A Hope For A Great 2004!

[orwell]

"Focus on the positive?"

This company cares only about profits and shareholders, we are the necessary evil
that enable AA to sell its product and sell it where it's attractive to use the product and yes to buy stock.

News flash: Profits = paychecks. No - seriously - they really do! I'm not joking!

And you know what that means? Why, that means profits are - gasp - one of the positives that everyone should be focused on.

Anyone who thinks a company's number-one priority should NOT be profits should go join a commune. When will you realize that profits help YOU, the worker?

Now, ensuring that they are distributed in an ethical manner which also allows the entire company to grow is another story, and of course is essential as well. Those are two separate arguments, though.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

"Focus on the positive?"

This company cares only about profits and shareholders, we are the necessary evil
that enable AA to sell its product and sell it where it's attractive to use the product and yes to buy stock.

News flash: Profits = paychecks. No - seriously - they really do! I'm not joking!

And you know what that means? Why, that means profits are - gasp - one of the positives that everyone should be focused on.

Anyone who thinks a company's number-one priority should NOT be profits should go join a commune. When will you realize that profits help YOU, the worker?

Now, ensuring that they are distributed in an ethical manner which also allows the entire company to grow is another story, and of course is essential as well. Those are two separate arguments, though.

OK orwell, I'll "buy" your above post.

However, I'm sure you wont mind if "hopeful, or myself, or anybody on here, should AA do a "dirty deed #2", loudly remind you, "WE TOLD YOU SO" ??????

Arpey's recent statement "That we're all done running from low cost competiters", IS going to come at a cost, to US EMPLOYEES.
That sir, you may "take to the bank".

NH/BB's

 

[Hopeful]

ORWELL:
I am right in stating the company only cares about profits and shareholders!
THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT EMPLOYEES----NO, SERIOUSLY, THEY DON'T!


PROFITS = PAYCHECKS?

WHAT'S THIS INGENIOUS STATEMENT?

Companies don't exist to provide people jobs. But when you take advantage of the people whom you have given jobs that is unjustified.

Wait til they go after our pensions! But I guess ORWELL subscribes to the belief that companies don't owe employees pensions, or maybe even medical benefits for that matter!
I never said I didn not want AA to be profitable. But we're locked into a debacle of a contract for five more years, do you think we'll reap the benefits?

 

[orwell]

OK orwell, I'll "buy" your above post.

However, I'm sure you wont mind if "hopeful, or myself, or anybody on here, should AA do a "dirty deed #2", loudly remind you, "WE TOLD YOU SO" ??????

Arpey's recent statement "That we're all done running from low cost competiters", IS going to come at a cost, to US EMPLOYEES.
That sir, you may "take to the bank".

NH/BB's

When you say it that way, it almost sounds like you're happy about bad news - "I told you so."

Think about it this way - we all know both union and mgmt have made huge errors in the not-so-distant past. But that doesn't change the fact that the commodity carriers are here to stay, and the fact that customers care only about price - yes, many even put it above safety, though few would admit it.

So, if our price per tkt will NEVER be what it used to, because commodity carriers are growing like weeds, it's just simple math to acknowledge costs must be lowered. Therefore, "I told you so" might be right. I mean - if AA continues to run from commodity carriers, they'll end up shrinking to zero.

I agree with you 100% if you're saying it must be done fairly. But to argue that workers should be guaranteed raises while revenue continues to deteriorate is just wildly wishful thinking, unless of course the company is to live on credit until it finally dies.

The only hope I see is if business travelers come back big-time. The one exception to the rule that customers only give a rat's about fare is when they're spending SOMEONE ELESE's money. Then, suddenly things like more room and assigned seating matter.

Also, if UA were to go bye bye, that would buy lots of time, but still would not be a permanent fix, as commodity carriers would continue to grow at cancerous rates. And UA ain't going bye-bye anyway - bankruptcy is apparently so much fun that they were able to give birth to Ted, who, if you listen to them, is going to save the world.

 

[orwell]

ORWELL:
I am right in stating the company only cares about profits and shareholders!
THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT EMPLOYEES----NO, SERIOUSLY, THEY DON'T!


PROFITS = PAYCHECKS?

WHAT'S THIS INGENIOUS STATEMENT?

Companies don't exist to provide people jobs. But when you take advantage of the people whom you have given jobs that is unjustified.

Wait til they go after our pensions! But I guess ORWELL subscribes to the belief that companies don't owe employees pensions, or maybe even medical benefits for that matter!
I never said I didn not want AA to be profitable. But we're locked into a debacle of a contract for five more years, do you think we'll reap the benefits?

If they don't care about employees, why are there such things as extended flight benefits, and the home computers that were doled out a few years back. What about things like free domestic nonrev travel? I guess none of that counts. I guess you think those are things OWED to employees, right?

You were musing what I thought a company owed an employee - and the answer is it owes them exactly what they're worth. There can be injustice on both sides of the equation. You know darn well there are legions of employees that don't do anywhere near the work they're paid to do, and of course there are workers who have made huge sacrifices.

I agree with you 100% that those who make sacrifices should be rewarded accordingly and in proportion when things turn around. It would be nice if we could at least wait until things do turn around (If they ever do) before screaming bloody murder.

 

[FWAAA]

There's a fancy-pants English-teacher name for the style of argument put forth above by NHBB that I forgot many years ago - but in plain terms, it rests on a false premise: that AMR is coming back to get more from the employees, when there has been no evidence that is the case.

USAir, on the other hand, is rumored to be coming around, hat in hand, for the third or fourth time (I've lost count).

And if any airline goes Ch 7 in the next year or two, it will probably be USAir, not UAL.

 

[orwell]

There's a fancy-pants English-teacher name for the style of argument put forth above by NHBB that I forgot many years ago - but in plain terms, it rests on a false premise: that AMR is coming back to get more from the employees, when there has been no evidence that is the case.

USAir, on the other hand, is rumored to be coming around, hat in hand, for the third or fourth time (I've lost count).

And if any airline goes Ch 7 in the next year or two, it will probably be USAir, not UAL.

Hmmm...there's probably several choices, but "poisoning the well" comes to mind...


Agreed on US, and - nothing against US, but if they go out of business, I don't see that as "helping" the other legacy carriers all that much. I guess it could help DL in the Northeast a bit.

 

[Hopeful]

Read what I wrote. "Snapback of some sort."
Now you're saying unrealistic snapback. I didn't.
What I read here from pro-company posters is that in order to survive, companies can get these concessions from employees and retain the right to give nothing in return. Look at what AA received form the TWU. They claimed they needed $620,000,000.00 in concesions. Like asses, we gave it all to them.

But, Orwell, you do know that this $620,000,000.00 DID NOT INCLUDE LAYOFFS?
Layoffs were not included in the prepacked concession agreement. I believe this was the case in both the pilot's and f/a's agreements as well. Not being an MBA from the Wharton School of Business, a peon like me could see that the TWU probably donated $900,000,000-$1,000,000,000.00 in concessions when you consider layoffs and everything attached to those jobs.

American used the situation to go after something they have wanted to for years and have been unable to so because of the pre 2001 record profits they enjoyed.

THEY WENT AFTER OUR CONTRACTS!

Some highlights for you, Orwell!

TWU AGREEMENT.

1....17% paycuts
2....One week vacation loss per employee
3....5 uniforms returned to company
4....end of company paid laundering
5....No more double time wages
6....Paid holidays down to 5 from 10
7....Holidays paid at time and a half rather double time and a half
8....Sick day accrual down to 5 days from 12
9....First 2 sick days of each occurence paid at 50%
11...Paltry shift differentials of $.51 for afternoons and $.58 for midnights reduced
$.02 and $.03, respectively. (THIS ONE IS A BIGGIE, NO?)
12...IOD compensation, AA only pays 20 days, down from 80.

Sounds to me like American went after the contract, not just short term solutions.

Orwell, what do you think the company is going to do at the end of five years when this debacle expires?

They will use all these concessions and make them BARGAINING CHIPS all over again. After decades of collective bargaining, we get to beg for them ALL OVER AGAIN.

I ask you , Orwell, what's more unrealistic?
A "snapback of some sort" or politely breaking the unions?

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

orwell,

I too am ANXIOUSLY awaiting your answer to Hopefuls question !!!!!!!!!

NH/BB's

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Read what I wrote. "Snapback of some sort."
Now you're saying unrealistic snapback. I didn't.
What I read here from pro-company posters is that in order to survive, companies can get these concessions from employees and retain the right to give nothing in return. Look at what AA received form the TWU. They claimed they needed $620,000,000.00 in concesions. Like asses, we gave it all to them.

But, Orwell, you do know that this $620,000,000.00 DID NOT INCLUDE LAYOFFS?
Layoffs were not included in the prepacked concession agreement. I believe this was the case in both the pilot's and f/a's agreements as well. Not being an MBA from the Wharton School of Business, a peon like me could see that the TWU probably donated $900,000,000-$1,000,000,000.00 in concessions when you consider layoffs and everything attached to those jobs.

American used the situation to go after something they have wanted to for years and have been unable to so because of the pre 2001 record profits they enjoyed.

THEY WENT AFTER OUR CONTRACTS!

Some highlights for you, Orwell!

TWU AGREEMENT.

1....17% paycuts
2....One week vacation loss per employee
3....5 uniforms returned to company
4....end of company paid laundering
5....No more double time wages
6....Paid holidays down to 5 from 10
7....Holidays paid at time and a half rather double time and a half
8....Sick day accrual down to 5 days from 12
9....First 2 sick days of each occurence paid at 50%
11...Paltry shift differentials of $.51 for afternoons and $.58 for midnights reduced
$.02 and $.03, respectively. (THIS ONE IS A BIGGIE, NO?)
12...IOD compensation, AA only pays 20 days, down from 80.

Sounds to me like American went after the contract, not just short term solutions.

Orwell, what do you think the company is going to do at the end of five years when this debacle expires?

They will use all these concessions and make them BARGAINING CHIPS all over again. After decades of collective bargaining, we get to beg for them ALL OVER AGAIN.

I ask you , Orwell, what's more unrealistic?
A "snapback of some sort" or politely breaking the unions?

Hopeful,
Even though I came to this conclusion YEARS ago,
I'll put "this" out here, one more time.

It's not that you, or I, or a few(very few) other guys, are smarter than other posters here(FWAAA) etc., It's comes down to a "PHILOSOPHICAL" difference.

From where we're from, were taught that if;
1. If you "push" us, we'll push you(back) HARDER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2. If you "disrespect us, we'll disreprect you MORE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
etc, etc.

others(from different parts of the USA) take the "position", that if you,
"Jam it in my shorts", I'll loudly protest, and be upset !!!!!!!!!!

The difference ????

Bottom line(No matter how you "slice it"), certain people wind up "taking it in the shorts"

 

[JFK777]

Profits = money for new 737-800, no new 738 in over 2 years. No profits= no more new 777's. no profit - sharing for employees. AA has 350 MD-80's, the replacing needs to start soon since some are nearly 20 years old. Most should be replaced with 738, but some could replaced with a smaller type. Profits fund the future of any business including raises for the workers and their expensive health insurance benefits( this can be from $4,000 for a single person to $12,000 for a family with children, annually). If your health insurance is too expensive don't blame AA, call your congessman( physician's liability insurance causes the massive increases). Profits are good for everyone.

 

[Hopeful]

JFK777: I don't care too much about new aircraft. and I would love to see these big raises we're gonna see when American is profitable. Do you mean the 1 1/2%
increase the TWU is going ot get in 2004. That comes out to anwhere from $.10 to $.30 an hour fro members.
You're living in a dream world if you think AA is going to spread the wealth with us when they return to profitability.
You also seem to forget that all the concessions we gave back are somehow going to be restored and packaged in a nice box with fancy wrappijng paper.

This company will not restore anything unless there's a paypack attached to it.

Let's not forget the whopping 6 1/2% raise OVER SIX YEARS we had contract before last.

But there is still enough money in the kitty for executive country club memberships
I see.

 

[LiveInAHotel]

Some people to this day can't figure out why AA is known as the "Sky Naazis!" I just enjoy my new work rules and pay scale (from the late 80's early 90's). We will never see the money we gave up comeback to us. Even know some of the concessions votes were tainted! I just want to know how much APFA President John Ward was paid to sell us out? To think he is running for re-election as APFA President.

Now with rumors flying around that Arpey and his cronies may ask for more concessions, do you actually think 04' will be better?

 

[Hopeful]

LiveInaHotel:

There are those like Orwell and JFK777 who believe AA will share with us the rewards. They honeslty believe that AA will restore what we all gave up. We are going to have to beg like paupers to get back just a fraction of what we lost!

 

[JFK777]

Some will say workers gave up conncessions, they did. But from what point do you start counting? Remember the summer of 2000, James Goodwin was CEO at UA and the pilots got the bankruptcy causing 20+% raise. AA pilots eventually got a huge raise, pre 9/11, until early2003( pilots rode the ectra gravy train for 2 years). Then in March or April 2003 AA threatens CH11 and the pilots and other gave up wages( concessions).

IF you got a huge raise (an extraordinary amount in airline history), and then had to give back about the same amount, AA workers are about where they were in 1999 or early 2000( before UA bankrupting raise). I don't know the numbers but could some one out there please provide a realistic number for what their job was paying in 1999, 2000, 2002, & 2003? I would expect to see a raise then give backs. Airlines are unfortunately a lousy business making the oil countries richer. We all would love to make the wages of Regulation but that was when Ford and Carter ruled washington, another era.