American Airlines' Arpey gets hefty raise
- Thread starter AirLUVer
- Start date
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
Go ahead and harp on whatever you see as management failures, but at the end of the day, AMR avoided bankruptcy thru the vision of AMR's management team (and executed by the unions and employees). That's why you still have your pensions, and assuming you weren't an idiot and sold it the day your shares vested, you still have stock that's actually worth something.
If you're too damn stupid to realize you are better off today than you would have been facing a bankruptcy court, then I guess it's a good thing you have a union to represent your sorry ass.
And yes, UAL folks lost their pensions, primarily the pilots whose annual benefit exceeded the PBGC maximum guaranteed benefit. A majority of employees also took a fairly big hit in the form of ESOP shares, which were made worthless by the bankruptcy filing.
If you're too damn stupid to realize you are better off today than you would have been facing a bankruptcy court, then I guess it's a good thing you have a union to represent your sorry ass.
And yes, UAL folks lost their pensions, primarily the pilots whose annual benefit exceeded the PBGC maximum guaranteed benefit. A majority of employees also took a fairly big hit in the form of ESOP shares, which were made worthless by the bankruptcy filing.
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
Tell you what, moderAAtor.
Had AA given us either 4200 shares of stock each that I could've sold at the high of around $29, I would have recouped my $120,000 in pay and benefit cuts.
Either that, or I can just wait till the stock hits $269 a share to break even. (Which after inflation and medical increases, we would still be behind the eight ball.!
Instead I received 446 shares which at its high still would not recover one year of concessions.
And before you dislocate your shoulder patting yourself on your "I'm better than a union worker because I'm in management" back, AArogant AAirlines would not want a bankruptcy judge to look over their backs. And why should AA manangement desire bankruptcy with company unions on the property?
VISION OF AMR'S MANAGEMENT TEAM???????????????
WHAT A LAUGH?
DO YOU REALLY NEED AN MBA TO RUN AN AIRLINE WHEN ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS THREATEN YOUR COMPANY UNION JUST BY LIP SYNCHING THE PHRASE "CHAPTER 11?"
WHEN ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS SAY "WE HAVE TO DECIMATE YOUR CONTRACTS OR WE WILL HAVE A BANKRUPTCY JUDGE DO IT FOR YOU??
The vision was created years ago when the TWU leadership was put on AA's payroll.
AMERICAN AIRLINES WILL NEVER EVER EVER GO BANKRUPT!!!!!
DO YOU KNOW WHY???????????????????????????
BECAUSE THE TWU WILL HAVE US WORK FOR MINIMUM WAGE AND NO BENEFITS AS LONG AS THEY COLLECT UNION DUES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TIME FOR CHANGE
Veteran
So a company that is employee owned comes out of bankruptcy with a stock offering to the public at 40 dollars a share of which upper management is granted Millions of dollars worth and the employee now ownes nothing.
Management is good at one thing stealing
nothing more.
Everyone at UAL should have went on strike just to keep those thieving bastards from making more money off the backs of the emloyees.
It will be a lot easier for me to get a job making 60K than for them to get a job making 700K
"If" they would have gone BK it would not have made much of a difference. Up until that point in time (2003) even the carriers that were in BK were not able to get the concessions that AA got without going BK.
Not only would we have been better off rejecting the concessions, and if management is to be believed going to BK, but so would every other airline worker that gave concessions. After our concessions went through they all went for another round of cuts.If we had rejected the concessions and gone BK we probably would have ended up with less of a paycut. After AA got what they got how could the other unions, who were in front of the BK Judge say no? Jim Little was actually running around claiming that AA might go straight into liquidation instead of reorganiztion, another lie.
The fact is that AA had long term concessions in place, some from 1983(that the BK airlines were seeking in BK) and then in 2003, out of the blue, with the threat of BK, AA gets an additional 25% reduction. USAIR and UAL were only approaching AA labor costs in BK then AA took it another 25% lower. So yes, we would have been better off calling the company's bluff. Either way we lost more by setting the precident as far as concessions.
Sure we may still have an underfunded pension, but is worth giving up $120,000 every 6 years for a pension? If we took that money and put it in a 401K we would likely end up with a lot more than we would from the pension. In return for my $20,000/year paycut AA put $2000 into my pension, their numbers not mine.
So who is the stupid one here? Those who believe we did the right thing by giving away everything or those who think that we should not have. Whats to stop AA from getting out of the pension in 2008?
Hopeful
Veteran
- Dec 21, 2002
- 5,998
- 347
Bob, don't you know? According to the anti-unionist sentiment here, the pension will only be taken away from union workers, not management and non-union workers, because they are more important than anyone else in the airline.
Nor'Easta
Veteran
- Mar 8, 2006
- 510
- 1
operaations
Veteran
- Jul 31, 2003
- 562
- 0
local 12 proud
Veteran
- Mar 5, 2004
- 4,265
- 4
you really should get out from that cubicle once in awhile.
operaations
Veteran
- Jul 31, 2003
- 562
- 0
you average 82.75 posts a month and nearly 3 posts per day and you say I need to get out. wow that is rich
local 12 proud
Veteran
- Mar 5, 2004
- 4,265
- 4
Are you stalking me?...
wow, 3 posts per day now thats astronomical, completely off the charts, your worried about my time spent on these boards?...who is it that needs the prozac again?..
I'll bet that cross utilization leads the Company openers. I'll bet that the APFA will seriously entertain ways to "sell" the proposal. I'll bet that if a little money is thrown in for bait the AA f/as will say "ok", especially if the pensions are held sacred. As for AA expanding, they are still in transfer mode. ie moving more domestic to AE I'll bet if cross utilization is traded for extended recall and some cash there could be two different business "plans". 1. The Co. will go on and recall because the faster the TWA
f/as are recalled the faster AA can hire off the street. (and as my son so charmingly likes to remind me, most of us are so old we won't be here that long because we are older that dirt...ps I'm retired so I'm out of the equation" New hires are the cost savers..low pay, low pay, low pay. There are so few of us at the higher pay that we are now fairly insignificant to the overall bottom line. As for attitude, we have always been professionals and I have no doubt that you'll see anything less. When we came back from our 3 year strike, customer service ratings went up in direct proportion to how many were recalled. Ok, the other option is even with unlimited recall, AA will hold off recalling because with cross utilization you will probably require 2000 to 2500 less
f/as. And this is where the older than dirt equation really begins to play out. I also think you'll see quite a few not make it through training either for "medical" reasons or
training "issues". Just a guess on my part and a squat load of experience in contracts and second guessing openers. I haven't been wrong very often. I only wish THB had taken some of my suggestions for getting prepared after she took office and boy would I have loved to work on that project. I even offered "for free".
kirkpatrick
Veteran
Nancy,
I have a bit of a problem with predicting cross-utilization in the near future. Training thousands in wet ditching and all the other aspects of international flying would take many months, if not a couple of years, and would be very expensive. Maintaining everyone's qualification would add to the training budget in the future.
There is virtually no support for this in the active FA ranks; in fact, I think most are vehemently against it, just as we were before it was forced on us by Icahn's strike. The union is under no obligation to open contract negotiations early, or to quickly come to any agreement. Contracts traditionally take two years or even more after they become amendable. A major rewriting of the contract would be necessary to accommodate this.
I think if AA thought they could slash the workforce by another 2000 or so FA's they would have tried to do so long ago, yet no mention of cross-utilization seems to have been made in the last contract talks or in the concessionary talks. I brought this up before we were furloughed and a supervisor told me essentially what I mentioned above: the cost of training and maintaining qualifications would negate any slight increase in productivity.
It may happen some day, but it won't be soon.
MK
