90 replies to this topic

[ord78]

As long as there is a furlough list, there will be no hiring

...and that's a fact that many don't quite grasp

[czerny]

nbmcg01, on 22 February 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

Just a thought: Do you honestly think the company wants to be locked into not being able to hire again for AT LEAST 5 years? They have already agreed (in principle) to unlimited recall. The company wants to be able to hire off the street. And then you have those pesky little CMSs who are able to gain seniority and benefits while more senior are still on the street.

Nancy, with all due respect, those "pesky" CM speakers were hired because not enough current fas, both on the furlough list, and on the line qualified for the language. The offer was given to those on furlough to qualify for the language before the hiring ad was posted. I flew with two former TWA fas in LGA who are ethnic American chinese. One was never taught by her parents to speak Chinese and the other refused to qualify because she couldn't stand mainland Chinese.

[kirkpatrick]

nbmcg01, on 22 February 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

those pesky little CMSs

Those "pesky little CMs" triggered the recall of 200 additional FAs off the furlough list who obviously were not needed and who have just escaped furlough on 4/1. I think it's time we got over the CM issue.

MK

[IORFA]

czerny, I think you don't understand sarcasm.

[IORFA]

kirkpatrick, on 23 February 2012 - 09:02 AM, said:

Those "pesky little CMs" triggered the recall of 200 additional FAs off the furlough list who obviously were not needed and who have just escaped furlough on 4/1. I think it's time we got over the CM issue.

MK

Agreed. There are bigger fish to fry at this point.

[jersey777]

On Thursday, a dubious industry consultant called me up to ask me what I thought about the $1 billion goal. On Friday, analyst Hunter Keay of Wolfe Trahan dumped a whole bunch of skepticism on American's plans.

Wrote Hunter, with the headline "The AMR revenue plan begs questions":

"We think AMR believes high costs and restrictive labor contracts were and are the main drivers of, if not the only reasons for, its revenue deficiency. We believe differently.
"The cost/labor argument as a facilitator of a revenue deficit was probably true when AMR competed for price sensitive customers against low cost carriers but less true when AMR competed for corporate contracts against other network carriers with more powerful networks.

"Given that AMR is apparently intend on winning back large corporate customers predominantly by restructuring labor contracts but operating a network that closely resembles the network that it had entering bankruptcy, we see a low probability of success. We conitinue to believe that AMR has a low likelihood of emerging from bankruptcy as a viable standalone airline."




Any one surprised by this?

[jimntx]

Try to imagine the shock on my face!

[eolesen]

Quote

Given that AMR is apparently intend on winning back large corporate customers predominantly by restructuring labor contracts but operating a network that closely resembles the network that it had entering bankruptcy, we see a low probability of success

Probably not a discussion for this thread, but anyone who thinks AA is going to stick with the status quo on the network is an idiot. And I'm not exactly impressed with Keay's research, or that of anyone else who gets quoted on a regular basis by USA Today or Bloomberg... Real analysts (e.g. Gary Chase, Jamie Baker, Kevin Crissey) don't need to give away their analysis in McPaper, mainly because they have people willing to pay for their opinions...

If AA haven't planned to expand beyond the present footprint, why go thru all the trouble of eliminating the commuter restrictions in the TWU contract, re-writing the cap on 88 seaters & below to be 50% of mainline aircraft, allowing for more domestic codesharing, etc.

DL and UA haven't made gains simply because they operate a lot of capacity in the top 20 markets. They've made gains because they also can offer a reasonable two-cabin product in markets which AA couldn't afford to serve with an MD80 and were beyond what Eagle could serve with a single cabin 50 seater.

Ironically, it appears that UA may be undoing some of those gains as the battle with their pilots over scope continues.

Again, it's off the topic, and been beaten to death elsewhere...