Thanks for the viewpoint aa73. Stay strong!

I ain't an AA guy. However, why is it always the assumption that the judge will impose the company's original term sheet? 1113c requires that both parties negotiate in good faith and that if the company's "last/best offer" is refused, the judge can take action on the original 1113c motion. If the judge imposes the term sheet, that is retaliatory since the entity in protection has already indicated that it is satisfied with the financial aspects of the TA.

IMO, a judge would be hard pressed to not impose the TA as the court ordered work agreement. While there is no direct precedent on the issue, there are many other examples that can be used to draw an analogy on how the judge should proceed within the guidlines of the US code.

That is my opinion which is worth 2 cents. But, the one good thing that could come from a court imposed work order is that the day the company exits BK, the pilots enter section six negotiations because they have no negotiated CBA under the definitions of the RLA.

Frats,
Lee

I don't think comparing our No vote should be lumped in with criticizing DAL pilots. There was good and bad with the DAL TA... it passed, and they now have a contract worth shooting for, in our case. Same with the UAL TA, if it is similar to DAL's.

Our No vote was really based on one thing: if we have to have a concessionary contract forced on us, we'd rather die standing on our feet than survive living on our knees.

Thanks for all the support.

All true, but the more mature and rational view you take is not as cool as insulting the DAL Pilot group.

Scoop

So if the APA strikes do we have the guts to back them up at the other airlines. I'm talking about taking a stand and making it clear that we support DAL+ contracts and will not allow the APA to lose to other carriers moving in. I know that's beyond the "rules" of the RLA which have been gutted by bankruptcy/threat of BK. Based on my opinion that only about 1/4 of people actually get what's going on and care on most issues, I think not. Anyway, I'm in, this stand is long overdue imho.

I wonder now that APA voted no. Could management give that 13.5 equity stake to the creditors committee for a stand-alone plan?

The TA was passed to the pilots and rejected the judge could still issue the term sheet. AMR would out source AA flying in code share and alliance agreements allowed in the original term sheet. Or is that impossible?

In honor of this week's event....may I present....

Congrats to the APA pilots who voted no. Had we voted no 8-10 years ago at USAIR, UAL (me), and DAL, the industry would probably not have descended into the death spiral that it has become.

I voted no every time at UAL. If we had torpedoed UAL 9 years ago, I would probably now be a 9 year FO or Captain at another major airline in the US, making far more money than I would be as a Captain at UAL right now. Unfortunately all the ALPA represented pilots caved in to the 1113 threats that our companies used, and these threats were backed up by the ALPA cronies.

It is my belief (also worth 2 cents) that you guys finally did the right thing. I only wish we had the same cajones 9 years ago.

Section 1113 of the bankruptcy code was put into the US bankruptcy code in 1983 to PROTECT the interests of union laborers in court. It is not a threat, it is there to protect you and your interests. By voting no, you are allowing the law to be followed. I wish we had done the same. In the end, after two "voluntary" pay cuts and then voluntarily giving up our pensions, we ended up far below the companies original term sheet.

LEEDX:
I agree with most of what you said except that the judge will go by the term sheet. The judge is required by 1113 to look at the haircut that he imposed on other creditors, and make sure that if he abrogates the union contract, that it is in line with those cuts. Are there any recent precedents with pilots in recent bankruptcy proceedings? Unfortunately no. None of the rest of us in the industry had the cajones to stay in the game, and see the other guys cards, We folded.

Well done to you, the pilots at American, and good luck.

The contrast in perspective over at the TWU is interesting:

TWU mechanics contract passed by only 48 votesStar-Telegram


It was definitely a squeaker.

According to vote totals posted to Transport Workers Union Local 565's website, the mechanics contract at American Airlines passed by only 48 votes.

The vote results were 4,776 in favor and 4,728 against. The store clerks vote passed by a wide margin with 858 voting in favor and 229 voting against.

The Dallas/Fort Worth mechanics base voted 85 percent against the contract while its stores group voted 91 percent in favor, TWU local 565 said.

TWU International representative Don Videtich said this was a difficult decision for the union members.

"We wouldn't have been surprised if it would have passed by more or if it would have lost by more," Videtich said in an interview on Wednesday.

Videtich said the mechanics contract includes 15 percent pay raises over the term of the deal and lowers the employee cost portions of health insurance as well as improves the 401(k) plan.

And while the deal is still concessionary, it was a better alternative than possibly having the bankruptcy judge throw out the mechanics existing contract. Bankruptcy judge Sean Lane is expected to rule on American's union contracts on August 15.

"What would have been worse is if we go to the judge and the judge abrogates the agreement and the company imposes other terms," Videtich said. "It's something that would have been worse that what we are dealing with."

I understand as many as 200 votes were thrown out/disqulified. Sounds to me something fishy is going on in this situation. Who knows,..........if the pilots vote were that close, ours may have miraculously passed by a 50.25% marging too, but maybe the vote count was strong enough against that whomever couldn't throw that many votes out to change the outcome, so it had to stand.

It's not that I don't trust certain people and entities, it's just that...........well, I don't trust them.