Bailout Board May Have To Pull Plug On Us

[usfliboi]

Usairways has an agreement with the atsb..... Guys this is ridculous. The company has the opportunity to restructure and it might mean pissing us all off, but its gonna happen. They will not fille chap 7 nor will we be forced into it. They have made it clear. The resaon this was filed is to get labor cuts.... plain and simple!

 

[PITbull]

Usairways has an agreement with the atsb..... Guys this is ridculous. The company has the opportunity to restructure and it might mean pissing us all off, but its gonna happen. They will not fille chap 7 nor will we be forced into it. They have made it clear. The resaon this was filed is to get labor cuts.... plain and simple!

[post="180639"][/post]​

First and only statment you have ever made on this board that speaks to truth and reality.

 

[BoeingBoy]

PitBull,

I hate do disagree with you, but I think only the last sentence is truth and reality. The rest is wishful thinking....

Jim

 

[RedOne]

You guys can succeed, if you attract the necessary revenue and improve your productivity. Despite management.

Let's see. Today we had 3 a/c on the ground at the same time. Had 1 agent in operations, 3 on the ramp to unload then load the 3 aircraft. How much more productive can we get? Oh I know....could have been given roller-blades and a broom (guess where it could have been put) and could have swept the ramp while going from one flight to the other!

 

[mrfish3726]

I agree with Funguy2, the ATSB will eventually pull the plug and call the loan in default. That is what the ATSB was set up to do, stabilize the airline industry and protect the U.S. taxpayers against the ones that go into default. There won't be any government miracles for USAIR OR UAL PERIOD!

 

[USA320Pilot]

UseYour Head:

UseYourHead said: "We can only save ourselves, no one else will. Labor needs to get on board and with the support of creditors we will have another chance to make a go of things. Duh....what has taken everyone so long to figure this out. Chest beating does not cut it...unless of course your one of those looking forward to unemployment."

USA320Pilot comments: Your points are valid. Moreover, the ATSB has agreed to work with US Airways during the bankruptcy proceeding and the airline is likely going to see a huge cost cut initiated next week.

Respectively,

USA320Pilot

 

[usfliboi]

Well thanks PITBULL, maybe all of this has made you see things more clearly. Read my post closer, youll find mor ecommon sense statements.

 

[GadgetFreak]

Usairways has an agreement with the atsb..... Guys this is ridculous. The company has the opportunity to restructure and it might mean pissing us all off, but its gonna happen. They will not fille chap 7 nor will we be forced into it. They have made it clear. The resaon this was filed is to get labor cuts.... plain and simple!

[post="180639"][/post]​

I think the first half is probably true. They probably had a agreement with the ATSB. I dont think the rest is accurate. I think management had a better idea of the risks of Ch11 than did the unions. Bronner will likely lose a quarter billion dollars over this. He doesnt hate you that bad. They had to do this, and it is more likely than not going to be unsuccessful. Unless something very unexpected happens it seems like there isnt much possibility to get out of Ch11. The only hope may be stabilize things and then hope that a miracle happens. US needs time now. It isnt clear they have much.

 

[usfliboi]

listen to his last message , and court records. The reason BK was filed was to finish transformation. Most of the dirty work with vendors was done already. Theres a few left but labor is the problem. Thats why youll see a fast track to get the contracts nulled temporarily..

 

[GadgetFreak]

listen to his last message , and court records. The reason BK was filed was to finish transformation. Most of the dirty work with vendors was done already. Theres a few left but labor is the problem. Thats why youll see a fast track to get the contracts nulled temporarily..

[post="180966"][/post]​

Im not really disagreeing. I just think they would have really preferred to do this outside of bankruptcy. Now that they are in Ch11 the creditors have a lot of influence. If they dont like the progress on the contracts, either through agreements or court orders I think they will likely force liquidation. This move has put Bronners quarter billion at great risk, in fact that is probably an understatement. He is likely to lose his money. They really wanted to avoid this very badly. Now they are really struggling for short term survival.

 

[Aryeh]

mrfish3726, Pennsylvania is a crucial state for each candidate, so is North Carolina. I agree the election has nothing to do with UAIR. But it would be "bad politics" to put 28,000 good paying jobs on the street. Job loses are a political issue and if the unions were smart they would start a PR campaign to use as a "bargaining chip."

[post="180494"][/post]​

Typical right-wing, facist, pull -em up by the boot-straps-speak!!
I, am many others with whom I work do have an "education." And regardless of one's education, or one's occupation, from street cleaner to floor shiner on up, all workers deserve not a high-wage but a livable wage. What the company wants to pay us is not livable. In every society, somebody is going to be unskilled and at the bottom economic rung. But even they deserve respect and they deserve the means to provide for themselves and their families; not just the "skilled."
How very un-Christian of you!!

 

[funguy2]

A couple of points...

1) The agreement between US Airways, ATSB, and the banks, has the ATSB loan collateralized with slots and other assets. Now that the BK judge is allowing US Airways to dip into its ATSB loan money to operate (i.e. using unrestricted cash below the miniumums that ATSB agreement provides for), this means that now, US Airways does not have enough cash on hand to pay back the ATSB loan. This means, in my opinion, that it is increasingly likely for the ATSB to force liquidation. All ATSB has to do is call the loan, UAIRQ cannot pay for it, and must sell something.

2) The agreement between UAIRQ, ATSB, and the banks is a contract. Voiding contracts is a power of the BK court. It seems that every so-slighty, the BK judge is voiding the ATSB contract, by allowing UAIRQ to no longer adhere to the contracts covenants. By doing so, the ATSB could end up being free from its end of the deal (i.e. the guarantee), and the banks could demand their cash. Its all an interpretation of the law and the contract... This will be interesting to watch, from a legal perspective.

3) I don't believe BK was filed solely to deal with labor. The reality is that UAIRQ must still negotiate with labor, under court supervision. UAIRQ is not allowed to just void the contract and impose its own wage structure. Frank Lorenzo, who did just that at CAL many moons ago, forced the changes in BK law to prevent this from happening again. While UAIRQ is certainly targeting labor, it is in BK for one reason: not enough cash to pay the bills.

My best wishes to everyone still connected to US Airways.

 

[BoeingBoy]

funguy,

Only thing I can find the tinest bit of fault with is the "judge ever so slightly voiding the ATSB contract". As I read the motion, the ATSB was on board with the change. My intrepretation is that they gave the company just the slightest bit of breathing room (till Oct 14, if memory serves) but kept a tight rein with a fair number of conditions (10-15, if memory serves again).

And of course left the door open to pulling the plug on Oct 15 or thereafter....

Jim

 

[allegheny1]

Re ATSB

I can t remember which docket it is in,but according to the filing the atsb is
actually overcollateralized on the outstanding loan balance.
The balance is at about 717 mil. and the assets pledged against the loan were
valued at 800 mil by 2 seperate independent appraisers.
It does not appear that the atsb would be in any hurry to call the loan based
on hard asset valuations.

regards

 

[BoeingBoy]

allegheny1,

As for the appraisals, you are correct. I don't remember the exact number either, but even using "distressed" values, the collateral plus the unrestricted cash is more than sufficient to cover the loan balance. I presume that is why the ATSB was willing to lower the balance on hand requirement, at least for a few weeks.

But appraisals are not the same as actually getting cash for those assets in a liquidation, which is why I presume the ATSB wasn't willing to go lower (or eliminate) the unrestricted cash limit.

Jim