Analysts get gloomier on AMR

[Bob Owens]

Bob, where do we buy the foil hats? We need to order more!

The investors want short term gains at labor's expense. That's how Wall Street works, don't you remember when you took on the Wall Street analysts only a few short months ago? You battled wits with them and took them to task arguing labor's cause for us.

So let me get this straight, Wall Street is against us, the media is against us, the NMB is against us, our own Int'l is against us, the AFL-CIO is against us, etc...

If you were a mechanic you would be able to make your own!

The struggle is between Capital and Labor.

So you think Wall Street is an ally of labor? Wall street is the tool of Capitalists however Capitalists will turn on each other if they feel its worth it.

Who owns the media? Capitalists, with the exception of NPR which is why they are trying to destroy it.

Who'se agenda will they forward? Do we buy ad space on a regular basis? Watch the Mike Quill vs Sen Hartley debate on You-tube and you will see a Great TWU leader talk of these things 50 years ago.

As far as the International all I can say is that some of them, not all of them, sit back collecting their six figure salaries and make sure that we hear every bit of bad news they can find, ignore the good news and keep an economiist on payroll that over estimated our cost out by over $250 million. It was not a simple mistake, it was a littany of them. Every time I challenged him the number went lower and lower. Now why would an Econoist who is supposed to be on our side inflate the numbers to such an extent? Why keep him on? Why is it that the 2003 concessions are reffered to on annual cost basis but when we look for a new contract we look at it as total cost over the term? Why was our economist calling the TA a two year deal and not counting the years since the contract became amendable? These are all just small examples of how some in the International are working in the interests of the company by using subtle propaganda techniques to lead to a desired conclusion. The company doesnt need to do it, they have people doing it for them.

That said I have seen some movement in the right direction, Gary Drummond's letter was better than what we usually see come from the International, certainly better than Conely ever put out. The leaflet put together by the campaign committee was very good. But I suspect that the next time the committee meets there will be other more ominous versions and perspectives on the purchase given to the Committee the day before we go into Mediation again. Lest we get unreasonable expectations.

 

[Super FLUF]

AMR will start showing profits and losses in-line with everyone else after all labor contracts are settled. If anyone here is unclear about what drives corporate earnings statements, let me give it to you through the words of Bob Crandall. Here is a missive from the former President of APA.

Ladies and Gents,

The latest flap over the extraordinary bonuses due to AMR executives brings to mind an occurrence that took place more than a decade ago during my first term as APA President. I have never forgotten it. The entire negotiating committee and I attended a sit down meeting with CEO Bob Crandall and all of the senior corporate executives at AMR. It took place in what I call the “war room” on the sixth floor of AMR headquarters. If you have never seen it, the “war room” outside the CEO’s office has a giant round table so large that it is equipped with croupier sticks to slide documents from one side to the other.

During the course of the meeting Bob Crandall made a statement that we on the labor side should all understand intuitively but which he stated explicitly. Bob Crandall was very direct which I personally appreciated because there was always little doubt as to where he stood. Crandall suddenly said, “Do you know who owns this company?” There was a short silent pause. Crandall pointed to an empty chair beside him and said: “There he sits. The ownership of this company is opaque. Today he owns an airline. Tomorrow he owns an oil company. The next day he owns a steel company. I say in public that we operate this company on behalf of the shareholders because the SEC requires me to say that but that is not the case. We operate this company on our own behalf.”

Crandall was inclusive in that statement of labor and management. I replied, “We understand that better than you think we do. We (labor) have always maintained that the stakeholder (one who draws salary and pension) has a higher level of interest in the success of the enterprise than does the shareholder because we are literally going to sup off this enterprise for the rest of our lives.”

This was a philosophical clearing of the air. We at APA would bargain for our share of the enterprise and management would do their best to get theirs.

Corporate executives’ highest interest in representing shareholders is not their legal SEC requirement but more in the support of their personal wealth through executive compensation plans. As you are aware those compensation programs have certain bench marks including at AMR the share price of the stock itself.

Nearly all of management’s compensation bench marks are predicated in some way on their ability to convince labor to take a lesser share. When many on the labor side give a little a few on the management side will gain a lot.

Sorry, but if you think that these quarterly earnings have anything to do with institutional investors, shareholders, or accounting rules that you THINK you know, you are a fool.

 

[care2purchasefood?]

AMR will start showing profits and losses in-line with everyone else after all labor contracts are settled. If anyone here is unclear about what drives corporate earnings statements, let me give it to you through the words of Bob Crandall. Here is a missive from the former President of APA.

Ladies and Gents,

The latest flap over the extraordinary bonuses due to AMR executives brings to mind an occurrence that took place more than a decade ago during my first term as APA President. I have never forgotten it. The entire negotiating committee and I attended a sit down meeting with CEO Bob Crandall and all of the senior corporate executives at AMR. It took place in what I call the “war room” on the sixth floor of AMR headquarters. If you have never seen it, the “war room” outside the CEO’s office has a giant round table so large that it is equipped with croupier sticks to slide documents from one side to the other.

During the course of the meeting Bob Crandall made a statement that we on the labor side should all understand intuitively but which he stated explicitly. Bob Crandall was very direct which I personally appreciated because there was always little doubt as to where he stood. Crandall suddenly said, “Do you know who owns this company?” There was a short silent pause. Crandall pointed to an empty chair beside him and said: “There he sits. The ownership of this company is opaque. Today he owns an airline. Tomorrow he owns an oil company. The next day he owns a steel company. I say in public that we operate this company on behalf of the shareholders because the SEC requires me to say that but that is not the case. We operate this company on our own behalf.”

Crandall was inclusive in that statement of labor and management. I replied, “We understand that better than you think we do. We (labor) have always maintained that the stakeholder (one who draws salary and pension) has a higher level of interest in the success of the enterprise than does the shareholder because we are literally going to sup off this enterprise for the rest of our lives.”

This was a philosophical clearing of the air. We at APA would bargain for our share of the enterprise and management would do their best to get theirs.

Corporate executives’ highest interest in representing shareholders is not their legal SEC requirement but more in the support of their personal wealth through executive compensation plans. As you are aware those compensation programs have certain bench marks including at AMR the share price of the stock itself.

Nearly all of management’s compensation bench marks are predicated in some way on their ability to convince labor to take a lesser share. When many on the labor side give a little a few on the management side will gain a lot.

Sorry, but if you think that these quarterly earnings have anything to do with institutional investors, shareholders, or accounting rules that you THINK you know, you are a fool.

AA is notorious for spending tons of cash and driving their stock price to the ground when we are in labor negotiations. They do this so they can say, "We have no money for labor. Labor costs are what is driving this airline into the ground. We need to get labor in line with other carriers to be competitive in the market place." "Yes, we will still take our BONE-USES, but we need to in order to keep top talent around to operate American Airlines." All of us have been here for a long time and its the same ole' song and dance with the greedy folks at the top.

 

[strikeforce]

If you were a mechanic you would be able to make your own!

So you think Wall Street is an ally of labor?

Who owns the media?

Who'se agenda will they forward?

As far as the International all I can say is that some of them, not all of them, sit back collecting their six figure salaries and make sure that we hear every bit of bad news they can find, ignore the good news and keep an economiist on payroll that over estimated our cost out by over $250 million. It was not a simple mistake, it was a littany of them. Every time I challenged him the number went lower and lower. Now why would an Econoist who is supposed to be on our side inflate the numbers to such an extent? Why keep him on? Why is it that the 2003 concessions are reffered to by annual cost but when we look for a new contract we look at it as total cost over the term? Why was our economist calling the TA a two year deal and not counting the years since the contract became amendable? These are all just small examples of how some in the International are working in the interests of the company.

That said I have seen some movement in the right direction, Gary Drummond's letter was better than what we usually see come from the International, certainly better than Conely ever put out. The leaflet put together by the campaign committee was very good. But I suspect that the next time the committee meets there will be other more ominous versions and perspectives on the purchase given to the Committee the day before we go into Mediation again. Lets we get unreasonable expectations.

Hey Bob,

It's quite apparent that Little & Co. are scrambling to find ways to shove more concessions down our throats. I presume that Phat Don & Chicken Little knows the membership will not bow down to these tactics in the future, especially after the failed T/A. The discontent and misery on the floor is deafening, and the company knows it and hears it. I'll bet all the money in the bank, and it's not much, that WE will not accept further concessions, regardless of AA's financial position.

I truly believe management & the INTL screwed themselves, first by selling "shared sacrifice", and then enriching themselves with bonuses, cars and trips, and secondly, by stalling negotiations for at least 3 years, and finally, trying to shove a POS T/A down our throats and blaming the NMB for it. I'm really proud of the membership for not falling into that trap, and taking more concessions.

I recently blamed the union for not having a PLAN B, but I don't think the company and INTL have a Plan B to screw over the membership, either, outside of BK. I'm glad the company and union are working together to screw us because it's just more ammunition for the members to get rid of the union. Time is of the essence for the TWU & AA. The longer we wait for money....the more it's pissing US off, and probably zero chance the INTL and company will see more concessions. If anything, both will most likely see more CHAOS, and that's a good thing because BOTH deserve it!!

 

[Frank Szabo]

... snip


I recently blamed the union for not having a PLAN B, but I don't think the company and INTL have a Plan B to screw over the membership, either, outside of BK. I'm glad the company and union are working together to screw us because it's just more ammunition for the members to get rid of the union. Time is of the essence for the TWU & AA. The longer we wait for money....the more it's pissing US off, and probably zero chance the INTL and company will see more concessions. If anything, both will most likely see more CHAOS, and that's a good thing because BOTH deserve it!!

I believe BK and the sale of the OH business to Boeing, Spirit or, more likely, some chinese entity will happen within a year in order to clear AMR's books.

 

[Frank Szabo]

... snip

Sorry, but if you think that these quarterly earnings have anything to do with institutional investors, shareholders, or accounting rules that you THINK you know, you are a fool.

I am convinced the institutional investors were well taken care of {by passing out additional shares) in order to garner their continued support for the AMR corporate plan of compensation and the hosing of the workers. They really don't care who get's what as long as their funds lose little if any value.

There will be a few that say this isn't possible but we know better.

 

[Overspeed]

I am convinced the institutional investors were well taken care of {by passing out additional shares) in order to garner their continued support for the AMR corporate plan of compensation and the hosing of the workers. They really don't care who get's what as long as their funds lose little if any value.

There will be a few that say this isn't possible but we know better.

So knowing that then what? You know who is in control. So yes, we should fight for our share of the pie however, are we gauging correctly what our share of the pie is?

 

[Overspeed]

If you were a mechanic you would be able to make your own!

The struggle is between Capital and Labor.

So you think Wall Street is an ally of labor? Wall street is the tool of Capitalists however Capitalists will turn on each other if they feel its worth it.

Who owns the media? Capitalists, with the exception of NPR which is why they are trying to destroy it.

Who'se agenda will they forward? Do we buy ad space on a regular basis? Watch the Mike Quill vs Sen Hartley debate on You-tube and you will see a Great TWU leader talk of these things 50 years ago.

As far as the International all I can say is that some of them, not all of them, sit back collecting their six figure salaries and make sure that we hear every bit of bad news they can find, ignore the good news and keep an economiist on payroll that over estimated our cost out by over $250 million. It was not a simple mistake, it was a littany of them. Every time I challenged him the number went lower and lower. Now why would an Econoist who is supposed to be on our side inflate the numbers to such an extent? Why keep him on? Why is it that the 2003 concessions are reffered to on annual cost basis but when we look for a new contract we look at it as total cost over the term? Why was our economist calling the TA a two year deal and not counting the years since the contract became amendable? These are all just small examples of how some in the International are working in the interests of the company by using subtle propaganda techniques to lead to a desired conclusion. The company doesnt need to do it, they have people doing it for them.

That said I have seen some movement in the right direction, Gary Drummond's letter was better than what we usually see come from the International, certainly better than Conely ever put out. The leaflet put together by the campaign committee was very good. But I suspect that the next time the committee meets there will be other more ominous versions and perspectives on the purchase given to the Committee the day before we go into Mediation again. Lest we get unreasonable expectations.

I am a mechanic CC.

No I do not think Wall Street is an ally but the are a key component of any contract negotiation and how the company makes decisions.

If you are referring to Don and bad news you definitely didn't hear his message. Get our house in order by increasing labor's value through productivity and cost reduction (not through wage and benefit concessions), grow AA third party business, and increase accountability of our union and management workers. I remember one of his talks in the break room was that lufthansa was making billions with union workers and passing a good share of those profits over to the everyday worker. So maybe he is trying to leverage the bad news as to say, "Let's not be like NW, UA, and US but be like Lufthansa and get our share." Did you maybe think of it that way?

Saying you will need to get paid now and hopefully we will give you the productivity and high quality isn't going to cut it. Poor bargaining strategy.

 

[Frank Szabo]

So knowing that then what? You know who is in control. So yes, we should fight for our share of the pie however, are we gauging correctly what our share of the pie is?

I believe the company is maneuvering towards a bankruptcy filing - in that case, you'll be told by a judge what your "share" is, if any at all, as will be the friggin' TWU International when their contract is voided.

If things do get to that point, we'll hopefully be rid of the International blood suckers. Unfortunately, there's not a soul in the company itself capable of running a lemonade stand and making a profit due to having been so inbred with the never-ending promotions of friends and other incompetents into management vacancies. Those who are really capable are never given any consideration as their primary function is to play the game, not manage.

... and NO - I am in no way interested in any type of situation/job where I'd be in charge of more than myself - that's not what I learned to do in the past 40 years.

Working non-union means simply that - doing one's job. I did it for many years and I can do it again if need be.

 

[Overspeed]

I believe the company is maneuvering towards a bankruptcy filing - you'll be told by a judge what your "share" is, as will the friggin' TWU International.

At least if there's even a company left, we'll be rid of those bastards.

Get rid of the bastards? I doubt it. BK courts usually leave the existing management in place while the company navigates through restructuring. They get big retention bonuses while the workers get the bone.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Get rid of the bastards? I doubt it. BK courts usually leave the existing management in place while the company navigates through restructuring. They get big retention bonuses while the workers get the bone.

I made a few edits that didn't show up when you responded - I don't care what happens to the infestation of Centrepork, either by their own hand or that of the bankruptcy court - I was referring to the company's wholly owned subsidiary, the TWU.

 

[Overspeed]

I made a few edits that didn't show up when you responded - I don't care what happens to the infestation of Centrepork, either by their own hand or that of the bankruptcy court - I was referring to the company's wholly owned subsidiary, the TWU.

Ahhh...not really. The labor agreement can be restructured by the courts however it does not remove the TWU as the collective bargaining agent. Even after NW filed BK AMFA remained the AMT collective bargaining agent until they gave them up when DL took over NW. You would have to decertify the union to get rid of the union.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Ahhh...not really. The labor agreement can be restructured by the courts however it does not remove the TWU as the collective bargaining agent. Even after NW filed BK AMFA remained the AMT collective bargaining agent until they gave them up when DL took over NW. You would have to decertify the union to get rid of the union.

Suits me - let's do it. Give little jimmy and his menagerie a pay cut.

Screw 'em with a barrel full of those rusty tire tools.

 

[Bob Owens]

I am a mechanic CC.

So what are you saying , you have to assign someone to make your foil hat?

No I do not think Wall Street is an ally but the are a key component of any contract negotiation and how the company makes decisions.

BS. Do you actually think Wall Street manages every company across the world? Or, do you think that managers ask Wall street what their next move wshould be, how they should run their business, how much they should pay their employees? No, Wall Street is one of several markets that sells stocks and other financial tools. Wall Street has conviently become the bossman's latest excuse, "I'd love to bring you guys up to industry leading but Wall Street wont allow it". Give me a break. If the company was so concerned about Wall Street, which has as many different opinions as they do analysts, even different opinions within the same company, then why havent they reacted to all Wall streets complaints as far as Bk, mergers, further capacity cuts etc etc?

If you are referring to Don and bad news you definitely didn't hear his message. Get our house in order by increasing labor's value through productivity and cost reduction (not through wage and benefit concessions), grow AA third party business, and increase accountability of our union and management workers. I remember one of his talks in the break room was that lufthansa was making billions with union workers and passing a good share of those profits over to the everyday worker. So maybe he is trying to leverage the bad news as to say, "Let's not be like NW, UA, and US but be like Lufthansa and get our share." Did you maybe think of it that way?

No but I did hear Don bring up all the money we saved the company through productivity and cost reduction only to hear the company say that Fuel ate it all up and what we get is to be able to keep our jobs.
I have no desire to be like NW, UA or US but we sure are a lot more like them than Lufthansa, Southwest, Jet Blue , Fed Ex or UPS as far as compensation.

Saying you will need to get paid now and hopefully we will give you the productivity and high quality isn't going to cut it. Poor bargaining strategy

Well its certainly no worse then giving them productivity up front and expecting to be given credit at the table later. That has been proven already.

 

[eolesen]

More BS from Bob...

Wall Street is far more than just stocks and financial tools. It's also where the guys lending AMR money work.

So, if you think your costs don't enter into the risk assessment at Citibank, Chase, etc. on whether or not to continue lending AMR money or refinancing debt, you're just as mistaken as you are on just about everything else related to finances...