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

BK Judge points to DAL union busting

  • Thread starter Thread starter FDJ2
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 9

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

FDJ2

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
3,908
By Christian Plumb
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The judge presiding over Delta Air Lines Inc.'s bankruptcy said on Monday that the carrier's motion seeking to void its pilots' labor contract had the taint of "union busting."

"The issue is whether or not at this time I should permit the rejection of the union contract," U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Prudence Beatty said. "One can talk about union busting and that is precisely what this kind of motion has the taint of...."

Her remarks came amid a testy exchange between the judge and Delta lawyer Jack Gallagher in which Beatty, who the pilots have in the past accused of siding against them, assailed some of the airline's main arguments.

The No. 3 U.S. carrier is asking the court to void the pilots' contract so it can force them to accept $325 million in givebacks, part of $3 billion in cost cuts and revenue hikes it says it needs to stem its losses.

"Frankly, I think you have a bias here," she told Gallagher. "It's a personal bias against the pilots."

Gallagher argued that the airline needed to weigh the pilots' rights against those of its 44,000 other employees.

"There is not enough money left in this company to continue to pay these pilots," he said.

Earlier, the pilots' lawyer Bruce Simon grilled the carrier's chief financial officer, questioning the numbers in Delta's restructuring plan.

"Your projection of your fuel expense is $100 million above what the market tells us today," said Simon, a lawyer for the Air Line Pilots Association, which represents Delta's 6,000 pilots.

Delta's plan for stemming its cash drain next year and regaining positive cash flow in 2007 was finalized in September, reflecting oil prices which peaked shortly after Hurricane Katrina.

The plan is based on an estimate of jet fuel priced at $1.73 per gallon in 2006 and 2007. That compares with current market forecasts of $1.69 a gallon, Simon said, adding that each penny of added fuel cost is equivalent to $25 million to $26 million in costs on an annual basis.

The price of jet fuel "has now moderated very significantly," Simon said before a courtroom packed with uniformed pilots and other observers.
Delta Chief Financial Officer Edward Bastian, in his second day on the witness stand, acknowledged that fuel prices had gone down, but said that big risks remained.

Under questioning from Simon, Bastian also acknowledged that the Atlanta-based carrier does not have a contingency plan in place in case of a strike, which the pilots have threatened if the court throws out their contract.
"We've made very clear that we think that if a strike were to occur it would be devastating for the company," he said.

Bastian said in a brief interview following the hearing that Delta still hopes to reach an out-of-court settlement with the pilots, though he said no formal talks were under way.
(Additional reporting by Paritosh Bansal)
 
It's good to see these Judges are realizing the weight of their decisions. Since forcing a contract on a union group (in general, not just pilots) is going against all those people, some whom even lost their lives, that fought so hard to get them. Although it is a shame the unions went corrupt as well.
 
When it really comes down to it, I see Delta trying to take more from the pilots because it shows the "non union" employees what NOT to do---Unionize. "We'll take care of you, if you don't...."(hence the Union Busting thoughts) I think we ALL need to take pay cuts, but not mainly the pilots. The judge seems to be able to see that. She said in the last round that pay cuts would be "unfair to the lowest paid Delta pilots." When the Delta lawyer stated that the other 44,000 employees took pay cuts, she said "well, they can get other jobs. The pilots have a certain skill set, and you are stuck with them...." We'll see if she continues to profess this throughout the hearings.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Last edited:
YourPilotFriend said:
It's good to see these Judges are realizing the weight of their decisions. Since forcing a contract on a union group (in general, not just pilots) is going against all those people, some whom even lost their lives, that fought so hard to get them. Although it is a shame the unions went corrupt as well.

Judges actually do, not one Judge in bankruptcy courts have voided union contracts at the request of the airlines.....
 
I hope Lee Moak sees the opportunity here. The judge is obviously leaning towards the pilots at this point, so moving ahead too rapidly with a settlement might not be the best idea. Slowing down the negotiations and being a little bit more hard-line might be the best option for DALPA. You might just be able to get away with a third of what Delta is asking for if the MEC plays their cards rights.
 
FWIW, here at Aloha we were supposed to have a ruling this morning. we feel good about our case against the company, and apparently the company thought so today too. just minutes before the ruling was to be given, the company lawyers asked for some more time to negotiate with the union. an extension to 3pm was given, that time came and the company still wasnt ready. so now there is an extension til tomorrow morning at the companys request.

we feel that maybe now the company might finally start negotiating in good faith.

good luck on your fight guys!
 
Midnight Mike said:
Judges actually do, not one Judge in bankruptcy courts have voided union contracts at the request of the airlines.....

That's because not a single judge has ever had to actually rule on the issue. When you negotiate a settlement it takes the ball out of the judges hand.
 
PCL_128 said:
Slowing down the negotiations and being a little bit more hard-line might be the best option for DALPA.

I think that's exactly what you're seeing. On the 25th DALPA gave managment a new offer to include a cost on items that were previously uncosted because the judge said there was a cost to them (the big one was scope and the 79 seat jet). My personal guess is that DALPA added the price of scope, subtracted other stuff and the total offer remains at $90million..but that's just (hopeful) speculation on my part.

As for the pace of negotiations, can't get much slower. The two sides last met on the 15th.
 
YourPilotFriend said:
some whom even lost their lives, that fought so hard to get them. .

People lost their lives to get a good contract? Give me a f'ing break.

Finally a BK Judge that's eyes aren't clouded over by a management profit and loss statement.
 
erj-145mech said:
People lost their lives to get a good contract? Give me a f'ing break.

Finally a BK Judge that's eyes aren't clouded over by a management profit and loss statement.

Easy. I think he meant organized labor in general. A movie called Matewan is pretty hard core. Alot of the common work rules of today that are standard were a result of unions. (40 hour work week, etc...)

Many labor disputes were settled with guns.



We now return you to your regularly scheduled unabashed union hating on Channel FlightInfo.
 
PCL_128 said:
I hope Lee Moak sees the opportunity here. The judge is obviously leaning towards the pilots at this point, .

I wouldn't be encouraged by anything Her Honor says...
 
The Judge may or may not be sympathetic to the pilot cause. That said, in the end, they all usually rule to the benefit of the majority of employees. Look at it from this view. If she comes down on the pilots side or any group and fails to give management what they want, the Judge risks being the goat if the BK company fails and most do not want that.
You are often dealing with judges that do not really have a feel for a business.
 
Publishers said:
You are often dealing with judges that do not really have a feel for a business.

That's the only accurate part of your statement.

The Judge may or may not be sympathetic to the pilot cause. That said, in the end, they all usually rule to the benefit of the majority of employees.

The "cause" has nothing to do with how the judge rules nor is the benefit of any employee. The judge will rule on whether the 9 requirements under section 1113 have been regardless of what it does to pilots or other employees.

Those 9 requirements are:
• The company must have made a proposal to the union.
• The proposal must be based upon the most complete and reliable
information available at the time of the proposal.
• The modifications must be necessary to permit reorganization.
• The modifications must provide that all affected parties are treated fairly
and equitably.
• The company must provide the union with such relevant information as is
necessary to evaluate the proposal.
• The company must have met with the collective bargaining representative
at reasonable times subsequent to making the proposal.
• The debtor must have negotiated with the union concerning the proposal
in good faith.
• The union must have refused to accept the proposal without good cause.
• The balance of the equities must clearly favor rejection of the agreement.

The highlighted parts are the contested parts of the 1113 filing. As you can see, by law, the judge is required to be fair and equitable to all employees (including pilots) and not let the pilots take the brunt of the pain.​
 
Publishers said:
The Judge may or may not be sympathetic to the pilot cause. That said, in the end, they all usually rule to the benefit of the majority of employees. Look at it from this view. If she comes down on the pilots side or any group and fails to give management what they want, the Judge risks being the goat if the BK company fails and most do not want that.
You are often dealing with judges that do not really have a feel for a business.

I think this line describes Publishers to a tee:

"Frankly, I think you have a bias here," "It's a personal bias against the pilots."


You really seem to be a management plant, or a know it all who reads a lot of books (hence the Publishers name).

Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Publishers said:
The Judge may or may not be sympathetic to the pilot cause. That said, in the end, they all usually rule to the benefit of the majority of employees. Look at it from this view. If she comes down on the pilots side or any group and fails to give management what they want, the Judge risks being the goat if the BK company fails and most do not want that.
You are often dealing with judges that do not really have a feel for a business.

Is not a BK judge's duty not only to the Company, but also to the creditors and the employees? Is it not His/her job is to balance them all? I am pretty sure that the creditors are #1 and the company and employee tied at #2. If the company cannot produce a fair plan (in her opinion) then she must protect the creditors and force the company to liquidate. At least she appears to be making the company do its job and put together a fair plan vs negotiate with labor fairly. (vs the style of negotiating with a gun to the head of labor like United, NWA, USAIR, etc like to do) At least that is how it looks to me.

Still, good luck to you guys.

Just my opinion...

FNG
 
Last edited:
Perhaps her boss told her to make some silly pro pilot comments to counter the anti comments she made earlier.... it really means nothing after all...
 
Rez O. Lewshun said:
Perhaps her boss told her to make some silly pro pilot comments to counter the anti comments she made earlier.... it really means nothing after all...

At least the press didn't get a hold of it........And, they have 14 year terms as judge.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
General I am not a plant, however have been managing aviation companies, writing articles, publishing magazines, and testifying as an expert in a 30 year career that covers 91, 121, 135, and Fixed Base Operations.

The judge usually is first turning to see if the company is viable to continue at all. That usually puts the employees first as they are necessary to continue. Voiding contracts such as aircraft leases, union contracts, supplier contracts, putting off debt, restructuring, all these things are examined usuallly presented by management to make the company more viable. If she has no faith in the managment, she has the option of placing a Trustee at the helm.
Trustee's tend to have their first priority in seeing that they get paid and the cash is there to keep it going, then hire others to consult and come up with the plan.
Creditors and shareholders usually are going to get the shaft. Suppliers like the leasing company can get their asset back if they are secured. Unsecured creditors and shareholders may end up with nothing.

My earlier point was that regardless of her sympathies, there is inherent risk to telling managment they are wrong and ruling against them. Does that mean it is impossible that she would rule for the pilots, -- No. Just that at this point when you rule against what management says they need, there is some risk. When you have a trustee, the risk is theres although most of them make sure they get theirs on the way out.

As to the bias against pilots, there is little that makes sense to a businessman of the airline industry whether management or pilots.
 
General Lee said:
I think this line describes Publishers to a tee:

"Frankly, I think you have a bias here," "It's a personal bias against the pilots."


You really seem to be a management plant, or a know it all who reads a lot of books (hence the Publishers name).

Bye Bye--General Lee




Pot,meet kettle.....


PHXFLYR:cool:
 
PHXFLYR said:
Pot,meet kettle.....


PHXFLYR:cool:

Ok, what? I have a bias against pilots? I do? Maybe against a couple in PHX that are total goofs. Other than that, I like pilots a lot more than management.



Publishers,

I am glad you have run companies etc and publish books. Good for you. I understand you have an opinion, and that is good also. I think the judge is seeing that the pilots have contributed in good faith, and that management hasn't kept their side of the bargin, with bad management practices. The judge is telling it how it is. I am not against giving back some more pay, and I don't think we are "above that." I do think that management is using bankruptcy as a grab bag, and that isn't right. Looks like the judge may agree.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 

Latest resources

Back
Top