eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
Onerous?... That's laughable.
Bad optics would be allowing one entity within AAG to remain with higher costs than another entity within AAG which does essentially the same work.
The ball's in the employees court. They can match the other wholly owned regional's cost structure, or they can be wound down. Seems like a pretty simple choice, and given the regional route slashing going on, I wouldn't count on it being a bluff. AAG doesn't need two wholly owned regionals, and they suppliers be willing to pick up the work that the Envoy employees think isn't worth what the outsiders are already getting paid...
Bad optics would be allowing one entity within AAG to remain with higher costs than another entity within AAG which does essentially the same work.
The ball's in the employees court. They can match the other wholly owned regional's cost structure, or they can be wound down. Seems like a pretty simple choice, and given the regional route slashing going on, I wouldn't count on it being a bluff. AAG doesn't need two wholly owned regionals, and they suppliers be willing to pick up the work that the Envoy employees think isn't worth what the outsiders are already getting paid...