Once again you don't understand different comp strategies and how the TA is structured
We know when DL went through BK they were the only company to not restructure wages and debt - they just went through BK for the fun of it
Knowing they AA and DL went through BK at different times and at different inflection points in the economy there would be different outcomes
So with all the years DL was at depressed wages AA employees were making much more than DL however I don't think we were carping on for days weeks months etc about that
this is the closest thing you have said to being a verifiable statement.
and I don't agree that AA employees did retain their earnings while other employees - including DL - were cut in BK.
however, and this is absolutely relevant - AA employees took TWO rounds of cuts - first in 2003 and another in BK. DL and UA employees (and CO and NW) took only one (UA actually had a couple of smaller adjustments).
you may very well be right that net, net, AA employees came out better off since 2001 but I simply don't have the data to verify that... although it can be done.
thus, I won't deny that it is possible that AA employees in total fared better but I also will not say and haven't said that every AA's BK that it is known which workgroup actually came out ahead.
but AA employees did not enjoy profit sharing that DL employees have enjoyed for several years since BK. This year at $1B is by far the largest profit sharing for DL employees but the $500 from last year and the hundreds of millions in years before is still larger than what AA employees have received.
so, if you want to compare total compensation, then you have to include ALL of the profit sharing that DL employees have enjoyed - which started very soon after emerging from BK.
and the larger question is how AA will do in the future. Every industry analyst believes that the industry will be more profitable and more stable in the future than it was in the past.
If AA employees are giving up profit sharing in the future because they retained higher compensation in the past (which may or may not be true), then the chances are that AA employees will come up with less in total.
Does it not surprise you that Parker is HAPPY to not have to pay profit sharing at a time when every other airline is including it?
of course he is because in the long run, the chances are very high that total compensation will be higher WITH profit sharing.
again, WN employees will likely see larger total compensation even with very small pay increases because they also have strong profit sharing.
finally, if AA is really on the verge of facing much higher revenue pressures in its key markets than other carriers because of Latin America, DFW, and DCA, then AA employees might well be better off by not holding out for profit sharing.
time will tell.
the chances are far better than other airline employees and other carriers will fare better off than AA and their employees will - and it is directly tied to each company's performance in the market.
