Alabama Retirement Head Threatens Liquidation

[Oliver Stone''s Apprentice]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/7/2002 12:27:40 PM gogogadget wrote:

It is a tactic, although effective, to put the squeeze on employee emotions to get what tye want.

PERIOD!

----------------
[/blockquote]

Well, there were a lot of people on this forum who thought threatening Ch.11 was just a tactic.

ooops.

It wasn't....

I've said it before, and I'll say it again -- don't underestimate Bronner.

Bronner in some ways is Frank Lorenzo, Carl Icahn, and Jack Welch combined. All three of them were shrewd businessmen who made millions, and didn't take crap from labor.

Personally, and without malice, I see liquidation coming rather quickly if the unions don't jump onboard. Quickly. Cash reserves are at the point where there won't be a prolonged death like Eastern or TWA...

 

[AOG-N-IT]

I have to agree. The Bronner Threat is not going to fair well. Simply put....almost every union I know of has gone on record saying that further concessions to achieve the newest $200 Million figure they are asking for....Is directly linked to shared concessionary moves in terms of " Real Money" and a shared timeframe of the shared burden by the other Unions...as well as Management.

 

[delldude]

[STRONG]time to send in the clowns.......i'm overloaded with this crap.....end of event.......[/STRONG]

 

[pitguy]

I was told years ago by a friend to view pilots as management with a organization to help them with company matters since they are spread all out.


--We need to hurry up and get through this 2nd round of concessions so we can start on the 3rd round.


--Top secret plan unveiled----Rumor has it from unnamed sources that they are priming us to be part of the Wal-Mart corporation. Soon we will all be issued the little orange vests that say ' How may I help you?' on them.

-----Wal-Mart Airlines--------

I hope we get a discount in their stores.

 

[ExitPointer]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/8/2002 2:22:32 AM AOG-N-IT wrote:

Here again...Pilots will not be outsourced ...nor will flight attendants. But everyone else is subject to whatever direction the company chooses to take. This simply doesn't fly....and nobody with a sense of loyalty to themselves or thier co-workers in the non-flying groups should buy off on this..let alone endorse it.

--------
[/blockquote]

True, the flight attendants can not be outsourced; we simply get fired. Flight Attendants accounted for over 33% of the 2500 recently announced
layoffs, giving an approximately $30,000,000 in savings to the company annually by staffing our aircraft with FAR skeleton minimums. Additionally, the company mandates 20 million plus more in productivity givebacks...no credit is given for the minimum staffing/furloughs.

AOG, the flight attendants are subject to whatever direction the company chooses to take; no we can't be outsourced, but we are hurting.

 

[N786P]

It all sounds alot like a re-vist to Eastern, like someone else commented beter to die on your feet than on your knees...

 

[deelmakur]

The fox is in the henhouse. As has been pointed out, because of the way DIP financing works, even if they tank the place, RSA will likely get its money out ahead of everybody but the IRS. They are there because management miscalculated. The last miscalculation was the abortive UA merger. Different management...same old problem. As they say, "it's the vision thing". Much has been said on these boards about the old Eastern. That is another monument to miscalculation. Since then, most airline people now believe a large airline can really cease to exist. One of the things that made the Eastern situation so hopeless was the endless rancor between labor and management. Bethune saw that at Continental, and effected a classic turnaround by first securing the trust of the employee group. Shugrue, who by that time was running the carcass of Eastern, tried to do it, but the old line employees never made the distinction between him and the, by then, departed, Lorenzo. With Bronner (by the way, has he ever run a business?) emasculating the management, and dividing the workforce with direct threats, it's kind of a long walk off the proverbial short pier. As a sidebar to all this, a rather interesting piece appeared in the Wall Street Journal this past week. It appears to be the beginning of the deconstruction of the Wolf legend, and started out by examining whether his earlier actions may have set UA on its present path. It went on to draw some parallels with USAirways. Makes for interesting reading, but doesn't put food on the table. Anyway,from one of the biggest fans of this airline, to the employee group I truly miss, as I take my business to other carriers (who, unlike your marketing people, thought enough of my, and my family's business to match my US1 FF status as an inducement to move), I wish you all the best of the season. I guess nobody made much money all those years, but it sure was fun.

 

[delldude]

[STRONG]expect mechanic and related to be at wal-mart.[BR]pilots can always get work as sky caps.[/STRONG]

 

[autofixer]

Sky caps make much more money than a RJ pilot. Besides, pilots already have the hat.

 

[cubfan02us]

Rumor is after preliminary talks with all labor
groups U is about 6 million short of the new target.

If anybody has any ideas please foward them to
the proper people...

 

[tug_slug]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/8/2002 1227 PM cubfan02us wrote:

Rumor is after preliminary talks with all labor
groups U is about 6 million short of the new target.

If anybody has any ideas please foward them to
the proper people...
----------------
[/blockquote]

Cubfan,

I havent heard of management making any sacrifices yet. What about the $6 million incentive bonus middle management just received?

 

[Rational Thought]

[BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][FONT color=#000000]----------------[BR]On 12/7/2002 745 PM MrMarky wrote:[/FONT][/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]
[BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"]
[P style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"][FONT color=#000000]Hi Rational,[BR][BR]Thanks for the information. I appreciate the details. The part I'm still looking for is whether RSA is only in it as far as the DIP they provided (in return for effective control of the company) and which they would likely recover in a Chapter 7 situation, or whether RSA has deeper investments in U which would likely be jeopardized in a Chapter 7 filing, such as the leases they hold on aircraft, etc. Normally I wouldn't expect the aircraft leases to result in that much liability because you could repo them and lease them to someone else to recover your investment. But in this market, they'd be stuck with aircraft they can't place with another customer, and its corresponding value on the resale market has also diminished substantially. [BR]----------------[BR][/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][BR]Don't have any info on that.[/P]
[BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][BR]----------------[BR]On 12/7/2002 745 PM MrMarky wrote:[BR][BR]The debtholders accepted the risk when they extended credit to the company. The employees OTOH, are stakeholders, not debt holders. Their livlihood is on the line as is their investment in their ongoing employment and eventual retirement. They have a major stake in the health and success of the company. The debtholders have no such equivelant investment. They have either provided goods, services or funding in exchange for a profit and with risk factors clearly identified before hand. This won't put them out on the street unless they're as mismanaged as the airline. Excepting of course the stockholders, who have already been screwed. But they had plenty of warning and it's much easier to dump your poorly invested stock than it is to dump your job.[BR]----------------[BR][BR][/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]Most of us with investments and pensions ARE invested in debt. It's in our insurance policies, our pension funds, and our mutual funds. Our companies invest excess cash in debt products and our governments do also. So, yes...my livelihood and that of most people is involved here. Albeit not as exposed idiosynchartic risk as that of an employee. Moreover, if our society was cavalier with debt and did not place negative ramifications to insolvency, all of us would become quite poor fairly fast. Our financial markets would quickly grind to a halt and that would be pretty aweful. Lastly, the world already has one country were failed business models are allowed to continue as zombies and insolvency does not result in a reallocation of assets or winding up of the firm. It's called Japan. And Germany is trying to join it.[BR][BR]So, as bad as it may sound, letting US Airways exit the market is how things are supposed to work. There really is no painless way for a country or industry to restructure its economy. But, the beauty of it is that we have these spells of discomfort and come out stronger on the otherside. No pain, no gain. That is why we don't make sneakers in the US...we make software.[BR][BR]I sympathise with what is happening at US. It is not fun. I've been there.[/FONT]
[P][/P]
[P][/P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][/BLOCKQUOTE][FONT face="Courier New"][/FONT]
[BLOCKQUOTE][/BLOCKQUOTE][FONT face="Courier New"][/FONT]

 

[AOG-N-IT]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/8/2002 8:37:18 AM ExitPointer wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
True, the flight attendants can not be outsourced; we simply get fired. Flight Attendants accounted for over 33% of the 2500 recently announced
layoffs, giving an approximately $30,000,000 in savings to the company annually by staffing our aircraft with FAR skeleton minimums. Additionally, the company mandates 20 million plus more in productivity givebacks...no credit is given for the minimum staffing/furloughs.

AOG, the flight attendants are subject to whatever direction the company chooses to take; no we can't be outsourced, but we are hurting.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Exit Pointer , Dear friend...my failure to include you AFA folks in line with the rest , was purely an oversight of the late hour in which I made the post.

I have gone on record a few times about my stedfast support of how the AFA has responded to the companies demands!! Trust me!! I think you folks are the cats meow for taking a stand!!

I realize exactly how you are being asked to operate..and I realize exactly the losses your group have taken in kind. Just remember , You folks do have the FAR's to keep you from being abolished or outsourced..and that in itself is a small degree of safety that your group has over the rest.

In the past I have viewed the AFA as a "Tag-Along" in some respects with the pilots. I never understood why? Because the differences in benefits is absolutely staggering. The AFA has broken that mold now..and I applaud your efforts for taking Managment to task. This burden is either to be shared on a fare and equitable level..or let Bronner do his worst!! It certanly can't be anymore miss directed than our managments best efforts. I still think the end result will be the same...unless a mracle takes place soon.

Sorry for the omission of your group in my expressed thoughts!!!

 

[ExitPointer]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/8/2002 5:52:52 PM chipmunn wrote:
termination".


IAM-FSA & CWA - The Rez personnel will see a reduction in work force due to the MCO Rez facility closure. The non-hub/focus city airport CSA & FSA employees need to reach an accord to try and preserve jobs due to RJ outsourcing, otherwise the these work groups will see further furloughs due to affiliate/wholly owned RJ expansion and in the near future the agreement between ALPA and the company to have a separate EMB-170 and EMB-175 mainline RJ division (this will be in addition to the new minimum fleet count of 279 A-318 aircraft and above.

...

The sad truth is the company has the options to lower employee expense and the issue is where do the unions want their cuts to come from? In addition, we could see the company offer furloughed employees “soft landing” opportunities in the new mainline EMB-170/EMB-175 mainline division.

----------------
[/blockquote]

Chip,

Would you be so kind as to more fully explain the "mainline division" plans for the RJs and A318(?). The local LEC AFA office seemed pretty confused as to the meaning of the "new" minimum fleet size.

Also, the AFA has stated that the new F/A staffing parameters would not be "credited" as savings to the flight attendants per the new management request for concessions. Has this changed?

And while I have your attention, do you happen to have any insight as to which "me too" clauses are under assault?

Best.

 

[chipmunn]

In my opinion, labor has very little negotiating leverage and the employee cost cuts are going to come one way another. Here's why:

ALPA - Today I talked with members of the MEC and the company provided a counter proposal. The new agreement should result in modest W-2 cuts, work rule/benefit changes, and an agreement with the PBGC to preserve the retirement plan with modifications.

AFA - The F/A's will see about a 13% headcount reduction with 810 employees furloughed per Sherry Hendry's November 26 letter due to the In-flight Department transitioning to FAR minimum staffing. In addition, the AFA will see contract changes due to their "me too" clause with ALPA. The only question for the AFA may be their pension. If the AFA fails to reach a pension accord, they run the risk of the PBGC exercising a "distressed termination".

IAM-FSA & CWA - The Rez personnel will see a reduction in work force due to the MCO Rez facility closure. The non-hub/focus city airport CSA & FSA employees need to reach an accord to try and preserve jobs due to RJ outsourcing, otherwise the these work groups will see further furloughs due to affiliate/wholly owned RJ expansion and in the near future the agreement between ALPA and the company to have a separate EMB-170 and EMB-175 mainline RJ division (this will be in addition to the new minimum fleet count of 279 A-318 aircraft and above.

IAM-M - The mechanics have experienced a productivity hit with the closure of the TPA hangar and the transfer of work to PIT and CLT. The company has announced the transferred work will be completed with fewer employees. If the IAM-M does not reach a work rule and benefit concession accord, this group who has the second highest pension fund, could see the company seek a "distressed termination" of their plan.

The sad truth is the company has the options to lower employee expense and the issue is where do the unions want their cuts to come from? In addition, we could see the company offer furloughed employees “soft landingâ€￾ opportunities in the new mainline EMB-170/EMB-175 mainline division.

Also noteworthy, US Airways and its unions will know more about the future of the company after the December 12 Omnibus Hearing and the December 20 RSA deadline to submit the final Plan of Reorganization.

Chip