From the American Airlines VP Ops/Chief Pilot
 

Who is the Chief at AA you ask? Well he was the Head of pilot negotiations for the Company against the union when he took the job of VP of OPs and chief of chiefs.

Here's his latest on why we must vote yes to the companies last best final offer.

To be clear I (7576FO) voted NO!


Good morning, this is CA John Hale with the Flight Department Hotline for Friday, August 3.

I was planning to take this hotline and talk about something near and dear to every pilot’s heart, airplanes — some of the details on the incremental 777-300ER orders we confirmed today to demonstrate the growth that’s already taking place and an update on some of the milestones we’re seeing in our new Airbus fleet. However, it’s been brought to my attention that there is some misinformation out there about the TA and it would be a disservice to you if I didn’t take this time to address that instead.

Jim Ream and I have had a number of productive meetings and conversations with pilots around the system over the last few weeks. They’ve been candid and truthful, with the ultimate goal of helping pilots understand just what a critical decision we’re facing. However, it’s apparent from the report outs of some of those meetings that we weren’t successful in clearly communicating the next steps the company would pursue if the TA does not ratify.

There is no question that our goal is to achieve a consensual agreement with our pilots. It’s in the best interests of everyone, both the company and you all. And that’s why the company made the moves they did in the TA that’s in front of you — including the agreement to support an equity stake in the new American. We want to reach a consensual agreement without the judge’s ruling.

But let me be perfectly clear, contrary to what you may be reading or hearing, saying no to this TA means one thing — the company will ask for Judge Lane’s permission to abrogate the current pilot contract. That isn’t what we’d prefer, but it will be the only choice we have left. So there is no confusion, if the contract is abrogated, the company will immediately begin implementation of the April Term Sheet so that we can start realizing the savings necessary for a successful restructuring. A unilateral implementation of the April Term Sheet is not the outcome the company or I am hoping to achieve. But, if a consensual agreement is not reached, we will not wait any longer to implement the changes necessary for our company to successfully restructure and compete. We will of course continue to negotiate in good faith with APA in an attempt to achieve a new agreement consistent with our legal obligations. But, that will take time, and implementation of the April Term Sheet changes would begin and would remain in effect until a new contract is agreed upon and put in place. The April Term Sheet would also be the new starting point for those negotiations, not the terms of our tentative agreement.

A no vote can lead to only one thing — uncertainty and more pain. A failed TA and contract abrogation won’t bring an expedited, better deal, as some would have you believe. As I said at the beginning, this isn’t the message I wanted to focus on today, but given the stage we’re currently in, I could not in good conscience ignore some of the misinformation that’s circulating. This is your life, your future, and your decision. The TA before you includes substantial improvements over the April term Sheet, and represents the limits to which we can responsibly go to meet APA’s and the pilots’ concerns. A failed ratification will take us down the path I’ve just described.

Contrary to another misperception from the meeting, the company has made no decisions regarding consolidation at this time. As we have communicated previously, we are undertaking a thorough and objective evaluation of all alternatives and options regarding consolidation.

The facts are before you and I can’t stress enough how important it is you understand the paths in front of you.

Thanks for joining me today. We’ll talk again next week.

Here are some of the many reasons AA pilots are voting NO against the company's LBFO:

Here are my reasons for the no vote:

6-year agreement turns to ten - or longer

Onerous wording and incomplete language

The supposed "pay increases" are actually pay reductions when one considers inflation and medical costs

There's no serious replacement for the retirement beating we are being served

It comes from an untrustworthy entity (liars)

Permanent "B" scale A319 pay

No real improvement in reserve

It is 100% concessionary

It is all one-sided favoring AMR

If we agree to this it will take literally years to recover. Most on property don't have that kind of time.

History will repeat itself. Labor makes concessions. Executives line their pockets.

Is this enough?


Well! I ask myself as a judge, if a company presents me with a 1113 and says this is what we need to survive, then adjusts it later with higher pay etc: etc: And if pilots turn down the new 1113 offer, do I then ram the original 1113 down their throats, when in fact, this company can afford to give them more, HHHHMMMMMMMMMMM?????

As a pilot, I wonder, take the new 1113, then negotiate a new contract after emergence from BK. Say no and possibly have the original 1113 imposed and then what? emerge and start negotiating, so far, what has negotiating been in the past? Years of negotiating to no avail. Seems to me, say Yes take the better deal and go into negotiating after BK then at the very least, live with a better deal for 5 or 6 years.

1) No real scope, Jet Blue, and other Pilot groups will get even more of our future jobs & routes...

2) No real pay increases, LBO Pay proposal does not even keep up with inflation...

3) High probability, we are stuck with this LBO Pay Scale, and No Scope for the next 10 years...this is Not Good!

4) More AA Pilots loosing jobs, as more Pilot Jobs outsourcing happens...

5) We don't have all the details, for this LBO, -only "Bullet Points"

6) APA misled the Pilots in '03 to accept, the current POS contract, how can anyone trust what they say, -now- when, there are no real details, on this "LBO".

7) 13.5% equity state, is a "Big Maybe" that can easily be watered down, later on...remember Who is offering it...any real credibility, there??

Same ones I post in my vote no thread;

- 6yr contract (meaning 10)
- 319 pay rates
- Eliminate night pay
- No increase in Int pay
- Per diem 2.00/2.20
- No increase in avg day with more hrs/month, offered 5+20 in Nov (no cost item)
- Reserve system, very fuzzy wording
- New TTS TBD, yea right, wonder how that will work out
- Sick
-- 60 hrs short term, that's all you get this year
-- Sick verification
- Vacation max 35 daays, just say hours!
- Airport Hotels, enjoy that
- Pension changes, may term the A at any time, remember UAL
- Scope
-- 75% of narrow body fleet
-- Unrestricted domestic code share
-- Modify how to count, new math
- Disability, max to 24 months?
- IOD, don't get hurt at work, you will use your own sick hrs
- Average Comparable Pay Rate at yr 3, yea right

Reason #1:
Same management team... Lying thieves.

Reason #2
Six year AGREEMENT( translates to 10)

Reason #3
Forming another "B"scale pay scale

Reason #4
Would like to be able to look at myself in the mirror

another poster wrote:

"Give it to the Judge."

I will not be party to selling out my future to alleviate the fear of the unknown.
To give into this imposed pressure is a failure of character.
We must resist to the limit of our ability to do so.

House payment, Kids education, Promised equity stake, etc , are just not a good enough reason to give up on my self worth and standing as a professional.

My career will go on, just not as a pilot for American Airlines, I am Ok with that.

21 years with high quality aviators, how can I regret that?

Therefore, my realities are fight to fix this place or leave.

I will not lie down with dogs.

10. This management team received an overwhelming vote of NO CONFIDENCE from us. SCOPE.
9. I read the first 100 pages of the TA and the word "eliminate" was used 35 times, effectively destroying decades of collective bargaining by ourselves and our predecessors. SCOPE.
8. The scheduling and PBS agreements give the company excessive amounts of control with little ability of the individual pilot to refuse reassignment, rescheduling, or changes to trips. SCOPE.
7. Distance learning is paid at 1/3 of base rate. SCOPE.
6. Hotels at complete discretion of company with airport hotels preferred. SCOPE.
5. SWA is not included in the Industry Comparable Pay Rates Proposal. SCOPE.
4. Reserves will still will have moveable DFP's. SCOPE.
3. 6 Year Contract. SCOPE.
2. Paragraph 1. pages 29 and 30, under Settlement Consideration has enough holes to fly an Airbus 380 through it(Please see Tom Westbrook's analysis on another thread). SCOPE.
1. No 1.5 or 2.0 pay for holiday flying in the first 100 pages or Section 8. SCOPE.

Finally, I am one of those who voted "YES" in 2003, because I was scared and felt like my back was against the wall. Guess what, my back is still against the wall, but this is it for me at 54.5. I am gonna press to test and see what happens. Care to join me in a run up this river and see if we can stir up some **** with the goonies that managed this place into bankruptcy.

Its not personal, its just business,
No Wait, it is personal, they made it personal.

In addition to the lies we hear that American Eagle is profitable (not true)
Here are more lies:

10. "Weeks Not Months"
9. "We need RJs to grow the mainline"
8. "7300 floor"
7. "Two Great Airlines, One Great Future"
6. "Shared Sacrifice"
5. "Bricks in our backpack"
4. "You don't understand executive compensation"
3. "Cannon shot"
2. "Things change"
1. "Win Together Pull Together"

more reasons to vote NO:

from a 600 seniority Capt at AA

You are definitely on the right track.
(Sorry for stealing your list format)
Just talking out loud so to speak with a review of where we are at:
1) AMR is doing very well this summer.
2) Their cash balance is growing.
3) Horton's plan was to exit in about a year, but his labor strife requires an extension to Dec.
4) Legacy carrier pilot groups have a history of consensual agreements.
5) This Judge does not want to be the first to dictate to us the terms.
6) AMR just wants a majority of APA to believe that they have made their LBFO and it must become their contract.
7) AMR doesn't care for Parker pre-empting their plans.
8) The CLA with US sunsets if AMR exits bankruptcy, and they may be able to do so, if we give them what they want and they issue a POR simultaneous with the end of the extension.
9) The extension gives us time to stick it in their face and renegotiate, since abrogation would be unprecedented.
10) I cannot be sold a rotten bill of goods by Jeff Brundage when my peers at other airlines are going to leave me in the dust.
11) There are no guarantees in life.
Voting NO for the profession.
I will not subsidize a failing enterprise that does not respectfully appreciate my contributions.
It's time.

"Uncertainty and more pain". Hmmmm............. :cool: Well, it appears desperation may be setting in, in addition to coming down to the final wire. What happens then is usually a combination of threats and intimidation, perhaps with the inference of a lollipop, if one is good.

It seems this communique has all those ingredients.

But yes, I think those two descriptive terms would be an accurate assessment of the immeadiate future at AA should the TA fail. I would assume those people know that would likely apply to ALL parties and not just the pilots. Once the 1113 is under way, no one knows how AA will function, but one would have to be a fool to think it will operate totally unaffected considering no airline of this size has ever attempted to operate itself in that manner after an airline's management initiates that level of attack on its pilots. What the consequences of that is, is anyone's guess, but it will be interesting to see if the outside investors will also embrace "uncertainty" in AMR's stand alone plan under those circumstances considering it might be a day-to-day situation stability-wise as most of those within it will be existing under unprecidented "pain" as this threatening letter implies.

The questions and uncertainties mentioned above notwithstanding, I will NOT succomb to threats, intimidation and tyranny in this situation. My vote stays NO. Additionally, I couldn't care less on what terms they restart negotiations, 1113 or otherwise. Unless another agreement materializes that satisfactorily meets the draconian deficiencies of this TA, it's more wasted time with the same result from me..........NO. One final observation is the interesting fact the author assumes the judge is certain to rule for the tyrants. It is likely, but not an absolute certainty and quite presumptuous, although understood considering it appears the obvious point of the communique is to terrorize the oppressed.

Don't cave in!