This is the internet, and some will read this and need a definition.
What is Corporate Bankruptcy

There are two primary types of bankruptcy for corporations: "Chapter 7" liquidation and "Chapter 11" reorganization. The names refer to sections of the Federal Bankruptcy Code.
If a business chooses Chapter 7 bankruptcy, or is involuntarily placed in it, all the company's assets are sold, and the proceeds are used to pay creditors in a priority also defined by law. Filing Chapter 7 results in the company being dissolved.
Under Chapter 11, the company presents a reorganization plan and is not dissolved. Such a plan also may be filed by the company's creditors or other interested parties, and the company may be forced into involuntary bankruptcy under Chapter 11. The plan includes a timetable for repayment to creditors. During the reorganization time, the company is allowed to continue to operate. The amount of debt that the company is required to pay off is based on the value of the business at the time of filing, the business's ability to pay, and the willingness of creditors to accept delayed payment with the expectation that the company will return to being profitable.
Bankruptcy Code Sections
There are three motions the Company can file with the court that could affect our work lives. These are an 1113 motion; 1113 E motion and 1114 motion; each referring to a different section of the Bankruptcy Code. You will be notified if any of these motions are filed with the court and the affects it will have on you.

• An 1113 motion if/when it is filed by the Company would ask the judge to reject or "throw out" our agreement. If the Company files such a motion, good faith negotiations MUST take place. If we reach an agreement with the Company, it will be sent to you for a vote. If we do not reach an agreement, the judge will then hold a hearing. Attorneys for the Company and the Union would present arguments and evidence on whether the Company's proposed changes are "necessary" to a successful reorganization, and whether they are "fair and equitable" to all parties. If the Court finds that the changes are necessary, and that they are fair and equitable, the judge would grant the Company's 1113 motion, and reject our collective bargaining agreement. Keep in mind the judge will not work out a contract for us to work under; he simply decides whether the Company's motion to reject our entire contract should be granted. If we get to that point, the Company will most likely, but not definitely, impose its last best offer from the 1113 negotiations. And, under this scenario, there would be no opportunity for a ratification vote. In the meantime, we are still negotiating with management outside of any formal motions.
  
• An 1113 E motion would be filed by the Company if they need immediate relief in some part of the labor agreements. Section 1113 E permits such emergency relief on an interim basis if the Company can show that it is "essential." Most likely, if an 1113 E motion were filed the Company would seek to immediately reduce wages or other immediate cash costs. AS OF THIS WRITING THE COMPANY HAS NOT FILED AN 1113 E MOTION.
  
• An 1114 motion relates to retiree medical benefits only. Like 1113, Section 1114 lays out a process of negotiations followed by a court hearing if negotiations fail to yield an agreement on proposed changes. If the Company files an 1114 motion, a procedure has been put in place by the court to establish a committee to represent the retirees' interests. The committee would have its own attorneys and professional advisors paid for out of the assets of the Company. The law recognized the union as a proper representative of the retirees, but also allows the retirees to be represented independently of the union, with representation on the retiree committee. By Oct. 4 we will determine the best way to represent the retirees in this procedure.
  

Now back to the regularly scheduled thread that has been de-railed.
Just throwing out TWA's collective bargaining contract, they still would have had Carl Icahn on their back for .50 c/US D on every ticket sold.
I'm sure you'll tell how wrong I am.
Aircal was a viable Company. Reno Air was a viable company. Ozark was a viable company. TWA was not.
I think ALPA recognized that. And it sounds like it went down as, Don Carty said accept this deal or good luck. I think ALPA knew it would end badly if TWA tried to make another BK filing work.
TWA was a great airline. All of the TWA pilots I've met are great. AA is slowly using some of the procedures that are beneficial and great ideas.
I honestly think that if NWA was on the brink, I mean ready to file BK and possibly chapter 7, that the SLI would have gone differently.

And to the gentleman that flowed back to Eagle, I was wrong to say you should thank ALPA and APA. I shouldn't have wrote that. My intention was to accentuate that nothing is free and all things like that insurance policy was negotiated.

I like what nowake wrote, very thoughtful.
Happy Holidays
75

Thank you for the review of corporate bankruptcy. Predictably, we still disagree on many points. Enough said.

Happy Holidays,

X

Then TWA guys need to shut the whiny pie-hole, accept the deal ALPA negotiated, and concentrate on getting the Capt Kool-Aids in St Louis to support getting our flying back from AE and our furloughees back and support getting a new contract instead of blaming the APA leadership for the failure of AA management to even negotiate. Enough is enough. Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.

You're killing me. As you express yourself with sophomoric euphemisms you make absolutely no mention of the fact that the very people you want to support your union are the very people who will feel the most pain--and have the most to lose--for your game of chicken. You aren't dealing with a seniority list with the most junior people making the least amount of money.

X

Agreed, FliFast. Something else to remember is the APA gave up those concessions, nothing was taken. They had the option of riding the airline into bankruptcy just like the Delta pilots chose to do.

To their credit, one reason the APA chose to take the hits was to preserve jobs. More than 1900 (I heard 2200) would have been furloughed if the American lawyers had marched up those court house steps.

Tell 2200 pilots brother APA pilots who were stapled to the bottom then cast overboard at the first sign of trouble to shut up and like it? Now isn't this a typical Sky Nazi attitude.

The deal ALPA negotiated? Are you saying APA didn't have anything to do with furloughing the TWA pilots or failing to reach an agreement allowing their recall?

A leader has to know which way they are going. Charging up the wrong hill will make everyone following them suffer even more.

Actually it was about 3000 furloughed both ex-TWA and AA native, including me. There are still almost 2000 on furlough. And I voted against the 2003 contract. This time, if AA wants a bankruptcy contract, they can take it to bankruptcy. I've got no problem with that.

Will there be full pay restoration and everything else? Probably not, but that's why it's called a negotiation. Right now, however, the company is engaged in regressive bargaining and some of the St Louis crowd is cheering them on.

If the kool-aid drinkers in St Louis have their way, it sounds to me like they'll go for a Delta parity contract, PB, and allow the company to operate 100 seat aircraft at AE. If that happens and the over-60 geriatric cases in STL and elsewhere continue to constipate any advancement at AA, then anybody on furlough can kiss it good-bye. There would probably be even more furloughs (1000?) if PB is adopted and monthly max's increased to what the company wants.

Fortunately, St Louis is becoming more and more irrelevant all the time considering a significant number will always be malcontents. Like I said before, I wish the whole TWA debacle had not been done in the first place. That's what I thought at the time of the acquisition and what I still think. It brought only problems to AA and it's employees. I know that's not politically correct to say, but it's the truth.

Another great American Airlines management decision. Taking it out on the TWA pilots and flight attendants won't allow you to be recalled or improve AA's financial stability in a flooded and highly competitive market.

Looks like you'll get your wish on bankruptcy. AA will go bankrupt the same day your peers go on strike. When do you think this will happen, in 2009 or 2010?

I don't think there will ever be a general strike. Never leave the cockpit. You lose control at that point. The company wants to break the unions once and for all. Time frame I'd put at next summer sometime, but that's certainly just a gut feeling at this point.

I think it's most likely that a deal will get done that provides a substantial pay restoration and protects scope. But it's not going to happen until the very last minute. There is ZERO incentive for the company to negotiate seriously until the consequences of not negotiating are more severe than negotiating.

Further, I think the NMB will have a significant change in course after the Obama administration takes office. It will no longer blatantly favor managements.

That's funny, some of the most ardent supporters of the current union policy are the senior AA guys. Well, like it or not, TWA guys are sitting in the APA boat. Even the junior AA natives are pretty old. Do they risk less than some TWA guy? If you don't want to support the APA, then fine. There are no prisoners here. Membership in the APA is not mandatory and there are lots of TWA malcontents that refuse to join.

I'm actually optimistic and think the APA is doing a superb job in keeping on-message, maintaining resolve, and not letting the yapping and carping of a few to be a distraction.

The first big test will be the outcome of the 7300 pilot floor arbitration. Lots more to come after that. The company knows they're in a bad position on most of this stuff and that they have a high chance of losing.

I hope everyone can forget about this crappy industry and have a great holiday season.

I just read the whole AMR presentation. I have a few questions.

1. Is APA actually wanting to get $275 an hour for a 737 captain?

2. Why wouldn't APA pilots be interested in additional annual compensation for not calling in sick?

3. Is seems that AMR wants to get rid of the scope clause and source out flying to cheap regionals, which is not in the interest of APA pilots. Instead, why doesn't APA stay firm on the scope but, at the same time, negotiate rates for APA pilots to fly smaller aircraft? At least it would stay within the pilot group.