So APFA has benefited at the expense of the IAM represented F/A's.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Almirante:
"As noted above, the contractual language and the bargaining history does not disclose that there was any guarantee for AA's TWU-represented employees that there would be additional work apportunities created for them by the acquisition and integration, nor does the language dictate that Americans's TWU-represented employees benefit at the expense of the IAM-represented workforce".

So APFA has benefited at the expense of the IAM represented F/A's.

---

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: L1011Ret ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:
You all can sit by your little camp fire and dream of stealing seniority, while the rest of us have bigger fish to fry. While it must be so exciting for you to dream of getting the days off you want, you might want to notice that a big storm is approaching. One that if not prepared for could take us all out.

---

When presented with the facts, such as Marky posted, is that the best you can do? IgnorAAnce and AArogance are a deadly combination. APFA and APA will soon learn their lessons, and their memberships will pay.

As far as "stealing seniority," let's see, who stole whos? You are working and I am not. You are flying our routes, and we are not. You are taking advantage of our assets, and we are not. You are being trained to fly OUR Aircraft, while we are furloughed. So please save your sactimonious, self righteous, bull sh&t self justifications, and 'fess up to what really happened. RAPE. Pure and simple.

Mrs. Hawkman
(CeeHawk)

Edited for typo. Sorry.
[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:
......However the many AA bases seem to be what the TWA'ers have their eyes on.

---

Are you talking about SFO, LAX, and JFK which were shut down as LLC domiciles and are at the heart of a grievance now? I am sure that none of that flying was absorbed by AA and the marketshare was given away.

Rape is rape. Don't even try to justifiy it.

Sometimes we think so alike it's scary. I have been wondering the same thing as of late.

2 years since the 2 Great Airlines,,,,,,. Seems more like it's now "One screwed up airline, and we hope we have a future"

How did a TWA less KARABU and wacko aircraft leases + the great money machine that was AA turn into this mess?

I have said this before,,,In my Industry,,I have seen tons of mergers and buyouts. Most have failed. One VERY well run comany was successful at sucking up a loser and turning out a winner. In the Mid 90s, even THEY were almost closed down by a poorly planned buyout. MOST of the time, when a loser and winner got together , the combination was a loser. Every once in a while, two LOSERS tried to combine and make a go of it. I don't remember ANY of those concoctions working.

At BK time we are pretty sure TWA was losing money, but if you took away the previously mentioned items, they should have been making money. Was AAs P&L in the red at time of the buyout? If it was, who was the real money maker, right after BK? We may never know.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HAWKMAN:
Like our JFK base that was closed? Like our sattilites in BOS, ATL, DCA, LAX, FLL, ORD, MCI, SAN, SFO, MSP and TPA?

Rape is rape. Don't even try to justifiy it.

Mrs. HAwkman
(CeeHawk)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:
You all can sit by your little camp fire and dream of stealing seniority, while the rest of us have bigger fish to fry.

---

"Stealing"? You mean what AA has been doing all along with jobs that DON'T belong to them, right?

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:

... Our friends at US and UA are in a lot worse shape then us right now. I would guess that they would maybe love to be in your shoes right now.

---

Love to be in MY shoes? You are kidding, right? How high are you? I am FURLOUGHED because my job was stolen! Might want to check your reading comprehension.

But then again, it is in the high 70s, no snow or ice. My shoes might not be that bad a place to be.

Mrs. Hawkman
(CeeHawk)

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by B-757-200:

"Stealing"? You mean what AA has been doing all along with jobs that DON'T belong to them, right?

As far as being a 'failure', AA is going to be bankrupt soon as well, and then guess what will happen? 1113 filing to abrogate CBAs, then 20-30% pay cuts. Can you handle that? Better get ready, it will happen.

---

How can AA be stealing jobs that don't belong to them when they bought the assets of the now defunct TWA? They bought the jobs, they can do what they want with them. I think you fail to realize that TWA is dead.

quote:

---

Originally posted by L1011Ret:
Sorry, but I think the post "I think the saying goes something like - you can't rape the willing."; is out of line.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:

How can AA be stealing jobs that don't belong to them when they bought the assets of the now defunct TWA? They bought the jobs, they can do what they want with them. I think you fail to realize that TWA is dead.

---

aa777,

Independently of AA's financial woes, it is not accurate to say that AA bought the jobs and "can do what they want with them."

For TWA employees in collective bargaining units, there are Federal legal protections, even if the TWA collective bargaining agreements did not carry over to AA.

These protections are written into Federal labor law and there is a lengthy precedent in the transportation industry going back to the days of the railroads, in which union employees in acquired companies are protected as a group.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TWA Fan 1:

aa777,

Independently of AA's financial woes, it is not accurate to say that AA bought the jobs and "can do what they want with them."

For TWA employees in collective bargaining units, there are Federal legal protections, even if the TWA collective bargaining agreements did not carry over to AA.

These protections are written into Federal labor law and there is a lengthy precedent in the transportation industry going back to the days of the railroads, in which union employees in acquired companies are protected as a group.

And by the way, these legal protections apply regardless of any seniority agreements that may have been hashed out or not between TWA and AA unions representing similar categories of employees (pilots, mechanics, etc.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:

Your right, thanks for the accuracy check. However my point is that if AA wants to shut down a base they have the right to do it. If AA wants to fly a 767 to lgw from stl they can do it. Any route that used to be flown by TWA is now owned by AA and they can dictate which base flys it. AA makes the schedule not APFA. Closing JFK(TW) since we already had a JFK base made sense. Closing the old TW satalite bases was right thing to do since AA doesn't operate like that. I hardly consider these items the equivalent of being raped. At the time of the buyout the flight attendants received a raise and DOH for benefits and vacation. Anyone who came from a bankrupt carrier would think this is far from being raped. The fact is that they worked with a company(TWA) that sent them down a road of no return. If it wasn't for AA there probably would be more TW'ers on the street right now.

---

Whether or not TWAers are better off with AA than any other hypothetical situation is an idle exercise in guessing.

As far as the closing of bases, flying a 767 lgw to stl, satellite bases closures, you are absolutely right. AA owns the operation and, so long as they are acting in accordance with the law, it is their business to run as they see fit. No argument there from me even if it is a painful thing for the TWA family (no criticism of AA implied here by the way).

As you have accurately pointed out, there is no more TWA, except for a few lawyers in St Louis handling the liqiuidation.

quote:

---

Originally posted by donuway:

I totally agree with you about STLs outstanding hub location. Next time you connect here,,how about taking a longer layover, leave the airport, and go stimulate our local economy a bit

Don

---

Don,

As far as stimulating the local economy, a couple of remarks. As I have pointed out a couple of times, I flew TWA through STL hundreds of times.

I was never late even five minutes once. Not a single time. Therefore, I never missed my connection. I guess you'll have to blame TWA's stellar performances for mmy lack of patronage of the local hotels.

Second, I DID stimulate the local economy within Lambert, inlcuding the Cheers bar between the two concourses, that book store next door, the TCBY near gate c-2 or c-3 (can't remember the numbers any more) as well, of course, as the bar at the Ambassadors Club.

Sorry!

quote:

---

Originally posted by TWA Fan 1:

As far as the closing of bases, flying a 767 lgw to stl, satellite bases closures, you are absolutely right. AA owns the operation and, so long as they are acting in accordance with the law, it is their business to run as they see fit. No argument there from me even if it is a painful thing for the TWA family (no criticism of AA implied here by the way).

---

The problem is, they are not doing things fairly. And APFA has done nothing to ensure our jobs are protected. The fact we have not been trained, and our STL-LGW, STL-OGG, STL-HNL flights have been given to crews from other bases is the crux of the current DFR suit filed against APFA.

It is costing AA tons of bucks everyday to deadhead in, then layover a ORD or DFW crew and have that ORD or DFW crew fly what were our routes. The waste is asounding. Perfectly good crews, based in STL not allowed to fly our own trips. They fly our trips from another domicile and we get furloughed.

Ok, close JFK for the TWA folks. Fine, you don't need 2 sets of pencil pushers, but why were they not allowed to stay in JFK?

As for the sattilites, many TWAers have TRIED to present the cost effectivness of this program to both AA AND APFA, and no one wants to hear it. Just like the rest of the cost saving ideas we have tried to present, no one wants to hear it. "That isn't how we operate." Well, so be it, but when your company is hemorraging huge bucks, you need to look at EVERY SINGLE COST SAVINGS IDEA to find new streamlined ways of doing business. And AA won't. Had we kept our sattilites, than we could have stayed where were we were, and aa777 wouldn't be so worried about us infiltrating her/his domicile. Instead we get furloughed. I am convinced AA really doesn't want to save money. Like I said before, IgnorAAnce and AArogance is a deadly combination.

Mrs. Hawkman
(CeeHawk)

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HAWKMAN:

The problem is, they are not doing things fairly. And APFA has done nothing to ensure our jobs are protected. The fact we have not been trained, and our STL-LGW, STL-OGG, STL-HNL flights have been given to crews from other bases is the crux of the current DFR suit filed against APFA.

It is costing AA tons of bucks everyday to deadhead in, then layover a ORD or DFW crew and have that ORD or DFW crew fly what were our routes. The waste is asounding. Perfectly good crews, based in STL not allowed to fly our own trips. They fly our trips from another domicile and we get furloughed.

Ok, close JFK for the TWA folks. Fine, you don't need 2 sets of pencil pushers, but why were they not allowed to stay in JFK?

As for the sattilites, many TWAers have TRIED to present the cost effectivness of this program to both AA AND APFA, and no one wants to hear it. Just like the rest of the cost saving ideas we have tried to present, no one wants to hear it. "That isn't how we operate." Well, so be it, but when your company is hemorraging huge bucks, you need to look at EVERY SINGLE COST SAVINGS IDEA to find new streamlined ways of doing business. And AA won't. Had we kept our sattilites, than we could have stayed where were we were, and aa777 wouldn't be so worried about us infiltrating her/his domicile. Instead we get furloughed. I am convinced AA really doesn't want to save money. Like I said before, IgnorAAnce and AArogance is a deadly combination.

Mrs. Hawkman
(CeeHawk)

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

---

You have zero argument from me. As my nickname implies, I am TWA Fan 1. Having done an in-depth financial analysis of TWA, it turns out that without Karabu TWA could have been one of the most profitable airlines in the United States. By the way, that's why AA acquired TWA; it was a good deal for them.

LLC could really be the savior for AA with its highly-qualified people who know how to operate very well under tight financial constraints.

As far as the AArogance and the IgnorAAnce, you don't need to tell me. Although I'm a mere passenger, I've run across it many times.

In fact a number of patently shocking episodes flying with AA (nearly one million miles) led me to switch to TWA in 1994.

The 8 or so years flying TWA as exclusively as possible were the best years of my life as a passenger.

TWA treated me right and made me feel like family.

I will never forget it and will endeavor to be as articulate an advocate for the memory of TWA as I can be.

But everything we're saying doesn't contradict what aa777 writes. The former assets of TWA now belong to AA and they can do whatever they like with them, even if their actions prove not to be in their own best interest.

The only thing they can't do is engage in illegal labor practices. Unfortunately plenty of what's unfair is not also illegal.

And one thing that's definitely not illegal is a company wasting its own money and inefficiently using its resources.

I could not agree more. We have offered solution after solution only to be shot down, time and again. We have seen all the roadshow charts before, and heard all the speeches before. Sad part of it is, we had so much to offer. No one wants to listen to us, so now most don't care anymore. I personally went on a months-long sugar campaign, the details of which are too long to get into here; suffice it to say, nothing changed as of my furlough date. And I doubt it ever will.

Thanks for your loyalty, TWAFan1. It was folks like you, Jeff I., Marky, and all the rest of you who made it worth while to fight through the lean times. Between myself, my husband and my father-in-law we had 60+ years of TWAhood. And they will NEVER take that away from us.

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:
However the many AA bases seem to be what the TWA'ers have their eyes on.

---

Only so we can get back to where we were when you closed our bases and satellites and corralled us all in STL.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HAWKMAN:

Thanks for your loyalty, TWAFan1. It was folks like you, Jeff I., Marky, and all the rest of you who made it worth while to fight through the lean times. Between myself, my husband and my father-in-law we had 60+ years of TWAhood. And they will NEVER take that away from us.

Mrs. Hawkman
(CeeHawk)

---

Thanks for the kind words.

As far as the loyatly, I didn't do anything, you guys earned my loyalty by doing such a fine job and by doing it with a very unique grace under fire.

I was so amazed by how well TWA did that it actually energized me when my business was going through rough spots.

quote:

---

Originally posted by HAWKMAN:

It is costing AA tons of bucks everyday to deadhead in, then layover a ORD or DFW crew and have that ORD or DFW crew fly what were our routes. The waste is asounding. Perfectly good crews, based in STL not allowed to fly our own trips. They fly our trips from another domicile and we get furloughed.

Ok, close JFK for the TWA folks. Fine, you don't need 2 sets of pencil pushers, but why were they not allowed to stay in JFK?

As for the sattilites, many TWAers have TRIED to present the cost effectivness of this program to both AA AND APFA, and no one wants to hear it. Just like the rest of the cost saving ideas we have tried to present, no one wants to hear it. "That isn't how we operate." Well, so be it, but when your company is hemorraging huge bucks, you need to look at EVERY SINGLE COST SAVINGS IDEA to find new streamlined ways of doing business. And AA won't. Had we kept our sattilites, than we could have stayed where were we were, and aa777 wouldn't be so worried about us infiltrating her/his domicile. Instead we get furloughed. I am convinced AA really doesn't want to save money. Like I said before, IgnorAAnce and AArogance is a deadly combination.

Mrs. Hawkman
(CeeHawk)

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:

The trips from STL to LGW, HNL and OGG where transfered over to AA crews when AA decided to park the TW aircraft. A cost savings. Also remember even trips from other Intl Bases are not always flown by the local base. You mention the cost savings you can see by not having 2 sets of pencil pushers and then go on to say that you don't understand why the TW f/a's couldn't stay. That would require tw a/c and support staff to be based there too, Not cost effiecient. I think arrogance is someone coming from an airline that lost money 17 years in a row (while most airlines were making record profits)and suggesting that we don't know what we're doing.

---

Keeping TWAers in JFK would not have required 2 sets of pencil pushers. Once we went to your "contract" and SABRE, why would we need 2? Oh, I forgot... the AAers are flying all of the routes out of JFK that we flew.

I am not suggesting AA doesn't know what to do. After seeing what I saw of your operation, I am flat out saying it. AA knows how to run a fat airline, not a lean one. AA is way too wrapped up in itself to even listen to known, proven, cost effective measures from those who have been there.
But that is your problem now.

Mrs. Hawkman
(CeeHawk)

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

[ 02-25-2003: Message edited by: HAWKMAN ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:
Well I'm glad we have people like you with such outstanding attitudes to wish us well.

---

you're going to need it!

I would also like to add that since the transition to AA, I have been treated very well by AA too, and have no complaints about their customer service. Some of their policies suck, like their outdated and ever-worsening upgrade system, but as far as treatment, they have certainly done right by me and I appreciate it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by aa777:

I think arrogance is someone coming from an airline that lost money 17 years in a row (while most airlines were making record profits)and suggesting that we don't know what we're doing.

---

Hi aa777,

You at AA DON'T know what you're doing. In the last two years AA has lost more money than TWA did in all its 76 years of flying combined. To be exact, AA has lost $5.3 BILLION in the last two years, and the figure would be $6.3 Billion if not for the $1 billion gift of public funds we taxpayers handed out to you in the form of a cash grant from the ATSB following 9/11.

In the 1st quarter of 2003 alone, AA is expected to lose somewhere north of another half billion. A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking real money.

Can you explain to me what action AA management has taken to turn this situation around, other than cutting back on customer service, meals, etc (those things which differentiate the AA product from the low-cost carriers) and demanding massive give-backs from employees?

Let me help you -- the answer is NOTHING. The only people on the property at AA who have any experience with this kind of thing are the TWA people. Why squander that resource?

I'm willing to do my part (as a customer) to help AA, by flying them and encouraging others to fly AA as well. But AA has to do their part and I've yet to see them take any action other than action which is essentially punitive not only to their own workers but punitive to their best customers as well.

I know you are not personally responsible for this, and I also see your point of view with regard to the integration of former TWAers. I commend you for the mature way that you have conveyed your position.

The bottom line is that it is in all of our best interest to work for a return to health by AA. But the leadership must start from the top.

Take care,

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrMarky:
I would like to concur with TWA FAN 1 as far as his remarks about the wonderful treatment we always received from TWA. It's as close as I'll ever get to feeling like royalty. Special thanks to CeeHawk (How ya doing???) and others for expressing their kind appreciation to us passengers as well.

I would also like to add that since the transition to AA, I have been treated very well by AA too, and have no complaints about their customer service. Some of their policies suck, like their outdated and ever-worsening upgrade system, but as far as treatment, they have certainly done right by me and I appreciate it.mAArky

---

mAArky,

Concerning the service on AA. As I have mentioned, I rediscovered TWA in 1994 largely in an effort to find an alternative to AA after I suffered a series of deeply abusive incidents at the hands of AA.

AA is no longer abusive. But as far as the service, my experience has been that it is largely professional and competent. Nothing more.

I still find that in cases where there is a problem (delay, overbooking, flight cancellation) AA doesn't do nearly as good a job as TWA (in its last incarnation) of communicating to the passenger. As a result, the passenger feels AA is callous or doesn't care about the passenger's needs.

And I have had one or two slightly eyebrow-raising incidents in which AA people, although not abusive, made gratuitously hostile comments (not about me).

You write that TWA made you fee like royalty. But does the service at AA make you feel like royalty?

In my case I would have to say no. I buy my ticket, I check in, I fly. I feel like balast in the seat.

To me the experience of flying TWA stood out. Flying AA is OK, but I find the people at DL, on the whole, more relaxed, while the upgrade policy at CO is definitely better.

And despite Don Carty's now-infamous comments about AA being worth a 30% premium, I have found that, on the whole, AA costs more for less. With the one (major) exception of the extra legroom in coach, AA's incentive plans and "added value" premiums are the least compelling in the industry.

AAdvantage puts restrictions on miles earned for discounted tickets. Upgrades are extremely limited. There is no American Express Membership Miles tie-in and the Admiral's Club is the most expensive lounge in the business and you still have to pay for liquor.

In the meantime, in what I believe is a disastrous p.r. move, Carty and AA have been extremely public about cutting back on minor amenities like hot meals. In most cases the cutbacks are not as severe as the public statements would lead one to believe, but this simply fosters the impression that AA is an expensive airline that is out to charge more for less service.

CO, on the other hand, has played its hand brilliantly by aggressively advertising its commitment to full service.

The bottom line: I haven't found anything at AA that warrants the kind of fanatic loyalty I developed for TWA.

By the way, a note to the nAAtives reading this. There is absolutely nothing personal about my comments. You're terrific people, but whatever issues there might be at AA are created by the management and the corporate culture it fosters.

And yes, if you could let down your guard for just a moment you might realize that the TWA people can bring a lot to the table to help make AA (your airline) a better and profitable airline.

And by the way, aa777, the 17 years of losing money at TWA had absolutely nothing to do with TWA operations. The money lost was management's doing. Remember, at the beginning of that long run of losses, TWA was the golden airline of America.

You might see it as a cautionary tale of what can happen to the high and mighty when they start to believe that they are invincible.

[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: TWA Fan 1 ]

[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: TWA Fan 1 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TWA Fan 1:

The money lost was management's doing. Remember, at the beginning of that long run of losses, TWA was the golden airline of America.

You might see it as a cautionary tale of what can happen to the high and mighty when they start to believe that they are invincible.

---

Why is it People STILL dont learn from history??

quote:

---

Originally posted by SUPER 80:
I think you fail to realize that TWA is dead.

---

Your statement about negotiations to ammend Supp CC is a falsehood.

The discussions are only to resolve the outstanding issues/grievences regarding staffing within STL. The APA is working to resolve those issues favorably. There is no effort by anyone AA or the APA to bring harm.

If you are an APA member....you should know that. If you aren't and don't know: then you should refrain from spreading false rumors.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Adnan ILyas:
At JFK, we were scheduled to be in Terminal 8 on 2 Dec anyways, and all TWA property was to to turned over to the Port Authority. The only support staff the flight ops had at JFK was 2 admin assitants. That's it. So basically AA saved the salaries of 2 assitants when they shutdown JFK. All this garbage you hear about saving millions is just that, garbage.

---

Overlooking the following garbage...

1.The TWA property was scheduled to revert to Port control on 01 Jan.AA had signed leases with the Port for the facilities that ran until 01 January.The month after the move of operations on 02 Dec was designed to allow the final movement of the support infrastructure for LLC to AA's facilities.

AA ended up paying leases on empty facilities even after the JFK operation was shut down ahead of the planned move date.

2.Flight ops may have had two assistants,but exactly how many agents,mechanics and ramp agents would have come over to service your twenty daily departures?

Should the entire JFK staff have been brought over En Masse to handle less than two dozen daily departures?

[ 03-01-2003: Message edited by: L1011Ret ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by L1011Ret:
Fences are of different kinds. One might protect senior pilots on a type of equipment, while another is deliberately targeted to prevent integration of the workforces as was done by APFA.

---