Mgt Demands Retroactive Paycut For Pilots
- Thread starter Phoenix
- Start date
allegheny1
Member
- Oct 1, 2002
- 84
- 0
To all
As of 9/4/04 the TWU groups have not been given a target number.
Additionally, each time we ask for the number and a date to negotiate we
are stonewalled. Guess is the company can not be bothered with these
small groups until the larger unions have completed negotiations.
regards
As of 9/4/04 the TWU groups have not been given a target number.
Additionally, each time we ask for the number and a date to negotiate we
are stonewalled. Guess is the company can not be bothered with these
small groups until the larger unions have completed negotiations.
regards
how long will the company operate in Chap 11 without a DIP financier? Bronner has said he won't be .... with no meanigful foreseeable pricing improvements and the pitiful pile of debt that the legacy carriers are , who will be interested?... seems like the rest of the discussions about what will happen to unions without TAs by the chap 11 filing is pointless .....without a sucker to finance it.
USA320Pilot said:
320..
As Allegheny 1 has stated, the TWU has not been given any numbers. I talked to several people in OCC this past week who all confirmed this fact. In fact, had you not been running to/from DCA, you would have known the TWU had a union meeting last week to discuss this issue. They had a TWU lawyer present to present options and answer questions.
As soooooooo many people on this board have implored you to do, STOP spreading mis-information. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE SAYING!!
Lindy
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
- Aug 23, 2002
- 2,627
- 945
kiloromeo said:
You actually believe ANYTHING this lying management tells you? YOu may just be the guy that wants to buy this bridge.... :blink:
UAIR has got to go chapter 11, AND ensure that the RSA's equity is WIPED OUT, or this crap will continue forever. The RSA has got to be driven from this property, even if it means the end of UAIR.
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
- Aug 23, 2002
- 2,627
- 945
It's becoming more and more obvious to me that this whole negotiation charade is really just an effort to break all of the unions. They love seeing the ALPA "girlie men" fight with the RC 4/5, and in fact continue to come up with ways to inspire more infighting. The only group to thwart their efforts so far is the IAM, and it is frustrating them to no end. I would bet that when (I say when, because I know that ALPA is being led by folks with NO BACKBONE, except of course the one shoved up there by the RSA) ALPA does agree to accept some heinous company offer that the company will back away AGAIN. The entire goal here is to be able to represent this as good faith negotiating, something that has NOT happened yet. I hope ALL the unions are preparing for the onslaught of legalities coming their way in an effort to leave all the groups at management's wretched hands. It's coming. You can bet on it.
And, hey, twoturnin, do you really think that the commuters will get through this unscathed? After they get done with mainline, get ready. Also, if mainline goes under, which is a distinct possibility, what do you think will happen to the commuters and contract carriers? Hmmm, food for thought, eh?
And, hey, twoturnin, do you really think that the commuters will get through this unscathed? After they get done with mainline, get ready. Also, if mainline goes under, which is a distinct possibility, what do you think will happen to the commuters and contract carriers? Hmmm, food for thought, eh?
jimntx
Veteran
oldiebutgoody said:
Ah yes. This is ALL the fault of RSA. Before RSA, US Airways was nothing but a financial bed of roses. At MBA schools around the nation, US Airways management for the last 15 years have been held up as paragons of perfection in airline management. NOT!
jimntx said:Ah yes. This is ALL the fault of RSA. Before RSA, US Airways was nothing but a financial bed of roses. At MBA schools around the nation, US Airways management for the last 15 years have been held up as paragons of perfection in airline management. NOT!
[post="176377"][/post]
Thanks for the laugh
My son's college professor "business" once told his students that whatever U's management does, do the opposite, he actually did made that statement so yours is even that much more funny!
jimntx
Veteran
700UW said:
No, but what I do know is that all things considered, the Retirement System of Alabama is one of the best (if not THE best) managed retirement systems in the nation. What could the RSA possibly gain from "raiding" US Airways? In the total RSA picture, the US Airways investment is negligible (less than 1% of total assets). Destroying US Airways would only guarantee that the RSA would lose its entire investment.
Personally, I think Dr. Bronner made two mistakes. First, the fact that he invested at all in a failing business--not being tacky, just looking at the facts. Second, he deferred to the "airline professionals" as far as the on-going management of the company.
I agree that he probably doesn't understand that the airline business is, in fact, a different sort of animal, and that he assumed that an airline can be run like any other company. But, he wouldn't be the first to make that mistake now would he?
Given the management that US Airways has and has had over the past 5-10 years, can you honestly say that things would be different today whether the $240 million had come from the RSA, the PTA, or the BSA?
If not, tell me exactly what the RSA has done in the time since they invested in US Airways (less than 2 years IIRC) that has brought your airline to its current state. Not what Siegel, or Lakefield or any of the other CCY denizens has done. What has RSA done?
- Banned
- #88
Let see Dr Bonehead telling whole world he will liquidate US, dropping bookings. (Done this twice)
As Chairman of the Board, willing approving contract violations that benefited his home state.
And approving trying to raid the employees wallets instead of hiring someone who knows how to run an airline.
And the only reason he invested in US as he was going to take a bath on the 737 leases and EETCs.
As Chairman of the Board, willing approving contract violations that benefited his home state.
And approving trying to raid the employees wallets instead of hiring someone who knows how to run an airline.
And the only reason he invested in US as he was going to take a bath on the 737 leases and EETCs.
savyinvestor
Senior
- Jan 15, 2003
- 494
- 0
I just wondered why you were squealing like a stuck pig when you said you weren't a pilot. Now I know thats all. Don't you recall your post saying you weren't a pilot and that you shouldn't give more than the other groups even though you made sooooo much more? Looks like the company agrees with me although I will say their approach is even more than I envisioned. SavyEyeInTheSky said:
EyeInTheSky
Veteran
Savy, I think you need therapy. Now, back to the topic.
