Open Email To Dave & Jerry

[Colby]

I think maybe Dave should Hire one of Donald Trumps Apprentices to help him figure out how to make a profit.......

 

[ua767fo]

I understand the plan is not yet ready, suggesting something else may be up. However, when the power point presentation is ready, just go on the road and show it and let the employees decide, period.

With all due respect, if there truly is a plan, I suggest you go on the road and show it.

Mr. Munn,

I have a better idea. Let the elected representitives of each union do their job and hear the plan, should the company decide to present it, and decide whether or not its worth their memberships consideration. To advocate the company simply go on the road with it is to circumvent representation and help management undermine the representitive process.

I would suggest to the company that they not attempt to circumvent the various elected representitives, as their position with labor is tenuous at best. And frankly, the companies management is in a deeping downward spiral which they are progagating. Sadly, they do no not have the ability to see this. Of course, neither did Borman, Lorenzo, Leonard, or Shugrue.

Denver, CO

 

[PITbull]

ua767fo,

With all due respect, it is not the labor leaders' role as representatives to view a business plan, and take the business plan out to the membership. It is the management responsibility to provide and communicate all information to the employees with regard to a newly devised business plan of the corporation. The members will decide if they want their leaderships to go to the bargaining table to discuss the plan and negotiate.

 

[700UW]

Bob, Bob, Bob,

After we voted NO on the first concessions, the company held mandatory captive audience meetings.

The one I was forced to attend was held by Vice President of Maintenance Charles Nardello.

Mr Nardello informed us since we were going to revoting that if we voted YES we would save our scope language.

He showed us charts that showed the Airbus Work being done in TPA with the first two airplanes being in the TPA hangar in August of 2002. He also informed us that 200 mechanics would be added to staff the work.

So like I have told you before, you are an OUTSIDER, you are on the outside looking in, you are not privy to what has transpired and what we have been thru.

 

[delldude]

Point #1. These were issues during bankruptcy - which puts them in a different ballgame.

Point #2. Moreover its correct that US was "not trying to vendor maintenance with either Boeing or Airbus." They went to a totally different company. So the statement was not inaccurate.

Regarding #1, Chaper 11 is when they should have attempted to alter the CBA to permit the outsourcing. To try to do so after the fact unilaterally is what the uproar is about.

Regarding #2, your analysis of the statements made is very, very similar to the Clintonian definition of "sex"--you know, the oral variety does not count...

A spade is a spade, and US management did in fact lie thru their proverbial teeth about the Airbus issue. I will concede that it might have been done due to pressure from the Chairman of the Board, but nevertheless, the move was outrageous and certainly in bad faith.

clue ,you are right on the mark here(as usual).....
its good someone on the outside has insight into our daily workings and can see what really is going on.
thanks........

 

[delldude]

i have to watch out....they're looking for workers in the fields i hear.

 

[High Iron]

Point #1. These were issues during bankruptcy - which puts them in a different ballgame.

Point #2. Moreover its correct that US was "not trying to vendor maintenance with either Boeing or Airbus." They went to a totally different company. So the statement was not inaccurate.

Regarding #1, Chaper 11 is when they should have attempted to alter the CBA to permit the outsourcing. To try to do so after the fact unilaterally is what the uproar is about.

Regarding #2, your analysis of the statements made is very, very similar to the Clintonian definition of "sex"--you know, the oral variety does not count...

A spade is a spade, and US management did in fact lie thru their proverbial teeth about the Airbus issue. I will concede that it might have been done due to pressure from the Chairman of the Board, but nevertheless, the move was outrageous and certainly in bad faith.

I was thinking the same thing as I just read this thread for the first time...Clintonian tap-dancing that would make Fred and Ginger blanch...and sure enough, you beat me to it.

 

[Fleazle]

"Wow, did Dave and Jerry hire a firm to post on here? A lot of pro-management Trolls have seemed to have crawled out from under their bridge."

Just because a person posts to this board with any semblance of pro-company attitude at all does not mean that they must be some company stooge that has been planted here to win employees over to the dark side.
I am a former employee with lot's of good friends still working for the company.....can't really tell you how I found this link but here I am.
Other posters are passengers who fly U and have a vested interest in what direction the company is headed.....chill out.
When employed by U (a dues paying union member myself) I found this very attitude from some of my union "brothers and sisters" a little tiring to deal with, and slightly paranoid.
I would hope that the management team would have more important things to worry about besides canvassing the internet to place double agents on message boards.

 

[aviator42]

"Wow, did Dave and Jerry hire a firm to post on here? A lot of pro-management Trolls have seemed to have crawled out from under their bridge."

Just because a person posts to this board with any semblance of pro-company attitude at all does not mean that they must be some company stooge that has been planted here to win employees over to the dark side.
I am a former employee with lot's of good friends still working for the company.....can't really tell you how I found this link but here I am.
Other posters are passengers who fly U and have a vested interest in what direction the company is headed.....chill out.
When employed by U (a dues paying union member myself) I found this very attitude from some of my union "brothers and sisters" a little tiring to deal with, and slightly paranoid.
I would hope that the management team would have more important things to worry about besides canvassing the internet to place double agents on message boards.

I am neither pro management or pro labor relating to my post, nor a "troll". Just someone with their head out of the sand and see the industry changing. My concern is not to see another proud airline die and put another 25000 good people in the unemployment line.

Regards