Originally Posted by
alfaromeo
Yes it is true that you don't know what the claim will be. I heard the same arguments when we negotiated our claim in bankruptcy. It could be worth zero it could be worth more than the Delta pilots got. Certainly if you let your contract get rejected, it will be zero, you can bank on that.
Actually, not correct. The "13.5%" claim was a negotiated agreement between AMR and the APA and was basically just the ketchup on a turd dog to make it more palatable going down. The claim still exists without the TA (turd dog), but is currently undefined as it is a form of partial compensation for the loss of the A-fund value.
Originally Posted by
alfaromeo
I have been deeply involved in several contract negotiations, I read both term sheets multiple times so I know what you were facing. I believe I referred to it as a "crappy contract" and a worse one. You can stop the bleating over how bad it is. My pension was terminated, we took a 14% pay cut, and more in bankruptcy. Your offer was not out of the range of any other bankruptcy deal. At Delta, we are now on our second post bankruptcy contract and we exited bankruptcy in April 2007.
...and you can stop bleating for us to follow any of your advice. Look, you've given that advice and you need to accept you're in a room shouting to yourself. The outsourcing provisions alone of that TA would likely leave the bottom half of the seniority list eventually unemployed anyway, so most of us have little else left to lose.
Originally Posted by
alfaromeo
If the APA is smart they will be talking to management and the UCC. Given the judges comments, there is very little incentive for either of those parties to change the economics of the deal to any extent. You can rearrange the deck chairs but the total nut will probably not change.
Who says the sides aren't talking or won't talk in the near future ?
The term sheet written as-is leaves little for most AA pilots to work with and the "economics" are suspect at best and undependable overreaching fantasies at worst. I don't see this or any future BOD making the same mistake twice and passing a new turd dog with mustard added to the ketchup.
Originally Posted by
alfaromeo
I note you take deep offense to my opinions and call it arrogance to offer advice, but say nothing when a Compass RJ driver does the same thing. I at least have over 20 years in the industry and have extensive negotiating experience along with being centrally involved in our own bankruptcy. But I am sure that the 25 year old RJ driver has much more experience to offer. Maybe you only take offense when someone disagrees with you.
It's good you recognize your statements as simply one person's opinion as that is all they are. It sure sounds like YOU are the one offended by those affected not considering your erronous assumptions as anything more then opinion. Hopefully, you'll get over that.
Did you throw a lot of food as an infant ?
Originally Posted by
alfaromeo
My point is this. Your airline will not be the same 18 months from now as it is now. During these big changes, you want to have a contract, you want to have merger protections, you want to have fragmentation protections. Look around at previous airlines and see what is possible in bankruptcy. If you get caught in some major transaction with no contractual protections you will look back on those A-319 rates and wish you had signed up for those. Having been through bankruptcy I understand your anger and frustration. In my opinion, you will only magnify the pain if you allow your contract to be rejected. Your lawyers, your officers, your negotiators, your BOD all recognized that fact when they approved this TA, as stinky as it was. It is too late to yell "Halt" after the steam roller has run over you. So if it is arrogance to try to warn your fellow pilots not to shoot themselves in the foot, head, heart, and groin then I plead arrogance.
Almost half our BOD did NOT approve that TA. What you say above are all possibilities, but if fragmentation is announced, you can bet that it will be like walking into an abandoned rat-infested house and discharging a .44 magnum. You'll have rats racing out of every hole. The rats would be both pilots racing to protect what they have and customers fleeing to other networks as a result. It would disastrous for creditors, both those with short and long-term interests.
Originally Posted by
alfaromeo
As for the rest of you on this thread. Grow up. I am sure you must think that your grade school taunts mean something. They show that you are immature people with little imagination and nothing of substance to add to the debate.
Yes, the pillar of accuracy, neutrality and reason you are (not). Get over yourself alfa. Again, be proud you've done your bit, but at this point well simply have to see what plays out. That TA is done and anything similar has zero chance of success, so onward the process goes and where it goes no one knows.