happen, it will not end well. It's not enough to build a cheap company, they need to build a good company and this is not how you do it.
AMRCostUnit
Back on the 737
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2004
- Posts
- 274
Much going on here behind the scenes. The judge used 105 and 3/4 pages to say AMR made its case and APA did not, yet he still denied the motion! I find that to be extraordinary!
AMR made their case and the two points he denied on are minor in the eyes of the BK process. Why did he deny the motion? The UCC.
Did you see the press release the UCC sent out after the judge denied the motion? There are talking directly to the pilots "urging" us to make a deal and they will "reluctantly support" our 13.5% equity claim if we can reach a consensual deal. A UCC actually acknowledging pilots exist? When has that ever happened?
Now that is HUGE! Everyone in this process, including my union and their high dollar consultants told us repeatedly over the last few months that the 13.5% "goes away" if we vote NO.
Guess not. Fail.
Now the UCC come DIRECTLY to the pilots and wants us to make a deal. Why might that be?
They need a pilot contract to exit BK and get their money. They need pilots on board to make the operation run smoothly. Many of our Europe and Deep South flights are leaving 12 hours or more late! Hellva way to run an airline.
They need a pilot contract to get financing for new aircraft and other things. I don't think anyone will loan money to AMR with the operation running less than smoothly. Some say they don't need a contract to exit. They said we'd lose the 13.5 equity too. It's still on the table.
The threat of abrogation is "pain and uncertainty", words our VP of Flight the beloved John Hale used in a hotline to the pilots prior to the vote. I was stunned...my boss threatening me and those of us out on the line making this operation run. Seriously?
"Scope will be WORSE" was the cry! Here is what I think. In order to exploit the full "pain" of the 1113, AMR must make contracts with the lift providers out there so they can plan their schedules, buy airplanes, and make investments. Well, as long as we are in BK, any contracts AMR signs can be voided should LLC or someone else takes over in BK. Too much risk while in BK. So some of the percieved "hammers" are made of foam.
There are probably more problems that NOT having a consensual agreement with the pilots causes. I hope so. I think they need us. Going through us is not an option. Otherwise, the judge would have abrogated and been done with it.
A few more innings to go I think...
Unit
P.S. The FA's voted Yes on their deal today. Good, other than their "me too" clause. Less dead weight to drag along.
AMR made their case and the two points he denied on are minor in the eyes of the BK process. Why did he deny the motion? The UCC.
Did you see the press release the UCC sent out after the judge denied the motion? There are talking directly to the pilots "urging" us to make a deal and they will "reluctantly support" our 13.5% equity claim if we can reach a consensual deal. A UCC actually acknowledging pilots exist? When has that ever happened?
Now that is HUGE! Everyone in this process, including my union and their high dollar consultants told us repeatedly over the last few months that the 13.5% "goes away" if we vote NO.
Guess not. Fail.
Now the UCC come DIRECTLY to the pilots and wants us to make a deal. Why might that be?
They need a pilot contract to exit BK and get their money. They need pilots on board to make the operation run smoothly. Many of our Europe and Deep South flights are leaving 12 hours or more late! Hellva way to run an airline.
They need a pilot contract to get financing for new aircraft and other things. I don't think anyone will loan money to AMR with the operation running less than smoothly. Some say they don't need a contract to exit. They said we'd lose the 13.5 equity too. It's still on the table.
The threat of abrogation is "pain and uncertainty", words our VP of Flight the beloved John Hale used in a hotline to the pilots prior to the vote. I was stunned...my boss threatening me and those of us out on the line making this operation run. Seriously?
"Scope will be WORSE" was the cry! Here is what I think. In order to exploit the full "pain" of the 1113, AMR must make contracts with the lift providers out there so they can plan their schedules, buy airplanes, and make investments. Well, as long as we are in BK, any contracts AMR signs can be voided should LLC or someone else takes over in BK. Too much risk while in BK. So some of the percieved "hammers" are made of foam.
There are probably more problems that NOT having a consensual agreement with the pilots causes. I hope so. I think they need us. Going through us is not an option. Otherwise, the judge would have abrogated and been done with it.
A few more innings to go I think...
Unit
P.S. The FA's voted Yes on their deal today. Good, other than their "me too" clause. Less dead weight to drag along.
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
