Bill, you make the same point that I have long made about our situation. DOH would not have been appropriate. Slotting would have been.
American management and unions meet about possible merger
- Thread starter FWAAA
- Start date
Bill, you make the same point that I have long made about our situation. DOH would not have been appropriate. Slotting would have been.
AA, UAL, BA and Virgin will still control the prime arrival and departure slots. Many of the new carriers into LHR have paid top dollar for some less than prime arrival and departure slots. Its one thing to be able to get you there, its another to be able to do in the peak arrival, departure, and connecting times.
I WOULD NOT ASSUME THAT AA IS THE ACQUIRER.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #34
The one thing I always wonder about is whether any legacy carrier merging with AS would face some difficulties due to AS' intra-Alaska operation. That non-lower 48 operation is pretty unique and unlike about anything that any of the legacies operate (and not just because of the weather/extreme cold). How many yield management departments work with cargo/pax space on a combi, for example.
In my view, anyone wanting to buy AS better be prepared to retain a lot of the operating experience unique to AS' operation - the more typical "We know better" attitude might just be a mistake.
Jim
In my view, anyone wanting to buy AS better be prepared to retain a lot of the operating experience unique to AS' operation - the more typical "We know better" attitude might just be a mistake.
Jim
AA has people out on furlough from the last merger / acquisition / purchase / rape - whatever you want to call it. Do you really believe AA will get any support from any union or government official for another merger / acquisition / purchase / rape?
You are joking, I hope.
Please ......... don't put another group of employees through what you put the former TWA people through.
It's unethicAAl.
With that said, I agree that another acquisition is done more fairly. However, some of these TWA people are an embarrassment to their own group. The one that claims to be an activist with the handle nmbq seems to always be on the keyboard complaining, whining, blaming others for the last several years - doesn't realize how much more harm and embarrassment she has caused to that group. Although, she isn't anymore embarrasing than having a scab as the elected union rep of stl.
AA has people out on furlough from the last merger / acquisition / purchase / rape - whatever you want to call it. Do you really believe AA will get any support from any union or government official for another merger / acquisition / purchase / rape?
You are joking, I hope.
Please ......... don't put another group of employees through what you put the former TWA people through.
It's unethicAAl.
I agree that a more fair way of seniority integration should have happened. However, the embarrassment that some of the TWA people and the one with the handle nmbq has brought upon their own group hasn't helped bring them any sympathy. Claiming to be an activist, seems to spend more time on the keyboard whining, complaining and blame others rather than doing any real work. Although, no more embarrassing than having a scab as the base rep and chair.
Its always fun to watch the new know it all, show how much they don't know. I challenge you to actually read more than 2 of Nancys post's and then post that kind of dribble.
True, but there are more than few old hands at AA who do daily "crunches/push-ups/pull-ups" with pax & cargo issues at La Paz, Quito and Teguicigalpa. Same story, different short runways
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #39
True - every airline has issues arise with weight restrictions. Though that's a little different than deciding how much space in the cabin on next weeks flight to Barrow will be alloted to people and how much to cargo, when the only way to get cargo (during the winter) or people (anytime) to/from there is by air (and Barrow is certainly not the only place like that).True, but there are more than few old hands at AA who do daily "crunches/push-ups/pull-ups" with pax & cargo issues at La Paz, Quito and Teguicigalpa. Same story, different short runways
Or consider something as simple as tankering fuel - strictly a cost of tankering/savings on fuel price calculation for most airlines except in unusual situations. But for many of the "cities" settlements, really) in northern/interior Alaska, fuel also only comes in by air year around (or barge for coastal settlements when the ice is clear enough in the Bering Sea). So it's not just a fuel cost vs extra fuel burn to tanker equation, but also availability and displacing revenue equation.
Jim
I'm sorry that your perception of me is so tainted. Personally, I have been very happy the past few years. I have stated a fair appraisal of alternatives that could have been used to make the acquisition better for all. If calling a union to task for not educating the membership and allowing a proper vote on how the integration should take place is complaining, then I'm guilty. If expecting my union to adhere to the first priority of preserving jobs is whinning, then I'm guilty. I blame AA senior management for lying to Congress, the APFA for allowing the illegal RPA to be implemented, and if that causes you discomfort, too bad. These are all issues that you should be fighting as they affect your livelyhood also. If reminding the active employees of the "shared sacrifice" of those furloughed (now topping $700,000,000) is offensive, just don't read my posts because I refuse to let that be swept under the carpet. And finally, if advocating for the return of all AA furloughed f/as is offensive to you, put on your big girl/boy panties and deal with it.
As to the STL rep, how dare you speak about something you have no knowledge of...Our strike was our business, not yours. Some of the young 85-86 hires have become wonderful activists. They learned and have been eager to "give back" to their flight attendant community. I was "out" from March of 1986 thru May of 1988. I EARNED the right to judge and or forgive. You did not. (at least not with our f/as) STL has the "real deal" representing them. The rest of the system should be so lucky. I would have loved to see how well you all would have held up after 10 days, 10 months, or several years. And while I think you all didn't have time to exchange phone numbers and recipes much less be "tested", your strike was yours, and I will not judge anyone who had to make that tough decision. I have never crossed even an informational picket but that is MY choice. I have done my best to educate our younger members in the importance of unity. Maybe you should come to class.
FurloughedByAPFA
Member
- Dec 5, 2006
- 92
- 0
[quote name='Nor'Easta' post='575532' date='Feb 22 2008, 10:10 PM']YES!
Have you heard the term?
Money talks, bull***t walks![/quote]
Employee concessions to avoid bankruptcy = Executive bonuses;
Is that your idea of money talks & bull$**t walks ??
:unsure:
Have you heard the term?
Money talks, bull***t walks![/quote]
Employee concessions to avoid bankruptcy = Executive bonuses;
Is that your idea of money talks & bull$**t walks ??
:unsure:
Thank you.
PRINCESS KIDAGAKASH
Veteran
- Oct 9, 2003
- 1,401
- 2
You can try to "sugar coat" it as much as you want. Once a SCAB, always a SCAB! When comes down to walking that picket line or Scabbing, those so called 85-86 "hires" will SCAB again.
Not a chance. However, when any group has been totally disenfranchised, all bets are off. In our strike it was our own "Clipped Wings" who wanted to fly "one more time" that did the most damage. TWA has an alternate "Silver Wings" for retired full term strikers. Union education is a funny thing. It builds understanding, loyalty, and helps "grow" the future union leaders. This isn't sugar coating. this is fact. Our crossovers accepeted the consequeces of their actions. It is something that they have lived with since that '86 decision. It is our history and in the scheme of all that made up the former TWA f/a career, a chapter in a long and interesting book. 'nuff said.
Since when is the first priority of a union preserving jobs?
Unions developed the seniority system to allow for layoffs when there is a surpluss of labor so that wages would be preserved and employers could not use the surpluss in order to lower wages.
Unions have lobbied for years to construct "safety nets" for workers so that they could make better wages and benifits for their members the number one priority. If preserving jobs is the number one priority then workers will never see increased wages and benifits. Whenever opponents of labor are faced with arguements for increased mimimum wage rates they use the preserving jobs arguement.
The first priority of unions is better wages and benifits. Let the government, who would eventually carry the burden of the unemployed, prioritize job creation.
