Brancatellis Column/ Trustee Appointed ?

[AP Tech]

Any chance on getting managment's take on this article from one of the mighty ones at CCY? What do you think Hawk? Sound like some truth?

I would be all for having a trustee running the company as long as they have no affiliation with current or previous managment or current or previous union leaders.

 

[mwereplanes]

Notice how 320 is avoiding this one?

Wonder why that is?

mr

 

[ClueByFour]

Geeze,

What I am saying is that people need to get away from their concept that something is going to change the FACT that they will face a large cut in pay/rules.

This will happen either because of reorganization, or because of liquidation.

I don't think anyone is denying that.

I do think that many US employees don't see any point in giving further to a management crew that has failed in a rather spectacular and self-admitted fashion.

If US had decent leadership at the helm with any ability to do anything but beat concessions out of labor (and proceed to squander them), you might find that more employees would be willing to work with CCY to do what it takes to survive.

 

[High Iron]

Bingo.

 

[N628AU]

Brancatelli's thoery is flawed in it's own argument. Yes management has made it's own share of mistakes, but if it has been totally screwed up since emerging from Chapter 11, then the following people must also be morons:

(1) The ATSB.

(2) The ATSB's financial advisors who approved the plan of reorganization as meeting a specified profit target.

(3) GECAS.

(4) Dr. Bronner.

(5) Bombardier.

(6) Embraer.

(7) Bank of America.

All of the above had some significant financial investment in US Airways being successful. They can't all be moron's since they are all very profitable from business and investment standpoints (save the ATSB since it is a government entity).

Further breaking stuff down:

Fuel costs. No one, not even Southwest expected fuel costs to remain stubbornly high for so long. 18 months ago, everyone figured (and wrongly so) that we would be out of Iraq, and no one figured in fuel speculators driving market prices up and the overheated econmies in China and Asia driving demand so high.

Passenger revenues. This and argument #3 (Southwest in PHL) No one here or anywhere else 18 months figured Southwest are really the same thing. I challenge anyone to show with indisputable evidence they know WN was headed for PHL itself. Most figured that the airlines were learning that overcapacity was killing them, and they would stop slitting each other's throats to their own demise. How many fare increases to cover things like the higher fuel costs did every carrier except NW adopt, and then back off from when NW failed to go along?

If the plan was so bad, where is the Brancatelli article from March 2003 saying this paln had no chance, and the carrier should have been liquidated then. My bet it is, if it exists, everyone on this board would have butchered him to no end.

 

[Oliver Twist]

Huh?

[post="182392"][/post]​

The "Coke can" debacle was part of the "Mirror Image" from the US/PI merger. US at the time served a glass of coke while PI served a glass of coke and the can it came from. It was silly enough to make U look stupid and cheap. The PI F/A's were told to give a glass, not the can as well. The newspapers picked it up and ran with it making such a minor issue look huge and all of us look cheap. It was a bonehead decision later changed as I recall. But, it gave US a ton of bad press when it least needed it.

The purpose of my original statement within this thread was to jog a few memories about the countless stupid decisions of managment both recent and past and how it might relate to where U is now. In a round about way, I was showing my support for a trustee. If you think about it, and not very hard thinking either, could a "rookie" CEO from outside make any worse decisions than Metrojet/IAD/BWI/Business Select and the countless other "ideas" that have sucked millions from U's asset base and placed the company in such a bad way as it is today? I think I or you could have done better than any of those theives, certainly no worse.

Thats my 2 pennies anyway (and I didn't get a "golden" anything when I left.

 

[DCAflyer]

If you think about it, and not very hard thinking either, could a "rookie" CEO from outside make any worse decisions than Metrojet/IAD/BWI/Business Select and the countless other "ideas" that have sucked millions from U's asset base and placed the company in such a bad way as it is today?

[post="182467"][/post]​

Yes. His name is David Siegel.

 

[Oliver Twist]

Yes. His name is David Siegel.

[post="182469"][/post]​

I was referring to outside the industry, Seigel came by way of CO Express so as I see it, he was just another "bonehead" insider anyway.

 

[funguy2]

A few comments:

1. A trustee won't help, in the short-run. It will take time for the trustee to get up to speed, and that's time US Airways doesn't have. Second, the trustee would still be working with the same team of management, which was either at US Airways for a long time or recruited by Seigel.

2. Everyone called for Seigel's head, and they got it. Then they got Lakefield revamping his business plan and doing the same thing anyway (immediately). If a trustee cam into the situation, it would likely be similar... New face, same story. I believe Lakefield asked for the same wage cuts as Seigel did just a week or two after Seigel's departure...

3. US Airways POR was a bad plan because there was no contingency plan, and everyone overlooked it. The contingency plan was "Hopefully the economy recovers." That's a bad plan. All it would take for US Airways to fail was to miss on just one of the estimations... Low and behold, US Airways missed the fuel estimation, and the carrier failed (defined as BK again).

Bombardier and Embraer went with the plan because they got aircraft orders from it. GE has a whole bunch of unsecured debt in US Airways, which it is more likely to collect on if the company operates... Also, lease payments are only made by operating airlines. They are not morons, they are making the best of a bad situation.

 

[Rico]

Hmmm,

Well, I think many on here are too quick to lay the blame for his predecessors upon the feet of Mr Lakfield. That is not quite fair IMO.

As for Mr.Lakefield, I guess the main criticism I have heard is that he has not implemented his plans sooner. I have not heard much of a beef with the restructure plan (other than towrds pay/rules cuts).

Other than that I think it comes down to fustration with negotiations.

Well, I am quite sure that it takes two to tango in that regard. One glaring example is the unwillingess of the IAM to even come to the table. <_<

If you (the company) had that kind of response from IAM, would you not think that the leverage of bankruptcy was your best option too...? You cannot fix this company's issues without addressing the situation at IAM also. That was one of the massive problems with Metrojet, that besides cheaper pilots, it really had all of the same issues the remainder of mainline had.

Why go through that mistake again...?

Let's be honest. Can you think of any other way of forcing the changes required around here other than in bankruptcy...? If we are going to transform, then let's really do it, not part way (just to shelter some work groups). And let's stop wasting time too, because it IS running out.


Peace B)

 

[Oliver Twist]

They are not morons, they are making the best of a bad situation.

[post="182479"][/post]​

As I see it, they were morons as to how to run this company, but a genius in lining their pockets.

Yes the situation is bad, but it would have been a whole different ball game if they had seen the writing on the wall sooner and not blown millions on stupid ideas.

But then again, "thieves" only care about their own pocket, right?

 

[CynicalResAgent]

Geeze,

What I am saying is that people need to get away from their concept that something is going to change the FACT that they will face a large cut in pay/rules.

This will happen either because of reorganization, or because of liquidation.

[post="182376"][/post]​

Look, I realise that we will take a paycut. What you do not recognize is that nobody believes in current management. Why should I take a paycut when it will be wasted away.

The problem is that they need a new vision. US needs to be changed from top to bottom, no seat cushion should be left un-turned.

Are planes are dirty and minus the great employee dedication to keep our customers and a great FF program we are not that much different from Airtran. We need to refurbish our planes, revamp domestic First class, and make upgrading worth something again.... Jetblue has inflight entertainment we should too.

Hey if they take my pay, I want to see something other than the same old "rationalize the fleet,more RJs, focus on PHL, add caribbean flights" drible that has not worked for us in the last 5 years.....

 

[PITbull]

Excellent article and powerful. Either managment is sadly stupid or keenly smart.

There is a little bit of a surprise in all the BK stuff to be shown for sure... I just hope all are ready for it when it raises it's ugly head.

[post="182205"][/post]​

IMO, there is no excuse for the managment blunders and lack of foresight in running an operation.

My true feelings, as I have been saying for two years...its all about "union busting" my friends. Plain and simple logic when you place it in that perspective. Only way to bust us and keep stealing from the employees, is to dance into BK until all of labor is the lowest paid in the industry.

This is one for Glass and Associates. I am sure if he is successful here at U in making us the lowest paid in the industry...there is no stopping his consultant firm.

 

[PITbull]

Hmmm,

Well, I think many on here are too quick to lay the blame for his predecessors upon the feet of Mr Lakfield. That is not quite fair IMO.

As for Mr.Lakefield, I guess the main criticism I have heard is that he has not implemented his plans sooner. I have not heard much of a beef with the restructure plan (other than towrds pay/rules cuts).

Other than that I think it comes down to fustration with negotiations.

Well, I am quite sure that it takes two to tango in that regard. One glaring example is the unwillingess of the IAM to even come to the table. <_<

If you (the company) had that kind of response from IAM, would you not think that the leverage of bankruptcy was your best option too...? You cannot fix this company's issues without addressing the situation at IAM also. That was one of the massive problems with Metrojet, that besides cheaper pilots, it really had all of the same issues the remainder of mainline had.

Why go through that mistake again...?

Peace B)

[post="182486"][/post]​

AFA went to the table, along with the rest of the other labor groups, and....we we'll still get ramed by the motions this co. will make to the judge. Didn't matter whether we had t/A's or not...managment and the BOD were taking this company into BK. The co. purposely dragged their feet and kept increasing the cost targets for all groups at the table with every counter proposal.

They just didn't want any labor group to get there, outside of a bk filing.

 

[insp89]

Rico, Noticed your "whining" about the IAM not willing to negotiate "in good faith" with a management team that has them in Arbitration,, and the ruling on that Arbitration is not yet known ????? Could this be a reason why the IAM did not bother talking MORE concessions ??? What do you think ?