The ONLY good news?!? I think the fact that we still exist is good news. How do you know attrition is higher than at AA? The reason that the UA f/a's aren't coming back is because they never planned to come back after the furlough a few years ago. United gave such a good deal to take furlough (payed medical and dental, no lost seniority, unlimited passes ) that those who volunteered planned to enjoy these benefits until UAL took them away. Now they have and these people never had any intention of returning in the first place.
🌟 Exclusive Amazon Black Friday Deals 2024 🌟
Don’t miss out on the best deals of the season! Shop now 🎁
$68 Million Net Income In Third Quarter
- Thread starter FWAAA
- Start date
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2003
- 5,311
- 584
- Banned
- #17
<_< Now that's funny!!!!! I've been through two of them!!!!!
maddogdriver
Member
- Feb 14, 2004
- 54
- 3
aafsc:
You better read what I wrote again. I never said you or anyone else predicted liquidation. . I said everyone was "praying for us to file Chpt 11".
LIQUIDATION (since you don't know) is the sale of the assets of a company to one or more acquirers when venture capital investors receive some of the proceeds of the sale. This has not happened at United. CHAPTER 11 involves a REORGANIZATION of a debtor's business affairs and assets, filed by corporations which require time to RESTRUCTURE their debts. Chapter 11 gives the debtor a fresh start, subject to the debtor's fulfillment of its obligations under its plan of reorganization.
MCI: I came from that same place you did - you should know how this works. There's NOTHING funny about what's happening here. If you really went through two, you would agree. If you still think it's funny just remember what I wrote: " ............payback's a #### folks. They aren't going to like it after we emerge."
All the naysayers - enjoy the next year. I'm sure you guys are going to have fun.
mad dog
You better read what I wrote again. I never said you or anyone else predicted liquidation. . I said everyone was "praying for us to file Chpt 11".
LIQUIDATION (since you don't know) is the sale of the assets of a company to one or more acquirers when venture capital investors receive some of the proceeds of the sale. This has not happened at United. CHAPTER 11 involves a REORGANIZATION of a debtor's business affairs and assets, filed by corporations which require time to RESTRUCTURE their debts. Chapter 11 gives the debtor a fresh start, subject to the debtor's fulfillment of its obligations under its plan of reorganization.
MCI: I came from that same place you did - you should know how this works. There's NOTHING funny about what's happening here. If you really went through two, you would agree. If you still think it's funny just remember what I wrote: " ............payback's a #### folks. They aren't going to like it after we emerge."
All the naysayers - enjoy the next year. I'm sure you guys are going to have fun.
mad dog
Since UA is hiring new hire F/As off the street, it is logical that they have higher attrition. I am glad that those who decided not to stick around at least got medical and dental for a while along with passes. But if I recall, USAir F/As got the same thing in addition to some cash to walk out the door. The "no loss of seniority" means nothing if one plans to never come back. Also, UA basically lied to their senior people by telling them if they retired before a certain date, their retiree medical would remain unchanged. Many people took UA's word and retired before that date to avoid the cost increases.
1. I know very well the difference between a Chapter 11 reorganization and a Capter 7 liquidation.
2. I told everyone that I was hoping that UAL would avoid Chapter 11. While many others did not, I WANTED UAL to get the ATSB loan. Why? Because as I said a couple of years ago, given UAs size, what happens there would impact everyone. What I said would happen is happening. UA went into bankruptcy court which has allowed management to go for the jugular. Now DL and NW want even more than what UA was able to get; thus the race to the bottom. It is my opinion AA will come back for more in some form or another; in fact I expect them to. It appears that some people are unhappy with the fact that AA people still have their pensions and post retirement benefits intact and are in fact praying for AA to file so we can lose them just as they did.
Stratoboozer
Member
- Jul 22, 2004
- 16
- 0
I normally don't like to jump into touchy subjects like pensions, furloughs, finances, etc. But being through the last 5 years at UA has been absolutely the most daunting of my career, yet the ones that are still around (and the folks we've lost over the years), still keeping UA flying and are persevering, keeping that level of hope that someday we'll turn the corner and come out strong again. Huge sacrifices made by many, myself included, whether it was giving up pay, pensions, work rules, or everything will always be embedded in our memories but whether we like it or not... we had to move forward and onward. It was no joke that UA was close to closing the book on a 75+ year history, but I feel we have turned that corner and signs point to a clearer future. I don't wish ill will on anyone, including our competition, because it really comes down to the people just trying to earn a good living. But hearing, seeing, and reading constant crud of anti-UA cheerleaders wishing for our demise over the years makes me sick that some people don't realize what was and is at stake. PEOPLE'S LIVES. This company isn't perfect, and I haven't seen one yet that is, but I'm doing my job to keep the spirit alive... to do the job that I was hired to do, to give the best service to our customers and get them from A to B as safely and quickly as possible, day in, day out. Personally, yeah it sucks that my DB pension is gone and I'm working more for less, but what can I do? Fight a battle that isn't winable? I'd rather see UA be around for another 20 years than 2. The hardest thing for me to do during this whole ordeal was to remain optimistic. I'm beginning to see the payoff now...
Cheers
Cheers
maddogdriver
Member
- Feb 14, 2004
- 54
- 3
aafsc:
I apologize for the previous sarcasm, but you did refer to "liquidation" rather than "chpt 11". Some people really don't get the Chpt 11 thing....and that's frustrating when you've sacrificed as Stratoboozer perfectly wrote.
I apologize for the previous sarcasm, but you did refer to "liquidation" rather than "chpt 11". Some people really don't get the Chpt 11 thing....and that's frustrating when you've sacrificed as Stratoboozer perfectly wrote.
JetClipper
Advanced
- May 2, 2004
- 149
- 0
Yeah, but it's even easier when you employ a bunch of near scabs who buckle at the blowing of the wind... Right Mr. AMR employee?
It’s always someone else’s fault, isn’t it?
For as long as I’ve been reading and posting on this board, you’ve been blaming United’s failure (yes, failure; Chapter 11 was just the outcome) on everyone from the ATSB to Northwest and the low-cost carriers. Now you’re after American’s workers, which, in my opinion, is a little bit like saying a whale pissing in the ocean caused a tsunami.
United’s failure was the result of years of largesse on the part of both management and labor (remember Dubinsky’s comment about choking the goose) and refusing to recognize the threat low-cost carriers represented. Those who do not learn from history are bound to repeat it.
Yes, United did have an operating profit; good for them. However, I still question some of the assumptions their post-bankruptcy business plan is based on (e.g. oil returning to $50/barrel, domestic revenue growth, etc.). Time will tell if they can adjust accordingly when things don’t go as planned, or go right back to blaming everyone else for their woes.
Why did UAL go BK? Simply put, our costs exceed our revenue. Not only that, our cost exceeded our revenue by a wider margin than at some of the other airlines. Why? If you take out the effect of higher pay rates at UAL, it can be CLEARLY seen that UAL would NOT have been the first to go. It would have likely been AMR. So you are correct, UAL's failure was largely UAL's fault since we didn't recognize the spineless nature of the AMR, CAL and NWA labor groups. In all honesty, I advocated giving the company the lower of CAL's rates, AMRs Rates, NWA's rates, or our contract rates. I personally wanted to take away the incentive of the more spineless groups to sit happily on their thumbs while UAL and DAL carried the banner of industry pay rates on their shoulders alone. Was very low pay rates on the part of the LCC's also a problem? Certainly, however, the most damage was done by (IMO) AMR and NWA with it's predatory refusal to raise fares, subsidized by cheap, spineless labor.
In truth, it's irrelevant. You got what you wanted. UAL went BK, the employees lost their retirements and ownership of the company. And you got a no win situation. You so aSStutely point out that UAL planned for fuel at $50 a barrel (never mind the "mean reverting" historical nature of fuel, I'm sure it'll stay at $60 ). Yet UAL posted an operating profit in Q3. This is before every last dime is wrung out of BK, so costs may decrease even more after BK. Meanwhile, AMR has exhausted credit, and what will be a smaller cash balance than UAL after UAL's exit, and you point out that oil is above $60.... Who do you think $60 oil is REALLY bad for? UAL with new financing and boat loads of cash, or AMR with every single paper clip financed to the hilt, pension obligations, and bad financial results. Good luck with that...
Let's face it. There is a lot of animosity towards the AMR Sky Nazi's at UAL. The same applies to NWA and CAL. I listened to the comments on the NAT tracks. I endured so called friends from AMR tell me UAL should go away while they undercut industry wages (AGAIN....). I watched is disbelief AMR and NWA literally lobby the government against UAL's loan. They didn't write the law. Congress did, and did it while representing the people of the U.S. Yet these two clown companies decided to circumvent Congressional intent and lobby against UAL. A better call would have been to mind your own f'in business. But you didn't. Now it gets to be YOUR turn. You will join NWA within the next two years in BK. Mark my word, put it on your calendar.
AMR has a history of being predatory. Just look what they did to Braniff. In the past they picked battles they could win. This time they didn't. They screwed the pooch. They bet it all on red in it came up black. Call it whatever you'd like, but UAL SURVIVED. And now they are p1ssed, and looking for payback. The next 2 years will be a VERY long two years for AMR. Even if the price of oil goes down, I honestly don't see UAL making huge profits while letting NWA and AMR off the hook. UAL will price to make a modest profit and make AMR/NWA bleed. It will be interesting indeed. Congrats, you won, UAL went BK. Now you get to live with it.
But just to be clear, after AMR goes BK, you will be openly pronouncing that AMR FAILED, and it did it on it's own, not because of what UAL is about to do to it, won't you?
Where have you been the last couple of years? How can you say AA refused to raise fares? Everyone knows that AA is the industry leader in trying to raise them. Nearly ALL the fare raising initiatives came from AA. It is also common knowledge that NW would NEVER follow AA's lead. Do you also remember USAir's "Go fares"?. Or how about Delta's "simplifares"? And lets not forget SW, AirTran,Jetblue, Frontier, Spirit, Song, and TED.
Subsidized by cheap labor? Hardly. In 2001, AA employees (except the pilots) had industry leading payrates amongst the legacies. Carty offered the pilots parity with UA and DL but the pilots held out for more. Then, shortly thereafter, the bottom fell out after 9/11 and it was obvious that they were not going to get parity.
As you pointed out, the UA employees lost their pensions and ESOP. But if you think the vast majority of the other airlines' employees take pleasure from it, you are dead wrong. I have a relative who is a retired UA pilot who lost his pension and ESOP. I also have friends that work there.
In my opinion, there is a 50/50 chance of AA filing for Ch11. AA has had a couple of quarters of small net profits, a few quarters of operating profits, and a healthy string of quarters with a positive cash flow. AA has done far more than any other legacy in terms of changing the way it operates. But it needs to do a lot more. UA filed for Ch11 because it was evident that it would not have enough cash to satisfy obligations coming due. Too much cash flew out the door in a short space of time. Snapback+the raises+summer of 2000+911= bleeding to death. That is why UA filed, not because of AA or it's employees or any other airline or it's employees.
If you honestly think that's true, then I'd suggest your time would be better spent in a Community College Accounting course than on the forum.
CruelSummer
Member
- Oct 6, 2005
- 77
- 0
I'm glad someone is seeing the glass half-full here.
The naysayers might see this as a spinning of the numbers, but I see it as a step in the right direction.
Let's enjoy this one while we can!
maddogdriver
Member
- Feb 14, 2004
- 54
- 3
Salmon37:
This explains it. Busdrvr is right. It's fundamental accounting.
From MarketWatch.com:
"All of the quarter's restructuring charge -- $1.7 billion -- was linked to non-cash aircraft rejection charges, set aside to meet creditors' claims against the company.
UAL said these claims typically settle for less than what creditors originally filled with the bankruptcy court. As such, the company said it expects to see most of the $1.7 billion returned as a gain when it exits bankruptcy, adding that it is primarily an accounting exercise unlikely to have much impact the company's cash position."
This explains it. Busdrvr is right. It's fundamental accounting.
From MarketWatch.com:
"All of the quarter's restructuring charge -- $1.7 billion -- was linked to non-cash aircraft rejection charges, set aside to meet creditors' claims against the company.
UAL said these claims typically settle for less than what creditors originally filled with the bankruptcy court. As such, the company said it expects to see most of the $1.7 billion returned as a gain when it exits bankruptcy, adding that it is primarily an accounting exercise unlikely to have much impact the company's cash position."
