No Ruling Till The 31st

[ualdriver]

broke@sfo-

But what would you get if you worked until 62? 65? If you can afford to retire at 60, that's great. I don't know many people who can afford to retire at 60, especially now, and the SSA pegs average retirement age for men in the US in the mid 60's. But what would your benefits be if you worked a couple of years extra? The PBGC benefit goes up quite dramatically if one works to an average retirement age.

ualdriver

 

[ualdriver]

UAL driver should have checked into it before he made that statement. The fact is that pilots make much, much more than other workers and if he agreed to match Jet Blue if everyone else did then he would be hit much worse than most other workers.

Ummmm........Bob? We did get hit MUCH worse that not only most other workers. All the workers!

And what the heck does it matter if my pension costs more than another employee groups' pension? Of course it does! I earn more than them! What is all that banter about retirement age supposed to mean? That it costs more to fund my pension than it does a ramper's pension? No kidding! A mechanic's pension is going to cost more than a ramper's pension as well, as it should. Are you going to write a few paragraphs about that fact as well?


Now even with the big cuts you are taking, if you adjust your lifestyle accordingly you will still enjoy a better than average lifestyle, however the same is not true for the other lower paid workers. Pilots will still recieve more than enough to cover the essentials, other workers will not and will be forced back to work. So despite the fact that raw numbers indicate that pilots and higher paid workers are losing more the real test to see who is really getting screwed worse would be to ask both parties if they would be willing to trade places with the other. My guess is that no pilot would rather trade places with an FA or other low paid worker but every FA or other low paid worker would gladly trade places with the pilot.

The fact of the matter is that pilots have been very well paid.....So yes, the lower paid groups have every right to be pissed and for you to say they are being hurt the least is simply the revealation of your narcisistic arrogant ego.


Bob, you're wrong. If you truly are a lower paid worker in retirement, the PBGC will cover MOST IF NOT ALL of the pension lost. The only thing that will change is who sends you the check. So if your hypothetical "low earner" was scraping by with a $1000/month pension check and is currently retired, he's still going to get that $1000/month pension check FROM THE PBGC. If he had to go back to work, then it had nothing to do with losing his UAL pension.

Second of all, you have absolutely wrong to completely exaggerate and misrepresent my perceived "better than average" lifestyle or that of my peers. The vast majority of us didn't get any special breaks in life. We all paid our dues and pursued the careers of our choice through YEARS AND YEARS of hard work and financial sacrifice. If my retirement or lifestyle is better than yours or anyone else's because I worked hard to get there, then tough! I don't owe you or anyone else anything "extra" just becaue I earn more. Do the math. I'm taking a bigger % hit than anyone else on the property, whether it's my gross pay OR my pension. If you don't like it Bob, then when it comes time to make some tough decisions over on your property, you can burn that house down too. That'll teach those evil high earners a lesson!

And it's not narcissim or ego there Bob. Maybe it's your ridiculous sense of entitlement? Woe is you because you only pull in $40,000/year and that evil first officer you know pulls in $70K? And that Captain, oh my god, he's making $120K? Man, if someone is earning more than Bob Owens, then Bob Owens DESERVES something "extra" in return. Give me a break.

Every employee on the property Bob has the right to be pissed. If they're pissed, go on strike. Burn the place down. Whatever. There may be a lot of people collecting unemployment benefits on or about June 1st. Perhaps they can use those benefits to obtain an education or vocation that will allow them to enjoy the same perceived benefits that I or others have spent their life pursing instead of complaining about them.

 

[Bob Owens]

ualdriver,May 25 2005, 05:26 PM]
UAL driver should have checked into it before he made that statement. The fact is that pilots make much, much more than other workers and if he agreed to match Jet Blue if everyone else did then he would be hit much worse than most other workers.

Ummmm........Bob? We did get hit MUCH worse that not only most other workers. All the workers!

Not in the context of your statement about going to JetBlue rates you werent.

And what the heck does it matter if my pension costs more than another employee groups' pension? Of course it does! I earn more than them! What is all that banter about retirement age supposed to mean? That it costs more to fund my pension than it does a ramper's pension? No kidding! A mechanic's pension is going to cost more than a ramper's pension as well, as it should. Are you going to write a few paragraphs about that fact as well?

I'll try and be brief. The fact is that you produce for less years but put a much bigger burden on the company than other workers. You are complaining that you lost more out of your 80 hours a month than they lost from their 200 hours per month. Well the fact is that you still have a ways to go before you could match what you could get as a pilot if UAL fails. The fact is you have more to lose therefore it follows that you would be willing to give up more rather than risk losing all that UAL offers you. However you dont seem to look at it that way. You feel that those who get much much less should give up as much as you. Well not only why, but how, could they? They dont get that much from UAL to start with.


Bob, you're wrong. If you truly are a lower paid worker in retirement, the PBGC will cover MOST IF NOT ALL of the pension lost.

Well what about those who are still working?As far as those that are retired they can thank you for their pay cut because you guys folded.

The only thing that will change is who sends you the check. So if your hypothetical "low earner" was scraping by with a $1000/month pension check and is currently retired, he's still going to get that $1000/month pension check FROM THE PBGC. If he had to go back to work, then it had nothing to do with losing his UAL pension.

No it could be that he lost his medical coverage.

Second of all, you have absolutely wrong to completely exaggerate and misrepresent my perceived "better than average" lifestyle or that of my peers.
The vast majority of us didn't get any special breaks in life. We all paid our dues and pursued the careers of our choice through YEARS AND YEARS of hard work and financial sacrifice.

Do you think that makes you unique?Look, I think you should make a good wage. I just think that when things go south its wrong for you to expect others who are scaping by to make more concessions so you can keep what you feel you earned. If you earned it then YOU should fight to keep it. I met the head of your MEC at a 9-11 function hosted by the APA a few years back. He was already saying "You got to know when to fold em" and saying that everyone had to give concessions.

If my retirement or lifestyle is better than yours or anyone else's because I worked hard to get there, then tough! I don't owe you or anyone else anything "extra" just becaue I earn more.


Who said you did? People who are just getting by dont owe you anything either.

Do the math. I'm taking a bigger % hit than anyone else on the property, whether it's my gross pay OR my pension.


So, you felt it was worth it for you. Even after the cuts you must still be doing better than if you went elsewhere.Other workers may not feel the same way. Just because you gave up more why should other workers feel that they should?

If you don't like it Bob, then when it comes time to make some tough decisions over on your property, you can burn that house down too.

You can count on the fact that no matter what they threaten us with I will vote NO for concessions. To me its not worth it. Let them shut down and I'll collect unemployment till I find something else.


And it's not narcissim or ego there Bob. Maybe it's your ridiculous sense of entitlement?

Entitlement? Why do you say that? Because I dont feel that since you willingly gave away what you feel you earned instead of fighting for it that everyone else should be willing to do the same?

Woe is you because you only pull in $40,000/year and that evil first officer you know pulls in $70K? And that Captain, oh my god, he's making $120K? Man, if someone is earning more than Bob Owens, then Bob Owens DESERVES something "extra" in return. Give me a break.

No, did I say that? If I only pull in $40G should I pay them $10G so then I would lose as much as you agreed to? I would say No, I still want my whole $40G because I'm more than worth it. If the company doesnt agree I'm willing to strike, then we can see if I'm right. If the pilot gave up $50G then maybe he really didnt feel he was worth $120G. What can I say? Thats his choice.Maybe he figures $73/hr is still pretty good.



Every employee on the property Bob has the right to be pissed. If they're pissed, go on strike. Burn the place down. Whatever. There may be a lot of people collecting unemployment benefits on or about June 1st. Perhaps they can use those benefits to obtain an education or vocation that will allow them to enjoy the same perceived benefits that I or others have spent their life pursing instead of complaining about them.

 

[ualdriver]

Bob, first of all, you're not even a United Airlines employee. I think I'm starting to understand why you're here commenting on what's going on. Perhaps some restructuring will be occurring at your airline as well very soon? Perhaps if you can "cajole" other airline employees to fall on their sword you won't have to fall on yours? I think I'm starting to see a conflict of interest.

I produce less, Bob? Really? Last I looked, I'm a full time employee at UAL with 10 days off a month and just about 20 days away from home every month. What was I thinking? That's part time work. I guess the real work is in the break room watching TV between flights.

Bob, I'm not asking that anyone else give MORE than me. I'm asking that they give up the SAME as me. Not as a gross number, Bob. A percentage. If it's OK to ask me for a 40% pay cut the first time around, then it should be OK to ask everyone else for a 40% pay cut. It doesn't matter IF YOU THINK I HAVE MORE TO LOSE and therefore I should give up more. That's YOUR opinion. Not mine. And FYI, at this point I don't have more to lose.

Bob, your analogies about FIGHTING are bogus. Absolutely ridiculous. You see, Bob, my definition of FIGHTING and your definition and understanding of FIGHTING are two very different things. You see Bob, you don't read about ALPA in the press every other week threating to strike or slowdown or whatever because it is a BIG WASTE OF TIME. To guys like you, Bob, it's really cool when the AFA and the IAM are in the press sabre rattling because it sounds like they're actually doing someting, doesn't it? Name ONE thing that either of these unions got by FIGHTING so far? One thing Bob. You can't. You know why? Because they got NOTHING for it. While the IAM and AFA are in the press or on their websites THREATING to strike, ALPA is in the background talking to the people who REALLY matter and are getting extras like bonds to distribute to their membership and additional retirement contributions. AMFA got a little extra too. You didn't see them "fighting" in the press like other unions, did you? Did they roll over too? Or were they smart enough to realize where the real fight is......in the courtrooms actually doing something for their membership, not in the press. When the AFA and IAM membership get a clue as to where the real fight is, maybe they'll get some extras too instead of threatening to send their entire membership to the unemployment line.

The problem with "unionists" like you, Bob, is that you have lots of understanding of "fight" but you have zero understanding what it takes to run a business and that eventually, your COSTS have to be less than your REVENUE or your company dies. Even if every union on the property of UAL gave management the finger and said, "full pay to the last day (my personal favorite)" and refused to take one penny of a paycut, we still would have lost our pensions, our retirees still wouldn't have their medical benefits, and to top it off, EVERYONE WOULD HAVE BEEN OUT OF A JOB. You call that fighting, Bob? Fighting for what? You have to fight smart Bob, not like a suicidal maniac. Fall on your own sword.

Bob, go back to your airline. Whether UAL survives or not, you guys have some serioius restrucuting to do. And you had better start saving for a rainy day in your future because if you represent your unions' mentality, it sounds like you're going to need it.

 

[spacewaitress]

While the IAM and AFA are in the press or on their websites THREATING to strike, ALPA is in the background talking to the people who REALLY matter and are getting extras like bonds to distribute to their membership and additional retirement contributions.

I hate to say it but I have to agree...AFA is intent on battling windmills. It's just plain dumb to be raising hell about losing our pensions now that they're lost. AFA always seems to end up involved in some grand scheme (ChangeAmerica.com) that has nothing to do with the bread and butter issues of its members, especially its members that provide over 1/3 of its resources. They are worst than UAL at finding stupid ways to fritter away our $$.

It happens over and over and over again.

Watch out Frontier flight attendants!

 

[casual rat]

It really amazes me that we all work for the same company....it does...everyone has a different perspective than everyone else. My group is 'more right' than yours is....That's why I hope it 'burns'. We've reached pathetic--in general.

 

[UAL_TECH]

It really amazes me that we all work for the same company....it does...everyone has a different perspective than everyone else. My group is 'more right' than yours is....That's why I hope it 'burns'. We've reached pathetic--in general.

[post="273500"][/post]​

Sad but true......

Take Care,
B) UAL_TECH

 

[Bob Owens]

ualdriver,May 27 2005, 01:22 AM]
Bob, first of all, you're not even a United Airlines employee. I think I'm starting to understand why you're here commenting on what's going on. Perhaps some restructuring will be occurring at your airline as well very soon? Perhaps if you can "cajole" other airline employees to fall on their sword you won't have to fall on yours? I think I'm starting to see a conflict of interest.


Well I've heard that before. The fact is that when we were in the position of voting on concesions I was stongly against it, much to the chagrin of the TWU International. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to sell the plan and we nearly foiled it with the help of a $13,000 ad in the Tulsa World. In fact in part they removed me from elected office due to my opposition to the concessions.

I produce less, Bob?

Less years, correct. You must retire at 60 whereas most other people retire at 65.

Really? Last I looked, I'm a full time employee at UAL with 10 days off a month and just about 20 days away from home every month. What was I thinking? That's part time work. I guess the real work is in the break room watching TV between flights.

Did I say anything about you being part time?

Bob, I'm not asking that anyone else give MORE than me. I'm asking that they give up the SAME as me. Not as a gross number, Bob. A percentage. If it's OK to ask me for a 40% pay cut the first time around, then it should be OK to ask everyone else for a 40% pay cut. It doesn't matter IF YOU THINK I HAVE MORE TO LOSE and therefore I should give up more. That's YOUR opinion. Not mine. And FYI, at this point I don't have more to lose.

Well actually I dont think you should give up anything, however you seem willing to do so, and because you are willing to do so you seem to feel that everyone else, even those who are in a totally different position, should also be willing. Perhaps you are more willing because even after the cut you are still doing pretty good, or perhaps you guys have something in there that will get you back up faster like the pilots at AA who like every other group gave 25% but got a 9% snapback after the first year. Perhaps its because with your long progressions your actaul raises over the next four years(because of the step raises) will likely keep you ahead of inflation.

Perhaps you are willing because you can afford it. However for most other workers thats probably not the case. If they took as big of a percentage cut as YOU WERE WILLING to take they may be better off unemployed.

When you guys got your big raises a few years back did everyone else get as big of a raise? If not, then why should thery give as big of a percentage cut? The fact is even if you took a 50% cut it would be unreasonable to expect flight attendants or other lower paid workers to accept such cuts.

Bob, your analogies about FIGHTING are bogus. Absolutely ridiculous. You see, Bob, my definition of FIGHTING and your definition and understanding of FIGHTING are two very different things. You see Bob, you don't read about ALPA in the press every other week threating to strike or slowdown or whatever because it is a BIG WASTE OF TIME. To guys like you, Bob, it's really cool when the AFA and the IAM are in the press sabre rattling because it sounds like they're actually doing someting, doesn't it? Name ONE thing that either of these unions got by FIGHTING so far? One thing Bob. You can't. You know why? Because they got NOTHING for it. While the IAM and AFA are in the press or on their websites THREATING to strike, ALPA is in the background talking to the people who REALLY matter and are getting extras like bonds to distribute to their membership and additional retirement contributions.


OK, so there is one little perk you got-Bonds. By the way ALPA has a history of striking and threatening to strike. But I doubt that when the company says that "$300/hr pilots wont accept concessions to save company" (I know very few ever see $300/hr but it doesnt matter, thats what the public will hear) that ALPA will get much public support. I also think that ALPA is still concerned that if they do resort to a job action that the McCain & Lott will pull out SR1327 again.

AMFA got a little extra too. You didn't see them "fighting" in the press like other unions, did you?

Yea, we do. You just have to lok a little harder because they dont seem to get the coverage that the other unions get.

Did they roll over too? Or were they smart enough to realize where the real fight is......in the courtrooms actually doing something for their membership, not in the press. When the AFA and IAM membership get a clue as to where the real fight is, maybe they'll get some extras too instead of threatening to send their entire membership to the unemployment line.

The fact is that for working people the courtroom is the last place you want to fight, better to do it on the shop floor where you have leverage. Most of the judges are in the back pockets of corporate interests anyway, lets face it, what can unions or working people have to offere a judge? Rule in favor of corporataions and when they decide to step down from the bench and the "friends" they made during their tenure will have a nice cozy job waiting for them.

The problem with "unionists" like you, Bob, is that you have lots of understanding of "fight" but you have zero understanding what it takes to run a business and that eventually, your COSTS have to be less than your REVENUE or your company dies. Even if every union on the property of UAL gave management the finger and said, "full pay to the last day (my personal favorite)" and refused to take one penny of a paycut, we still would have lost our pensions, our retirees still wouldn't have their medical benefits, and to top it off, EVERYONE WOULD HAVE BEEN OUT OF A JOB. You call that fighting, Bob? Fighting for what? You have to fight smart Bob, not like a suicidal maniac. Fall on your own sword.

Well if SWA can put out the same product at a lower cost with higher wages then maybe the company should die and make room for companies with successful business plans than can pay good wages.

The fact is that there is a minimum amount that people need just to provide the basics. Should everyone else work for an insufficient wqage to cover the basics because you gave up 40%? Costs, well you guys represent the biggest costs of all workers. Not only that, there are a lot more of you. Certainly a lot more pilots than mechanics. Maybe instead of having 777 or 747 captains making those huge figures they should make the same as a 737 Captain? Have one pay rate for Captains and one for FOs with the Captain getting a small overide like $1.75 over the FO like a crew chief gets over a mechanic. Mechanics get paid the same regardless of what aircraft they work on, why shouldnt pilots? Maybe thats one luxury that airlines can no longer afford? Why should a 747/777 pilot get paid any more than a 737 pilot?Bring the 737 pilots pay up and the 777 pilots pay down.

Bob, go back to your airline.

I dont have an airline, I just work for one.

Whether UAL survives or not, you guys have some serioius restrucuting to do. And you had better start saving for a rainy day in your future because if you represent your unions' mentality, it sounds like you're going to need it.

Unfortunately for us, the TWU has your mentality.So go ahead and give the cuts if you like. In 2006 the TWU and the other company unions will simply give more cuts and UAL will be in the same posaition as before. Are you willing to give more cuts after this? I doubt many mechanics are.

 

[ualdriver]

Well I've heard that before. The fact is that when we were in the position of voting on concesions I was stongly against it, much to the chagrin of the TWU International. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to sell the plan and we nearly foiled it with the help of a $13,000 ad in the Tulsa World. In fact in part they removed me from elected office due to my opposition to the concessions.

Bob, your airline needs concessions. Mine does too. Go to the investor relations page, Bob. Take a look at the numbers that your company filed with the SEC. For the first quarter of '05, you're about 162M in the red. You can fight concessions all you want Bob. The simple fact of the matter is that your airline has to have revenues that exceed its costs in the long term. when labor is 33% of your airline's total expenses, and fuel is the other 20% you can't control, labor's going to take a hit or the airline will liquidate. And if you go to another airline job, chances are you're going to accept the same (or similar) wages and workrules that you just shot down at your last airline, only now you're going to be at the bottom of someone else's seniority list. Like I said Bob, fall on your sword. You'll gain nothing.

Well actually I dont think you should give up anything, however you seem willing to do so, and because you are willing to do so you seem to feel that everyone else, even those who are in a totally different position, should also be willing................. If they took as big of a percentage cut as YOU WERE WILLING to take they may be better off unemployed.

Hey Bob, read my lips. IF YOU OR ANYONE ELSE AT YOUR AIRLINE OR MY AIRLINE OR ANYONE ELSE DOESN'T LIKE THE PAYCUTS THEN GO ON STRIKE AND BURN THE PLACE DOWN!! Bob, do you hear me? If there's an employee at my airline or yours that doesn't like their wages, then STRIKE AWAY, LEAVE, STAY, WHATEVER! Do you hear me, Bob? Stop telling me that I'm telling other employees to behave one way or the other. I certainly have opinions about what I think would be a stupid move on ANY unions part (including mine) to think that a strike would somehow HELP their position, but all the unions on the property will probably be free to shut the airline down if they decide to do so.

OK, so there is one little perk you got-Bonds. By the way ALPA has a history of striking and threatening to strike. But I doubt that when the company says that "$300/hr pilots wont accept concessions to save company" (I know very few ever see $300/hr but it doesnt matter, thats what the public will hear) that ALPA will get much public support. I also think that ALPA is still concerned that if they do resort to a job action that the McCain & Lott will pull out SR1327 again


Bob, we got two HUGE perks. 550M in convertible notes is not "little." An extra 3% in our C fund is not little, especially for the younger members. AMFA getting 10's of millions for their smaller group is not "little." There are no more $300/hr pilots, Bob. There practically were never any $300/hr pilots. And ALPA was never of the mindset that a strike was a solution to this #### sandwich we've been handed. We negotiated, took REASONABLE positions, and got something for leading instead of taking our fight to the Chicago Tribune or some professor's classroom. Unfortunatley, you just don't get it.

Unfortunately for us, the TWU has your mentality.So go ahead and give the cuts if you like. In 2006 the TWU and the other company unions will simply give more cuts and UAL will be in the same posaition as before. Are you willing to give more cuts after this? I doubt many mechanics are.

Bob, my mentality is that I look at my company's financials that are filed with the SEC under the punishment of prison time for my CEO if he's lying about ANY number on that paper, I crunch some numbers doing some VERY SIMPLE adding and subtracting, and I think to myself: is my CEO coming after my pay just for $hits and giggles or is my company really in need of relief? If the answer is the former, THEN it is time to draw the proverbial "line in the sand." If the answer is the latter, I think about how much the company needs and realize that although it sucks, sometimes you have to do what's difficult in the short term in order for a better long term. You, on the other hand, let emotion get in the way, jump and down, yell and scream, and get absolutely nowhere. In fact, that makes your situation worse and probably will lead to needing MORE pay cuts down the road. Maybe your membership saw that and you didn't?

Listen, Bob. You're a bitter, angry person. I can understand that. But I don't think you have a firm grasp of what is happening in the airline industry. I don't think you understand airline business fundamentals. I don't think you grasp what "smart fighting" is. I don't think you understand that "full pay to the last day" is going to work anymore, especially for a company in bankruptcy or approaching it. I don't think you understand that it is not guys at this airline or even your airline that are dragging airline wages and working conditions down to the level they are today. You're getting mad at the wrong people. You really, really need to worry about what's going on at your airline vs. what's happening over here. No matter what happens here, your peers, as well, are going to have a choice between falling on their swords and visiting the unemployment line or evaluating the situation and doing what's right to keep the airline going forward.

If there are so many jobs out there that pay so well as you imply for guys like you and the IAM, perhaps you should consider a change to another field? It's only going to get worse for you very soon. May as well leave now and save yourself the stress.

 

[synchronicity]

Well I've heard that before. The fact is that when we were in the position of voting on concesions I was stongly against it, much to the chagrin of the TWU International. They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to sell the plan and we nearly foiled it with the help of a $13,000 ad in the Tulsa World. In fact in part they removed me from elected office due to my opposition to the concessions.

Bob, your airline needs concessions. Mine does too. Go to the investor relations page, Bob. Take a look at the numbers that your company filed with the SEC. For the first quarter of '05, you're about 162M in the red. You can fight concessions all you want Bob. The simple fact of the matter is that your airline has to have revenues that exceed its costs in the long term. when labor is 33% of your airline's total expenses, and fuel is the other 20% you can't control, labor's going to take a hit or the airline will liquidate. And if you go to another airline job, chances are you're going to accept the same (or similar) wages and workrules that you just shot down at your last airline, only now you're going to be at the bottom of someone else's seniority list. Like I said Bob, fall on your sword. You'll gain nothing.

Well actually I dont think you should give up anything, however you seem willing to do so, and because you are willing to do so you seem to feel that everyone else, even those who are in a totally different position, should also be willing................. If they took as big of a percentage cut as YOU WERE WILLING to take they may be better off unemployed.

Hey Bob, read my lips. IF YOU OR ANYONE ELSE AT YOUR AIRLINE OR MY AIRLINE OR ANYONE ELSE DOESN'T LIKE THE PAYCUTS THEN GO ON STRIKE AND BURN THE PLACE DOWN!! Bob, do you hear me? If there's an employee at my airline or yours that doesn't like their wages, then STRIKE AWAY, LEAVE, STAY, WHATEVER! Do you hear me, Bob? Stop telling me that I'm telling other employees to behave one way or the other. I certainly have opinions about what I think would be a stupid move on ANY unions part (including mine) to think that a strike would somehow HELP their position, but all the unions on the property will probably be free to shut the airline down if they decide to do so.

OK, so there is one little perk you got-Bonds. By the way ALPA has a history of striking and threatening to strike. But I doubt that when the company says that "$300/hr pilots wont accept concessions to save company" (I know very few ever see $300/hr but it doesnt matter, thats what the public will hear) that ALPA will get much public support. I also think that ALPA is still concerned that if they do resort to a job action that the McCain & Lott will pull out SR1327 again
Bob, we got two HUGE perks. 550M in cash is not "little." An extra 3% in our C fund is not little, especially for the younger members. AMFA getting 10's of millions for their smaller group is not "little." There are no more $300/hr pilots, Bob. There practically were never any $300/hr pilots. And ALPA was never of the mindset that a strike was a solution to this #### sandwich we've been handed. We negotiated, took REASONABLE positions, and got something for leading instead of taking our fight to the Chicago Tribune or some professor's classroom. Unfortunatley, you just don't get it.

Listen, Bob. You're a bitter, angry person. I can understand that. But I don't think you have a firm grasp of what is happening in the airline industry. I don't think you understand airline business fundamentals. I don't think you grasp what "smart fighting" is. I don't think you understand that "full pay to the last day" is going to work anymore, especially for a company in bankruptcy or approaching it. I don't think you understand that it is not guys at this airline or even your airline that are dragging airline wages and working conditions down to the level they are today. You're getting mad at the wrong people. You really, really need to worry about what's going on at your airline vs. what's happening over here. No matter what happens here, your peers, as well, are going to have a choice between falling on their swords and visiting the unemployment line or evaluating the situation and doing what's right to keep the airline going forward.

If there are so many jobs out there that pay so well as you imply for guys like you and the IAM, perhaps you should consider a change to another field? It's only going to get worse for you very soon. May as well leave now and save yourself the stress.

[post="273738"][/post]​

Driv er, he won't believe you. I'm sure he's convinced that the airlines are somehow "cooking the books" and not in as deep trouble as they really are, because now they get the chance to really screw labor over. He's convinced that lessors will be able to mae up their losses just fine and real easy in the next few years if UAL comes out of this because they'll just buy new airplanes and lease them to UAL at much higher rates, even though things like lease rates are driven by capital markets overall and not some strange oligopoly, but we'll let that slide. Then again, he's convinced the Fed is just a willing accomplice in the ever present Plan to Screw The Common Worker. And that's assuming my comments about the bath creditors are taking in this mess are "true", cause "he hasn't seen the leases", although anyone with half a brain and a desire to look at the going rates for UAL's debt knows that they're priced as if their only value is as wallpaper or kindling.

But then, I'm a "lawyer", and I get my info on lessors from a BK attorney who was representing one of UAL's creditors, so I'm biased.

I'm consistently amazed at how someone who possesses such strident economic views seems to be so ignorant of much of the workings of finance. Then again, if he really understood much of it, he wouldn 't be able to maintain such strident views.

-synchronicity

PS- there's a reason "real" wages in the airline industry have dropped over the last 25 years. It's called "deregulation". Ya see, before that, airline wages were considerably HIGHER than equivalent counterparts in other industries.

 

[Broke@SFO]

broke@sfo-

But what would you get if you worked until 62? 65? If you can afford to retire at 60, that's great. I don't know many people who can afford to retire at 60, especially now, and the SSA pegs average retirement age for men in the US in the mid 60's. But what would your benefits be if you worked a couple of years extra? The PBGC benefit goes up quite dramatically if one works to an average retirement age.

ualdriver

[post="272950"][/post]​

Under the current agreement that was terminated, I would have recieved $3480 a month. This is at age 62 with 40 years service. Under the PBGC I will now get about $2642. If I wait till I am 65 years old I will get $2832. per month. The only positive thing is if I elect to continue to work past age 65. I can continue to earn my regular mechanic salary at UAL and collect my retirement from the PBGC of $2832. Also, the PBGC will pay appox. 60% of my medical insurance expense.

 

[ualdriver]

Broke, it sucks that you even have to consider continuing to work at UAL beyond the age of 65 to make up the difference. I feel badly that the situation you guys are in, especially so close to retirement and unable to really "save" the difference by putting away a little extra in the bank, even if you could. I didn't realize that the PBGC covered anyone's medical expense. Good luck, and thanks for the info.

 

[North by Northwest]

I know that many @ Ual think my harsh beef is with their airline....it is NOT. It is with the pigs @ the trough that demand this of their workforce and it ripples throuh the industry. Under the
contractual UAL plan that was terminated I would have received
$3,045.00 per month. Under the new plan, i.e. PBGC, I will now only get
$2,173.00. This is a monthly reduction of $872. Or roughly 29%.
Our CEO Glenn Tilton will get a 5 million dollar pension that he has
opted not to terminate. His pension won't be terminated because he says
"I have a contract". Hey Glenn, I also had a "contract" until you
choose to terminate it! This is what Glenn Tilton refers to as "shared
sacrifice".

 

[Retired1]

Broke, you better check again on PBGC paying for health insurance.

 

[Bob Owens]

ualdriver,May 28 2005, 02:29 AM]
Bob, your airline needs concessions. Mine does too.

No they need to cut costs or increase revenue.

You can fight concessions all you want Bob. The simple fact of the matter is that your airline has to have revenues that exceed its costs in the long term.

And you are endorsing long term concessions to correct a short term problem. I dont know how long you have been in this industry but I've been here for 25years and have seen these same excuses before. "Oh the low cost carriers are killing us". "There is too much overcapacity" etc. In the long term the industry will be profitable again with or without concessions, the only question is whether or not we get a livable wage out of the deal. Like I pointed out before your wage is obviously sufficient.The fact is this is a cyclical industry, always has been.

when labor is 33% of your airline's total expenses, and fuel is the other 20% you can't control, labor's going to take a hit or the airline will liquidate.


Well 33 + 20 is only 55%. Simple math as you said. Maybe they need to cut costs somewhere in the other 45%. How much do the airlines need to break even? Are we supposed to set our wages down to the point where at its lowest point the company makes a profit, no matter how badly managed it is?

And if you go to another airline job, chances are you're going to accept the same (or similar) wages and workrules that you just shot down at your last airline, only now you're going to be at the bottom of someone else's seniority list. Like I said Bob, fall on your sword. You'll gain nothing.

But maybe I will lose less. When the EAL workers shut down EAL it briefly slowed down the concessions trend. Maybe the owners of these companies need to know that we would rather see the company shut down and take our chances finding a job in the vacuum created than to work for nothing.

Well actually I dont think you should give up anything, however you seem willing to do so, and because you are willing to do so you seem to feel that everyone else, even those who are in a totally different position, should also be willing................. If they took as big of a percentage cut as YOU WERE WILLING to take they may be better off unemployed.

Hey Bob, read my lips. IF YOU OR ANYONE ELSE AT YOUR AIRLINE OR MY AIRLINE OR ANYONE ELSE DOESN'T LIKE THE PAYCUTS THEN GO ON STRIKE AND BURN THE PLACE DOWN!! Bob, do you hear me? If there's an employee at my airline or yours that doesn't like their wages, then STRIKE AWAY, LEAVE, STAY, WHATEVER! Do you hear me, Bob? Stop telling me that I'm telling other employees to behave one way or the other. I certainly have opinions about what I think would be a stupid move on ANY unions part (including mine) to think that a strike would somehow HELP their position, but all the unions on the property will probably be free to shut the airline down if they decide to do so.

Bob, my mentality is that I look at my company's financials that are filed with the SEC under the punishment of prison time for my CEO if he's lying about ANY number on that paper, I crunch some numbers doing some VERY SIMPLE adding and subtracting, and I think to myself: is my CEO coming after my pay just for $hits and giggles or is my company really in need of relief?


So you are claiming that the numbers submitted to the SEC tell the whole story? The fact is that the purpose of those reports are to make sure the managers of the company are not overvalueing the company. If they include all the worst case scenarios that only makes the SEC more satisfied. What Enron and other companies did was spin the numbers to overvalue the company and they got caught when the company collapsed. If you had read those same reports from Enron you would have thought the company was doing great when in fact they were not. So much for putting complete faith in those reports. Clearly if a company is posting the opposite, projecting that they are doing worse than they actually are and the end result is that the company prospers who is going to balk?


If the answer is the former, THEN it is time to draw the proverbial "line in the sand."

If the answer is the latter, I think about how much the company needs and realize that although it sucks, sometimes you have to do what's difficult in the short term in order for a better long term.


And how will your long term be better if you keep lowering wages? Oh yea, I forgot that you are a pilot and even if you accept pay cuts you will still get raises as you move up along the steps.The fact is that your real wage will never be restored and until you really draw a line in the sand they will keep coming back for more. If they get concessionms from you now, why wouldnt they come back for more? The fact is that even though we now have had two major carriers in BK for over two years both airlines continue to operate and still lose money despite slashing wages. It seems that some are still willing to keep these companies running.

You, on the other hand, let emotion get in the way, jump and down, yell and scream, and get absolutely nowhere.


Wow. Sure would make it hard to type if I was doing all that.
In fact, that makes your situation worse and probably will lead to needing MORE pay cuts down the road.


So far has anyone who recieved concessions hesiated to go for more? Better off to keep as much as you can for as long as you can. At least it gives you a better chance of putting enough away if the company eventually folds. You on the other hand claim that you are better off to work for less to keep what you admit is a failed business plan in play.

Maybe your membership saw that and you didn't?

My membership voted no on concessions by over 90%.

Listen, Bob. You're a bitter, angry person. I can understand that.


Is that your comeback to the question "why should a 747/777 pilot get paid any more than a 737 pilot"? The fact is that mechanics get paid the same no matter what aircraft they work on. Airlines pay less for their mechanics than you pay to have your car serviced at the dealer. The airlines have been getting a bargain from the mechanics since the beginning. In fact SWA has all 737s and has the highest paid mechanics in the airline industry. Maybe thats the key, streamlining pilots pay.

Break down that 33% of labor costs. How much is for the pilots? Half? even though they are only a third or less of the workforce?

Dont you realize that once they have driven everyone elses pay to the point where they cant get anyone to show up that you guys are next?

I'm not degrading your skills but now that they, and apparently you, are content to offer the public airplanes that are "adequately" maintained, maybe with all the sophisticated automated control of aircraft they will also settle for "adequate pilots"?

The fact is that people are willing to pay to flyairplanes, pilots will work for less, lok at how much less Rejional pilots and Air Taxi pilots get paid. I know plenty of people that pay for the fun of flying an aircraft and what could be more fun than flying a Jet? But even though many of us enjoy working on airplanes I've never met anyone who was willing to pay for the fun of fixing or servicing aircraft. High pay and high standards for pilots was part of the sales pitch to get people comfortable with strapping themselves into an aluminum can and going 500 mph eight miles high. Is that really still needed? Or is "the best" no longer affordable and now "adequate" is enough?




If there are so many jobs out there that pay so well as you imply for guys like you and the IAM, perhaps you should consider a change to another field?


I and many of my coworkers have considered it. In fact several have voluntarily left already. It may come to that but before I walk away from a 25 year investment I will fight back as best as I can. If that leaves the industry in ruins and people decide to take trains and busses instead, so be it. I,ve been through this twice before and I'm willing to bet it all that if we fight back that five years from now we will all be better off. More people will be flying in more airplanes than ever before. Just like in the past. In order to do that they will need workers. By the way as a bus mechanic, in a few years I would be at least at what I'm making now, bus drivers get a little less than mechanics.