bad

[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 12/18/2002 10:34:27 AM Biffeman wrote:
[P]Why should union be embarassed about the tactics the company is using? The public needs to know we have given them $985 million a year all ready and now they want the rest. "Labor-Friendly" Dave is a scam. And the public should know they company negotiates by threats, intimidation and ultimatiums and that the travel plans they have made might be in jepeordy so they are not stuck in BFE instead of being with their families on x-mas[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]Wow. Sounds just like what the unions propose to do every time a strike deadline looms.
 
BiffY;

You certainly are a bitter person. I have 25 years with this company. When Braniff went broke the first time and shut it down back in the early 80's it occurred to me that my job was in jeopardy. Even when we were profitable I understood that there were no guarantees in this business. You evidently do not believe that. You think that this is a lifelong right. That this company OWES you. Well, it doesn't. Whining may be cathartic for you as well as voting no (which you aren't going to get a chance to do) but the bottom line is you and I are along for the ride. And all the yipping and chest thumping in the world won't change that. Look outside this industry and see how many other companies are BK or shut down. That is called capitalism. And you evidently don't understand the premise.

My union has the most to lose and we gave them 100+ mill more because of it. The other unions are now in control. If you think this guy is bluffing, you are wrong. If you think the judge won't allow a liquidation, you are wrong. The fact is simple: Many have lost and are going to be losing thier jobs. Those that remain will work harder and longer for less money. Unless, of course, the other unions decide to sacrafice those remaining jobs and then we will all be out of work. To me, that is a travesty. Because if we don't keep them from liquidating, we will not be in a position to recover and fight for our pay and work rules if the company succeeds. And most intelligent people would want to take that chance. Because you will NOT find a job out there with instant seniority or the same or better pay and work rules. If you could have, you would have by now.

So if it makes you feel good, I enourage you to continue your incessant whining. I actually enjoy your posts. I am constantly amazed by the lack of common sense and intelligence I read here daily. It is cathartic for me to see that. A person's character and integrity are best judged during life's most difficult times. I have never believed that more than I do now. Good luck to you. To all of us.

mr
 
Why should union be embarassed about the tactics the company is using? The public needs to know we have given them $985 million a year all ready and now they want the rest. "Labor-Friendly" Dave is a scam. And the public should know they company negotiates by threats, intimidation and ultimatiums and that the travel plans they have made might be in jepeordy so they are not stuck in BFE instead of being with their families on x-mas
 
Someone should tell the public is a possibility. After our company pulled that stunt in Tampa last month, we know that our management will lie through the teeth to keep the peace. Isn't it obscene that with potential of a corporate shutdown looming, our company is still trying to get people to fly? Only so that the unexpecting could be screwed right in the middle of their holiday vacation!
----------------
Will UA honor our tickets?
11.gif']
 
[BR][BR][BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 12/18/2002 10:55:10 AM mrplanes wrote: [BR][BR]BiffY;[BR][BR]You certainly are a bitter person. I have 25 years with this company. When Braniff went broke the first time and shut it down back in the early 80's it occurred to me that my job was in jeopardy. Even when we were profitable I understood that there were no guarantees in this business. You evidently do not believe that. You think that this is a lifelong right. That this company OWES you. Well, it doesn't. Whining may be cathartic for you as well as voting no (which you aren't going to get a chance to do) but the bottom line is you and I are along for the ride. And all the yipping and chest thumping in the world won't change that. Look outside this industry and see how many other companies are BK or shut down. That is called capitalism. And you evidently don't understand the premise.[BR][BR]My union has the most to lose and we gave them 100+ mill more because of it. The other unions are now in control. If you think this guy is bluffing, you are wrong. If you think the judge won't allow a liquidation, you are wrong. The fact is simple: Many have lost and are going to be losing thier jobs. Those that remain will work harder and longer for less money. Unless, of course, the other unions decide to sacrafice those remaining jobs and then we will all be out of work. To me, that is a travesty. Because if we don't keep them from liquidating, we will not be in a position to recover and fight for our pay and work rules if the company succeeds. And most intelligent people would want to take that chance. Because you will NOT find a job out there with instant seniority or the same or better pay and work rules. If you could have, you would have by now.[BR][BR]So if it makes you feel good, I enourage you to continue your incessant whining. I actually enjoy your posts. I am constantly amazed by the lack of common sense and intelligence I read here daily. It is cathartic for me to see that. A person's character and integrity are best judged during life's most difficult times. I have never believed that more than I do now. Good luck to you. To all of us.[BR][BR]mr----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]First of all I am not a bitter person, but no airline that has filed bankruptcy and gotten employee concessions has been saved. ( CO broke all their unions and had to file again and vendored out most of their work and to this day still have one of the lowest pay scales in the industry.)[BR][BR]Two the IAM has their membership on any major change in our contract, (unlike yours) so don't tell me we won't get to vote. Your union caved because of your pension and you have the most to lose, I can go out and find a job making $40,000 a year, you guys can't go out and find one that pays $200,000 a year those are facts. [BR][BR]I have never said this company owes me anything, all they owe me is a pay check for my work and all I ask in return is to be treated like a person, not a liablity and not lied too.[BR][BR]And personally I don't care if they liquidate, I have never stated the judge won't do so, so don't put words into my posts. Either way I vote I will most likely be out of a job, so all I am voting on would be 14 weeks of severence, which at this point does not matter to me anymore. If we accept this contract the company will decimate my department and coworkers. I don't like the idea that they will close your station and not pay our moving expenses, hmm let me think I just took a big paycut, paying more for insurance (let me say paying the same as a pilot who can make $200,000 a year and myself will be lucky to make $40,000) and I am suppose to fork over several thousand dollars to move, find interm housing while my house sells, so I have to pay for two places to live.[BR][BR]I for one will not let the two Daves and their management cronies make a profit out of my hide, Dave and his team have been here nine months and I have been here 14 years and I will be gone while they reap the profits of blood money. [BR][BR]What is to stop Dave and his cronies coming back in three months and telling us we are still not reaching the 7% revenue profits (which they never will) and telling the remaining folks, we have to close heavy maintenance and the shops and vendor out all heavy maintenance? I will tell you nothing will, this company will turn over every stone to rape the employees. And I have been around and you won't win back any pay or work rules you give up now in the year 2008.[BR][BR]There is life beyond US Airways and you will have to learn to accept that fact and move on. But this company has one foot in the grave and the other not far behind. Myself and numerous of my coworkers are tired of being lied too, threatened and given ultimatiums, if they want to liquidate and shut down then so be it. But you have to draw a line in the sand and say enough is enough all ready, and I for one will not be bullied into making bad choices and voting away my job while Bonner a man who has no airline experience tells Dave and his cronies how to run this airline.[BR][BR]There has not been on labor-friendly act since Bonner blackmailed Dave into getting more board seats and coming out pubically in the New York Times and threaten us.[BR][BR]"Having met with RSA CEO David Bronner, I am confident of his strong interest in our successful restructuring, and even more importantly, of his support to the labor-friendly approach that we are taking," Siegel said.[BR][BR]"In exchange for their participation, we have committed that this will be a labor-friendly Chapter 11 reorganization," said Siegel, who nevertheless stopped short of issuing a firm promise to avoid layoffs[BR][BR]"Our employees have not only been running a great airline, but have also committed themselves to the Company's successful restructuring. We recognize the impact the sacrifices they are making will have on them and their families. In exchange for their participation, we have committed that this will be a labor-friendly Chapter 11 reorganization, in which we will honor new agreements that have been ratified, and provide labor with a voice in the Company's governance through representation on the Board of Directors," Siegel said. "Our efforts will now be focused on renegotiating favorable terms with certain large vendors, lenders and aircraft lessors, which is essential to accomplish our restructuring initiatives. Our reorganization is critical not only to our employees, but also to the economies of the communities we serve."[BR][BR]Here is Dave "labor friendly' Bonner's statements:[BR][BR]The chief executive of the primary lender to US Airways said yesterday that he would liquidate the airline if unions refused to provide $200 million in additional wage and benefit concessions. [BR][BR][BR][BR]In an interview, David G. Bronner, head of the Retirement Systems of Alabama, said that he did not expect to have to follow through on his ultimatum and predicted that the discussions between the airline and its employees would result in an agreement by next week. [!--Middle ad type : skyscraper --][BR][BR][BR][BR]The concessions would be the second round in US Airways' efforts to draft a reorganization plan under Chapter 11 protection from its creditors. US Airways has said it hopes to submit its proposal to a federal bankruptcy court by Dec. 20. Before that, it would like to receive final approval for $900 million in loan guarantees from the government, which gave it provisional approval last summer. [BR][BR]To do so, the airline has asked union members for further cuts in pay and benefits. If they do not comply, Mr. Bronner said in the interview, the airline would go out of business and be liquidated in bankruptcy court. 'What's their alternative?' he asked rhetorically. 'If they don't want to do this, we'll Chapter 7 it.' [BR][BR]Referring to the debtor-in-possession financing that the Alabama pension system is providing the airline during its time under bankruptcy protection, Mr. Bronner said that without concessions, 'we'll pull the D.I.P. financing and they're gone.' [BR][BR]His stance with the US Airways unions is an example of the tough approach that analysts expect airlines to begin taking with employees now that a United Airlines bankruptcy filing seems highly likely. [BR][BR]Indeed, Mr. Bronner's comments came as Donald J. Carty, the chairman and chief executive of American Airlines, continued a series of meetings this week with groups of employees. In the meetings, which began last week in Chicago and are expected to continue through the end of the year, Mr. Carty is emphasizing the financial crisis American is facing and its need for concessions, an American spokesman, Tim Doke, said. The airline is telling employees that if United emerges from bankruptcy with labor cost reductions, American will have to become similarly lean, Mr. Doke said. [BR][BR]At US Airways, Mr. Bronner's words carry extraordinary weight. As the result of negotiations completed this week, Mr. Bronner, who directs the $25 billion Alabama fund, will in effect take control of the airline's board at the point US Airways emerges from bankruptcy. [BR][BR]Mr. Bronner and the airline agreed that he will have 7 of the 13 seats on the board, up from the 5 that he and the Alabama pension fund originally gained when he came forward in September to bid for the airline. [BR][BR]Mr. Bronner said the seven seats would be equivalent to 72 percent voting control of the airline, for which he initially agreed to provide $240 million in immediate financing as well as $500 million more in debtor-in-possession financing, outbidding the Texas Pacific Group. US Airways has drawn $300 million of that $500 million but cannot draw the remaining $200 million until it emerges from bankruptcy. [BR][BR]Mr. Bronner said that he would occupy one of the seven board seats, but had not decided who would have the others. As part of the agreement with the airline, Mr. Bronner is cutting his fund's stake, originally 37.5 percent, to 36 percent, so that a larger share can be given to unsecured creditors. Management is also reducing its stake, to 8 percent from 10 percent. Whenever the company emerges from bankruptcy, which it hopes to do by March, Mr. Bronner said he would give 2 percent of his stake to management to restore its lost holdings. [BR][BR]The negotiations came as US Airways struggles to reduce its costs and complete its Chapter 11 plan. Though workers cooperated in an initial round of concessions, some are opposed now. Only the pilots' union has agreed to consider further concessions. The machinists' union has rejected the idea, while the flight attendants said they would participate only if other unions did so. [BR][BR]Mr. Bronner asserted it was vital for the airline to obtain work rules from the unions 'that are in this century, and not in the last century.' [BR][BR]Yesterday, Scotty Ford, the president of the union chapter that represents mechanics, said he was willing to meet with US Airways on the matter. 'We're just going to see what they're going to say,' Mr. Ford said. [BR][BR]Patricia Friend, international president of the Association of Flight Attendants, was critical of Mr. Bronner. 'He's acting as though he believes an airline can be saved on the back of the workers,' she said. 'It shows his lack of experience. Maybe he's looking for an easy way out because he made a mistake. There's not going to be anything to govern if he liquidates.' [BR][BR]Under the restructuring plan, unions will have three representatives on US Airways' board, one each for pilots and machinists, and the third to be shared by flight attendants and other employee groups. But unlike their counterparts at United Airlines, the union representatives do not receive veto power over company affairs, nor will the unions hold a stake in US Airways. [BR][BR]A spokesman for the airline, Chris Chiames, declined to comment on Mr. Bronner's remarks but said, 'We plan to be working through the weekend, talking with our unions, and have every confidence that we'll reach agreements.' [BR][BR]Mr. Bronner said he had no regrets about investing in the airline, despite the difficulties in this stage of the reorganization plan. 'It always gets ugly right at the end,' he said. [BR][BR]Officials at American, meanwhile, said their airline had no timetable for achieving cost reductions. Nonetheless, the carrier hopes that employees will rapidly agree to cuts that will help achieve savings of $3 billion to $4 billion a year by 2004, compared with what it spent on operations in 2001. Management has already squeezed out spending cuts of about $2 billion a year before approaching the union groups, said Mr. Doke, who is American's vice president for corporate communications. [BR][BR]'One of the purposes of these meetings is to give the sense that this is a period of immediate financial crisis,' he said, 'and we have to address it with that sense of urgency. We have to acknowledge that this is a time where we need to take a real hard look at our contracts, and look for as many savings as we possibly can.' [BR][BR]In the meetings, which involve senior executives of American, the airline is providing employees with details of those spending cuts, then presenting comparisons between its labor costs and those of its competitors. The approach is intended to show employees that they are not the only source from which American is extracting savings. [BR][BR]But, Mr. Doke continued, 'Obviously labor is a major expense line in this company, and we're going to have at some solutions to get us closer to the $3 billion to $4 billion target that will make us competitive.' [BR][BR]While some analysts have speculated that American, based in Fort Worth, could follow US Airways, and potentially United, into bankruptcy court, the airline is not raising that possibility with employees, he said, nor does it expect that workers would put it in that position. [BR][BR]'None of our employees want to have anything close to a United situation,' he said. 'I don't think there's any way our employees will let us get to the point where a creditors' committee and a bankruptcy judge are writing our contracts.' [BR][BR]But the airline is also not ignoring the economies that United could achieve in bankruptcy. 'If United emerges as more competitive in their operations, we're going to have to be competitive with them on the cost side,' Mr. Doke said. [BR][BR]He described the meetings as cordial, not adversarial, adding, 'It's kind of a 180 from the kind of approach our friends in Alabama are taking.' [BR][BR][BR]I guess Bonner and Siegel never heard that you catch more flies with honey then you do with vinegar.[BR][BR]I wish I could tell you how our negotiators are being treated by Labor Relations you would be surprised how unprofessional they are, even though they all got promotions and raises. Must be nice to get raises while we take it in the shorts.
 
Well ITRADE our last negotiations took 4 1/2 years, contracts in the airline industry do not expire they become amendable the the company uses the Railway Labor Act to prolong negotiations, they have no incentive to settle if they can use the act to stall.
 
Biff:

Regardless of what you say, the fact is at one point or another CO & HP employees both took concessions and survived.

The three-point US business plan to increase liquidity, lower costs, and raise revenues were not present at the failed carriers.

From a business perspective I believe your argument is invalid. Posting articles from last August is now dated and old information, largely irrelevant.

Chip
 
AWA filed twice even the ATSB did not demand wage concessions from their employees because they are at the bottom of the industry. AWA got fined from the FAA because they lack of quality control at the vendors who perform their heavy maintenance since AWA farmed out those jobs too.
 
What about America West?

The difference between those airlines who failed and US Airways is emergence financing and business plan. All of the airlines who failed did not have equity after thier cuts; however, US Airways has lined up a $200 million credit facility, $1 billion loan guarantee, and a $240 million equity investment.

With its lower cost structure, new business plan, additional RJ/domestic/international alliance revenues, and strong emergence liquidity, I believe US Airways can not only survive, but eventually thrive.

The question is will the company and unions reach accords to wait out the seasonally slow winter months and meet PBGC demands or will the company liquidate?

Chip
 
[BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 12/18/2002 11:39:39 AM chipmunn wrote: [BR][BR]What about America West? [BR][BR]The difference between those airlines who failed and US Airways is emergence financing and business plan. All of the airlines who failed did not have equity after thier cuts; however, US Airways has lined up a $200 million credit facility, $1 billion loan guarantee, and a $240 million equity investment.[BR][BR]With its lower cost structure, new business plan, additional RJ/domestic/international alliance revenues, and strong emergence liquidity, I believe US Airways can not only survive, but eventually thrive.[BR][BR]The question is will the company and unions reach accords to wait out the seasonally slow winter months and meet PBGC demands or will the company liquidate?[BR][BR]Chip----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]You forgot thousands of laidoff employees and minimum and low wage workers replacing us. Scab outfit freedom air flying your routes. Hey Chip, I guess when things get worse the company will come back and ask ALPA to reduce the fleet and farm out mainline flights to freedom or anyone else who makes less.[BR][BR]Chip, like I said, I am not afraid of liqiudation, losing my severence, my pension is low enough to meet the PBGC limit. Yours is not.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/18/2002 11:39:39 AM chipmunn wrote:
With its lower cost structure, new business plan, additional RJ/domestic/international alliance revenues, and strong emergence liquidity, I believe US Airways can not only survive, but eventually thrive.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Chip,
I admire your enthusiasm and support for your company and I do wish the employees of US all the luck, but:
1) US new cost structure will still be too high for their operations in the northeast
2) US business plan is more or less same, with the exception of the code-share with UA (a carrier itself in chapt. 11) plus membership in * alliance is not going to happen in the very near future
3) additional RJ - although good, it may be too little too late - your competition (CO, DL)is years ahead of you (even AE is going all jet in the northeast)
4) is the ATSB loan still conditional?
5) RSA is threatning chpt. 7
6) disgruntled employess
7) still too much exposure to low cost competition
8) weak route network
 
From the previous article, Patricia Friend has it all wrong. It's not that Bronner doesn't understand. It's that he just doesn't care.

He's going to recoup his investment in US Airways one way or another. If it's by emergence from Chapter 11 as a profitable company, he'll make it back and then some. If it's through a Chapter 7 liquidation, he'll still make some money on his investment, just not as much.

Bottom line? Once Bronner grows impatient with the shenanigans, he'll take his bat and ball and go home. He gets his money for RSA no matter what.
 
Irrelavant? The NYT artilce was not even two weeks ago. CO and HP had concessions forced upon them and Congress changed the laws because of CO and Lorenzo's first BK filing which did not help.[BR][BR]Chip I dont have a million dollar pension or a $10,000 a month pension to protect. Dave and Dave have lied time after time to us, they treat us with threats, deadlines and ultimatiums, you tell me how that is labor friendly?[BR][BR]Chip how do you like taking another paycut while all people at labor relations got promtions and raises? Why dont you stick to the issues that I presented in the previous post.
 
sounds to me like a no vote does nothing but put you on the unemployment line---you say you do not care about severence pay....tell that to your family xmas eve- I for one would NEVER put my feelings about U ahead of my family. Vote with YOUR concieous and live with it. I personaaly don't know why anybody that harbors such deep regrets about the company continues to stay working for them. I will be furloughed if this passes also but at least i'll have 15 weeks pay to ease the pain. Do you harbor such hatred (or jealousy) about your coworkers keeping their jobs that you don't care if this company folds? Life goes on ...get over it.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/18/2002 3:04:07 PM tugslug4hire? wrote:

sounds to me like a no vote does nothing but put you on the unemployment line---you say you do not care about severence pay....tell that to your family xmas eve- I for one would NEVER put my feelings about U ahead of my family. Vote with YOUR concieous and live with it. I personaaly don't know why anybody that harbors such deep regrets about the company continues to stay working for them. [/blockquote]

It seems to me that many U workers must have figured this could happen, and have already begun to look into other careers. The worse it gets, the more people will just say screw it and be willing to move on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top