Originally Posted by
Splash
Sounds simple!
Give me the step-by-step strategy the DPA would have used to counter the stomping administered under the protection of bankruptcy laws. Please make it as detailed as possible.
Thanks in advance.
This is not the strategy DPA would have used. It is the strategy DALPA
should have.
Instead of buying into the intense and lop sided lounge presentations that delivered the messsage of "this is the best you'll get from the bk process" put on by DALPA, we should have thought and voted more critically.
Did we need to take the first offer. No. DALPA would go on to emphasize that by rejecting this TA, we would be hammered by the judge, process ends.
Not true.
Exhibit 1. Hawaiian Airlines. Rejected the first TA that was produced because it reached too far. The went back and after working on it produced the 2nd TA that was ratified.
This TA
* Did not terminate their pension.
* Had significantly higher payrates.
* Had significantly higher DC.
Exhibit 2. One item USAir included that DALPA did not was a snap back provision that can be found in their LOA 93.
Sure would have been nice to have one of those negotiated into tour agreenment.
These were all examples of groups that went into the process prior to us.
Instead, DALPA sold it with F. U. D.