It's Official Atsb Says "no"

Boomer said:
Based on that claim, I presume you would both be in favor of removing the airlines from the RLA and placing them under the less restricitve covenants of the NLRB?
Click to expand...
I certainly can't speak for avek00, but I am absolutely in favor of ending the absurdity of the RLA coverage.

But let's be clear here. UA is part of "the fundamental and essential air service for this country," just as every other airline is part of it. It's just that none are such a significant part that everything would fall to pieces if any one of them disappeared tomorrow.
 
Boomer said:
mweiss,

Both you and AVEK claim that UAL is not part of the fundamental and essential air service for this country.

Based on that claim, I presume you would both be in favor of removing the airlines from the RLA and placing them under the less restricitve covenants of the NLRB?

In other words, Clinton would have been forbidden to order the AA Pilots back to work or intervene in the Flight Attendant strike; although, we're still linterested in the "Focal Points" of those particular interests;-)
Click to expand...
I don't think Mweiss was implying that air service is not an essential and vital part of the nation's economy. What he was saying in my understanding is that no one airline is essential and vital to the nation's economy. Not just UAL, any airline.

Even if WN were to disappear tomorrow, the void would be quickly filled by the remaining airlines. We have too many airplane seats chasing too few butts today. And, don't give the me the argument that if airfares are low enough that people will fill those seats. That's already happening. Houston, we have a problem. Most airlines are losing money at the current fare levels.

If you want just basic transportation from Point A to Point B and don't care that you have no choice in air travel other than the basic brown bus type flying, then just wait awhile. At this rate, you are going to get it.

Don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with the LCCs. They fill a need. But, personally, I don't want to face flying NY-LA with nothing other than a bag of peanuts and no leg room even with my own TV screen. But, that''s just me.
 
Well.... I think the sad truth here is that UAL failed to prove the following:

1. It failed to prove it was locked out of financial markets.

2. It failed to prove its financial condition was a direct result of 9/11.

Look... UAL already received a great deal of assistance from the federal govt. The federal government paid out claims to the 3000 or so families of victims from the terrorist attack, and further, shielded UAL (and AMR) from probably billions of dollars in negligence lawsuits. No other airline got this special treatment. When AMR dropped a plane on a neighborhood in Rockaway, the gov't did not step in and pay those victims... No that will be left to AMR and its insurance companies.

I am tired of this "we are UAL, we deserve more" crap. Is UAL an important, maybe even fundamental, part of our air transportation network? Yes. Have important and maybe even fundamental airlines failed and vanished before? Yes.

UAL had three chances to prove that it qualified for the loan, and yet did not. Its not like UAL was the only denial, just the largest one.

I tend to agree with the others who say UAL will emerge a stronger competitor as a result of this decision.
 
The Ronin said:
Do you think we should hire 2 more VP's to explain to us what the ATSB meant by saying NO????
Click to expand...
Heavens, no! I think ONE vice-president and a special assistant to the Chairman should be quite sufficient. :p
 
"I tend to agree with the others who say UAL will emerge a stronger competitor as a result of this decision."



"Stronger competitor" are code words for $10 an hour, no retirement and expensive medical insurance for unlicensed workers and correspondingly low compensation for licensed employees.

Welcome to the world of Bush/Cheney 2004!

"Americans need to go out and spend more! The economy is great!"

"The savings rate in American is very low. Americans need to save more for their retirement"

Of course, what Bush won't tell you is that unless you're not part of the elite controller manager class (or Texas ol' boy network), any defined benefit plan from your employer is going away.

Same for Kerry. He and his billionair wife could care less.
 
WorldTraveler said:
The irony is that most of United's int'l rights are being rendered less valuable as the US negotiates new treaties with countries - China most recently and the EU (affecting LHR) very possible in the near future.
Click to expand...
If you think LHR is going to open anytime soon, I've got a bridge you might be interested in...
 
Winglet said:
"I tend to agree with the others who say UAL will emerge a stronger competitor as a result of this decision."



"Stronger competitor" are code words for $10 an hour, no retirement and expensive medical insurance for unlicensed workers and correspondingly low compensation for licensed employees.

Welcome to the world of Bush/Cheney 2004!

"Americans need to go out and spend more! The economy is great!"

"The savings rate in American is very low. Americans need to save more for their retirement"

Of course, what Bush won't tell you is that unless you're not part of the elite controller manager class (or Texas ol' boy network), any defined benefit plan from your employer is going away.

Same for Kerry. He and his billionair wife could care less.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with economics... The sale fare of $99 each way coast-to-coast has been around since the early 1980's, despite inflation of around 2-4%... This means this fare has been available in the Regan admin, the Bush Admin, the Clinton Admin, and the second Bush Admin. Why? Because if you raise the bottom fare to $119, apparently less people travel. See.. that there is Supply vs. Demand... Not Bush vs. Kerry.

As for "code words for $10/hr and no retirement", maybe you are right... But why should America West, Frontier, Spirit, et al, be the only airlines to benefit from a competitive wage structure?
 
Why would anyone want a defined benefit pension when a 401k makes so much more, plus I am in control of it! Give me a matching 401k any day. If you switch jobs, roll into an IRA. DBP are 1960s, rust-belt 20th century thinking.

Look at Southwest, 401k and profit sharing, that's it. BUT, no layoffs in their history, ever! How's that for job security?

United has tremendous assets, with routes, gates, and aircraft that LCCs drool over. But the inelasticity of airfares will keep the pressure on wages. That's the real world, folks.

My top 5 list for UAL:
1. Reject pensions
2. Sell DENTK
3. Pull out of South America
4. Get a computer system that is more efficient... Unimatic is 40+ years old!
5. Pay cuts for equity stock options upon BK exit
 
Yes, it appears to be the real world now. As a point of fact, legacy airlines had 401ks in addition to A and B funds. I always max out my 401k even though the limit is pretty small. However, airlines with 401k's, IF they match at all, usually are only 5% which is chump-change. ESOP's used to be the hot thing, now you'd have to be an idiot to tie up your income and savings at the whim of some CEO thief or incompetent.

There are a lot of UAL people that lost hundred's of thousands of dollars mostly due to the incompetence of UAL senior leadership, with their sometimes 400 times the compensation of regular employees. Of course, guys like Goodwin walked away with tens of millions . . . . that they'll admit to.

At least there is no pretense as to class warfare now. If you vote for another Republican for anything, you're nuts. The democrats aren't much better, but at least they're different.
 
Press Release Source: Continental Airlines


Continental Airlines Responds to ATSB Decision Regarding United Airlines Loan Guarantee
Monday June 28, 12:05 pm ET


HOUSTON, June 28 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Continental Airlines (NYSE: CAL - News) today issued the following statement in response to the Air Transportation Stabilization Board's decision regarding the United Airlines application for a federal loan guarantee:
ADVERTISEMENT


"United Airlines is a great franchise with exceptional employees. The more than 70,000 hard-working men and women of United have made tremendous sacrifices in recent years, as have tens of thousands of employees at Continental Airlines and the rest of the industry. In addition, United's efforts to reduce costs and generate additional revenue have made the airline a stronger competitor.

"The wide support among political leaders and others for United's loan guarantee application showed a great commitment to the airline's employees. However, given United's success in reshaping itself, the ATSB and its members made the appropriate decision after their careful and thorough assessment of United's needs and the industry's position. They should be applauded for that decision.

"The challenges facing the U.S. airline industry are many, but the most appropriate course of action is to allow the marketplace to determine the shape of the industry.

"Continental Airlines is confident that private investment and further structural change -- rather than government intervention -- can position United Airlines for success in this difficult environment."
 
WOW!!!! Thanks Continental. I can sleep better at night knowing that I have your approval.

God bless you Gordon Bethune!

737nCH11
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
No need to Vote
Replies
6
Views
1K
synchronicity
S
W
IAM Vote Cancelled
Replies
0
Views
2K
wts54
W
E
United Comments on ATSB Loan Guarantee Decision
Replies
4
Views
1K
UAL24
U
U
Ua Execs Negotiating W/atsb Wed
Replies
9
Views
2K
Busdrvr
B
O
ATSB SUPPORT
Replies
0
Views
1K
ohcaptainron
O

Latest posts

Back
Top