No wAAy APFA
You're not going to give OUR money away that easily
There's mounting concern among many who voted YES to AMR's Tentative Agreement (LBFO) that they did so because they were pressured by the APFA to ratify an agreement that (1) clearly lacked information, (2) provided unclear language, (3) allowed for the changing of language during the voting process, and (4) at times misstated very important language altogether.
There's also concern that the APFA knowingly promoted a conflict of interest by suggesting that a merger with US Airways would somehow bring about a better contract knowing that US Airways CEO Doug Parker and AMR CEO Tom Horton are long-term friends and former colleagues. This concern is further fueled by an Associated Press report which suggested that the idea to promote a merger was hatched at an executive barbeque luncheon held in Wyoming just months before AMR filed for bankruptcy.
Some have said that flight attendants may have a legal avenue for recourse. Whether one exists or not is something that would have to be determined by legal experts, not flight attendants.
One thing we know for sure is that the LBFO will be in place for the next 10 years based on the history of negotiations between American Airlines and APFA. Any hope of changing that outcome rests solely on challenging the way the agreement was implemented — no other option exists.
For those interested in knowing what avenues are available, please fill out the following form and your name will be added to a list of individuals who would like to contribute $100 to retain counsel for an opinion.
The information obtained in this form is confidential and will not be shared with anyone other than legal counsel should counsel be retained.
Whether you voted YES or NO has no relevance other than to aid counsel in determining any legal recourse should any opportunities for recourse present themselves.