Glass.......

[MarkMyWords]

So then no one ever gets out of their comfort zone to learn about different aspects of the company. While I agree that there are specialty areas where previous experience is important (ie VP Maintenance), there are other areas that it is less important. Nigel was a great Manager / VP. I stand by my comment that had he stayed in that position, he would have done a great job.

 

[700UW]

You learn by starting in a low level position, not starting at the top as VP of a department which you have experience.

 

[calibrator]

I stand by my comment that had he stayed in that position, he would have done a great job.

[post="274634"][/post]​

THOSE WHO HAVE A FAILING PLAN, ABSOLUTELY FAIL.....

 

[insp89]

700UW:

You and I BOTH know who the retention
bonuses are earmarked for, and it's not
your average Joe management employee
in a low level position in CCY or another
department. All that needs to happen is
for Judge Mitchell to split the proposal
into two parts, 1. Retention, 2. Severance.
Then he can rule against the retention part
and rule in favor of the severance.

But.... the unions would STILL whine
because that's what they do.

[post="274619"][/post]​

The "average" Joe management employee has ALREADY received their severance....Every mechanic, pilot, f/a and fleet service worker is now making AT LEAST 18 % less in pay due to the "transformation"...Care to guess what average Joe was required to give up ?? A whopping 1%.....Anyone with a lick of common sense has every right to "whine" about this insanity...

Use this money to help keep Usairways flying ! Better Yet, How about paying some bills Lakefield ?

 

[insp89]

You know in a perfect world I could and would agree.

But there is this nasty thing called reality and the reality is that you can't have attrition at the rate it is occuring and hope to hold the airline together untill the merger is completed.

And for the record some at CCY took a far bigger cut than 1%. The way that is done is "reclassification" and that can result in the same hefty cuts experienced by the unionized workforce.

[post="274648"][/post]​

Well Bob, The "reality" is people at this airline have sacrificed tremendously, [hundreds are furloughed, laid off, whatever you want to call it..]

You can't actually believe that if these people do not get this scam payment, Usairways will have to shut down ??? What a joke...

 

[pitguy]

I took a lot less cut in management than if I were a union person. It was still more than I wanted to bare though. Most management holding on are not because of them holding on for a bonus.

 

[eolesen]

I disagree about not needing experience in the job you are supervising or VP-ing, particularly Inflight.

The flight attendant job is very unique and you should have flown the line (for that airline, on the same aircraft types, under the same contracts) before you start putting out memos telling people how to do thier job.

[post="274629"][/post]​

Your VP isn't putting out those memo's -- they're coming from someone at the analyst or manager level.

The most important skill for any manager, director or VP is the ability to detect BS.

As long as they have the ability to know when they're being fed BS, anyone who is a good manager can lead just about any group.

Now, if the people inbetween the front line and the VP don't have a clue (or are too afraid to tell the their VP the truth), you're screwed.

That's why the retention bonuses for the analyst/supervisor/manager levels are critical.

You can replace the ones who leave, but you can't replace the knowledge and history on past projects and decisions that they take with them. I can't tell you how many times I've seen a new manager come in and try to do the same thing that the previous four managers before them tried to do and had to retract.

 

[SpinDoc]

The unions won't whine, no one has a problem with a regular CCY employee getting severence, no one above manager should get anything and no one should get a retention bonus.

Seems to me you have a case of union envy, and you forget the billions of dollars that those "whiny" union members gave back to this company in concessions has kept this company afloat and still given you a paycheck.

[post="274620"][/post]​

SpinDoc replies:

I agree with you 700. Retention bonuses
are a bad idea. Severance should be paid
just as it is to union personnel who have
their position eliminated.

 

[insp89]

SpinDoc replies:

I agree with you 700. Retention bonuses
are a bad idea. Severance should be paid
just as it is to union personnel who have
their position eliminated.

[post="274671"][/post]​

SpinDoc, Company personnel should be required to participate at the same percentage [at least 18%] in the transformation just as the union personnel did...Company personnel have already received their severance.....

 

[pitguy]

Actually management (excluding upper management) has a better severance package. It is only slightly better though. Upper management negotiated their own deals. I don't see where the bonus will truly help the company. If your here at this point your probably just going to ride it out.

 

[SpinDoc]

SpinDoc, Company personnel should be required to participate at the same percentage [at least 18%] in the transformation just as the union personnel did...Company personnel have already received their severance.....

[post="274676"][/post]​

Don't know what the H-E double hockeysticks
you're talking about. Management salaries
were benchmarked against LCC's and other
industries, and the salary and benefits were
in line with the others. Henceforth, a 1%
salary cut.

Let's face it. Union wages at US were over
inflated by years of capitulation by
management to keep the peace. The
18% union cuts reflect that. Remember,
YOU chose to be in the union and hand
over your income potential to their
negotiators, and unfortunately as a
direct consequence of being in a union,
you also have to accept the declines in
wages that were voted on by your own
union brothers and sisters.

For example, if my salary and benefits
were out of line with others in the same
position in this industry or another industry,
the company could choose to eliminate my
position. I work at will and have no
union protection. On the other hand,
I have the ability to negotiate my own
salary and benefits and am not at the
whim of someone else deciding that for
me.

I think a lot of the animosity that exists
between union personnel and management
rests with the limits that a union places on
individual ability to determine ones own
future, and I'm sorry we have so many
bitter people at US because of this.

Bottom line is that union represented
employees are receiving severance
when their job is eliminated. The company
recognizes this and is only asking Judge
Mitchell to give the same opportunity
to management personnel if their job
is eliminated. HOW IS THAT UNFAIR?

 

[PITbull]

Bull Feathers.......you don't have to be a Flight Attendant to be an effective VP for the Inflight Department. For him to eventually become the Executive VP of Customer Service (Should Al leave) it would have been a tremendous asset for him to have experience in Customer Service, Inflight and Operations.....all areas that fall under the Executive VP. They were grooming him for something much better, where he would have been very effecitve. Much better then what we have now.

[post="274589"][/post]​

Grooming him my eye. I guess they kept it a secret and he had no clue. And there were no concession talks at the time he left. Siegel had just arrived.

 

[insp89]

Don't know what the H-E double hockeysticks
you're talking about. Management salaries
were benchmarked against LCC's and other
industries, and the salary and benefits were
in line with the others. Henceforth, a 1%
salary cut.

Let's face it. Union wages at US were over
inflated by years of capitulation by
management to keep the peace. The
18% union cuts reflect that. Remember,
YOU chose to be in the union and hand
over your income potential to their
negotiators, and unfortunately as a
direct consequence of being in a union,
you also have to accept the declines in
wages that were voted on by your own
union brothers and sisters.

For example, if my salary and benefits
were out of line with others in the same
position in this industry or another industry,
the company could choose to eliminate my
position. I work at will and have no
union protection. On the other hand,
I have the ability to negotiate my own
salary and benefits and am not at the
whim of someone else deciding that for
me.

I think a lot of the animosity that exists
between union personnel and management
rests with the limits that a union places on
individual ability to determine ones own
future, and I'm sorry we have so many
bitter people at US because of this.

Bottom line is that union represented
employees are receiving severance
when their job is eliminated. The company
recognizes this and is only asking Judge
Mitchell to give the same opportunity
to management personnel if their job
is eliminated. HOW IS THAT UNFAIR?

[post="274710"][/post]​

Spin, This has nothing to do with being union or non-union, This has to do with a group of people that were NOT required to participate in concessions to the extent of others....Then, on top of that, Mr. glASS asks the judge for MORE severance money! You've already got your severance....

I'm not too concerned what you think or Don't think about Unions.

Now, I hope you know what the HE** I'm talking about.....

 

[PITbull]

700UW:

You and I BOTH know who the retention
bonuses are earmarked for, and it's not
your average Joe management employee
in a low level position in CCY or another
department. All that needs to happen is
for Judge Mitchell to split the proposal
into two parts, 1. Retention, 2. Severance.
Then he can rule against the retention part
and rule in favor of the severance.

But.... the unions would STILL whine
because that's what they do.

[post="274619"][/post]​

No, I don't think I would, as long as their was a third part (#3). No retention or severance for senior execs.

Then I would shut up.

 

[RowUnderDCA]

Pitbull-

I agree with you because I DO believe that if this merger fails for whatever reason, US should immediately liquidate. It seems to me, that U's bankrutpcy lawyers would KNOW that if they argued to NOT retain executives that they are TOTALLY conceding to the court that U WILL IMMEDIATELY liquidate more like Braniff on May 12, 1982.

That ceding of the premise might be too awkward for other reasons in bankruptcy, understanding that you've got a unsecured creditors committee and many powerful outsiders hoping against hope that U's planes will be scrapped.

Just a guess on my part. Again, I do believe that U should be liquidate.. and passengers potentially stranded and planes corralled, if U fails to merge with HP.