LipeGIG
Topic Author
Posts: 5050
Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:33 am

AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu May 31, 2012 1:30 am

Continuation of the original thread as it become too long:

Link to the previous one
AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread (by LAXintl Dec 5 2011 in Civil Aviation)


Please enjoy the website


Felipe
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
 
dirtyfrankd
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 3:10 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu May 31, 2012 2:42 am

Awesome, thank you for starting the new thread.

When can we expect to start hearing outcomes on management negotiations with the different unions?
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu May 31, 2012 5:59 pm

Well talks are only getting under way this week. I'm sure if there is any success both sides will be more than happy to announce it publicly.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
commavia
Posts: 9744
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Fri Jun 01, 2012 10:42 pm

Two items of note from the last week:

* AMR filed its April monthly operating report, and reported a $15M operating loss for the month ($67M net loss before restructuring costs, $142M total loss including restructuring costs), and positive operating cash flow of $145M

* Interestingly, Horton, in a memo to employees marking six months since AMR filed for bankruptcy, provided a little more detail on that 20% "growth" number that AA has been throwing around since their restructuring plan was proposed; specifically:

"The key message for all of us is that, after a decade of survival and shrinking, we are poised to grow our flying by 20% over the next five years. Nearly 70% of this new capacity will be flown by our American mainline jets, with the vast majority of that growth being international flying."

This provides a bit more "color," but not really too many surprises, about the details behind AA's growth numbers. As Horton's careful wording highlights that there will be a 20% increase in "flying" - previous public statements have specified "departures" - but 70% of the increase in capacity (though not apparently the "flying") with be mainline. That seems to confirm what many have suspected: there will be tons of new, non-mainline RJ flying, but because 1 777 carries the same or more than 3-4 large RJs, the net growth in "capacity" may well be tipped towards mainline. And, if Horton is defining capacity as ASMs, as opposed to seats, the disparity will likely be even bigger, since of course 1 777 not only carriers 3-4 times as many people as RJs, but is also likely to fly many times as far.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sat Jun 02, 2012 5:52 pm

Well the FA's say the mediated talks with the company failed to produce any breakthroughs, and no new talks are scheduled. This sets stage for the court to rule.
Pilots however will continue talking in the coming week.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/americ...ght-attendants-fail-163800095.html

=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
deltaffindfw
Posts: 1382
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 7:42 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sat Jun 02, 2012 8:04 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Well the FA's say the mediated talks with the company failed to produce any breakthroughs, and no new talks are scheduled.

No surprise. To the layperson, it seems like APFA is not willing to negotiate. Before and after BK, they have been the only union to publicly show that they don't care to work on a deal with management - whether right or wrong. Both APA and TWU have made press releases talking about ongoing talks. This may be a media ploy by the other unions, but it shows some savvy in the court of public opinion.
 
SJUSXM
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:52 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sat Jun 02, 2012 10:15 pm

During the court process, Laura Glading testified that during the last proposal from AMR management the APFA had determined that they would not accept the offer in UNDER 24 HOURS of receiving the proposal. If this isn't an unwillingness to negotiate then I don't know what is.
AT7, ER3, ER4, ER5, CR7, E70, E75, F100, M82, M83, 722, 732, 738, 752, 762, 763, AB6, 320, 321, 772, 77W
 
DesertAir
Posts: 1265
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:34 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:57 am

It seems to me that in BK everyone needs to take a hit. The management must lead the way. The lowest paid workers need not have salary reductions, but work/rule concessions to make a contribution. In this way everyone shares in the rescue. Most companies have too many administrative staffs, school districts included and needless to say govt. on all levels. The key word is effeciency and maxamize productivity. Also, employees have to feel that they are importante and management is listening and responding. Somehow the corporate culture that worships authority has to end to begin a newly colaborative model. I hope AA can survive to transform itself. I have a lot of positive experiences on AA. I use them for most of my Latin America flying. Please don't merge with US.
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sun Jun 03, 2012 4:50 am

Quoting deltaffindfw (Reply 5):
No surprise. To the layperson, it seems like APFA is not willing to negotiate. Before and after BK, they have been the only union to publicly show that they don't care to work on a deal with management - whether right or wrong.

APFA engaged in over 170 negotiation sessions over the past four years with AA, the majority of which were with an NMB appointed mediator at the table. Why is it automatically assumed APFA is the one to blame? They're not, and here's why: AA has never backed down from it's term sheet. It is as the company originally presented it in March, with a few exceptions which were accounting errors on the company's part that didn't change the overall ask and reach of the term sheet. Each and every time the Union has sat down with the Company in regards to the term sheet, the Company reiterates its "take it or leave it" stance. That is not negotiating. The exact same thing happened during regular contract negotiations prior to bankruptcy. The company would come in with their offer, which was take it or leave it. The negotiations over the past four years have been extremely frustrating to all parties, but you can't really call them negotiations. In order for that to occur, there has to be some give and take, and so far the Company has just taken.

Let me remind all that the APFA voluntarily agreed to a 33% pay and benefits cut in 2003. So to say the Union hasn't done anything, or isn't willing to negotiate, is as far from the truth as you can get. The APFA has even agreed to concessions during the bankruptcy, but again, the company is offering its term sheet as-is, no exceptions. What do you expect to negotiate with that?

Quoting deltaffindfw (Reply 5):
Both APA and TWU have made press releases talking about ongoing talks. This may be a media ploy by the other unions, but it shows some savvy in the court of public opinion.

I'm not sure you understand how these mediated sessions came about with this statement. The bankruptcy court scheduled these mediated sessions. APFA was scheduled first for June 1-2. The APA is up next from June 4-6, and the TWU follows on June 9-11. No one group is offering up more time than another, or has more interest than another in coming to agreement. All three unions are in the same boat, along with the company, in attending these court ordered sessions being mediated by a bankruptcy court judge.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2637
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sun Jun 03, 2012 6:19 am

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 8):
Let me remind all that the APFA voluntarily agreed to a 33% pay and benefits cut in 2003. So to say the Union hasn't done anything, or isn't willing to negotiate, is as far from the truth as you can get.

Let me remind you AA doesn't have a problem with how much they are PAYING thier employees. Its how LITTLE they get for thier money. The work rules are murder to thier bottom line. The inflexiblity and hostility are also crippling thier ability to react to market forces.

To be absolutely clear, from all that I have seen, the union management is the number #1 problem for both the airline's and the employee's future health. If they would roundfile the current self serving union management and elect more flexible leaders willing to work with airline management in a give and take enviroment for the benifit of everyone... AA will do well. If they keep blaming AA management for everything including thier own mistakes while demanding industry leading wages while providing only average or below productivity from its workers... There is absolutely no future for AA.
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sun Jun 03, 2012 5:15 pm

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 9):
To be absolutely clear, from all that I have seen, the union management is the number #1 problem for both the airline's and the employee's future health.

Then you're only seeing half the picture -- the picture AA wants you to see.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 9):
If they would roundfile the current self serving union management and elect more flexible leaders willing to work with airline management in a give and take enviroment for the benifit of everyone

So the work rule concessions the union has agreed to mean nothing? When AA filed for bankruptcy, 90% of the contract was settled, the last 10% being compensation (which is nearly always the last to be settled). The APFA had already signed off on increased monthly hours, a combined domestic and international operation, and a new reserve system. The only thing AA has done right is spin the PR machine and make people believe this bankruptcy was about employee costs. Nearly every industry analyst now agrees that is not the case. While the employee costs are part of the problem, they are not *the* problem. The unions have agreed to far more concessions than the company would ever have you know. The problem now is the unions are fighting the term sheet, which is much more drastic than UA's and DL's in their bankruptcies, two carriers which were in poorer health at the time of their filings than AA.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 9):
while demanding industry leading wages

Our wages are smack in the middle of the pack, behind WN and CO, but above UA and US.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
SJUSXM
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:52 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sun Jun 03, 2012 11:11 pm

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 10):
Nearly every industry analyst now agrees that is not the case

Can you find these for me please? I have seen people say that there is a combined cost AND revenue problem, but nowhere have I seen that the problems are solely revenue. And usually, if revenue disadvantage comes up, it's in relation to something with a US merger.

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 10):
Our wages are smack in the middle of the pack, behind WN and CO, but above UA and US.

The debate isn't what the wages are now, it's the demand to be the highest in the future. And I'm not sure CO is relevant, now that they are United, and all negotiations going forward, will be with UA. And these wages don't include the much better retirement benefits all AA'ers have been getting for at least 8 years, longer if compared to WN. That growing pension for the last eight years benefited current AA employees way more than their similar counterparts at UA who had it stop growing in their bankruptcy. DL pilots too. In addition, every public contract rejection has included pay raises on the current scale, so by not agreeing on a contract (no matter whose fault) the APFA (and APA/TWU) have missed out on PAY raises for the last few years. But comparing pay to pay is not an equal comparison.

Another major problem I have is when the head of the union uses phrases like "despicable and disgusting" in a press release. Even in the flame war going on between AA mgmt and the APA, neither side stooped to that level. Certainly doesn't help things, even if the APFA thinks they're getting screwed.

Finally, how can the APFA agree to things with US in such a short time, things that they won't agree to with AMR? When the tentative US CBA's were announced a while back they agreed to things such as a six year term, a preferential bidding system, and a single pay scale? All without a fleet plan or revenue analysis or even a guarantee that future cuts wouldn't be needed?
AT7, ER3, ER4, ER5, CR7, E70, E75, F100, M82, M83, 722, 732, 738, 752, 762, 763, AB6, 320, 321, 772, 77W
 
b377
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:51 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:52 am

I just spent 16 hours reading the Court Transcipts on the Section 1113 issues.

There is a lot of information on AA's business plan (if you can read between the lines on confidential information) and the Unions response.

The entire 1113 transcripts are on the APFA site: http://www.apfa.org/content/view/2276/626/

What are your thoughts?
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:10 pm

Regular omnibus hearings are scheduled for this week.

Nothing too exciting, but dockets items include:

o Rejection of aircraft and engines for 9 MD-80
o Protective objections of US Bank regarding timely surrender and return of aircraft, and AMR follow up that its delayed return was warranted under applicable laws.
o Motion by Bank of New York Mellon Trust for adequate protection of collateral due declining value.
o Allowing 325 pending claims against AMR from various vendors
o Disallowing, reclassifying, or partially allowing claims by 153 vendors


=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
kl911
Posts: 3981
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 1:10 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:15 pm

Why are they still talking to Unions now the are bankrupt? I thought they could do now whatever they want with contracts etc?

And, is it wise to talk to Unions now US is in talks to takeover AA? I assume in that case it should be US unions US should be talking to, not AA with AA unions, right?
 
flyfree727
Posts: 304
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 9:11 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 4:47 pm

Quoting kl911 (Reply 14):
Why are they still talking to Unions now the are bankrupt? I thought they could do now whatever they want with contracts etc?

AA needs NEGOTIATED contracts to emerge from BK.

Like it or not, they still have unions on the property and contracts still have to be negotiated.

AA ORD
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4595
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 5:30 pm

Quoting kl911 (Reply 14):
And, is it wise to talk to Unions now US is in talks to takeover AA? I assume in that case it should be US unions US should be talking to, not AA with AA unions, right?

US really has no reason to talk to their own unions at all, since they will virtually be instant minorities if any deal does in fact go through.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13843
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:55 pm

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 8):
Let me remind all that the APFA voluntarily agreed to a 33% pay and benefits cut in 2003. So to say the Union hasn't done anything, or isn't willing to negotiate, is as far from the truth as you can get.

I don't know how relevant what happened in 2003 is. If anything it tends to show that since the workers have been willing to work for 9 years for 1/3rd less, chance are that they are still overpaid because they haven't found anything else that pays better in the past 9 years.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
Av8tor
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:36 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:57 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
I don't know how relevant what happened in 2003 is. If anything it tends to show that since the workers have been willing to work for 9 years for 1/3rd less, chance are that they are still overpaid because they haven't found anything else that pays better in the past 9 years.

You obviously don't work for the airlines! Clueless.
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4595
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:08 pm

It's not all about pay.

Starting from scratch elsewhere can be difficult in other ways. You lose seniority which is everything. I do not work for a passenger airline, but I have been with my company for five years and I would not switch jobs even for a raise. Some companies do reward loyalty and reliability.
 
commavia
Posts: 9744
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:59 pm

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 11):
The debate isn't what the wages are now, it's the demand to be the highest in the future.

I don't think any AA employees, union or otherwise, have any expectation of being the highest-paid in their work group among industry peers anytime soon. That would be wholly unrealistic, ridiculous union demands/statements of yesteryear (Superbowl Sunday a paid holiday, "restore and more," etc.) not withstanding. Please show me one serious union representative (i.e., not a post on an internet forum) demanding - since bankruptcy - to be the "highest paid" in the future - I don't think you'll find one.

And focusing merely on wages largely misses the point, since pay scales - in isolation - are really not the issue here, as both the company and the unions have acknowledged. The labor-union-contract-driven "cost" that has put AMR at such a competitive disadvantage in the last five years are: first, the cost of labor productivity and efficiency levels lower than post-bankruptcy mainline peers and/or the regional airlines they have outsourced relatively more of their flying to; second, the defined benefit pension plans that have left a massive liability on AMR's balance sheet that competitors have either frozen or dumped; and finally, and perhaps most critically, the opportunity cost of lost chances for growth and competitiveness than AMR has missed out on because they were straight-jacketed by union restrictions.

Those are the issues AMR and its unions simply must address during this process, not base pay.

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 11):
Another major problem I have is when the head of the union uses phrases like "despicable and disgusting" in a press release.

It's the nature of the beast. Politicians have to use emotional, political rhetoric in order to rally the troops. Just witness what is happening in this country writ large at the moment ...

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 11):
Even in the flame war going on between AA mgmt and the APA, neither side stooped to that level.

False. An APA official - from the previous, radical, union leadership administration - several years ago implied that Gerard Arpey was a "murderer," and the APA (in)famously took out billboards near DFW essentially implying that AA's planes were unsafe. This outrageous rhetoric is hardly anything new, and in fact by comparison, nothing Glading has said - at least in public - seems all that inflammatory.

Quoting flyfree727 (Reply 15):
AA needs NEGOTIATED contracts to emerge from BK.

Do they? I think everyone would agree that AA should get negotiated contracts with their unions, and perhaps even that they "need" them in a sense to have some semblance of labor stability going forward.

But, legally, does AA truly need consensual, negotiated, membership-ratified CBAs in order to exit Chapter 11? Are ratified CBAs a legal requirement for Chapter 11 emergence?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13843
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Tue Jun 05, 2012 3:35 am

Note, in the below, when I say "your", I don't mean any particular individual....

Quoting Av8tor (Reply 18):
You obviously don't work for the airlines!
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 19):
You lose seniority which is everything.

Correct, I don't work for airlines, which means I don't suffer the lock-in that a seniority based system brings. If someone cut my salary by 1/3rd I would go out and find a different job in a different line of work if need be, and if I couldn't find such a job, that'd show me that the demand for the services I can provide is no longer there, so I'd better be happy with the 1/3rd cut, and/or build up my skill sets so I could get a better paying job.

Personally, I think it's "clueless" to hold a grudge for 9 years. Things changed, your salary got cut and you stayed in place. Now your company is in bankruptcy, so I would not bet on getting it back, and to bring up the 9 year thing now makes you look "clueless" when you can just as easily reach the conclusion that 9 years ago you were overpaid so the give back was justified.

This thread shows that everything that is going on now is under the supervision of a judge and that the union leaders you are paying are having a chance to bring their side of the argument to court, so if another set of givebacks result, I really hope you don't decide to hold another grudge for another 9 years, it's not good for you or your customers either.

I feel sorry for people caught under such circumstances, but it's a bumpy ride in most industries these days. Personally, my company has had three major layoffs over the last ten years, and many more minor ones. The last one 9 months ago I had already received my layoff paperwork and had two weeks to find another job in the company, and did so with just one day to spare.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
bmibaby737
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:07 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Tue Jun 05, 2012 11:28 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 13):
o Rejection of aircraft and engines for 9 MD-80

Would these be the 9 that were previously rejected, of which 7 returned to service and 2 remain in storage?

N556AA wfu and std 25 January 2012, rts 02 April 2012
N557AN wfu and std 23 January 2012, rts 23 March 2012
N558AA wfu and std 27 January 2012, rts 19 March 2012
N559AA wfu and std 22 January 2012, rts 27 March 2012
N560AA wfu and std 22 January 2012,
N561AA wfu and std 26 January 2012,
N573AA wfu and std 25 January 2012, rts
N574AA wfu and std 22 January 2012, rts 27 March 2012
N575AM wfu and std 27 January 2012, rts 08 April 2012

I believe someone asked about the current active fleet in the previous thread, so here's what I think is correct:

738 x178
752 x107
762 x15
763 x58
772 x47
M82 x112
M83 x87

Total mainline: 604
 
incitatus
Posts: 2700
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:21 am

Quoting Av8tor (Reply 18):
You obviously don't work for the airlines! Clueless.

While I do not agree with what Revelation wrote, he has a fair point. I know several corporate pilots who used to be airline pilots. One of them is an ex-777 captain still in this 40's. He just had it with airlines and moved on. I know real estate agents who used to be flight attendants. Airline employees who think the only job they can do is the same they already do are, might I say, clueless?
Stop pop up ads
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:29 am

Quoting commavia (Reply 20):
But, legally, does AA truly need consensual, negotiated, membership-ratified CBAs in order to exit Chapter 11? Are ratified CBAs a legal requirement for Chapter 11 emergence?

So if chpt.11 does not eliminate the right of the workers to remain in the union what work rules / conditions will they work under when they emerge and if they have no say about them, how does the judge or chpt.11 prevent a work stoppage when they emerge?
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:15 pm

Couple small court items for next week. All fleet related.

o Stipulation for extension of negotiations covering 2 737s – N970, N978
o Stipulation for extension of negotiations covering 4 MD-80s – N9412, 9413 9420, 973
o Stipulation for extension of negotiations covering 2 767s – N328 and 329
o Stipulation for extension of negotiations covering 216 Embraer regional jets.

Quoting bmibaby737 (Reply 22):
Would these be the 9 that were previously rejected, of which 7 returned to service and 2 remain in storage?

Yes I believe the aircraft are N556, N557, N558, N559, N560, N561, N573, N574, N575. While leases were being rejected, AMR had also separately sought authorization to purchase 9 MD-80 aircraft outright. I believe the two are the same.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:10 pm

In other news, the NMB ordered a vote for unionization of AA's passenger agents to proceed beginning June 21st.
The CWA has been trying to represent the 10,000 or so airport and reservations agents.

AA attempted to block the NMB from holding the representation election including going to both the BK and district courts. BK court last month refused to deal with the labor law matter.

The NMB timeline calls for voting to commence on June 21st, with ballots counted by the NMB on August 2nd.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:11 pm

News out of AA this week.

AA was able to get a temporary restraining out of US District Court pending a full hearing on June 21st to bar the NMB from conduct unionization election covering the 10,000 airport and reservations employees.
Frankly I don’t see why AA is battling this so hard. If these employees want to unionize, they will so one way or the other at the end.

Also the court mediated talks with TWU came to an end without agreement by the parties, while a second round of mediated talks with APA also concluded without an agreement. However on Friday, AMR presented the APA with a revised “best and final offer”, which they asked the APA to take to its members.
I wonder if AA will ask the court to delay its 1113 motions scheduled for a ruling on the 22nd as the union obviously wont have enough time to put it out for a vote.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15265
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:42 pm

Quoting incitatus (Reply 23):
One of them is an ex-777 captain still in this 40's. He just had it with airlines and moved on. I know real estate agents who used to be flight attendants. Airline employees who think the only job they can do is the same they already do are, might I say, clueless?

   Ultimately that invisible hand slaps you in the face regardless of what union you belong to, government you elect, referendum you approve, or tantrum you throw. You can either work with it, or wear yourself out working against it until it ultimately wins anyway.

Quoting commavia (Reply 3):
As Horton's careful wording highlights that there will be a 20% increase in "flying"

How do they intend to hold onto their unit revenue with such a large increase? Seems odd, especially in light of all the other bankruptcies.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
commavia
Posts: 9744
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:14 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 28):
How do they intend to hold onto their unit revenue with such a large increase? Seems odd, especially in light of all the other bankruptcies.

Because, again, that 20% increase in flying - as defined, apparently, by departures - will likely only result in a net increase in capacity of maybe a 1-2%, with much of that coming from an increase in international departures and capacity, offset by an increase in departures but decrease in capacity domestically (read: lots of 70-90-seaters a la Delta, United, USAirways, etc.). And as Horton has said, even that net increase in system capacity is likely to only come toward the tail-end of AMR's five year business plan, and indeed AMR's plan envisions AMR systemwide capacity being essentially flat for the first several years.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:14 pm

Small list of items on this weeks court docket.
Of course the big event will likely be the scheduled June 22nd ruling on the 1113 motions to abrogate the 3 union contracts.


o Extensions of time to assume or reject leases of 63 various airport properties.
o Authorizing assumption of 507 unexpired airport, and off airport real-estate leases along with payment of required cure amounts
o Authorizing rejection of ground lease agreement with City of Chicago
o Approving Letter Agreement between American Airlines, Inc. and Sky Chefs covering sublease of facilities
o Authorizing negotiations extension covering 7 MD-80 aircraft – N9401, 9402, 9403, 9404, 9405, 9406, 9409
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
ckfred
Posts: 4716
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 18, 2012 5:01 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 30):
Authorizing rejection of ground lease agreement with City of Chicago

IIRC, isn't AA still leasing some gate space at MDW? AA used to have service to both DFW and LGA, but that was probably 10 years ago.

I'm assuming that the court action involves the MDW lease and not the Terminal 3 and/or the maintenance hangers at ORD.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:17 pm

Well the APA has rejected AA's final offer by vote of 11-5.

Lets see what the court does on Friday.

Now I'm really starting to wonder what type of labor disruptions we can look forward to. If the courts abrogate the contracts, then the employees are legally free to with hold their services as well.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 31):
I'm assuming that the court action involves the MDW lease and not the Terminal 3 and/or the maintenance hangers at ORD.

The rejection covers various "premises and facilities ground leases" at O'Hare that go back to between 1969 and 1986.

More specifically the filing states:
After reviewing the terms of the Ground Lease and examining the costs associated with the obligations thereunder, the Debtors concluded that the Ground Lease constitutes an unnecessary ongoing expense to their estates. Accordingly, rejecting the Ground Lease is an exercise of the Debtors’ sound business judgment and is in the best interests of their estates.


By terminating the lease, AMR shall receive $6.5mil credits against future dues spread over 5-years.

Unfortunately I'm not certain as to what specifically they are opting to walk away from.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
commavia
Posts: 9744
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:43 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 32):
If the courts abrogate the contracts, then the employees are legally free to with hold their services as well.

Are you sure about that? Of course any employee can quit at any time, but if the court abrogates, are the unions free to legally impose self-help (i.e., strike, slow-down, sick-out, walk-out) as if this were a normal, non-1113 negotiation/impasse/strike?



[Edited 2012-06-21 09:45:00]
 
JFKPurser
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:03 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:57 pm

Quoting commavia (Reply 33):
Are you sure about that? Of course any employee can quit at any time, but if the court abrogates, are the unions free to legally impose self-help (i.e., strike, slow-down, sick-out, walk-out) as if this were a normal, non-1113 negotiation/impasse/strike?

No -- there is no legal self-help provision available to unions in an 1113 abrogation scenario. But it is widely believed among front-line AA workers that if the contracts are rejected tomorrow, for better or worse, the flood gates are going to open and there will be operational mayhem. And if it does end up happening, bear in mind that none of it will have been sanctioned by any union -- it will be of individuals acting on their own will.

[Edited 2012-06-21 09:58:36]
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:18 pm

Actually yes I believe employees can go to self-help.

This was actually a very likely scenario in one of the US Airways BK cases when it also sought to do a 1113c motion, and the question came up not if they had a right to strike, but when and what process the unions had to follow in notify their intent and if it fell under the RLA or Taft-Hartley Act as again there was a collision of BK law and Labor law. (basically right to immediate strike vs 30-day cool down period)

In other documents from a Q&A document I have from the United BK process.

Q. Do employees have any recourse in the event of imposed modifications or rejection of a collective bargaining agreement?
A. Yes employees maintain their rights to engage in forms of self-help such as protests or strikes. In similar light, the company has the right to engage in a lockout and seek alternative options incase employees refuse to participate under any revised employment terms or conditions.


Lastly I also tend to recall the threat of a strike was an issue in the Mesaba BK with its 1113c motion, where the pilots union voted upfront to strike if the motion was imposed.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:18 pm

Quoting commavia (Reply 33):
Of course any employee can quit at any time, but if the court abrogates,

Does the law allow a "have your cake and eat it too" scenario?
If the union contract with AA is abrogated one would assume that the workers now become individual employees, other than AA threating to fire, suspend or cut pay, who legally speaks for the workers but themselves?

I am definately interested in reading the legal obligations by all when such contracts are abrogated.
 
JFKPurser
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:03 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:40 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 35):
Actually yes I believe employees can go to self-help.

This was actually a very likely scenario in one of the US Airways BK cases when it also sought to do a 1113c motion, and the question came up not if they had a right to strike, but when and what process the unions had to follow in notify their intent and if it fell under the RLA or Taft-Hartley Act as again there was a collision of BK law and Labor law. (basically right to immediate strike vs 30-day cool down period)

In other documents from a Q&A document I have from the United BK process.

Q. Do employees have any recourse in the event of imposed modifications or rejection of a collective bargaining agreement?
A. Yes employees maintain their rights to engage in forms of self-help such as protests or strikes. In similar light, the company has the right to engage in a lockout and seek alternative options incase employees refuse to participate under any revised employment terms or conditions.

Lastly I also tend to recall the threat of a strike was an issue in the Mesaba BK with its 1113c motion, where the pilots union voted upfront to strike if the motion was imposed.

Well, if what you are saying is true, none of this has been entertained by any of AMR's unions -- at least not officially. None of it has been mentioned at all. Perhaps there is some sort of announcement pending -- following the judges's decisions tomorrow.
 
N839MH
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 4:05 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:04 pm

Why don't the employees just vote out all the unions (or a majority) and go along the lines of Delta?
Solodude!
 
JFKPurser
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:03 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:19 pm

Quoting n839mh (Reply 38):
Why don't the employees just vote out all the unions (or a majority) and go along the lines of Delta?

Do you live under a rock?
 
commavia
Posts: 9744
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 9:09 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 32):
Well the APA has rejected AA's final offer by vote of 11-5.

Lets see what the court does on Friday.
Never a dull moment.
 
skycub
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:49 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:28 pm

I have a question and I ask this with all due respect to the American flight attendants.

It really seems as though (and I could be wrong) their payscale is not the issue, but the lack of productivity and flexibility AMR gets from them is the problem.

As a flight attendant for another airline, I know most of my colleagues and myself WANT to be productive when we are at work. If we have to be gone for three or four days, a lot of us want to fly productively to earn the most hours/money in the fewest number of days. In fact, I often hear my colleagues complain that many of our trips are not productive enough.

I can tell you that in my base and at my airline, the high-productivity trips are usually bid by very senior flight attendants.

I don't know many flight attendants at my carrier who want 24 hour layovers even if they have flown a transcon.

While I understand that more productive trips and better utilization of flight attendants would, unfortunately, reduce the number of flight attendants required to staff the operation and and result in furloughs... I don't understand why American's FAs and APFA are opposed to flying more productively?

That being said, I will also say that I have had friends of mine look at my trip sheets in amazement that we are so productive but still manage to have trips that are purely AM or PM trips with decent (13-18 hour) overnights. One went as far as asking for a copy of my trips for the year so he could present them to APFA and AMR and ask why they cannot be scheduled/staffed as productively as we are.

So again, I am not knocking the AA flight attendants... I am just asking... why the opposition to being more productive? Is that actually the feeling of the majority of AA FAs or is that APFA's stand?
My opinions are my own. They are not representative of my employer, my union or my co-workers. They are all mine.
 
skedguy
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 3:47 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Fri Jun 22, 2012 12:08 am

Quoting commavia (Reply 40):
Never a dull moment.

Looks like Judge Lane has granted a 1-week extension to AMR and the APA:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/judge-...g-american-airlines-230310989.html

Question: Does this suggest that the APA may not be as tightly aligned with Parker's plan as has been advertised? Or, is this the union simply attempting to "save" as much as possible for its members during the would-be transition between an abrogation of the contracts and implementation of new terms under a merged AA/US?

If that's the case, why did the APFA walk away completely from the table, unlike five of the TWU groups?
 
aluminumtubing
Posts: 342
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:14 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Fri Jun 22, 2012 12:53 am

I think the APA board of directors did the right thing. It was not a no vote in general as we are being told, but the contract language was not put in place due to the time constraints. And based on what happend in the 2003 contract, they wanted all the i's dotted and t's crossed. There is definitely a trust issue between the pilots and the suits. It's the old trust but verify.

The parties have agreed and the judge has extended the ruling by a week, not for the parties to continue negotiating, but to put the proposal into concret contract language. I am fairly confident the board will vote by next Wednesday's deadline to pass the proposal to us for a vote. I have seen the "basics" and it is a definite improvement over the original 1113. It all of course comes down to what is ultimately put down on paper. I would be drawn, quartered, hung then shot if I were to make a hunch on how the membership will vote, so I won't.

I know there are a lot of experts out there on this forum, but I can say this is all being taken very serious by OUR board. Many, many pilots have served as Officer's in the Military, and I can assure you, you don't get there or here if you are an idiot. While there are some arm chair chest beaters, most are very mature, intelligent and able to make an appropriate decision.
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 1868
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:45 am

While the back and forth of negotiation can be tedious, stressful and frustrating - its a damn sight better than the proposition of the court allowing AA to dump all of the contracts.

There are lots of smart folks who are on the board for the pilots, there will be a way to work this out.

skycub's observations are interesting; the productivity issue may be a good way for the flight attendants to salvage a decent solution and in the end, may be a benefit to the membership.

Good luck folks - hopefully this will be sorted shortly.
 
commavia
Posts: 9744
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Fri Jun 22, 2012 4:01 am

Quoting SkedGuy (Reply 42):
Question: Does this suggest that the APA may not be as tightly aligned with Parker's plan as has been advertised? Or, is this the union simply attempting to "save" as much as possible for its members during the would-be transition between an abrogation of the contracts and implementation of new terms under a merged AA/US?

Probably a little of both - I imagine the APA is hedging their bets and trying to place both sides to get the best possible deal from both (not unlike the APFA and TWU).

In this case, though, the APA leadership is also likely confronting some difficult realities about their future, under either a merger or no-merger scenario. Either way, they're going to have to give on several key issues.

The key here is what is actually in the last, best offer from AMR - the company appears to have made some major moves in a lot of areas. And yesterday AMR announced that it was moving towards a deal with the PBGC and Department of Treasury to salvage the value (it not the current structure) of the APA's infamous lump-sum 'A Plan' pensions. It is obvious that there is movement here - from both sides. I still contend that the pilots deal will all come down to SCOPE, and I still maintain that on SCOPE, there is a deal to be had if both sides think creatively and put aside the bitterness of the past.

This is all likely reflective of the fact that, considering the pilots are the highest-paid already, and have the most to lose, there has also been a healthy amount of skepticism among the pilots about whether or not Parker's deal is actually the best course for the APA to pursue. While the APA leadership may be preaching unity, nearly a third of the board voted to take this deal to membership. Emails and Facebook posts abound from pilots skeptical of Parker, and frankly skeptical of the APA, and at least willing to entertain some of what AMR has proposed. That may be driving some of this rejection, then measured reconsideration, of AMR's offer.

What I think this most clearly illustrates, though, is what many have long suspected: this is really all about the pilots. It was the lack of movement on a pilot deal that finally brought the board to pull the trigger on Chapter 11, and it will be a deal with the APA - or lack thereof - that makes or breaks this whole process vis-a-vis labor. The pilot contract is the seminal, critical deal - not only are the pilots by far AA's highest-paid workgroup, but - unlike with, say, the flight attendants - the pilots' contract is the one that has a direct impact on so much of AMR's cost, productivity and revenue.

You can obviously see the broad outlines here of what the company is trying to do - the tried and true strategy of divide and conquer. AMR has already succeeded in getting consensual deals ratified with work groups representing nearly half of the TWU-represented employees, and if they are able to lock up a deal with the APA - which, again, is the single most strategically critical work group - that leaves just the APFA, plus M&E and Stores (and from what I have seen and heard about the deal the TWU cut with Parker, which honestly doesn't look all that much more friendly long-term to base maintenance than AMR's 1113 proposal, I suspect there are plenty of M&E folks who would be willing to see what else AMR might offer). Whether AMR's strategy succeeds is TBD, but I think that is their strategy, for better or worse.

Quoting SkedGuy (Reply 42):
If that's the case, why did the APFA walk away completely from the table, unlike five of the TWU groups?

As has long been the case, the APFA is the most militant of the work groups. They know the score: they're already basically the lowest-paid and least respected (sadly), ostensibly among the easiest to replace, and they have the least to lose. As such, it only stands to reason that their duly elected leadership would reflect those realities and attitudes.

[Edited 2012-06-21 21:16:00]
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 25, 2012 1:53 pm

Besides the delayed 1113c motion now pushed to Friday June 29th, there are a few other things on the courts agenda this week.

o Extension to negotiate covering 5 MD-80 aircraft – N513, 7514, 7540, 7541, 7542
o Extension to negotiate covering 4 B757s – N621, 628, 633, 635
o Extension to negotiate covering 2 B767 – N364, 368
o Motion directing AMR to produce documents per subpoenas for testimony for PBGC
o Motion to lift stay on pending litigation against AA in North Carolina
o Approving settlement with HP Enterprise regarding usage of critical technology services including allowing HP Ch11 claim of approx $7.7mil.
o Motion allowing AA entry into collective bargaining agreement with units of TWU that approved companies previous labor term sheet TA.
o Authority to retain and employ Ernst & Young LLP as auditors
o Establishing global procedures for treatment of reclamation claims
o Fully allow approximately 125 Ch11 claims against AMR
o Disallow, or reclassify 205 Ch11 claims against AMR
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
ckfred
Posts: 4716
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:21 pm

As to the issue of whether airline unions can engage in self help (i.e., work stoppages), if a contract is abrogated under section 1113, I think the answer is "who knows?" All of the court decisions regarding the issue of self help covered companies that aren't under the RLA. I haven't seen any such case law for an airline or railroad bankruptcy during the airline bankruptcies that came along after 9/11.

I know that United's F/As were threatening CHAOS while United was seeking to throw out their contract, but the union never went through on its strike threats, and the two sides eventually agreed to a new contract.

The problem that arises is that if the judge grants AMR's request under section 1113, then AA is free to impose a contract. But, no federal mediator has released the sides into the cooling-off period. So on it's face, it appears that any strike would be illegal. So, the question becomes whether a contract imposed by a bankruptcy judge under section 1113 frees a union from the provisions of the RLA that require declaration of an impasse and a cooling-off period.

I think that would be the first time a judge has to decide the issue.

If anyone is more knowledgable about labor or bankruptcy law, please feel free to correct me.
 
ldvaviation
Posts: 976
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:21 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:10 pm

Quoting ckfred (Reply 47):
As to the issue of whether airline unions can engage in self help (i.e., work stoppages), if a contract is abrogated under section 1113, I think the answer is "who knows?" All of the court decisions regarding the issue of self help covered companies that aren't under the RLA. I haven't seen any such case law for an airline or railroad bankruptcy during the airline bankruptcies that came along after 9/11.

From what I have read, the prevailing case at the moment would be Northwest versus its Flight Attendant Union.

The Northwest FA contract was governed by the RLA and they did seek self-help following the abrogation of their contract in bankruptcy court. An injunction was issued and was confirmed by an appellate court. If I remember correctly, the majority of the court ruled that the self-help provisions of the RLA were no longer valid after the "legal" termination of a contract that had been governed by the RLA. The termination of the contract was considered "legal" because it had been conducted by a judge in accordance with section 1113 proceedings of the bankruptcy court.
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: AMR Bankruptcy Court Thread Part 2

Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:06 pm

AA and the APFA have agreed to more talks July 3-5. Interesting they scheduled it over the holiday, but I guess it goes to show how short the timeline is, and the importance of continued talks. Perhaps this latest development will delay Judge Lane's decision. I know the company and APA reported earlier this week Judge Lane would delay his decision if the pilot's union sent the contract out to vote, but would rule on Friday if they did not. Interesting development nonetheless.

On a side note, AA has announced a new premium cabin service on international flights beginning December 2, 2012. It's such a drastic change, apparently, that all International Flagship Service qualified flight attendants will have to attend training in order to keep that qualification. Training begins in August. Also, the company has announced training for the flight attendants on the 777-300ER. Training will be three days in Dallas and begins in August as well.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.

Who is online