LiveInAHotel
Veteran
- Nov 5, 2003
- 645
- 0
I just want to know what those two are smoking?Hopeful said:
A Hope For A Great 2004!
- Thread starter FibberMcGee
- Start date
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
JFK777:
The whole point of my posts are that AA used the economy and airline undustry to their advantage. They did not just go after wages. They went to the very heart of what was won in colledctive bargaining over decades. They sought to break the unions. Don't you realize that from this year on, all American has to do is threaten bankruptcy and the TWU will put their tails between their legs and roll over in submission. What future do we as employees have? Please don't tell me we're luck to have a job because if you did I would like to ask you at what point do you say enough is enough? Why didn't AA say we need 25% from all employees? Wht the one week vacation loss? Why the lousy $.51 and $.58 cents differntial pay for afts and midnights, respectively? Why the lousy $.01 (YES FOLKS THATS ONE CENT!)per hour for longevity? We were raped, plain and simple! No one argues American was in financial trouble, but to take what they did from us is unjustified and unfair.
The whole point of my posts are that AA used the economy and airline undustry to their advantage. They did not just go after wages. They went to the very heart of what was won in colledctive bargaining over decades. They sought to break the unions. Don't you realize that from this year on, all American has to do is threaten bankruptcy and the TWU will put their tails between their legs and roll over in submission. What future do we as employees have? Please don't tell me we're luck to have a job because if you did I would like to ask you at what point do you say enough is enough? Why didn't AA say we need 25% from all employees? Wht the one week vacation loss? Why the lousy $.51 and $.58 cents differntial pay for afts and midnights, respectively? Why the lousy $.01 (YES FOLKS THATS ONE CENT!)per hour for longevity? We were raped, plain and simple! No one argues American was in financial trouble, but to take what they did from us is unjustified and unfair.
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 10,154
- 681
JFK777,
(IMHO), by the slimmest of margin,
It was everything else we lost, EXCEPT THE MONEY(compensation), that COST US MORE, and as Hopeful has been UNSUCCESSFULLY trying to tell you, those things will NEVER return.
At least with the actual $$ money, we've got an outside chance of recovering some of it, over the years. MABEY !!!!!!!!!!!!!
NH/BB's
(IMHO), by the slimmest of margin,
It was everything else we lost, EXCEPT THE MONEY(compensation), that COST US MORE, and as Hopeful has been UNSUCCESSFULLY trying to tell you, those things will NEVER return.
At least with the actual $$ money, we've got an outside chance of recovering some of it, over the years. MABEY !!!!!!!!!!!!!
NH/BB's
jimntx
Veteran
Fibber, et al...
As the old saying goes, "Keep smiling. It makes people wonder what you've been up to." (Also, it drives them crazy, which is fun.)
Of course, I hope that AA does well in 2004. I'm about 400 from the top of the flight attendant furlough list. Maybe, maybe, maybe there will be another recall in 2004.
In the meantime, a fellow member of 2000-23 and I have decided to blow our December unemployment checks and go skiing for Christmas. The times call for a little irresponsible fun. Happy Holidays to all, and my very best wishes for the New Year.
As the old saying goes, "Keep smiling. It makes people wonder what you've been up to." (Also, it drives them crazy, which is fun.)
Of course, I hope that AA does well in 2004. I'm about 400 from the top of the flight attendant furlough list. Maybe, maybe, maybe there will be another recall in 2004.
In the meantime, a fellow member of 2000-23 and I have decided to blow our December unemployment checks and go skiing for Christmas. The times call for a little irresponsible fun. Happy Holidays to all, and my very best wishes for the New Year.
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
jimntx:
You keep saying it's driving us crazy this cheery upbeat outlook talk for 2004.
You're another one who is not understanding NH/BB's, LiveInaHotel, and my posts. What we are saying is that even if AA has a profitable 2004, they will be sharing NOTHING with the employees. That is being realistic, not optimistic. As a matter of fact they will be sharing NOTHING with us unless there is a concession attached.
REALISM IS NOT PESSIMISM!
You keep saying it's driving us crazy this cheery upbeat outlook talk for 2004.
You're another one who is not understanding NH/BB's, LiveInaHotel, and my posts. What we are saying is that even if AA has a profitable 2004, they will be sharing NOTHING with the employees. That is being realistic, not optimistic. As a matter of fact they will be sharing NOTHING with us unless there is a concession attached.
REALISM IS NOT PESSIMISM!
jimntx
Veteran
You just can't stand the idea of someone else disagreeing with you or having the last word, can you? Actually I wasn't talking about you at all. It's just a generic saying that I've heard all my life.Hopeful said:
Note for the future: There are ephemeral, fleeting moments in each and every day when it is not about you. Try to be aware of them.
Of course AA won't share anything with you, no matter how profitable 2004 is. You see, AA borrowed several billion dollars to cover the cash shortfall from mid-2001 to mid-2003.Hopeful said:
Your statement that AA won't share any profits with you is as obvious as saying "The sun will rise tomorrow in the east and set in the west."
AA will repay some of those borrowed billions (as well as contribute billions to your pension funds) before it gives any more cash to you. That's why your concessions were to run for 6 years. Even if AMR posts profits of $1 billion each year until then (something it has never done before - earn $1 billion for six straight years), that would only be enough to repay the money borrowed over the last 2 1/2 years to fund the cashflow shortfalls.
Whine about it all you want, but AA's debts ballooned in the past 30 months and there's no way a reasonable person could expect raises or bonuses until that's paid down, at least in part.
You are correct. Those would be the employees who agreed that some of their comp would be based on AA's financial performance.dogdriver said:
I'm certain that AA would have entertained an offer by the organized workgroups to base some of their comp on the financial performance for the next six years, but somehow I doubt very many of the unionized employees would have gone along with it. After all, sharing in the upside would be fine with them; but sharing in the downside is "unjustified and unfair." B)
Wrong FWAAA, the agreement did include such an option but it only kicks in after the company makes $500,000,000 in profits. 10% of the profits after Five Hundred Million gets put into a fund to be given out as profit sharing. But like dogdriver said, there wont be anything in there for us. As far as sharing in the downside what do you call a 17.5% paycut along with the loss of holiday pay, sick pay, vacation, shift differential, increased out of pocket for medical and thousands of layoffs?FWAAA said:
No, Mr Owens, you're mistaken. I'm not talking about the pathetic profit sharing incentive you described, I'm talking about making a significant portion of your 2003-2008 compensation contingent on financial performance - something I'm certain you (and your co-workers) would reject out of hand.Bob Owens said:
Something along the lines of a much larger hourly pay cut (as opposed to the 17.5%) in exchange for real upside potential, not the piddly $500 million profitsharing pool you ended up with.
Considering how little upside potential you received (for everything you gave up), I agree that your union leadership let you down (as well as the leadership of the APA and APFA). For what you gave up, you really should have gotten more long-term incentives.
What do I call the litany of items you gave up? A good start.
Hopeful said they were "unjustified and unfair." From your posts on the subject, it would be fair to say you agree with Hopeful, right?
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2003
- 5,311
- 584
- Banned
- #42
<_< Well people! Wait tell you see your next few paychecks! Those in JFK,& LAX, will be setting up one hella of a howel!!! That's when our new insurance rates kick in!!!!! Just another way a.a. will say "Happy New Year!!!!" Signed, Just another red headed stepchild!!!! :down:
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
FWAAA and jimntx: you're right we should all share in the downside:
Posted on Sun, Dec. 14, 2003
American executives should get higher pay
By Mitchell Schnurman
Star-Telegram Staff Writer
Gerard Arpey
Don Carty
American Airlines can't afford to give big raises to its managers, not politically, maybe not even financially.
But can American really afford not to?
American is paying way below market rates for its management team, so it's not surprising that a brain drain is under way at the world's largest airline.
The chief financial officer left in November. The head of the frequent-flier program recently went to Marriott. The guy overseeing AA.com left in September.
American has 47 officers, its highest rank for executives, and the company says that seven have left this year for jobs elsewhere. In 2000, when the economy was booming, just one American officer resigned.
If there's that much action among American's elite class, imagine the stirring in the middle levels.
A local recruiter told me that headhunters are circling the company like a pack of wolves around an injured caribou.
Despite American's brush with bankruptcy last spring, its managers are still highly regarded by corporate America. They're well-trained, well-educated and experienced in big deals.
Turnover at American is highest in the departments where skills easily transfer to other industries -- legal, finance, purchasing and sales.
The hits often have a domino effect, depleting the company's bench strength. After a senior executive went to AT&T, he reached back and recruited two top American alums. Kinko's recently hired three American finance managers, and 7-Eleven picked off two.
Early last week, four corporate salespeople had new offers.
Many workers at the airline would probably shrug their shoulders at these developments and say, "Good riddance." They would note that American's leaders haven't exactly delivered the goods the past few years, so they're probably being paid what they're worth.
There's an element of truth in this line of thinking. As you move up the executive food chain, more of the total pay package hinges on performance. American managers haven't received raises or bonuses for three years because the company has lost billions during that time.
It's starting to recover now, primarily because everyone agreed to give up a lot in pay, benefits and work rules. Union concessions, valued at about 25 percent of payroll, were key to American staving off bankruptcy.
Managers had to go along with the program -- to save money and to stand as a symbol of shared sacrifice.
Now there's a new reality, even if it's a hard one for the rank and file to swallow: American's managers are underpaid, often by 20 percent, maybe 50 percent.
That's what the market is saying -- in raw numbers, in the number of managers bolting.
Chief Executive Officer Gerard Arpey is being paid $513,700 this year, and he won't get a bonus or stock options. The median CEO salary and bonus last year was $1.8 million, according to a survey of 350 large companies by Mercer Human Resource Consulting for The Wall Street Journal.
Include the value of long-term pay incentives, such as stock options and stock grants, and the median value is nearly $8 million.
Jeff Campbell left American last month to become chief financial officer at McKesson Corp., a health care services company. Campbell's pay hasn't been disclosed yet, but I'm betting that he doubled his total package.
At American, he was paid less than Arpey this year. The median salary and bonus for corporate CFOs was $728,700, according to a recent Mercer survey. Campbell's predecessor at McKesson, William Graber, was paid $1.2 million, plus another $1.3 million in long-term incentives.
Those gaps are enormous, but within the depressed airline industry, they're not as great. At Southwest Airlines, for example, executives are paid about the same as American execs, but like other Southwest employees, they make it up with stock options.
Southwest's work culture and fast growth rates also make it an employer of choice.
Some leaders at American will simply accept the status quo, betting on a turnaround and a big payday down the road. Many others have already lost their patience.
Money isn't even the only reason for the exodus. It's also about limited opportunity.
Executives in their 40s are looking ahead to their most productive years, and it's disheartening to consider spending them at a shrinking company, in a shrinking part of the industry. In the past, American attracted top talent and retained it by offering a fast career path, not the highest salaries.
Now officials are emphasizing lateral movement and the chance to learn a broader range of skills, at least until the business cycle turns up and growth resumes.
American also has a continuing problem with a divisive culture. It has made progress in relationships with its unions, but there's still a deep resentment on both sides. Many executives are eager to just get away from it.
All this, plus the heated competition from discount carriers, makes American's turnaround a tough one. Recruiting managers to this kind of situation usually requires a significant premium.
In bankruptcy reorganizations, for example, companies often must offer a retention bonus to keep executives. That's what former American CEO Don Carty put in place about a year ago.
But Carty kept the bonuses secret, rather than sell them to the unions. When they were disclosed, he lost his job and the bonuses were canceled.
With that history, Arpey will have a hard time selling a bigger bonus plan for management today, or more stock options for the group.
Maybe he should plead the obvious: that the market is making him do it.
Most union workers could never match their American salaries in the open market because their pay systems are based on seniority. If they left, their careers would start over.
But many American managers have much richer choices. They can take a similar job elsewhere, with higher pay and better prospects.
That's the world American has to compete in, and it doesn't come cheap.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitchell Schnurman's column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. (817) 390-7821 [email protected]
Posted on Sun, Dec. 14, 2003
American executives should get higher pay
By Mitchell Schnurman
Star-Telegram Staff Writer
Gerard Arpey
Don Carty
American Airlines can't afford to give big raises to its managers, not politically, maybe not even financially.
But can American really afford not to?
American is paying way below market rates for its management team, so it's not surprising that a brain drain is under way at the world's largest airline.
The chief financial officer left in November. The head of the frequent-flier program recently went to Marriott. The guy overseeing AA.com left in September.
American has 47 officers, its highest rank for executives, and the company says that seven have left this year for jobs elsewhere. In 2000, when the economy was booming, just one American officer resigned.
If there's that much action among American's elite class, imagine the stirring in the middle levels.
A local recruiter told me that headhunters are circling the company like a pack of wolves around an injured caribou.
Despite American's brush with bankruptcy last spring, its managers are still highly regarded by corporate America. They're well-trained, well-educated and experienced in big deals.
Turnover at American is highest in the departments where skills easily transfer to other industries -- legal, finance, purchasing and sales.
The hits often have a domino effect, depleting the company's bench strength. After a senior executive went to AT&T, he reached back and recruited two top American alums. Kinko's recently hired three American finance managers, and 7-Eleven picked off two.
Early last week, four corporate salespeople had new offers.
Many workers at the airline would probably shrug their shoulders at these developments and say, "Good riddance." They would note that American's leaders haven't exactly delivered the goods the past few years, so they're probably being paid what they're worth.
There's an element of truth in this line of thinking. As you move up the executive food chain, more of the total pay package hinges on performance. American managers haven't received raises or bonuses for three years because the company has lost billions during that time.
It's starting to recover now, primarily because everyone agreed to give up a lot in pay, benefits and work rules. Union concessions, valued at about 25 percent of payroll, were key to American staving off bankruptcy.
Managers had to go along with the program -- to save money and to stand as a symbol of shared sacrifice.
Now there's a new reality, even if it's a hard one for the rank and file to swallow: American's managers are underpaid, often by 20 percent, maybe 50 percent.
That's what the market is saying -- in raw numbers, in the number of managers bolting.
Chief Executive Officer Gerard Arpey is being paid $513,700 this year, and he won't get a bonus or stock options. The median CEO salary and bonus last year was $1.8 million, according to a survey of 350 large companies by Mercer Human Resource Consulting for The Wall Street Journal.
Include the value of long-term pay incentives, such as stock options and stock grants, and the median value is nearly $8 million.
Jeff Campbell left American last month to become chief financial officer at McKesson Corp., a health care services company. Campbell's pay hasn't been disclosed yet, but I'm betting that he doubled his total package.
At American, he was paid less than Arpey this year. The median salary and bonus for corporate CFOs was $728,700, according to a recent Mercer survey. Campbell's predecessor at McKesson, William Graber, was paid $1.2 million, plus another $1.3 million in long-term incentives.
Those gaps are enormous, but within the depressed airline industry, they're not as great. At Southwest Airlines, for example, executives are paid about the same as American execs, but like other Southwest employees, they make it up with stock options.
Southwest's work culture and fast growth rates also make it an employer of choice.
Some leaders at American will simply accept the status quo, betting on a turnaround and a big payday down the road. Many others have already lost their patience.
Money isn't even the only reason for the exodus. It's also about limited opportunity.
Executives in their 40s are looking ahead to their most productive years, and it's disheartening to consider spending them at a shrinking company, in a shrinking part of the industry. In the past, American attracted top talent and retained it by offering a fast career path, not the highest salaries.
Now officials are emphasizing lateral movement and the chance to learn a broader range of skills, at least until the business cycle turns up and growth resumes.
American also has a continuing problem with a divisive culture. It has made progress in relationships with its unions, but there's still a deep resentment on both sides. Many executives are eager to just get away from it.
All this, plus the heated competition from discount carriers, makes American's turnaround a tough one. Recruiting managers to this kind of situation usually requires a significant premium.
In bankruptcy reorganizations, for example, companies often must offer a retention bonus to keep executives. That's what former American CEO Don Carty put in place about a year ago.
But Carty kept the bonuses secret, rather than sell them to the unions. When they were disclosed, he lost his job and the bonuses were canceled.
With that history, Arpey will have a hard time selling a bigger bonus plan for management today, or more stock options for the group.
Maybe he should plead the obvious: that the market is making him do it.
Most union workers could never match their American salaries in the open market because their pay systems are based on seniority. If they left, their careers would start over.
But many American managers have much richer choices. They can take a similar job elsewhere, with higher pay and better prospects.
That's the world American has to compete in, and it doesn't come cheap.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitchell Schnurman's column appears Wednesdays and Sundays. (817) 390-7821 [email protected]
planemech669
Member
Schnerman has the typical greedy american ideal here, and he's right. The only thing that fuels corprate america is greed. There never has been or never will be a corprate executive that has been installed because what he/she knows of the industry that he is going to. This is why executives can move from the airlines to telecommunication. They know nothing of the what it takes to keep a plane flying or a telephone working. They only know how to manipulate people.
And we are fools to let them do so.
And we are fools to let them do so.
jimntx
Veteran
Though I am sure there are some highly competent managers at AMR, it seems to me that the majority got to their current positions via their adeptness at derriere osculation. And, as someone who once worked as a headhunter, I doubt that the headhunters are circling AMR's executive suite these days. Headhunters are predominantly interested in picking off the prime meat from SUCCESSFUL companies. If there is an airline executive office (among the majors) that is being encircled, I would guess it is Continental.
Remember Continental? The company that has not furloughed a single flight attendant since 9/11, and has not asked for a dime in concessions from its employees. By the way, a friend of mine who is a f/a with them told me that he heard that CO is shooting for new-hire class in April or May of 2004!!!! I wonder how long it will take AMR to start hiring again with 6000+ f/a's on furlough these days (actually if you count the overage leaves--what CO calls voluntary furlough-- there almost 7500 AA flight attendants furloughed).
Remember Continental? The company that has not furloughed a single flight attendant since 9/11, and has not asked for a dime in concessions from its employees. By the way, a friend of mine who is a f/a with them told me that he heard that CO is shooting for new-hire class in April or May of 2004!!!! I wonder how long it will take AMR to start hiring again with 6000+ f/a's on furlough these days (actually if you count the overage leaves--what CO calls voluntary furlough-- there almost 7500 AA flight attendants furloughed).
