Judge sean lane grants amr management 1113
08-15-2012, 03:49 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 514
Originally Posted by gloopy
WRT "furloughing and code sharing" that's really scope. Hopefully management's insane plans for massive E190 ULRJ "ultra large RJ" sized code share at the bottom feeders is squashed permanently, as is their idiotic JB/AS role as a massive American Connection.
The Judges objections to AMR's motion were specific to Furloughs and Codeshare. He felt that while AMR's business plan required increased Codesharing, the Debtor's motion essentially had no limits on codeshare and needed to be tightened up.
On the other hand, the Judge was absolutely fine with AMR's proposals concerning increased use of Regional jets both in terms of numbers of airframes allowed and the number of seats (up to 88). His discussion of RJs begins on page 58 and concludes with this statement regarding the need for RJs up to 88 seats:
Consistent with the trend in the industry, however, the Court concludes that American needs to use such jets to both compete with its peers in terms of matching market size and to generate additional revenue. The Court finds, therefore, that American has shown that the request in the March 21 Proposal is reasonable and necessary
And this statement regarding the the proposed number of airframes in the 'greater than 51 to 88 seat range':
The Court finds that the information in the Business Plan on regional jets is in line with American’s regional jet “ask” in the March 21 Proposal, which caps the number of aircraft at the 51 to 88 seat range at the larger of 255 or 50% of the total number of mainline aircraft in use at the time. The request for 255 regional aircraft is very much in line with the projected need in the Business Plan
Last edited by DelDah Capt; 08-15-2012 at 04:05 PM.
08-15-2012, 03:51 PM
#44
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Narrow/Left Wide/Right
Posts: 3,655
Originally Posted by LittleBoyBlew
Congratz AA pilots!! Truly a Victory for ALL pilots. Fight the good fight..
08-15-2012, 03:55 PM
#45
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 90
This is a huge victory for the scope issue alone! Unlimited domestic codesharing as proposed by AA would forever prevent any chance of growth at AA. These pilots voted very wisely and have won a huge victory even if the rest of the contract is abrogated, as I assume it will.
08-15-2012, 04:27 PM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 1,130
Originally Posted by aa73
Temporary victory.... battle's not even close to being won yet. They will re-submit by Friday and it will most likely pass. Still feels good though!
The fact the 1113c motion was denied for cause is excellent precedent for the future. And, IMO, the required negotiating under the code should be enough ammunition for the APA legal team to get the judge to enact that as a court ordered limit to the abrogation.
My 2 legal cents. Good luck AMR guys/gals.
Lee
08-15-2012, 04:35 PM
#48
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Wow, I thought the judge would deny the small jet scope as well as the code sharing scope. He separated the two issues, which is improper considering they are both the same thing. This fight might get harder, however, the most important thing to note is that AMR can not operate 1 single new RJ until an agreement is inked. You may need to take it to an appellate judge who is familiar with labor law as this judge obviously is not.
DON'T STOP FIGHTING!
DON'T STOP FIGHTING!
08-15-2012, 04:37 PM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Bigg Bird!!
Posts: 599
Originally Posted by LeeFXDWG
And the APA legal team should counter with the fact that although the TA wasn't passed, the company should be required to only be able to enact its last/best offer to the union since it was economically sound in their mind. I have no idea of what the original term sheet said, but feel that the TA is where the judge should allow the abrogation of the contract to go to. Then the AA pilots get the offer they turned down and immediately enter section 6 the day AA exits.
The fact the 1113c motion was denied for cause is excellent precedent for the future. And, IMO, the required negotiating under the code should be enough ammunition for the APA legal team to get the judge to enact that as a court ordered limit to the abrogation.
My 2 legal cents. Good luck AMR guys/gals.
Lee
The fact the 1113c motion was denied for cause is excellent precedent for the future. And, IMO, the required negotiating under the code should be enough ammunition for the APA legal team to get the judge to enact that as a court ordered limit to the abrogation.
My 2 legal cents. Good luck AMR guys/gals.
Lee
08-15-2012, 04:38 PM
#50
SDQ Base Chief
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 320 CA
Posts: 5,588
Originally Posted by Mesabah
Wow, I thought the judge would deny the small jet scope as well as the code sharing scope. He separated the two issues, which is improper considering they are both the same thing. This fight might get harder, however, the most important thing to note is that AMR can not operate 1 single new RJ until an agreement is inked. You may need to take it to an appellate judge who is familiar with labor law as this judge obviously is not.
DON'T STOP FIGHTING!
DON'T STOP FIGHTING!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
