Can you spare a twenty ( $20), please................

[eolesen]

Pshaw... Braniff did themselves in without AA's help.

In 1980, the year before AA started to grow DFW as a hub, BN's annual report stated that "the Company may be unable to continue as a going concern."

In English, "The Company is almost insolvent."

Here are the profit, total debt, and aircraft order commitments for BN starting with 1971 for history, and then 1976 through 1981, the last year that whole year results are available.

Year  Profit/Loss  Debt	Aircraft Orders  
1971  + $8M		$188M	$63M  
1976  + $26M	   $257M	$62M  
1977  + $36M	   $287M	$186M  
1978  + $45M	   $362M	$792M  
1979  - $44M	   $601M	$748M  
1980  - $128M	  $673M	$236M  
1981  - $156M	  $668M	$180M  

1Q82  - $47M loss, bankrupcy filing 2Q82

Up to 1976, debt and aircraft orders stayed consistent. Profits from 1971 climbed from $8M to $26M, which was reasonable considering the economy and oil embargo.

1976 was their last stable year. In 1977, they started to head south. Outstanding aircraft orders almost QUADROUPLED from 1977 to 1978, and their debt almost DOUBLED from 1978 to 1979.

To recap, $375M in losses from 1979 to 1982, and debt growing by $306M in the same timeframe, mostly due to the huge value of aircraft orders placed in 1978.

AA hubbed DFW in July 1981.

AA certainly didn't help BN, however they were clearly "financially troubled" starting in 1977, and were unable to pull out of that situation.



Back to the fare hike...

In English, there's a breaking point where fares go higher than the market can bear, and that's a moving target.

Given how much prices have increased this year alone, I think airlines have reached an equilibrium point.

If so, saying "raise airfares" over and over again won't do any good if the end result is fewer people buying tickets....

 

[frontline]

Fine, let them drive at $4.00 a gallon or stay home. The well has run dry for this Mechanic, and I plan to vote NO on every concession....Bankruptcy, ya say?

Bring it, I'll file my own chapter 13!!!!!!!!!!

I am offended by your disregard for your fellow co-workers livelihoods. And your idiotic logic. More passengers staying home means less revenue for the company and less potential for us to get back what we gave up.

I hope the majority of those who vote have at least some grip on reality and aren't dead set (like you seem to be) on throwing away your job just to snub HQ.

 

[super80fa]

Fine, let them drive at $4.00 a gallon or stay home. The well has run dry for this Mechanic, and I plan to vote NO on every concession....Bankruptcy, ya say?

Bring it, I'll file my own chapter 13!!!!!!!!!!

Most idiotic post I have ever read. If you haven't learned anything from the VOTE NO on every concession mentality (think Eastern Airlines) then why don't you just leave so that the other thousands of employees have a chance.

You negotiate during negotiations. You give some, you get some. Just saying no to everything is plain stupid.

 

[super80fa]

QUOTE DELETED BY MODERATOR



Local, I don't get my feelings hurt on a message board so no worries.

While I respect your opinion, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I like AA and have been here for a little over 20 years and I still enjoy my job. I will agree to what I feel is necessary for the survival of the company when asked, but I won't agree to give up things that I feel aren't necessary. What I really would like to see is a suspension of all bonuses for upper mgmnt until we are out of this mess.

 

[wingit88]

What I really would like to see is a suspension of all bonuses for upper mgmnt until we are out of this mess.

Wouldn't we all.

 

[The Goose]

...
What I really would like to see is a suspension of all bonuses for upper mgmnt until we are out of this mess.

What I'd like to see is 80% of the present supervisor-to-Arpey group sent to the street with those remaining forced to do their respective jobs.

I will agree, though, I'll do what necessary also except I've taken the attitude "You First" towards those in the ozone layer. I have no intent of tolerating the corporate and union lies ever again. If that attitude sends the company (and me) into a financial tailspin, so be it.

 

[eolesen]

What I'd like to see is 80% of the present supervisor-to-Arpey group sent to the street with those remaining forced to do their respective jobs.

That's almost as ignorant as if I were to say 80% of the present TWU work should be outsourced...

Just because you don't see the value in their existence doesn't mean that they're not providing an essential function, Goose.

 

[Bob Owens]

If that attitude sends the company (and me) into a financial tailspin, so be it.

We've been in one since 2003. Most here feel the same way.

 

[Mrs. McFly]

What I'd like to see is 80% of the present supervisor-to-Arpey group sent to the street with those remaining forced to do their respective jobs.

I will agree, though, I'll do what necessary also except I've taken the attitude "You First" towards those in the ozone layer. I have no intent of tolerating the corporate and union lies ever again. If that attitude sends the company (and me) into a financial tailspin, so be it.

Your frustration is understandable. There are, however, plenty of employees and their families that cannot afford to endorse your attitude.

 

[777 fixer]

777fixer, who are you trying to kid? This is the deregulated airline industry. THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES! Some airlines are going to have die in order for this industry to be profitable again. AA in the late 70's was able to clobber Braniff into oblivion and now AA controls DFW. AA with the right management team could do it again. Arpey and the gang are wasting a perfect opportunity to get rid of the trash. What makes you think AA can't clobber these other worthless junk airlines that are right on the edge of Chapter 7?

You still haven't told us your great plan to bring back profitability to the airline industry.

THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES! That's the point I was trying to make. You on the other hand seem to be rather confident that AA would survive your little suicide pact. What you are saying in regards to AA current management team makes no sense. You say "with the right management team". Well if you think that AA would survive your little fare war idea then I guess they have the right management team in place already.

I'm sorry but your fare war idea is not a plan to return to profitability. It's nothing more than Russian roulette.

One last thing, as eolesen has already pointed out AA did not "clobber Braniff into oblivion". As with every other airline that has gone under Braniff did it to it's self. The myth that AA is responsible is just that, a myth. A myth that some people believe without doing some rather easy fact checking.

 

[The Goose]

Your frustration is understandable. There are, however, plenty of employees and their families that cannot afford to endorse your attitude.

You're reading my comments strictly as frustration. Please read them a little differently.

I understand full well the financial state of many employed in the airline industry. Granted, most of it is caused by personal excesses; cars boats, airplanes, jet skis, etc.; basically, it's not cool the prepare for a situation as we're in - item 1, that's what is being counted on by the executive trash; i. e., external financial forces keeping the various unionized workgroups in line for fear of losing the ability to pay for those excesses. That is why the 2003 contract passed before Carty's skulduggery (with the approval of the board of directors) was exposed. It would not have passed a second vote, but it was accepted "on our behalf" by a former member of management-turned-union officer that can not be removed from his $230,000+ per year position as union president due to the twu bylaws.

Make no mistake - we, as a group are going down. The company has no intention of bargaining in good faith, rather, lowballing is their game. The union and company are one in this - Burchette and his lies got him returned to an international union position; he delivered what the company and union wanted and it wasn't good for the membership. I seem to remember comments about sticking his (Burchette) hands in Carmine Romano's pockets, implying a return (within reason) to former pay levels for mechanics, but it was no more than a lie. The company's so-called "improvements" in the one offer received so far have really been more concessions, masked from view.

Lies from the union (we pay for that), and lies from the company (expected). Very little information let loose for the rank and file to ponder (FYI - I got more information from the company re: negotiations via internal memos sent to the floor than from the "union").

I'm sorry some people and families aren't prepared for a pay disruption, but if the writing on the wall wasn't notice by them in 2003, they're probably not well prepared for anything else either whether concerning their employment or anything else.

Much like the industry itself where an over capacity leads to depressed prices, so goes the mechanics. Years ago, the push was on for everyone to go to school and learn computers - everyone did, and the "price", if you will, plummeted - the pay went to hell. The good jobs in that field are for those whose main attribute is the ability to generate negative pressure on command, actual working knowledge not being an issue.

I, like a few others, am willing to step out of my comfort zone and not look back if need be. It may not pay as much, it may pay more, but no matter - I'm willing, and if more were willing to take that step, things may not be what they are today.

 

[Joe Patroni]

You're reading my comments strictly as frustration. Please read them a little differently.

I understand full well the financial state of many employed in the airline industry. Granted, most of it is caused by personal excesses; cars boats, airplanes, jet skis, etc.; basically, it's not cool the prepare for a situation as we're in - item 1, that's what is being counted on by the executive trash; i. e., external financial forces keeping the various unionized workgroups in line for fear of losing the ability to pay for those excesses. That is why the 2003 contract passed before Carty's skulduggery (with the approval of the board of directors) was exposed. It would not have passed a second vote, but it was accepted "on our behalf" by a former member of management-turned-union officer that can not be removed from his $230,000+ per year position as union president due to the twu bylaws.

Make no mistake - we, as a group are going down. The company has no intention of bargaining in good faith, rather, lowballing is their game. The union and company are one in this - Burchette and his lies got him returned to an international union position; he delivered what the company and union wanted and it wasn't good for the membership. I seem to remember comments about sticking his (Burchette) hands in Carmine Romano's pockets, implying a return (within reason) to former pay levels for mechanics, but it was no more than a lie. The company's so-called "improvements" in the one offer received so far have really been more concessions, masked from view.

Lies from the union (we pay for that), and lies from the company (expected). Very little information let loose for the rank and file to ponder (FYI - I got more information from the company re: negotiations via internal memos sent to the floor than from the "union").

I'm sorry some people and families aren't prepared for a pay disruption, but if the writing on the wall wasn't notice by them in 2003, they're probably not well prepared for anything else either whether concerning their employment or anything else.

Much like the industry itself where an over capacity leads to depressed prices, so goes the mechanics. Years ago, the push was on for everyone to go to school and learn computers - everyone did, and the "price", if you will, plummeted - the pay went to hell. The good jobs in that field are for those whose main attribute is the ability to generate negative pressure on command, actual working knowledge not being an issue.

I, like a few others, am willing to step out of my comfort zone and not look back if need be. It may not pay as much, it may pay more, but no matter - I'm willing, and if more were willing to take that step, things may not be what they are today.

Great point and I fully agree. The writing was on the wall to me in 2003 and I started to plan for my eventual departure from the industry at that time. When the layoff came in 2005, it was the opportunity I was looking for. I turned down the 2 recalls that came my way in the last 6 months and now my decisions have shown to be the correct ones. All I can say is to not be afraid of change.

 

[wingit88]

You're reading my comments strictly as frustration. Please read them a little differently.

I understand full well the financial state of many employed in the airline industry. Granted, most of it is caused by personal excesses; cars boats, airplanes, jet skis, etc.; basically, it's not cool the prepare for a situation as we're in - item 1, that's what is being counted on by the executive trash; i. e., external financial forces keeping the various unionized workgroups in line for fear of losing the ability to pay for those excesses. That is why the 2003 contract passed before Carty's skulduggery (with the approval of the board of directors) was exposed. It would not have passed a second vote, but it was accepted "on our behalf" by a former member of management-turned-union officer that can not be removed from his $230,000+ per year position as union president due to the twu bylaws.

Make no mistake - we, as a group are going down. The company has no intention of bargaining in good faith, rather, lowballing is their game. The union and company are one in this - Burchette and his lies got him returned to an international union position; he delivered what the company and union wanted and it wasn't good for the membership. I seem to remember comments about sticking his (Burchette) hands in Carmine Romano's pockets, implying a return (within reason) to former pay levels for mechanics, but it was no more than a lie. The company's so-called "improvements" in the one offer received so far have really been more concessions, masked from view.

Lies from the union (we pay for that), and lies from the company (expected). Very little information let loose for the rank and file to ponder (FYI - I got more information from the company re: negotiations via internal memos sent to the floor than from the "union").

I'm sorry some people and families aren't prepared for a pay disruption, but if the writing on the wall wasn't notice by them in 2003, they're probably not well prepared for anything else either whether concerning their employment or anything else.

Much like the industry itself where an over capacity leads to depressed prices, so goes the mechanics. Years ago, the push was on for everyone to go to school and learn computers - everyone did, and the "price", if you will, plummeted - the pay went to hell. The good jobs in that field are for those whose main attribute is the ability to generate negative pressure on command, actual working knowledge not being an issue.

I, like a few others, am willing to step out of my comfort zone and not look back if need be. It may not pay as much, it may pay more, but no matter - I'm willing, and if more were willing to take that step, things may not be what they are today.

I get what you are saying, but there are those of us who are not living high on the hog and indulging in the personal excesses that you speak of. There are many who have been financially prudent, but still cannot afford to endorse the cavalier attitudes held by some. I don't want to come off like a management or union apologist because that I am definitely not, but I also can't bring myself to rally wholeheartedly around those that welcome a bitter fight that could lead to a breakdown of the company.

 

[The Goose]

That's almost as ignorant as if I were to say 80% of the present TWU work should be outsourced...

Just because you don't see the value in their existence doesn't mean that they're not providing an essential function, Goose.

I've never seen the value in the same old crap - that's what American's mismanagement has to offer.

On this site or somewhere else (I honestly can't remember) a person made a comparison that made a lot of sense; AMR's management "Team", from the top down, is badly inbred, for lack of a better illustration. No new blood and ideas have entered the arena for years, leaving those in charge literally inbred in their thinking as the stereotypical hillbilly clan.

It's not that I don't see the value in their existence, but they have been unable to perform any practical function. I see no value in perpetual stagnation.

 

[Mrs. McFly]

I've never seen the value in the same old crap - that's what American's mismanagement has to offer.

On this site or somewhere else (I honestly can't remember) a person made a comparison that made a lot of sense; AMR's management "Team", from the top down, is badly inbred, for lack of a better illustration. No new blood and ideas have entered the arena for years, leaving those in charge literally inbred in their thinking as the stereotypical hillbilly clan.

It's not that I don't see the value in their existence, but they have been unable to perform any practical function. I see no value in perpetual stagnation.

AA's management is not perfect and may have aided in causing the current mess the airline finds itself in, but the inflexibility and unwillingness of many others to adapt to the changes that must be made in the industry is also harmful. High fuel prices have helped to reveal the full scope of the issues at AA, and assaulting each party's intelligence is certainly not going to solve any problems.