So much for a strike

[mikeb]

When you say labor cost you gotta know that includes union and management. Also all off AA unions took a large pay cut and benefit reduction. While labor cost decreased management rewarded themselves with huge pay increases. The pilots union is the only group that has received a portion of their cuts back. Mtx and the bag smashers haven't received a dime.

Using the same article that you mentioned previously, i find:

"The last pilot contract was 10 years ago. At that time, the pilots made the biggest sacrifice of all American Airlines employees, a 23% pay cut. Benefits were also reduced, including a change in sick day accumulation, a cut in vacation time and an increase in flying time, all of which saved the company money. Later, they received 6% of that pay cut back. That was the last thing the pilots received from American Airlines. No increases, or bonuses since, in 10 years.

After the pilots took their 23% pay cut in 2003, American Airlines management took a 23% pay raise. They took bonuses while their employees didn’t get a raise for the next 10 years."

-------

Didn't the union negotiate that 10 year old contract?

"The three major unions at American Airlines said yesterday that they would conclude voting on concessions by this morning and try to get results to the company before 11 a.m. in Texas"

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/15/business/american-airlines-unions-vote-today-on-concessions.html?src=pm

So, shouldn't the union bear some blame for negotiating a poor contract with AA?

AA has legal obligations to pay those executive bonuses (more about that later), and AA has no contractual duty to pay the union employees any different than what is spelled out in the contract with the union.

That 10 year old contract expired in 2008, and contract negotiations have dragged on. We've already discussed the contract that was offered and refused by the union. Now of course AA has filed for bankruptcy - game over.

------

"As AMR Corp. prepares to report first-quarter earnings Wednesday, the company's unionized flight attendants and mechanics are launching protests against "executive greed" and "managerial incompetence"

http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=45&articleid=20110420_45_E1_AsAMRC960726

"Executive greed" and "managerial incompetence" are easy to explain. As a part of their total compensation executives are given a "compensation plan". The plan has specific goals - when those goals are achieved then the money in the plan is paid out. These plans are a "sweetener" used to hire and retain upper management, and they are in widespread use in all kinds of companies.

"American spokeswoman Susan Gordon said the company's executive compensation plan directly links pay to the company's performance and places a significant portion of management compensation at risk."

(same link as above)

There are a couple of problems with the concept of these plans. The first problem is they are generally too narrowly written. If a plan says that an executive has to do "x" to get his money you can dammed well bet he's going to do "x" by any means possible to get that money, even if that has negative consequences for the company, and even if it pisses off union labor. There is money involved and it's human nature to "get mine" and damn the torpedoes.

You saw the same thing in action recently with wall street where large bonuses where paid out right before bankruptcy was filed, or government aid was accepted. You can bet that the executives with compensation plans knew that the end was coming and they made their compensation plan goals to get the money before the end came.

The next problem is that compensation plans are a legally binding agreement between the executive and AA, and because of that they are inflexible. If the company is heading for the rocks and the goals are met - the eagle flies. AA is legally liable if they don't pay.

So you can see that the executive has little incentive to pursue things that are not in his compensation plan, and has little incentive to care about the consequences of his actions when he pursues his compensation plan goals (assuming that his actions are legal). Thus, "executive greed" and "managerial incompetence" are seen by the rank and file when the executive is really just pursuing the money in his compensation plan.

The compensation plans are most likely designed by the board of directors. Blame them for writing poor plans that reward executives for actions that don't move the company forward.

I feel sorry for the AA employees that got the shaft in this deal, but they agreed to be a part of a labor scheme that involves negotiations and contracts. And when you are involved with such a scheme, sometimes you win and sometimes you don't.

[The King]

Lot of sour grapes posts directed at unions in here.

If someone wants to work at a union job and is willing to pay dues to do so, that is their right. If someone is unwilling to doing so, they have the same right to seek employment elsewhere.

[FreightTrain]

Exactly. Hell, there's one video on youtube of a union worker shoving his daughter in front of a Verizon truck screaming at the driver, calling him every name under the sun and yelling "See my daughter!!!??? You're taking money from her SCAB!"

OMG there is a video on the internets. For someone that has seen war you would think something like that wouldn't bother you. I mean can you imagine the injustice. A man cussing out another man infront of his daughter someone call CPS.

[FreightTrain]

No, I can act like you shouldn't have to pay 'dues' or 'kickback' to work at a place of employment. That 100 bucks a month is a tank of gas, food for the family, part of a light bill and so forth. Again, do you agree with forcing someone to join your little mob as a condition of working there?

And what gives a union the right to come on private property and tell the owner of said property "You can't deal with your people one on one anymore, you have to deal with me and if I'm not happy, I take your work force away. Oh and you can't replace them during a strike either." If my workers go on strike, I'd replace every one of them.

So summary:

1. Why should I be forced to pay dues that come directly from my check without the opportunity to decide if I want to or not?
2. Why should I be forced to join a union in order to work at a business?
3. Where does a union get the right to come on private property and demand an owner deal with them instead of the people they employ?

And 4, my personal favorite: Why is it if you refuse to join a union at a 'union job' do you still have to pay dues despite the fact YOU DON'T WANT TO JOIN A UNION?

Don't go sidetracking. Actually answer the questions FT.

1. It's a free country and you can work where ever you want sunshine. If you know the place is union and you don't want to be union don't work there. After all the new guy has no right to bitch about what practices a company has in place.
2. See answer to question 1.
3. A union is a democracy and everything is voted on by a majority. The owner will still deal with his employees because it is current employees that will be elected as union officers and that is who the company will deal with.
4. See answer to question 1.

[Forever_frost]

Exactly. Hell, there's one video on youtube of a union worker shoving his daughter in front of a Verizon truck screaming at the driver, calling him every name under the sun and yelling "See my daughter!!!??? You're taking money from her SCAB!"

[fordracing19]

My dad was a scab for newspapers. When they went on strike they called his team in and ran the place. At quite a few places they couldn't leave the building since the strikers were violent.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[Forever_frost]

No, I can act like you shouldn't have to pay 'dues' or 'kickback' to work at a place of employment. That 100 bucks a month is a tank of gas, food for the family, part of a light bill and so forth. Again, do you agree with forcing someone to join your little mob as a condition of working there?

And what gives a union the right to come on private property and tell the owner of said property "You can't deal with your people one on one anymore, you have to deal with me and if I'm not happy, I take your work force away. Oh and you can't replace them during a strike either." If my workers go on strike, I'd replace every one of them.

So summary:

1. Why should I be forced to pay dues that come directly from my check without the opportunity to decide if I want to or not?
2. Why should I be forced to join a union in order to work at a business?
3. Where does a union get the right to come on private property and demand an owner deal with them instead of the people they employ?

And 4, my personal favorite: Why is it if you refuse to join a union at a 'union job' do you still have to pay dues despite the fact YOU DON'T WANT TO JOIN A UNION?

Don't go sidetracking. Actually answer the questions FT.

[03mustangdude]

interesting discussion subscribed.

[FreightTrain]

No, it's run by casinos. Would you like news reports of unions doing these things within the past couple of years? Or perhaps the unions destroying public property after Governor Walker limited their power? Do you believe FT that unions should be able to take money from your paycheck before you get it? Do you believe in freedom of choice in jobs?

I think I should be able to walk into any job and negotiate what my skills are worth without having to pay some middle man who tells me if I don't pay up and join that I can't work there

You act like due's cost a 1k a month lol. I pay less than $100 a month for dues and of that money 85% stays at the local level. Meaning it goes to help guys family's pay bills who get sick or hurt and can't work. It is also used for community projects, scholarships, meals at work and other employee programs. This is how my union opperates and I can't speak for others, but I don't mind paying that little amount of money for all the good it does. We have several guys out right now with cancer or other serious injuries that don't have to worry about how they are going to make their house payment because of the union. All they have to focus on is getting better.

[Forever_frost]

No, it's run by casinos. Would you like news reports of unions doing these things within the past couple of years? Or perhaps the unions destroying public property after Governor Walker limited their power? Do you believe FT that unions should be able to take money from your paycheck before you get it? Do you believe in freedom of choice in jobs?

I think I should be able to walk into any job and negotiate what my skills are worth without having to pay some middle man who tells me if I don't pay up and join that I can't work there

[2011GT]

If they were going to file bankruptcy anyway, why were offering increases? Unions have no place in business. They are archiac organizations that have mob like structures and employ similar tactics to get their way. You don't want to join? Then maybe your tires get slashed. Want to work and walk through a picket line? Then maybe you get your knees broken

Some jobs you have to join the union such as mine. We also can't strike.

[FreightTrain]

If they were going to file bankruptcy anyway, why were offering increases? Unions have no place in business. They are archiac organizations that have mob like structures and employ similar tactics to get their way. You don't want to join? Then maybe your tires get slashed. Want to work and walk through a picket line? Then maybe you get your knees broken

LOL stop watching movies from the 50s. I guess your going to tell me next that vegas is still ran by the mob too.

[Forever_frost]

If they were going to file bankruptcy anyway, why were offering increases? Unions have no place in business. They are archiac organizations that have mob like structures and employ similar tactics to get their way. You don't want to join? Then maybe your tires get slashed. Want to work and walk through a picket line? Then maybe you get your knees broken

[2011GT]

Oh really now? Name calling? You ever heard of the term "Ad hominem"? Go look it up.

Most of what i know about the AA bankruptcy I read in the Wall Street Journal over the past few days.

1. I said "The AA pilot union turned down a sweet deal for the pilots right before AA filed bankruptcy."

The pilots union did turn down what many of us would consider a sweet deal somewhere around November 15th (note the date on this article):

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/11/15/3528873/pilots-union-rejects-american.html

In another article we find more about the proposals that were rejected.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/11/14/3525974/american-offers-pilots-union-2.html

"American's latest "option A" proposal:

Offers a 4 percent average signing bonus, and then a 3 percent raise at 15 months, a 2 percent raise at 30 months and a 2 percent raise at 45 months.

Removes the hard monthly flying cap and creates an average monthly flying range of 72 to 83 hours with immediate productivity gains.

Gives pilots the choice of keeping their pension plans or changing to an age-based contribution plan.

Increases medical benefits with employee costs at 22 percent, increasing to 25 percent by the end of the contract.

Its "option B" proposal:

Offers a 5 percent average signing bonus, and then a 4 percent, 2 percent and 3 percent raise in year one, two and three, respectively, of the contract.

Removes the hard monthly flying cap and moves to an average monthly flying range of 72 to 83 hours with productivity gains phased in over the contract.

Immediately freezes pilots' pensions in the primary plan.

Keeps employee medical benefit costs at 19 percent through the contract."

----

Apparently the talks broke down over a %7 difference in the starting bonuses between what american proposed and what the unions wanted.

Do you realize that times are tight and a lot of people are not getting raises at all this year, or are getting very small ones? And the airlines are fighting high fuel costs, and AA in particular has high labor costs? I think that if you were to look at that deal thru the lens of an average american and not from the standpoint of an entitled union member - it looks like a pretty sweet deal. Maybe you should start a poll and see what the members here think about it.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/11/29/3559159/now-american-airlines-unions-will.html

"But American has lost more than $12 billion in the past decade, and that's not sustainable. It has an $800 million disadvantage on labor costs, and there was no finessing that albatross any longer."

2. I said "The deal they'll get now out of the bankruptcy is probably going to be far worse."

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/11/30/aa-pilots-prepare-for-bumpy-ride-through-bankruptcy/

"The APA union admits that bankruptcy strips them of any and all leverage in contract negotiations. The pilots also realize that their next contract will be settled by a judge."

In my business i've dealt with bankruptcy judges before (customers of ours going tits up and owning us money); they are a dour bunch and are very unlikely to give a deal comparable to the one that the union turned down. Turnabout is fair play, and the unions will be presented with a "take it or leave it" proposal now.

3. I said "Unions are out of touch."

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/11/29/3559159/now-american-airlines-unions-will.html

From that article:

"It wasn't enough that the Allied Pilots Association would reject a contract offer with job security, pension protection, annual raises and a signing bonus. Negotiators also wanted management to eat some humble pie.

After leaving for lunch on a Friday in mid-November, they didn't bother to return to the negotiating table -- and notified their counterparts with a text message. A few days later, after passing on the contract, they said they'd take a much-needed break for the week of Thanksgiving.

Well, no need to rush the talks now. While the union rested, American executives worked through the holiday and weekend, so parent company AMR could file for Chapter 11 on Tuesday.

The union snubs probably won't be mentioned in the legal papers, but they're telling: American's future was dangling by a thread, banking on an 11th-hour contract with the pilots union, and negotiators were still playing petty games."

--------

The union was clearly fiddling while AA burned. They clearly overplayed their hand. And that's being out of touch.

When you say labor cost you gotta know that includes union and management. Also all off AA unions took a large pay cut and benefit reduction. While labor cost decreased management rewarded themselves with huge pay increases. The pilots union is the only group that has received a portion of their cuts back. Mtx and the bag smashers haven't received a dime.

Now whether the APA voted yes on the last proposal the company would've filed bankryptcy regardless.

[sig239]