One Less VP
- Thread starter PITbull
- Start date
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
----------------
On 7/10/2003 2:44:21 PM PITbull wrote:
The idea with this management is to be a "smuck"....then you get to stay on and be a part of their club.
----------------
WHAT? Pity you never fail to amaze me! I thought of any person on this board you would be the first to jump up and down and sing at the loss of a VP. So what you really want is to pick and chose who stay''s and who goes. What happened to your analogy of the moldy loaf of bread? Flop-Flop-Flop......pick a side of the fence already.On 7/10/2003 2:44:21 PM PITbull wrote:
The idea with this management is to be a "smuck"....then you get to stay on and be a part of their club.
----------------
Anyone know the reason for his being fired?
LavMan,
I don''t know about Charlie always doing the right thing Amigo?
I remember a night in the Charlotte Hangar breakroom during the push for the 2nd IAM vote on concessions. Charlie stood in front of a standing room only crowd and asked for our cooperation with the company.
Charlie took some direct fire from people that knew thier fate was sealed regardless of the outcome of that vote. You I''m sure knew as many or more than I did that were present.
The main issue taken with him was about his bonus package being awarded...and more CLT Maintenance jobs said to be going to TPA (Another Lie)as we all later found out.
When pressed on the bonus subject...Ole Charlie said his bonus was going to amount to $40,000+..he also defended his reciept of this bonus by saying he had met all his targeted goals...Harsh words for a Mechanic, Utility or Stock person to hear when thier job is going away for good in connection with this.
Examine this thought.. We were failing as a team..but he reached his goals , That does not make a team player..nor a supposed leader of the team my friend.
We all know that as a company we were failing in many respects....and to ask us for more while we are to recieve less was a real slap in the face , coming from a man who was to profit from the efforts and sacrifice of others. Give me a break on his credibility being above reproach.
Doing the right thing invokes things like a sense a shared sacrifice...something Charlie clearly wasn''t interested in. Doing the right thing should have started by his saying NO to the bonus and taking his lumps with his team (Maintenance)..and then maybe more people would have aligned themselves with what he was pumping out? (Doubtful either way?)
The final straw for me with Charlie was this.
He said " I would rather be shot at again in combat than face you folks with this situation".
I found it inflammatory to the veterans in the crowd whom have been shot at in combat.
The reason being this , when did a Navigator in a KC-135 Tanker from the Pa. Air National Guard ever draw hostile fire? Maybe he was speaking loosely? Maybe I took that to much to heart?..but regardless of how it was said or taken...it wasn''t selling soap with anyone present.
I can only assume that Charlie had fallen out of grace with Prestofillipo...and maybe this is the opening shot at breaking up some of the old guard from PIT?...it all happened to the former PI people in leadership positioins...So the new is exactling it''s toll on the old again.
I can only think of one former PI leadership person still being around in the Maintenance and Logistics field...and I hope he can dodge the bullets of change.
Plus let it be said that Charlie was never a big fan of Charlotte...and we suffered job losses before 9-11-01 accordingly ..and this compounded the under utilization of a vastly superior work place in comparison to the ram-shackle faclities in PIT.
Note!! This is not a slap at the workers in PIT in any manner...just speaking the truth on the sub-standard facilities the maintenance employee''s have to endure in. (Been there..done that! , so I can speak on both places objectively.)
You can''t pick your relatives...but you can certainly pick your friends...and Charlie was no friend of mine or CLT Maintenance.
Sorry Charlie....See Ya!!
I don''t know about Charlie always doing the right thing Amigo?
I remember a night in the Charlotte Hangar breakroom during the push for the 2nd IAM vote on concessions. Charlie stood in front of a standing room only crowd and asked for our cooperation with the company.
Charlie took some direct fire from people that knew thier fate was sealed regardless of the outcome of that vote. You I''m sure knew as many or more than I did that were present.
The main issue taken with him was about his bonus package being awarded...and more CLT Maintenance jobs said to be going to TPA (Another Lie)as we all later found out.
When pressed on the bonus subject...Ole Charlie said his bonus was going to amount to $40,000+..he also defended his reciept of this bonus by saying he had met all his targeted goals...Harsh words for a Mechanic, Utility or Stock person to hear when thier job is going away for good in connection with this.
Examine this thought.. We were failing as a team..but he reached his goals , That does not make a team player..nor a supposed leader of the team my friend.
We all know that as a company we were failing in many respects....and to ask us for more while we are to recieve less was a real slap in the face , coming from a man who was to profit from the efforts and sacrifice of others. Give me a break on his credibility being above reproach.
Doing the right thing invokes things like a sense a shared sacrifice...something Charlie clearly wasn''t interested in. Doing the right thing should have started by his saying NO to the bonus and taking his lumps with his team (Maintenance)..and then maybe more people would have aligned themselves with what he was pumping out? (Doubtful either way?)
The final straw for me with Charlie was this.
He said " I would rather be shot at again in combat than face you folks with this situation".
I found it inflammatory to the veterans in the crowd whom have been shot at in combat.
The reason being this , when did a Navigator in a KC-135 Tanker from the Pa. Air National Guard ever draw hostile fire? Maybe he was speaking loosely? Maybe I took that to much to heart?..but regardless of how it was said or taken...it wasn''t selling soap with anyone present.
I can only assume that Charlie had fallen out of grace with Prestofillipo...and maybe this is the opening shot at breaking up some of the old guard from PIT?...it all happened to the former PI people in leadership positioins...So the new is exactling it''s toll on the old again.
I can only think of one former PI leadership person still being around in the Maintenance and Logistics field...and I hope he can dodge the bullets of change.
Plus let it be said that Charlie was never a big fan of Charlotte...and we suffered job losses before 9-11-01 accordingly ..and this compounded the under utilization of a vastly superior work place in comparison to the ram-shackle faclities in PIT.
Note!! This is not a slap at the workers in PIT in any manner...just speaking the truth on the sub-standard facilities the maintenance employee''s have to endure in. (Been there..done that! , so I can speak on both places objectively.)
You can''t pick your relatives...but you can certainly pick your friends...and Charlie was no friend of mine or CLT Maintenance.
Sorry Charlie....See Ya!!
AOG, I was there that night on third shift and I agree with you, but as of late for a couple of years, he knew what the contract language was and if the IAM was right he would let us know and the company know. I have heard much bad about him, but at least we knew where he was coming from, the rest of the new regime feels they can do whatever they want whenever they want.
OP
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #7
Mark,
If Lavman says he was "ok" as a company VP man, then I believe it. Why? Cause Lavman is a true-hearted unionist and always has my attention. And in my opinion has much honor in his "stance".
And you are astute in your findings regarding my opinion of VPs. I still believe we have too many, and the ones that NEED to go ARE THE NEW ONES.
I hope that does not include you. Cause I think you just might be "good people" even if you are management.
If Lavman says he was "ok" as a company VP man, then I believe it. Why? Cause Lavman is a true-hearted unionist and always has my attention. And in my opinion has much honor in his "stance".
And you are astute in your findings regarding my opinion of VPs. I still believe we have too many, and the ones that NEED to go ARE THE NEW ONES.
I hope that does not include you. Cause I think you just might be "good people" even if you are management.
LavMan,
I was there every step of the way when we had the "Ghetto Jets" and B757 Gliders...and I know exactly the few had the privledge of taking all the calls to get them back in the air too.
I also grasp that PIT needed the B737 work..because again , I was around when the Robs of Engines were taking place to get the Origional ones back on the DC-9's and MD-80's for lease return. Surely had the Fokkers remained , that would have under-utilized the folks in PIT as well.
Sometimes I think you are forgeting whom you are addressing with your replies LavMan...I see this big picture un-fold every night...and I see where we make it...as well as break it , both literally and figuratively.
Charlie may have had a good grasp of the contract...and he may have played it down the line? Well and good..but it doesn't change my overall opinion of leaders failing to lead while lining thier collective pockets...when you and I can just go eat cake...or pack sand in thier eyes.
My beef with leaders...are the ones that fail to lead by example...and Charlie should have seen it in exactly those terms , "Lead by Example". Had Charlie stood up and made himself accountable to those he was in charge of (I.E Maintenance , Utility and Stores)...he would have not only made himself more credible in our eyes...it would have also set a tone that other so-called USAirways leaders couldn't have dismissed or ignored...They woud have had to say no to those bonuses. Things have to start somewhere..and it starts with a "Leader"
I view the loss of yet another tainted or failed leader as no loss at all!! I hope it's a chance to correct some mistakes...or bring in a fresh perspective at a minimum.
Yes I was critical of paying retention bonuses to those that helped steer us into the wall of the abyss...and at the rate these folks are dropping out...it only compounds the point
Hopefully the next guy might get it right? We can only hope for the good of us all.
I was there every step of the way when we had the "Ghetto Jets" and B757 Gliders...and I know exactly the few had the privledge of taking all the calls to get them back in the air too.
I also grasp that PIT needed the B737 work..because again , I was around when the Robs of Engines were taking place to get the Origional ones back on the DC-9's and MD-80's for lease return. Surely had the Fokkers remained , that would have under-utilized the folks in PIT as well.
Sometimes I think you are forgeting whom you are addressing with your replies LavMan...I see this big picture un-fold every night...and I see where we make it...as well as break it , both literally and figuratively.
Charlie may have had a good grasp of the contract...and he may have played it down the line? Well and good..but it doesn't change my overall opinion of leaders failing to lead while lining thier collective pockets...when you and I can just go eat cake...or pack sand in thier eyes.
My beef with leaders...are the ones that fail to lead by example...and Charlie should have seen it in exactly those terms , "Lead by Example". Had Charlie stood up and made himself accountable to those he was in charge of (I.E Maintenance , Utility and Stores)...he would have not only made himself more credible in our eyes...it would have also set a tone that other so-called USAirways leaders couldn't have dismissed or ignored...They woud have had to say no to those bonuses. Things have to start somewhere..and it starts with a "Leader"
I view the loss of yet another tainted or failed leader as no loss at all!! I hope it's a chance to correct some mistakes...or bring in a fresh perspective at a minimum.
Yes I was critical of paying retention bonuses to those that helped steer us into the wall of the abyss...and at the rate these folks are dropping out...it only compounds the point
Hopefully the next guy might get it right? We can only hope for the good of us all.
Don''t get me wrong he had is faults and he was still management but he did realize the difference between what was right and what was wrong.
And AOG, the move of the 737s to PIT was far easier to do then to shut PIT down entirely and try to utilize CLT and TPA, I do not know if you were around in 99 when we have the metrojet gliders, a couple of 757 gliders and an aircraft parking lot in front of the hangars in CLT, PIT and TPA.
And AOG, the move of the 737s to PIT was far easier to do then to shut PIT down entirely and try to utilize CLT and TPA, I do not know if you were around in 99 when we have the metrojet gliders, a couple of 757 gliders and an aircraft parking lot in front of the hangars in CLT, PIT and TPA.
----------------
On 7/10/2003 6:30:06 PM MarkMyWords wrote:
Anyone know the reason for his being fired?
----------------
PITbull is not a flip flop logic circuit, her direction is like a laser, straight and never changing, her cause is a just cause in the face of a management team bent on turning a once great airline into a RJ kingdom with slave wages and benefits. I support her and again encourage all labor on the property to come together to stop this tyrannical management. Even though I am not a F/A I am volunteering my time to hand out flyers to the public explaining the reality of working at U under this management.On 7/10/2003 6:30:06 PM MarkMyWords wrote:
----------------
On 7/10/2003 2:44:21 PM PITbull wrote:
The idea with this management is to be a "smuck"....then you get to stay on and be a part of their club.
----------------
WHAT? Pity you never fail to amaze me! I thought of any person on this board you would be the first to jump up and down and sing at the loss of a VP. So what you really want is to pick and chose who stay''s and who goes. What happened to your analogy of the moldy loaf of bread? Flop-Flop-Flop......pick a side of the fence already.On 7/10/2003 2:44:21 PM PITbull wrote:
The idea with this management is to be a "smuck"....then you get to stay on and be a part of their club.
----------------
Anyone know the reason for his being fired?
----------------
As for the question you asked regarding the reason Nardello was fired, I believe you and not us know and would be able to answer that question.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
Sorry Cav, but you can''t have it both ways. In one note Pity will totally denounce the entire management staff of the airline, screaming from the roof tops that they all need to go. Now they have gotten rid of someone and it some travisty that he didn''t play by the "club" rules and was booted out. Well make up your mind. Which VP''s should stay, which should go? You can''t #### about there being to many VP''s in one breath and then #### when they actually fire one. This just proves my point that many of you that post on here only do so to #### and complain about everything, then complain again when things go the way you want. Make up your minds and stick to your guns.
AtlanticBeach
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 341
- 2
----------------
On 7/11/2003 7:01:36 AM TomBascom wrote:
On 7/11/2003 12:15:59 AM MarkMyWords wrote:
... make up your mind.  Which VP''s should stay, which should go?
That''s easy! Start with B. Ben Baldanza
----------------
On 7/11/2003 7:01:36 AM TomBascom wrote:
On 7/11/2003 12:15:59 AM MarkMyWords wrote:
... make up your mind.  Which VP''s should stay, which should go?
That''s easy! Start with B. Ben Baldanza
----------------
Hmmm. Baldanza, Baldanza. Oh, I remember him. He was the person who introduced new policies that ticked off millions of customers and cost the airline countless dollars. OK Tom, you convinced me.
OP
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #15
----------------
On 7/11/2003 12:15:59 AM MarkMyWords wrote:
Sorry Cav, but you can't have it both ways. In one note Pity will totally denounce the entire management staff of the airline, screaming from the roof tops that they all need to go. Now they have gotten rid of someone and it some travisty that he didn't play by the "club" rules and was booted out. Well make up your mind. Which VP's should stay, which should go? You can't #### about there being to many VP's in one breath and then #### when they actually fire one. This just proves my point that many of you that post on here only do so to #### and complain about everything, then complain again when things go the way you want. Make up your minds and stick to your guns.
----------------
On 7/11/2003 12:15:59 AM MarkMyWords wrote:
Sorry Cav, but you can't have it both ways. In one note Pity will totally denounce the entire management staff of the airline, screaming from the roof tops that they all need to go. Now they have gotten rid of someone and it some travisty that he didn't play by the "club" rules and was booted out. Well make up your mind. Which VP's should stay, which should go? You can't #### about there being to many VP's in one breath and then #### when they actually fire one. This just proves my point that many of you that post on here only do so to #### and complain about everything, then complain again when things go the way you want. Make up your minds and stick to your guns.
----------------
Marky,
Having too many and getting rid of all of them, is quite different. On all of my posts I have stated we have too many VPs and there has been no combining or downsizing the senior department heads.
But Ok. You convinced me. OFF THE FENCE I GO, screaming at the roof tops.
"GET RID OF THEM ALL AND START OVER", and let's not forget the CEO too.
Is that better for your confused head? Are we clear?
