Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




RockBottom
09-04-2012, 03:55 PM
Judge Says AMR Can Reject Pacts With Pilots
By JOSEPH CHECKLER, WSJ

NEW YORK—A federal judge said Tuesday that AMR Corp. can reject labor agreements in place with its pilots union, 20 days after he forced the American Airlines parent to make changes to its latest contract proposal.

The decision by Judge Sean H. Lane of U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan places new urgency on AMR and the Allied Pilots Association to reach a settlement on new contracts as AMR's merger talks escalate with US Airways Group Inc. The pilots have said they support a merger with US Airways.

Last month, the judge forced AMR to change provisions in its labor proposal that he thought gave it too much discretion to enforce employee furloughs and forge code-sharing agreements with other airlines. AMR made those changes in a filing late last month.

"Having addressed the two problematic items," Judge Lane said, he would allow AMR to reject the agreements already in place. The judge later said he sympathizes with the pilots and that he hopes a settlement will come soon.

After the hearing, American Airlines spokesman Bruce Hicks said the company has worked "very hard" to reach a deal with the pilots and that it would communicate details of its new plan in the coming days.

"Our goal remains to reach a consensual agreement with our pilots," Mr. Hicks added. A spokesman for the APA didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

In court on Tuesday, a lawyer for the pilots union said AMR's financial condition has improved since a three-week trial over labor contracts earlier this year, and that a new trial should be held.

The disagreement centered on what the meaning of the phrase "business plan" is—specifically whether AMR's latest offer of a 17% cut in labor costs related to the pilots, compared with a 20% cut in its prior offer, constituted evidence of a new business plan and necessitated another trial. The pilots said the change, which came after AMR offered similar concessions in settlements with its mechanics and flight attendants, was part of a new plan. But Judge Lane said the 17% offer came in confidential contract negotiations, not in bankruptcy court, and thus wasn't something he could consider.

Paul Hastings LLP's Neal D. Mollen, a lawyer for AMR, said that while the airline is in the process of changing its business plan, nothing has been finalized. On the witness stand, AMR Chief Restructuring Officer Beverly K. Goulet concurred, saying the original business plan has been "updated" to reflect settlements with other unions but that no new plan has been presented.

A lawyer for the union, James & Hoffman PC's Kathy Krieger, asked Ms. Goulet whether the proposal for a 17% labor-cost savings related to pilots was part of a larger change to the company's plan. "We did not go back and re-examine the other components of the business plan," Ms. Goulet said.

Judge Lane last month issued a 106-page ruling that said AMR couldn't reject its current labor proposals with the pilots because its latest labor offer forced pilots to take furloughs—or unpaid days off—and because it was too aggressive in implementing code-sharing agreements that would allow AMR to share routes with other airlines at a cost savings to the airline. AMR removed the furloughs and adjusted the code-sharing provisions and resubmitted its proposal to Judge Lane, who had supported most of AMR's other original arguments.

Such labor trials have become common in bankruptcy court: Companies must get a judge's approval to reject labor contracts so it can impose its own working conditions on unions. Often, the company ends up compromising with the workers, as AMR did with its other unions, including those representing its mechanics and flight attendants.

AMR has explored the possibility of exiting its 10-month-old bankruptcy as a stand-alone company, but recently has warmed up to a merger with another airline or airlines. Its most likely merger partner is longtime suitor US Airways, which AMR announced last week has signed a nondisclosure agreement so the two sides can share confidential information.


eaglefly
09-04-2012, 04:17 PM
Exclusivity for AMR ends at the end of the year. I'll bet the UCC won't support extention beyond that and barring an acceptable deal for AA pilots, Parker could be in drivers seat by January with 3 CBA's in his pocket. To merge the 2 carriers post BK, he'll need another deal. As conditions likely deteriorate for AA pilots, so will any interest in greasing the skids for the current players.

lakehouse
09-04-2012, 04:21 PM
Exclusivity for AMR ends at the end of the year. I'll bet the UCC won't support extention beyond that and barring an acceptable deal for AA pilots, Parker could be in drivers seat by January with 3 CBA's in his pocket. To merge the 2 carriers post BK, he'll need another deal. As conditions likely deteriorate for AA pilots, so will any interest in greasing the skids for the current players.

Or just keep running the separate like at United/CAL.....take whichever of the 3 takes the lowest pay rates and give them the new airplanes. That is one thing I do not get, why the AA pilots think Parker is some savior. He is going to screw you guys worst, and whip saw three mainline groups against each other. He doesnt want you, he just wants the international part of AA. New airplanes can go wherever he wants.


ForeverFO
09-04-2012, 05:45 PM
Or just keep running the separate like at United/CAL.....take whichever of the 3 takes the lowest pay rates and give them the new airplanes. That is one thing I do not get, why the AA pilots think Parker is some savior. He is going to screw you guys worst, and whip saw three mainline groups against each other. He doesnt want you, he just wants the international part of AA. New airplanes can go wherever he wants.

You have to understand the depths of our raw hatred for AMR and the officers of the last decade to understand how we can view anybody, Parker included, as somewhat of a savior.

If there is another way to get rid of our management team, I am all ears. Most of the guys I fly with would prefer to go it alone as #3 or #4 carrier in the USA, but the way things are these days, it doesn't seem likely.

lakehouse
09-04-2012, 05:53 PM
You have to understand the depths of our raw hatred for AMR and the officers of the last decade to understand how we can view anybody, Parker included, as somewhat of a savior.

If there is another way to get rid of our management team, I am all ears. Most of the guys I fly with would prefer to go it alone as #3 or #4 carrier in the USA, but the way things are these days, it doesn't seem likely.

Your trading an apple for an apple, maybe even a more rotten one, in my very young dumb opinion. It just opens you guys up for bigger problems is all I am trying to point out. Like how legacy United is getting hosed, and stalled on a new JCBA. It seems that may become the new trend, merge legacy airlines, then leave their bankruptcy contracts in place as long as possible, and run the airlines separate. Put the new airplanes at whoever is playing nicer and is cheaper. I just dont see how Parker works out good for AA. It will result is a massive amount of shrinking, as USAIR brings a dismal amount of international flying to the table. What you will have is American Domestic and American International real fast, with American Domestic having an East and West coast side. I foresee massive cutbacks, and hub closures.

jacjetlag
09-04-2012, 06:39 PM
The revenue figures will fall off because the airline performance will suffer. The UCC will begin to feel the pain and pressure Horton. I promise you, he will regret this day.

eaglefly
09-04-2012, 06:46 PM
Or just keep running the separate like at United/CAL.....take whichever of the 3 takes the lowest pay rates and give them the new airplanes. That is one thing I do not get, why the AA pilots think Parker is some savior. He is going to screw you guys worst, and whip saw three mainline groups against each other. He doesnt want you, he just wants the international part of AA. New airplanes can go wherever he wants.

Anything is possible, but that sounds like a recipe for disaster. But the U CLA has a no furlough clause and barring force majure (which your scenario is NOT), I don't see how he can make your hypothetical scenario realistically work. If AA and U merge prior to BK, the U CLA is binding. The U pilots have no furlough protection as far as I know and the CLA has arguably the most favorable costs of the 3 pilot groups.

But yes, he could operate 3 carriers for years as he's operated 2 for half a decade.

lakehouse
09-04-2012, 06:57 PM
Anything is possible, but that sounds like a recipe for disaster. But the U CLA has a no furlough clause and barring force majure (which your scenario is NOT), I don't see how he can make your hypothetical scenario realistically work. If AA and U merge prior to BK, the U CLA is binding. The U pilots have no furlough protection as far as I know and the CLA has arguably the most favorable costs of the 3 pilot groups.

But yes, he could operate 3 carriers for years as he's operated 2 for half a decade.

Well the upcoming retirements can offset any need to furlough at U. However AA is prime picking off the bat, its why I dont get why you guys want it so bad. Park all the MD80s right off the bat, and start picking and choosing which parts of the upcoming airplane orders he REALLY wants. The scary part starts coming when retirements happen, and new airplane orders happen, one place could get all the planes while the other sit in a pile of their own stagnation for a decade. That is starting to become the scary thought at United right now (legacy UAL), no airplanes on order, and a JCBA held so far over their head they feel like a small child jumping up trying to get a toy. Just trying to throw it out there that the USAIR deal might be a terrible alternative. Well, unless you block AMR from getting any bonuses from this Ch11 process and force a USAIR takeover, then at least you get the joy of blocking millions to Horton and CO, but at the expense of being at the mercy of Parker, and giving him whatever bonuses he gets.

I guess the big problem is corporate America is the new Mafia, ripping people off. Your picking Tony Soprano to save you from Johnny Sacks.

HSLD
09-04-2012, 07:59 PM
That is starting to become the scary thought at United right now (legacy UAL), no airplanes on order

Except for the 100 737-Max, 50 737-900ER recently announced. Oh yeah, the UAL pre-merger 25 787 and 25 A350 order (with options for 25 more of each). Plus all the pre-merger CAL jets on order.
Aside from that, UAL has no aircraft on order.

eaglefly
09-04-2012, 08:18 PM
Well the upcoming retirements can offset any need to furlough at U. However AA is prime picking off the bat, its why I dont get why you guys want it so bad. Park all the MD80s right off the bat, and start picking and choosing which parts of the upcoming airplane orders he REALLY wants. The scary part starts coming when retirements happen, and new airplane orders happen, one place could get all the planes while the other sit in a pile of their own stagnation for a decade. That is starting to become the scary thought at United right now (legacy UAL), no airplanes on order, and a JCBA held so far over their head they feel like a small child jumping up trying to get a toy. Just trying to throw it out there that the USAIR deal might be a terrible alternative. Well, unless you block AMR from getting any bonuses from this Ch11 process and force a USAIR takeover, then at least you get the joy of blocking millions to Horton and CO, but at the expense of being at the mercy of Parker, and giving him whatever bonuses he gets.

I guess the big problem is corporate America is the new Mafia, ripping people off. Your picking Tony Soprano to save you from Johnny Sacks.

AFAIK, only the East side is slated for a large number of retirements at U and that will still take years. I don't see mass parking of the -80's anytime soon as that would result in a massive and permanent loss of revenue. It seems you've got AA with no furloughs and theoretically little attrition parking all the -80's and all the new orders going elsewhere..........well, I suppose Parker could staff the AA side at 500% on reserves. :rolleyes: The failed TA provided for the outsourcing of the junior half of the pilots jobs anyway, so even in your draconian scenario, Parker wouldn't be any worse then that term sheet and as stated, the CLA throws a lot of wrenches in that plan.

Rick, this whole dance isn't going to go on for more then a few months at most (personally, I can't see it getting too far into the holiday travel season). The UCC cannot.........no, WILL not (by their own admission) sign on to AA exiting BK without a pilots CBA and that will either happen one of 2 ways. Either A. AMR and the APA negotiate something palatable to the pilot GROUP and that will have to be BETTER then U's CLA for the price of tolerating this management any further -or- B. a merger will be consummated within C11 and that triggers the U CLA, which may occur as a result of AMR's faliure to come to a consenual deal and the UCC acts to terminate exclusivity or perhaps before any deal as a result of AMR's acceptance of US Airways's submitting a POR to the court.

The judge has now given AMR a bigger bat to hit us with, but the faster and harder they swing it at our heads, the more determined we'll be to take the whacks until the UCC says time has run out and takes the bat away. That's my take on it anyway. AMR has stated they intend to impliment most of the 1113 provisions and has threatened to eliminate any pension including 401(k) contributions as a punitive measure, but we shall see. At any rate, in the very near term look for the following;

- Pay rate adjustments per the 1113.
- No sequence protection or minimum guarantee.
- 1113 adjustments to RSV system and reduction of pay credits.
- Loss of all E,F,G time and Int'l override.
- Loss of pay protection for fatigue.
- Changes to sick leave policy, including reduced compensation and requirement for 3rd party approval of illness.
- Airport fleabag hotels with no APA input.
- LTD adjustments for the negative.
- Implimenting scope changes.
- Closing of domiciles with STL, BOS and DCA the top contenders for elimination/reduction.
- Possible furloughs.
- Freezing of the A-fund and termination of the B-fund (again possibly replaced with NOTHING, if the threat is acted upon).

PBS will take 6 to as long as 18 months to impliment, I've heard. Medical plans will be changed for 2013 and those are normally selected during October, so that would take effect for 2013 (it's my understanding medical benefits cannot be changed mid-term), so those two seem more longer term changes.

lakehouse
09-04-2012, 09:05 PM
Except for the 100 737-Max, 50 737-900ER recently announced. Oh yeah, the UAL pre-merger 25 787 and 25 A350 order (with options for 25 more of each). Plus all the pre-merger CAL jets on order.
Aside from that, UAL has no aircraft on order.

And if no JCBA is worked out, how many are at LUAL??? I bet the guys on the LCAL will be enjoy them, while the LUAL guys feel like its Eastern all over.

Please tell me how many of those are slated to be at UNITED LEGACY SIDE if no one list, one contract is worked out???

This is why I put (Legacy UAL) in the post.

lakehouse
09-04-2012, 09:13 PM
AFAIK, only the East side is slated for a large number of retirements at U and that will still take years. I don't see mass parking of the -80's anytime soon as that would result in a massive and permanent loss of revenue. It seems you've got AA with no furloughs and theoretically little attrition parking all the -80's and all the new orders going elsewhere..........well, I suppose Parker could staff the AA side at 500% on reserves. :rolleyes: The failed TA provided for the outsourcing of the junior half of the pilots jobs anyway, so even in your draconian scenario, Parker wouldn't be any worse then that term sheet and as stated, the CLA throws a lot of wrenches in that plan.

Rick, this whole dance isn't going to go on for more then a few months at most (personally, I can't see it getting too far into the holiday travel season). The UCC cannot.........no, WILL not (by their own admission) sign on to AA exiting BK without a pilots CBA and that will either happen one of 2 ways. Either A. AMR and the APA negotiate something palatable to the pilot GROUP and that will have to be BETTER then U's CLA for the price of tolerating this management any further -or- B. a merger will be consummated within C11 and that triggers the U CLA, which may occur as a result of AMR's faliure to come to a consenual deal and the UCC acts to terminate exclusivity or perhaps before any deal as a result of AMR's acceptance of US Airways's submitting a POR to the court.

The judge has now given AMR a bigger bat to hit us with, but the faster and harder they swing it at our heads, the more determined we'll be to take the whacks until the UCC says time has run out and takes the bat away. That's my take on it anyway. AMR has stated they intend to impliment most of the 1113 provisions and has threatened to eliminate any pension including 401(k) contributions as a punitive measure, but we shall see. At any rate, in the very near term look for the following;

- Pay rate adjustments per the 1113.
- No sequence protection or minimum guarantee.
- 1113 adjustments to RSV system and reduction of pay credits.
- Loss of all E,F,G time and Int'l override.
- Loss of pay protection for fatigue.
- Changes to sick leave policy, including reduced compensation and requirement for 3rd party approval of illness.
- Airport fleabag hotels with no APA input.
- LTD adjustments for the negative.
- Implimenting scope changes.
- Closing of domiciles with STL, BOS and DCA the top contenders for elimination/reduction.
- Possible furloughs.
- Freezing of the A-fund and termination of the B-fund (again possibly replaced with NOTHING, if the threat is acted upon).

PBS will take 6 to as long as 18 months to impliment, I've heard. Medical plans will be changed for 2013 and those are normally selected during October, so that would take effect for 2013 (it's my understanding medical benefits cannot be changed mid-term), so those two seem more longer term changes.

I hope your right, I just have a hard time seeing any good coming from a USAIR merger. Outside of the worthlessness I see of USAIR in general, I see WAY too much room for elimination. This isnt DELTA/NWA, its not even UAL/CAL. ITs a scary amount of worthless units, almost like a TWA/Airtran.

KillingMeSmalls
09-04-2012, 09:40 PM
AFAIK, only the East side is slated for a large number of retirements at U and that will still take years. I don't see mass parking of the -80's anytime soon as that would result in a massive and permanent loss of revenue. It seems you've got AA with no furloughs and theoretically little attrition parking all the -80's and all the new orders going elsewhere..........well, I suppose Parker could staff the AA side at 500% on reserves. :rolleyes: The failed TA provided for the outsourcing of the junior half of the pilots jobs anyway, so even in your draconian scenario, Parker wouldn't be any worse then that term sheet and as stated, the CLA throws a lot of wrenches in that plan.

Rick, this whole dance isn't going to go on for more then a few months at most (personally, I can't see it getting too far into the holiday travel season). The UCC cannot.........no, WILL not (by their own admission) sign on to AA exiting BK without a pilots CBA and that will either happen one of 2 ways. Either A. AMR and the APA negotiate something palatable to the pilot GROUP and that will have to be BETTER then U's CLA for the price of tolerating this management any further -or- B. a merger will be consummated within C11 and that triggers the U CLA, which may occur as a result of AMR's faliure to come to a consenual deal and the UCC acts to terminate exclusivity or perhaps before any deal as a result of AMR's acceptance of US Airways's submitting a POR to the court.

The judge has now given AMR a bigger bat to hit us with, but the faster and harder they swing it at our heads, the more determined we'll be to take the whacks until the UCC says time has run out and takes the bat away. That's my take on it anyway. AMR has stated they intend to impliment most of the 1113 provisions and has threatened to eliminate any pension including 401(k) contributions as a punitive measure, but we shall see. At any rate, in the very near term look for the following;

- Pay rate adjustments per the 1113.
- No sequence protection or minimum guarantee.
- 1113 adjustments to RSV system and reduction of pay credits.
- Loss of all E,F,G time and Int'l override.
- Loss of pay protection for fatigue.
- Changes to sick leave policy, including reduced compensation and requirement for 3rd party approval of illness.
- Airport fleabag hotels with no APA input.
- LTD adjustments for the negative.
- Implimenting scope changes.
- Closing of domiciles with STL, BOS and DCA the top contenders for elimination/reduction.
- Possible furloughs.
- Freezing of the A-fund and termination of the B-fund (again possibly replaced with NOTHING, if the threat is acted upon).

PBS will take 6 to as long as 18 months to impliment, I've heard. Medical plans will be changed for 2013 and those are normally selected during October, so that would take effect for 2013 (it's my understanding medical benefits cannot be changed mid-term), so those two seem more longer term changes.

As always, a good assessment eaglefly. AFAIK is just throwing out some flamebait. I wish guys like that would just stick to their regional threads, because I am now dumber for reading his posts.

dvhighdrive88
09-04-2012, 11:34 PM
Except for the 100 737-Max, 50 737-900ER recently announced. Oh yeah, the UAL pre-merger 25 787 and 25 A350 order (with options for 25 more of each). Plus all the pre-merger CAL jets on order.
Aside from that, UAL has no aircraft on order.

Many missed the 160 more options UCH got on Max 9s and ERs for the 787 delays. They also make no mention of the Airbus revamp planned to run those till 2020. This is not a shrinking airline just one moving the pieces around for efficiency.

CaptainBigWood
09-05-2012, 01:15 AM
Doug Parker has a flight attendant fan club. I don't agree with all the view points, the pictures are worth a look.
FIREDOUGPARKER.ORG (http://firedougparker.org/)

Tony Nelson
09-05-2012, 03:31 AM
And if no JCBA is worked out, how many are at LUAL??? I bet the guys on the LCAL will be enjoy them, while the LUAL guys feel like its Eastern all over.

Please tell me how many of those are slated to be at UNITED LEGACY SIDE if no one list, one contract is worked out???

This is why I put (Legacy UAL) in the post.

The -900ER's (50 firm, 60 option) are planned to replace about 85 L-UAL 757-200's.

atrdriver
09-05-2012, 03:38 AM
The -900ER's (50 firm, 60 option) are planned to replace about 85 L-UAL 757-200's.

Exactly. Nothing to be jumping for joy about.

sailingfun
09-05-2012, 04:15 AM
Well the upcoming retirements can offset any need to furlough at U. However AA is prime picking off the bat, its why I dont get why you guys want it so bad. Park all the MD80s right off the bat, and start picking and choosing which parts of the upcoming airplane orders he REALLY wants. The scary part starts coming when retirements happen, and new airplane orders happen, one place could get all the planes while the other sit in a pile of their own stagnation for a decade. That is starting to become the scary thought at United right now (legacy UAL), no airplanes on order, and a JCBA held so far over their head they feel like a small child jumping up trying to get a toy. Just trying to throw it out there that the USAIR deal might be a terrible alternative. Well, unless you block AMR from getting any bonuses from this Ch11 process and force a USAIR takeover, then at least you get the joy of blocking millions to Horton and CO, but at the expense of being at the mercy of Parker, and giving him whatever bonuses he gets.

I guess the big problem is corporate America is the new Mafia, ripping people off. Your picking Tony Soprano to save you from Johnny Sacks.

I think I check on the UAL aircraft order thing. Your wrong, really wrong.

eaglefly
09-05-2012, 04:52 AM
As always, a good assessment eaglefly. AFAIK is just throwing out some flamebait. I wish guys like that would just stick to their regional threads, because I am now dumber for reading his posts.

"AFAIK" stands for "as far as I know", so I assume you're referring to rick86. There will be streamlining of equipment, routes and hubs as part of any AA/U merger, just like will occur without it, but the combined carrier doesn't have to shrink much to remain about the sizes of UAL or DAL. Those mergers so far haven't produced mass shrinkage/layoffs.

I think the crux of ricks beliefs are more wishful thinking a U hook-up can be avoided as he believes that scenario will be far worse for Eagle then a stand-alone AA. In that respect, he's almost certainly right. AA/U will almost certainly happen IMO, it's just a matter of in or out of BK and whether AMR management or Parkers team is in the drivers seat. That question depends on AMR and whether they can offer the pilots any incentive to support them vs. digging in like ticks until the UCC simply HAS to make a move to complete the process with Parker or Horton acquiesces and supports a POR by Parker triggering the U CLA.

Tony Nelson
09-05-2012, 04:58 AM
Exactly. Nothing to be jumping for joy about.

You are correct, and I'm not jumping for joy. Just passing the latest management plan.

eaglefly
09-05-2012, 05:03 AM
Doug Parker has a flight attendant fan club. I don't agree with all the view points, the pictures are worth a look.
FIREDOUGPARKER.ORG (http://firedougparker.org/)

Started to read that site and stopped when they said,"...and then AMR offered them a deal better then Parker's and they turned it down.". Totally in error and their credibility vaporized at that point. The AMR "LBFO" was/is worse than the U CLA. MOST AA pilots would prefer not to merge with U and aren't fans of Parker, but considering alternative, it's the lessor of two evils. IMO, Parker has the advantage as I'm skeptical AMR will bargain in good faith and offer something to the pilots better then the U CLA.

This time I don't see anything getting past the APA BOD to the membership that isn't better then the U CLA, so a warmed over LBFO II designed to just swing another 10% or so can never work if it stops at the BOD level, where it should. The longer this drags out in contractless purgatory, the stronger Parker's chances get for him.

B767
09-05-2012, 05:58 AM
I hope the best for you AA guys, and like your optimism about what's going on Eaglefly. The UCC lawyer did say a deal has to be made, however, this is their latest:

NEW YORK – There has been debate about how important it was to have a new contract with the Allied Pilots Association before American Airlinesand parent AMR exited Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.

On Tuesday, attorney Jack Butler for the Unsecured Creditors Committee gave his opinion – the airline must have a deal before exiting bankruptcy.

“Let there be no mistake” thatAMR has to have a contract with pilots, Butler told U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane.

“The committee is going to require that before there is any reorganization,” Butler said. “There has to be a deal.”

UPDATE: We had a conversation with Butler after Tuesday’s hearing in which he elaborated on his courtroom comments. Let’s put it this way: Butler and the committee want a deal before exit, but he acknowledges that a company can have a plan of reorganization without new labor contracts in place.

“It was the creditors committee’s expectations that there will be consensual deals here with all the labor organizations in connection with the plan of reorganization, and we believe that is very important. We believe that the company knows that. We believe the APA knows the committee’s position in that respect.”

Butler repeated that the creditors committee will not support any contract that gives pilots more value than the one they overwhelming rejected on Aug. 8.

“I don’t think there’s a better deal out there for them,” he said. END UPDATE

Now, how exactly this mess will play out, who knows. Like I said, I'm pulling for you guys.

hockeypilot44
09-05-2012, 06:11 AM
******* the creditor's committee. If they don't want to pay the pilots fairly, they can lose everything when the pilots go on strike.

tsquare
09-05-2012, 06:48 AM
******* the creditor's committee. If they don't want to pay the pilots fairly, they can lose everything when the pilots go on strike.


What a totally asinine thing to say.

eaglefly
09-05-2012, 06:53 AM
I hope the best for you AA guys, and like your optimism about what's going on Eaglefly. The UCC lawyer did say a deal has to be made, however, this is their latest:

NEW YORK – There has been debate about how important it was to have a new contract with the Allied Pilots Association before American Airlinesand parent AMR exited Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.

On Tuesday, attorney Jack Butler for the Unsecured Creditors Committee gave his opinion – the airline must have a deal before exiting bankruptcy.

“Let there be no mistake” thatAMR has to have a contract with pilots, Butler told U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane.

“The committee is going to require that before there is any reorganization,” Butler said. “There has to be a deal.”

UPDATE: We had a conversation with Butler after Tuesday’s hearing in which he elaborated on his courtroom comments. Let’s put it this way: Butler and the committee want a deal before exit, but he acknowledges that a company can have a plan of reorganization without new labor contracts in place.

“It was the creditors committee’s expectations that there will be consensual deals here with all the labor organizations in connection with the plan of reorganization, and we believe that is very important. We believe that the company knows that. We believe the APA knows the committee’s position in that respect.”

Butler repeated that the creditors committee will not support any contract that gives pilots more value than the one they overwhelming rejected on Aug. 8.

“I don’t think there’s a better deal out there for them,” he said. END UPDATE

Now, how exactly this mess will play out, who knows. Like I said, I'm pulling for you guys.

Well, it's certainly POSSIBLE for AMR to exit without a CBA and perhaps the creditors will approve that, but approve that they will have to. But if the UCC's position is that the best that will occur is a re-offer of the same deal again, it's a certain faliure. The APA BOD would NEVER simply pass on the same or similar reworked agreement to the membership after the resounding rejection, thus unless Parker prevails inside BK, then the UCC will have to stick with AMR management in the belief they can operate AA sans pilot CBA for an extended period of time. IMO, the long-term damage with that plan is incalcuable.

One must note that by May 2013 BK will be through and AA won't have a sympathetic judge. One of our pilots who's respected and runs a retirement planning company for pilots expects that once the B-fund is whacked, by the end of this year we will see a spike in retirements, which is an ominous signal for the holidays, especially the Christmas travel season. I think if the worst occurs as AA becomes more intolerable by the day as pilots are pushed to the brink and possibly beyond over the winter and into spring, the exodus will increase including resignations, retirements, medical leaves for physical issues and psychological stress. We must remember that pilots are human and I'm concerned greatly at how far this group of humans may be pushed by those unwilling to see the risks of doing so. Many pilots seeing their age and the pointlessness of wasting their remaining years being abused to that degree and seeing their income not justifying it will throw in the towel to ensure their summer isn't destroyed (let alone their overall health) and a large number of retirements across the board in all fleet types may kick in just before next summer when AA is tender and just emerging from BK. This may become a self-sustaining disaster as many others are pressed against the wall even harder to make up for it which may only increase attrition to intolerable levels and there will be no appetite for any bailouts from the remaining pilots at that point. I expect a high potential for a bad summer if the UCC rubber stamps a path like that for AA and that's with AA fresh out of BK and bills that have to be paid. Not a good situation should that be orchestrated by the UCC.

My point is, sure the UCC could do a lot of things and very well may as make no mistake, THEY are in control of the debtor, but at this point there is no road back for AA pilots to that TA in any way, shape or form and thus whatever the road ahead provides (good, bad or ugly), then that is what awaits. Personally, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see this carrier rocked to its core before someone steps in and says "enough". It already seems the "die has been cast" for a crazy train that even judge Lane will become a spectator to. We've been told in no uncertain terms by our union that this management team doesn't just underappreciate us, but openly despises us and that has been demonstrated in the past by public ridicule ("bricks in the backpack"). There is simply NO WAY a healthy, competitive company can be born or nurtured with this level of toxicity that gets intensified by the day. This Bankruptcy is WAY beyond that of the others with respect to the seething hatred and dysfunctionality among the two sides (management and pilots) and IMO, it would be serious error to just look at this as just another chapter 11 with the usual disagreements. It's sad the creditors with long-term interests are oblvious to the fact they are blindly building a house with ever rotting wood and bad cement. Even if we get a contract at this point, I think expecting a "premier" product is laughable from people so hideously abused to this degree and it leaves me speechless there are people out there who think they can.

For now, let's watch the show and see where it goes and where it goes, nobody knows........

BTW, one should take the UCC's statements in context. In court, I think they were sending a message to the debtor. Now, they are sending a message to the pilots. I see this latest "clarification" to their court comments as more of "managing the expectations" of the pilots to not become intoxicated with their perceived leverage and expecting an industry leading offer. Hopefully though, THEY understand that the provisions of that LBFO or anything simply "re-worked" is dead as dog**** with the pilots.

ForeverFO
09-05-2012, 09:23 AM
I still like my "nuclear" option. Actually, there might be two phases to it.

Assuming traditional pilot pressures have NO effect, and AMR is hell-bent on applying the term sheet or worse...

Under the filthy RLA, the APA has few legal options to withhold services in these circumstances. We know the courts and judges are owned by AMR. They will be used as bludgeons against the APA. The answer is simple... dissolve the APA as a legal entity.

Phase one would be a mass retirement. There are hundreds of pilots between 58 and 65 who have little to lose. 750 pilots retiring (or initiating the process) in a 6 week span as the holidays approach is a small tactical nuke.

The next step (the strategic nuke) is to dissolve the APA as a legal entity. Liquidate the assets and distribute them to the membership. There'd be no union officers to threaten or even throw in jail, no assets to attach. You'd now have 8,000+ "independent contractors" dealing one on one with AMR. What each person does, is up to him or her. There'd be potential mass firings, draconian threats, and sure there'd be scablike creatures who would cave and creep back to work... but a lot more would simply withhold services by whatever means they deemed best.

texavia
09-05-2012, 09:37 AM
What a totally asinine thing to say.

Not as asinine as your braying.

tsquare
09-05-2012, 11:00 AM
Not as asinine as your braying.

You know it is one thing for someone who works there to say that, but for hockeypilot, who has no skin in the game to urge the mass suicide that he seemingly thinks is a good idea, IS an asinine thing. You want to go down that road and be proud of it.. go for it. I am not going to urge you to do so, because I think it foolish. Call it braying if you want, I feel sorry for your predicament and wish you luck. I hope you have a job lined up if you decide to go this route to it's conclusion. It's bad out there.

texavia
09-05-2012, 11:28 AM
You know it is one thing for someone who works there to say that, but for hockeypilot, who has no skin in the game to urge the mass suicide that he seemingly thinks is a good idea, IS an asinine thing. You want to go down that road and be proud of it.. go for it. I am not going to urge you to do so, because I think it foolish. Call it braying if you want, I feel sorry for your predicament and wish you luck. I hope you have a job lined up if you decide to go this route to it's conclusion. It's bad out there.

OK, I think I got ya, if hockeypilot states an opinion, he's asinine; however, you having the exact same lack of skin in the game and calling something "fooolish" makes you what - a genius or a hypocrite?

tsquare
09-05-2012, 12:59 PM
OK, I think I got ya, if hockeypilot states an opinion, he's asinine; however, you having the exact same lack of skin in the game and calling something "fooolish" makes you what - a genius or a hypocrite?

Go get 'em tough guy.

texavia
09-05-2012, 02:10 PM
Go get 'em tough guy.

Yup - hypocrite.

uaav8r
09-05-2012, 02:35 PM
Yup - hypocrite.

Tex, don't waste your time arguing with tsquare. It's not worth the effort.

80ktsClamp
09-05-2012, 06:45 PM
Go get 'em tough guy.

There he is... caught in a corner in the wrong (again) and just tries to squirm away instead of manning up. The usual...

CaptainBigWood
09-06-2012, 01:45 AM
The track record of piliot unity is weak. The Nuclear Option would have limited support. Remember Lorenzo and Continental with strikes and picket lines, pilot pay cut in half. Some could stay out most could not afford too. I wish APA success.

Baron50
09-06-2012, 08:52 PM
The track record of piliot unity is weak. The Nuclear Option would have limited support. Remember Lorenzo and Continental with strikes and picket lines, pilot pay cut in half. Some could stay out most could not afford too. I wish APA success.

Bigwood,

Well, maybe at your airline, although I really don’t believe that would be the case. This tripe is espoused by management as a weapon to create fear, “your brothers will walk over your body,” but historically, pilot strike unity has been rock solid.

Your numbers for the CAL strike is just flat wrong, more than 2/3’s were still on strike when the line was pulled down, (CAL guys can help with the actual numbers). Eastern pilots did not break, even though it was a mechanic’s strike. The best Lorenzo could do was shut that airline down. He did not even win at CAL, the strikers survived. Today, they are once again ALPA, about to have an industry leading contract, and Lorenzo still needs body guards.

You call the “strike” the nuclear option, which is just nonsense. Strikes have served a useful purpose throughout history. They resolve a dispute. Management has to decide how long they can stand to lose all of their cash flow while trying to chisel the last few dimes out of their workers. It takes a maniacal ego like Ferris or a Lorenzo to justify that calculus.

A few of these miscreants try to replace their workers, and usually that is to their own detriment. In our industry, the concept of replacement workers is no longer viable, mega pilot groups, skills that are irreplaceable and a work force that understands scabbing is not a practical lifestyle. Management knows they can not operate during a pilot strike, they will shut down and that is why they use every trick to slow the RLA process.

The AMR pilots are in the driver’s seat. They are past the scary part, the judge can not hurt them, his authority exists only during the bankruptcy process. He does not know anything about running an airline. Horton is under enormous pressure to negotiate. He knows that whatever temporary, work changes he would implement, he will have to walk them back to get an agreement. No doubt that operation is going to suffer now that pilots know that their give ups are the result of an unfair, corrupt and possibly unnecessary use of the bankruptcy process.

So, should the AMR pilots prepare for a strike? absolutely. Even if it might be prohibited in bankruptcy, it moves the process forward upon exit. It also has the beneficial effect of making all the assorted crud, with their hand out, very nervous. If they are to see one dime of banker fees, lawyer bonuses or sleazy “Tip of the Hat” money, they need to see the company exit to get to the bond money. In AMR’s case, they went into BK with far more cash than anyone else, so much so, that you would think that someone should go to jail for thievery from the common shareholders.

A credible strike threat will bring them seriously to the table, and that would be the best solution. Just so long, as the pilots are not bent over that table. Considering managements have used the court injunction as a weapon, it is time that labor once again rolls out the strike tool.

Baron

syd111
09-07-2012, 09:26 AM
Baron don't forget the ual strike that was falling apart after a month and they sold some of their members out.

as far as cal please remember those that fought to the end and some are now at ual and will be behind those that crossed when the lists are merged.

You might think pilot unity is strong but most look at alpa as a country club not a union. You better talk to some of the line guys if you actually fly the line.

Baron50
09-07-2012, 01:20 PM
Baron don't forget the ual strike that was falling apart after a month and they sold some of their members out.

as far as cal please remember those that fought to the end and some are now at ual and will be behind those that crossed when the lists are merged.

You might think pilot unity is strong but most look at alpa as a country club not a union. You better talk to some of the line guys if you actually fly the line.

I see this repeated here from time to time and recognize that it comes from an element that had no idea what was going on in "85." It just may fit their current agenda, but it is not factual.

Every UAL pilot who struck on May 17th went back on the payroll the night the strike ended, even though it took another two weeks for the airline to use them they were fully paid. If you say we left the 570, we did, but the issue was won in Judge Bua's court. We did not represent them when the strike started, for all we knew they were our replacements. If you are a 570, that's great, you did the right thing, but had you not supported your own cause, the strike would have been over in 3 days, we had our contract. So who did we sell out?

The facts were, that the "85" UAL strike was falling apart for the company when we settled. They found out they could not have trained enough out-house scabs quick enough to save their own hides. The FAA insisted that all the scabs go through the entire UAL training program, not a quick three bounces. They were particularly short of qualified flight engineers. The brown suiters were not crossing in significant numbers as Guyette had planned. Furthermore, the bankers and large shareholders were putting pressure on management to get a deal. The UAL board had had enough of Ferris's ego and costs of the strike. The strike and it's after math cost the shareholders about 1 billion and Ferris was gone two years later. If you were part of the battle you would know that the strike was only a beginning, UAL nor any airline can operate long term with a truly disgruntled pilot group.

You may have got your impression of the relative strength of our strike from the anecdotal grumblings of a few line pilots, the fact was, the leadership would not have pulled the line down when it did, based on the notion that failure was imminent. The strike had a ways to go, but the reason for the strike was to be settled in court, therefore there was no reason to stay out.

The line pilot today is no different than those in '85.' We had the vocal fear mongers, management wannabes and naysayers, but they will go along, as they always have. Peer pressure is a potent force in war and in strikes. If the leadership chooses to strike, unity will follow.

Baron

syd111
09-07-2012, 02:44 PM
I see this repeated here from time to time and recognize that it comes from an element that had no idea what was going on in "85." It just may fit their current agenda, but it is not factual.

Every UAL pilot who struck on May 17th went back on the payroll the night the strike ended, even though it took another two weeks for the airline to use them they were fully paid. If you say we left the 570, we did, but the issue was won in Judge Bua's court. We did not represent them when the strike started, for all we knew they were our replacements. If you are a 570, that's great, you did the right thing, but had you not supported your own cause, the strike would have been over in 3 days, we had our contract. So who did we sell out?

The facts were, that the "85" UAL strike was falling apart for the company when we settled. They found out they could not have trained enough out-house scabs quick enough to save their own hides. The FAA insisted that all the scabs go through the entire UAL training program, not a quick three bounces. They were particularly short of qualified flight engineers. The brown suiters were not crossing in significant numbers as Guyette had planned. Furthermore, the bankers and large shareholders were putting pressure on management to get a deal. The UAL board had had enough of Ferris's ego and costs of the strike. The strike and it's after math cost the shareholders about 1 billion and Ferris was gone two years later. If you were part of the battle you would know that the strike was only a beginning, UAL nor any airline can operate long term with a truly disgruntled pilot group.

You may have got your impression of the relative strength of our strike from the anecdotal grumblings of a few line pilots, the fact was, the leadership would not have pulled the line down when it did, based on the notion that failure was imminent. The strike had a ways to go, but the reason for the strike was to be settled in court, therefore there was no reason to stay out.

The line pilot today is no different than those in '85.' We had the vocal fear mongers, management wannabes and naysayers, but they will go along, as they always have. Peer pressure is a potent force in war and in strikes. If the leadership chooses to strike, unity will follow.

Baron

Boy you sure have different facts than many pilots at ual. You did sell out the 570, you then supported the 539 who by the way had agreed to replace you. settled in court sure which you had no control of and took about 7 years, yea I know that didn't have any affect on you so who cares.

By the way the brown suiters were starting to cross when this ended and I don't care how you see it with your alpa glasses on but it was alpa that was crumbling and you sir are jusy one of those weak "brothers" Do these guys a favor don't keep coming on here acting like everything is unity, tell these new guys how it was when it got tough you looked our for your own sorry ass.

This is not much of a union! And as a union person my entire life I would love to see alpa off our property. I guess you can go back to your alpa dropping life, there is no way you fly the line.

Baron50
09-07-2012, 05:57 PM
Boy you sure have different facts than many pilots at ual. You did sell out the 570, you then supported the 539 who by the way had agreed to replace you. settled in court sure which you had no control of and took about 7 years, yea I know that didn't have any affect on you so who cares.

By the way the brown suiters were starting to cross when this ended and I don't care how you see it with your alpa glasses on but it was alpa that was crumbling and you sir are jusy one of those weak "brothers" Do these guys a favor don't keep coming on here acting like everything is unity, tell these new guys how it was when it got tough you looked our for your own sorry ass.

This is not much of a union! And as a union person my entire life I would love to see alpa off our property. I guess you can go back to your alpa dropping life, there is no way you fly the line.

Syd,

Well, you can dispute the “facts,” but you can not change them.

Your anti-ALPA rant is amusing, however it is like being mad at your car, it doesn’t care. As long as you pay your dues and honor the picket lines, that’s all we need. If you choose to be an ankle biter, that is your choice, no one is listening. Your opinion is really not relevant. There is no need to tell the young guys anything, they know the score, you would do well to listen to them.

It is OK for you to be angry with me, I will proudly admit to a few mistakes along the way, but the strike of ‘85’ was not one of them. You can knit pick it if you want, but it is widely recognized as a resounding success. The eventual elimination of the “B-scale” would not have been possible had we rolled over to Ferris. Your criticism is nothing compared to what we would have endured by selling out to permanent two tier pay.

If ALPA was off the UAL property, as you wish, who would run the new union, you? Or, would you not have any union?

This is our second go around about the ‘85’ strike. I not sure why you are so sensitive about it, is there something you want to tell us.

Baron



Sorry AMR pilots for hijacking the thread, you are doing a great job. When this is over, you will prevail. No doubt, 27 years from now someone, without a clue, will say you screwed it up.

syd111
09-07-2012, 07:21 PM
Syd,

Well, you can dispute the “facts,” but you can not change them.

Your anti-ALPA rant is amusing, however it is like being mad at your car, it doesn’t care. As long as you pay your dues and honor the picket lines, that’s all we need. If you choose to be an ankle biter, that is your choice, no one is listening. Your opinion is really not relevant. There is no need to tell the young guys anything, they know the score, you would do well to listen to them.

It is OK for you to be angry with me, I will proudly admit to a few mistakes along the way, but the strike of ‘85’ was not one of them. You can knit pick it if you want, but it is widely recognized as a resounding success. The eventual elimination of the “B-scale” would not have been possible had we rolled over to Ferris. Your criticism is nothing compared to what we would have endured by selling out to permanent two tier pay.

If ALPA was off the UAL property, as you wish, who would run the new union, you? Or, would you not have any union?

This is our second go around about the ‘85’ strike. I not sure why you are so sensitive about it, is there something you want to tell us.

Baron



Sorry AMR pilots for hijacking the thread, you are doing a great job. When this is over, you will prevail. No doubt, 27 years from now someone, without a clue, will say you screwed it up.

Whatever baron just because you think it was s success does not mean it was.

The reason I get sensitive about it is from listening to people like you that act like it was a great success and many of us if not most of us disagree. Why are you so sensitive is there something you want to to tell us?

Ankle biter, someone without a clue, just because I don't agree with you, what an ass.

syd111
09-08-2012, 05:58 AM
One last comment baron, I never said no union, on the property at ual we sure need one as do the pilots at amr, what I said was I have had enough of alpa. I have been a union member most of my life, and not just alpa. I have just had enough of the weakness of alpa, and members like yourself.

Enough on this subject, best of luck to the pilots at amr.

uaav8r
09-08-2012, 06:47 AM
Enough is right! The AA guys have enough on their plate without hearing about various versions of the UA strike of '85. Let's go highjack a DL thread instead.:D

syd111
09-08-2012, 06:58 AM
Enough is right! The AA guys have enough on their plate without hearing about various versions of the UA strike of '85. Let's go highjack a DL thread instead.:D

My apologies to the amr guys.

babs
09-12-2012, 06:27 PM
No comments on the implementation schedule of pilot terms and conditions????? Looks like AMR is seeking a war with pilots...this surely will not be pretty

aa73
09-12-2012, 07:03 PM
Oh, it's bad.

AMR implemented about 80% of the term sheet, effective either 10/1 or 11/1.

War is an understatement. Just voted YES on the strike vote.

lakehouse
09-12-2012, 07:39 PM
Oh, it's bad.

AMR implemented about 80% of the term sheet, effective either 10/1 or 11/1.

War is an understatement. Just voted YES on the strike vote.

Dont get fooled, the new Skywest flying is NOT taking Eagle flying, its taking AA flying, and its only the first little part of this. I am not stirring a war pot on the whose flying, but this added flying is coming out of your pile for about another 100 airplanes, then its finally reached the point that it is eating into Eagle.

cactusmike
09-12-2012, 09:26 PM
Just looked at the pilot implementation schedule. That is really, really nasty stuff in there. I hope this gets resolved soon.

The crappy part besides the gutting of your work rules is the implementation of more code sharing. Once those larger RJ contracts are signed it will be very difficult to get rid of them. If Horton signs these deals soon and he is subsequently removed then he will have handcuffed AMR to deals a successor management may not want. Parker's plan for AMR relied on some RJs but not as much as Horton. And Parker did not want domestic code share with other big jet operators.

CaptainBigWood
09-13-2012, 01:54 AM
One last comment baron, I never said no union, on the property at ual we sure need one as do the pilots at amr, what I said was I have had enough of alpa. I have been a union member most of my life, and not just alpa. I have just had enough of the weakness of alpa, and members like yourself.

Enough on this subject, best of luck to the pilots at amr.
I agree, need a Union that works. ALPA and USAPA have both fallen short of representing pilots.

eaglefly
09-13-2012, 02:19 AM
Just looked at the pilot implementation schedule. That is really, really nasty stuff in there. I hope this gets resolved soon.

The crappy part besides the gutting of your work rules is the implementation of more code sharing. Once those larger RJ contracts are signed it will be very difficult to get rid of them. If Horton signs these deals soon and he is subsequently removed then he will have handcuffed AMR to deals a successor management may not want. Parker's plan for AMR relied on some RJs but not as much as Horton. And Parker did not want domestic code share with other big jet operators.

Well, if it was their goal to "soften" the pilots for any further negotiations, it looks like its had the opposite effect. The APA is required to continue to negotiate in good faith, but the pilot group is only hardening. I think this management should plan on trying to mount a winning POR and stand alone exit without a pilots CBA at this point. The only other real option is Parker now and I agree they may want to ink irrevocable feed/RJ deals while they can. I'm afraid any possible future relationship between the pilots of this carrier and this management is now out of the question and the UCC needs to accept that and make their moves based on that, whatever they may be.

The toxicity level here is now at a level beyond revival.

aa73
09-13-2012, 03:59 AM
FYI, I am re-reading "Hard Landing" for the umpteenth time. Gee, what a coincidence, I'm on the chapter where Lorenzo puts CAL in BK in 1983 just to void the contracts... first such move in the airline industry ever. I tell you, the similarities between then and today's AMR BK are shockingly similar, including Lorenzo's term sheet.

Guess who Lorenzo hired for his BK attorney? Harvey Miller - same attorney AMR is using.

Guess who CAL's spokesperson was in 1983? Bruce Hicks - AMR's spokesperson today.

Dear AMR, have fun rebuilding The New AA repeating history.

"I Love the smell of Napalm in the morning..." ;)

Baron50
09-13-2012, 09:55 AM
The crappy part besides the gutting of your work rules is the implementation of more code sharing. Once those larger RJ contracts are signed it will be very difficult to get rid of them. If Horton signs these deals soon and he is subsequently removed then he will have handcuffed AMR to deals a successor management may not want.


Anything Horton signs in bankruptcy, requires the court's approval and is not worth much in any case. The new owner simply has to have a contingency that they do not accept those contracts. The judge will take care of it for them, if that will get it out of his court. So, who would sign a deal with Horton knowing it would mean labor unrest and is really not enforceable?

Nothing signed in bankruptcy is permanent, not until they exit and the judge is no longer in charge. That includes labor contracts.

Baron

CaptainBigWood
09-13-2012, 05:05 PM
This isn't suppose to happen with this labor friendly President.
I agree " Harding Landing" is repeating itself.

cactusmike
09-13-2012, 08:04 PM
FYI, I am re-reading "Hard Landing" for the umpteenth time. Gee, what a coincidence, I'm on the chapter where Lorenzo puts CAL in BK in 1983 just to void the contracts... first such move in the airline industry ever. I tell you, the similarities between then and today's AMR BK are shockingly similar, including Lorenzo's term sheet.

Guess who Lorenzo hired for his BK attorney? Harvey Miller - same attorney AMR is using.

Guess who CAL's spokesperson was in 1983? Bruce Hicks - AMR's spokesperson today.

Dear AMR, have fun rebuilding The New AA repeating history.

"I Love the smell of Napalm in the morning..." ;)


It's all sheer coincidence.

"Nothing to see here, just move along"

My question is did not the UCC say that they needed a voluntary labor agreement from the pilots ( and other labor groups) before they would sign off on the CH11 exit? So why would Horton take an axe to the Green Book when he needed a scalpel?

tomgoodman
09-13-2012, 09:05 PM
My question is did not the UCC say that they needed a voluntary labor agreement from the pilots ( and other labor groups) before they would sign off on the CH11 exit? So why would Horton take an axe to the Green Book when he needed a scalpel?

Some possible answers:

1. He thinks the UCC is bluffing; that they want to see a voluntary agreement, but will eventually ratify the exit without one.
or
2. He thinks the pilots will cave, thus satisfying the UCC and allowing an exit.
or
3. He is staking out an extreme position, from which he can later back off, and thereby claim to be reasonable.

eaglefly
09-14-2012, 02:51 AM
The question is, will Tom stay too long at the table try to beat the other players should the game change not in his favor ?

Not a whole lot of time left in this game as soon, some of the other players may invite a shark who has been circling the table to sit down and play. Even if they don't, in 8 months many of the players will have to leave the game and a new dealer takes over and then it becomes a completely different game.

The pilots plan to bet little, conserve their chips and wait for that different game, if necessary. Tom's stack of chips will be WAY down next summer, if he's still a player then. :D

Enterprise
09-14-2012, 03:28 AM
This isn't suppose to happen with this labor friendly President. I agree " Harding Landing" is repeating itself.

So what you're saying is that Warren Harding was a labor friendly president? :D