Bruce Lakefield Comments

[BoeingBoy]

Just a few questions....

Which is cheaper to acquire - 100 50/70 seat RJ's or 50 A320's?

Which is capable of generating more revenue, 100 RJ's or 50 A320's?

Which, in total, is cheaper to operate, 100 RJ's or 50 A320's?

Which, in CASM, is cheaper to operate, 100 RJ's or 50 A320's?

Which would spread the fixed costs of mainline over more ASM's, thus lowering mainline CASM, 100 RJ's or 50 A320's?

Jim

 

[pitguy]

Full Pay Until the Last Day....

 

[700UW]

DorkDriver, PSA will likely be sold so all of your questions will likely be over come by events.

In regard to the mecahnics, I was asked some questions and I have posted the facts. Some people do not like the facts and would rather "shoot the messenger".

The company has asked the IAM to participate in the new business plan and to attend the labor leader meeting, but the IAM has refused. Thus, if the IAM does not participate the company has a Plan B that could eliminate the mechanics and make the IAM irrelevant to the process.

Do I like it? No, I do not. However, David Bronner has said the plan will go forward "with or without employees" and I believe him.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

The IAM was not asked to the May 6th meeting.

 

[BoeingBoy]

You know, I've been intriqued by Bronner's statement that the plan will go forward "with or without employees".

Taken at face value, it seems to mean one of two things...

Either Bronner thinks you can run an airline without employees (he couldn't be that ill-informed, could he???).

Or "the plan" doesn't necessarily need employees, which means to me that "the plan" isn't to run an airline.

Now if I can just figure out which.

Jim

 

[autofixer]

Boeing, Just look at present UAIR management. Is there anyone with airline experience? Even Siegel was a Chapter 11 and RJ man, but wishfull thinking clouded that fact from view. I guess sitting here on the "outside" it is obvious what is taking place. MAA is going to be UAIR and it will be spun off or sold to the highest bidder; or maybe the delivery positions for the EJets will be sold. You-all have or are about to vote your jobs away, per the "plan". It is a lose, lose situation for the employees and the "plan" is in motion. JMHO

 

[Winglet]

Sounds like the mechanics have a choice . . . . go down fighting with their head held high, or be obliging to Lakefield and Bronner pockets and jump quietly off a cliff for them.

 

[USA320Pilot]

There is another option: Pre-packaged bankruptcy where the equity is preserved or re-issued and the company rejects lease agreements and labor contracts (for those unions who do not cut a deal before the filing).

There is an ALPA message board post that a Chief Pilot said this was the likely course of action, but it is an unconfirmed rumor at this point.

Could this be the reason why Bronner said the new business plan will go forward "with or without employees"?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[PITbull]

Boeing, Just look at present UAIR management. Is there anyone with airline experience? Even Siegel was a Chapter 11 and RJ man, but wishfull thinking clouded that fact from view. I guess sitting here on the "outside" it is obvious what is taking place. MAA is going to be UAIR and it will be spun off or sold to the highest bidder; or maybe the delivery positions for the EJets will be sold. You-all have or are about to vote your jobs away, per the "plan". It is a lose, lose situation for the employees and the "plan" is in motion. JMHO

Autofixer,

You are exactly correct. Many of us know this and why we take the position of resistance.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Well, I've never met the man. Judging from reports from the CLT MEC meeting a while back, he seems to be the type that is a "straight shooter" - says what he means and means what he says.

If that is indeed true, he could have easily said "with or without employee's agreement (or participation or whatever)" That would change the meaning considerably.

Of course, the quote could be wrong, too. Maybe he did say something like I intimated.

Jim

 

[PITbull]

This is such a Deja Vu experience for me. Big Steels collapse was equally painful.

I remember distinctly one of the Bethlehem local Presidents saying " we have to decide what we want, it either 200 jobs that pay $15/hr or 75 that pay $35/hr" They decided to eat their young and go with the 75 @ $35/hr

NOTE to the nitpickers, the hourly rates are made up, but the wage gap was about the same.

It seems that the dilema is similar though more complex here. In order for the "Plan" to work some groups will nearly cease to exist and others will have their work rules altered dramatically.

The bottom line will be 28,000 jos will disappear from the airline industry in under a year OR some number of jobs LESS than 28,000 will be left largely intact with OK but not stellar wages. The choices aren't great. But right now you still have choices.

All I will say was the Beth Steel guys got a very rude reception when they went job hunting in Bethlehem. It was ugly and it was because they made so much money with few marketable jobs skills that were transferable. All I'm saying is THINK

See Bob,

You think you know what the future holds. No one really does. Its just speculation on our part. Being on the "inside" we know very well that as Winglet poigantly stated, we can either fight or give them what they want and "silently" go off the cliff.

When Bronner speaks, everyone needs to pay attention to his meaning. To say the "plan" will be implemented with or without employees, is saying either, we concede and throw ourselves on the sword, or management will force us on the sword. Labor will lose. Perhaps not in your definition if we concede; but in our definition, to concede is to destroy the professions for all in the industry.

Your example of Steel Mill Industry and blaming the unions for lack of insight that the corporate BOD and decision makers should have had, is not the reason why USA Steel Corporations are not producing steel in this country as in the past. The pollution controls that the government environmental laws that were put into place made it unprofitable for many of the steel companies to produce steel, along with Vietnam war and than the Hostage situation in Iran caused the recession in the late 70s and early 80s. Even United State Steel Corporation had to merge with Petroleum company to become USX and diversify as many companies were doing back then. This is just from what I remember from living in Pittsburgh back then, as a teenager and young adult when much of this was taking place.
Another contributor was "outsourcing" jobs to another country to produce steel in total, was just much much cheaper. In order for the worker to compete, they would have to literally give up health care, benefits and pension. Didn't pay to keep the job for many. From living in Pittsburgh, many of the steel industry workers got grants from the government for reeducation, and many did take advantage of that. It might have taken some time, but folks did go on to find other jobs. My father owned a family restaurant, and I remember our neighbors who worked in the mills taking advantage of the "grant money" for reeducation. The mill where I lived close to was Allegheny Ludium Steel.

The unfortunate part for the workers at U, is that USAirways can not ensure that we will not be sold off. They say no, but that is in the "short term". No one can ensure the "long term". As a pax, you want U to stick around, after all you have said repeatedly, its for selfish reasons, and your frequent flying miles come to mind. So, I take your input with a "grain of salt" when it comes to the decisions for labor. I can say, I want folks to fly us, and we need the business and customers, but we can't compromise ourselves and subsidize the lowering of fares because management lacks the vision and creativity to produce a product that the customer will want to pay for, even if it a little higher than the competitor.

 

[PITbull]

Bob,

All labor employees will have an opportunity to vote up or down if they want us to go into negotiations and/or to ratify a proposal. Those EX CEOs you cite, MADE MONEY in those years. And labor was able to make these jobs sustaining and a profession during those years. I don't care if you like it or lump it....YOU CAN NOT REVAMP A COMPANY WITH THE ONLY VISION BEING TO TAKE FROM LABOR FOR THE THIRD TIME.

You have posted many many times here Bob. Just like me. And i can't go back and find all your posts. But I clearly remember you stating in the Winter concession vote on these boards that labor needed to concede even again back then so we could emerge from BK and then YOU and we could judge whether this team wil take those concessions and turn the company around. You said you would JUDGE them if they didn't do it right that time.

Well, here we sit. And you make excuses again from your perch. The only new reality that hasn't transformed yet in this industry is SENIOR MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION. No adjustmenet there and no words from you either on it. Just how much did Bronner have to shell out for Lakefield besides the $4.5 mil for Siegel who gets to keep the stock award as well. And then there is the issue of the "retention bonuses" that Lakefield just approved. And I would bet some cash with you that Cohen was given a handsome package for NOT walking away this past Friday.

Yea, no words on that either from you.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Bob,

Just one minor point...

"The bottom line will be 28,000 jos will disappear from the airline industry in under a year OR some number of jobs LESS than 28,000 will be left largely intact with OK but not stellar wages."

Unlike steel, where many of the jobs disappeared offshore, in this industry many of the jobs will still exist. If we closed the doors tomorrow, folks like you who plan to travel next week, next month, or whenever, will still travel. Other carriers will fill in the void - not overnight in all places, but in fairly short order. In doing that, they will need people.

Not every U employee would find another job in the industry, but many could. Would starting over be a wonderful experience - not hardly. But I've seen many from 4 different airlines do just that, with quite a few over 50. And for many, starting over somewhere else is no worse than what's likely to be asked of them here.

Jim

 

[cavalier]

JEEEZUS H KEYRIST as you put it has NOTHING to do with this Bob.


The term RAPE makes you cringe, as does your blatant disrespect of my Lord.


The more insane posts you post like this the bigger the fool you become.

 

[MrAeroMan]

Unlike steel, where many of the jobs disappeared offshore, in this industry many of the jobs will still exist. If we closed the doors tomorrow, folks like you who plan to travel next week, next month, or whenever, will still travel. Other carriers will fill in the void - not overnight in all places, but in fairly short order. In doing that, they will need people.

Not every U employee would find another job in the industry, but many could. Would starting over be a wonderful experience - not hardly. But I've seen many from 4 different airlines do just that, with quite a few over 50. And for many, starting over somewhere else is no worse than what's likely to be asked of them here.

Jim

Jim,

I agree with you in part here but one thing is for sure. While the void will be filled by a mix of the LCC's and a select few legacy carriers it's only a matter of time before the same sets of choices are put before those legacy carriers employees. The LCC's balance sheets are much "meaner and cleaner" than the legacy carriers balance sheets and that "Other" column that is killing UAIR right how and is pretty much empty for the LCC's. The legacy carriers are all going to have to address how to pay for the billions in losses they have accrued over the past few years while the LCC's don't have to do that. One of the largest cost items is employee costs and I'm sure that is where they will concentrate their efforts and try to drive costs out of the business to narrow the gap on the losses. UAIR employees are the first to see this but there is no way they are going to be the last. Saying no to protect the industry is an honorable thing to do but it's not going to stop the inevitable.

 

[ITRADE]

My point is this: If the company wins the upcoming arbitration and there is no agreement with the IAM to cost effectively conduct overhaul, then the Pittsburgh B737 maintenance facility will likely be closed or could be moved to a location where English is not spoken very well in the meantime.

You mean, they're gonna move maintenance to California??????