Pit Paper

[USA320Pilot]

Bruce Lakefield and David Bronner are not running the company, the creditor's are.

Specifically, the ATSB, GECAS, BOA, Airbus, and others are calling the shots.

According to CBS MarketWatch, US Airways has won extensions from two principal lenders that could help the airline avert liquidation. The "lenders and the board (ATSB) have agreed to extend financing terms to mid-January, contingent on the airline winning the labor savings. That's crucial because all airline's assets are pledged ruling out conventional bankruptcy financing," CBS MarketWatch noted.

USA320Pilot comments: Instead of complaining about management pay employees should seek the best money possible to help the airline obtain the highest profits possible, so employee profit sharing checks are as large as possible.

If people do not want to participate in the new business plan at LCC market based rates they do not have to -- they have the option of resigning.

Again, US Airways does not have a CEO in charge. The bankruptcy court and the creditor's are calling the shots and the creditor's now require employee concessions of at least a 23% pay cut to permit continued financing and operations past Friday, October 15.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[firstamendment]

Wow, it just gets worst.

 

[WestCoastGuy]

US320....




If that is the case, why is not management not participitating is the 23% pay cut?
They seem to have no problem wanting reductions in every group EXCEPT themselves? Do they have and "side deal" with the creditors? Why are they not
telling us this information? Why are they behaving in a manner that appears to be
very deceitful if that is the case? Why can they not simply be truthful, then, and
say, it is the creditors that demand 23% pay reductions from everyone?

 

[USA320Pilot]

ALPA's financial and legal advisors have said from the beginning the longer a union waits to obtain a new labor accord the deeper the cuts will be. It it what it is and every reader on this message baord was advised that would occur.

The advisors were right and the hardliners were wrong. Do I like it? No, of course not.

But it's really simple -- if you do not like the pending imposed cuts then you hsould complain to your union leadership who could have limited your damage.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[X-U]

"What do you think will happen if Bruce leaves? Do you think you will attract a talented individual to the CEO job if the money isn't there? "


Lee Iacoca worked for $1 per year when he was turning Chyrsler around.

 

[WestCoastGuy]

I would think if the incentive is packaged correctly, that being performanced based, it would be a very attractive offer, with the possibility of enormous returns for the chance to turn this company into something it should have been turned into long ago, thru various CEO's. Most CEO's have an enormous ego anyway, and the good ones have the drive and desire and leadership to succeed. Unfortunantly, we have had none that had those qualities...

 

[linemech]

Bruce Lakefield and David Bronner are not running the company, the creditor's are.
Again, US Airways does not have a CEO in charge. The bankruptcy court and the creditor's are calling the shots and the creditor's now require employee concessions of at least a 23% pay cut to permit continued financing and operations past Friday, October 15.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

[post="190260"][/post]​

The creditor's are calling the shots and the creditor's now require employee concessions to the tune of 23% in pay cuts plus work rule changes, benefit changes and scope to name just a few.

Everything that the creditors now require is what is being recommended by the DOUBLE SECRET CEO that US Airways does not have in charge.

US Airways management is not only lying to its employees concerning the magnitude of the required costs savings it is lying to its creditors.

Although cost reductions/savings are required, the "magnitude " of what is being asked of labor is no more that a wish list, not a sound management calculation.


linemech

 

[firstamendment]

ALPA's financial and legal advisors have said from the beginning the longer a union waits to obtain a new labor accord the deeper the cuts will be. It it what it is and every reader on this message baord was advised that would occur.

The advisors were right and the hardliners were wrong. Do I like it? No, of course not.

But it's really simple -- if you do not like the pending imposed cuts then you hsould complain to your union leadership who could have limited your damage.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

[post="190263"][/post]​

How can you even say that? If this is true, then management is more full of it then I thought, Please don't forget, Cap, that all the attntion in the last few weeks was on ALPA. They didn't give any over union the time of day. Do you really think the judge is that much in bed with management to not see how your logic makes no sense?

If the company wanted all contracts settled before oct. 7, why did they not have enough negotiators to go 'round the clock like they did with the pilots? I'll tell you why. They wanted to take us to court. They wanted to take the pilots to court, but alpa settled...for now. So the rest of labor should be punished because of the pilots?

a320, this judge has showed his concern that what the company is asking is too much. The afa had a very strong case against the company. Enough that he would not cave to the wishes of management at that moment.

So when you start acting as if somehow the alpa decision was right because you settled before the 7th. (although not ratified), just remember that we HAD no choice.

 

[MrAeroMan]

"What do you think will happen if Bruce leaves? Do you think you will attract a talented individual to the CEO job if the money isn't there? "
Lee Iacoca worked for $1 per year when he was turning Chyrsler around.

[post="190268"][/post]​

Yeah but how many stock options did he get while he was CEO? They were worth multi-millions.

 

[ClueByFour]

WestCoast....

What do you think is a fair wage for the CEO of a company on the verge of collapse? He didnt' put us in this position, he is the one tryig to get us out. So he should make what? 100K? 50K? The CEO's compensation has been reduced 43% but you want more. What do you think will happen if Bruce leaves? Do you think you will attract a talented individual to the CEO job if the money isn't there? Bruce came into this job for far less then Dave, with a lot less stock and benefits.

A CEO will always make more then the guys/gals doing the grunt work.

[post="190247"][/post]​

MMY--

The trick is to make the compensation for senior execs equity based. By doing so, their compensation is directly tied to the performance of the company.

I don't have the figures at hand for LUV and B6, but IIRC both CEOs don't make a pile of cash. They are both extremely wealthy individuals due to their equity and options, because they are running profitable businesses.

It's also a horrid PR move on Lakefield's part--apparently too much time around Bronner has rotted is brain.

If someone offered me a job at LUV with a compensation of 10,000 shares/year and the standard benefit package, I'd be sorely tempted to take it--multiply that up a bit, and you have arrived at how senior management should be compensated.

 

[USA320Pilot]

It does not matter what business you operate, if you have employees whose pay and benefits are above the compensation than you are at a competitive disadvantage.

Management provided information to the court obtained from DOT Form 41's that state US Airways' employee costs are third highest in the industry. Furthermore, every legacy airline continues to lose millions of dollars per year and the only profitable companies are the LCC's.

How do you think this looks to the creditor's and the court?

Do I like this? No, of course not, but it is what it is.

Last week no one single labor attorney argued that the cuts were not required for the business plan. The attorney's complained that the cuts were too extreme, but gave no basis for their argument.

Dan Katz, a lawyer for the CWA, who is an airline M&A attorney, too, told the court "These drastic pay cuts ... are uncalled for and inappropriate." Well, by what standard?

Shanon Levine, counsel for the IAM was even less effective when she said, ""At these income levels. Pensions are the Holy Grail."

Do you think the creditor's care when their money is at risk?

"People will be losing their homes, their cars," Katz said.

None of these attorney points will move the creditor's who want an ROI, period. Again, do I like it? No I do not. But it is reality.

Either the court imposes the cuts, which in the end could be greater than 23% pay cuts, or the company could lose its financing and liquidate.

In regard to management, US Airways has lost about 200 people in different management positions and may not have enough people to run the company. Then what? Furthermore, who is going to leave a secure position to come to the airline and even if they did, how much would headhunter and relocation fees cost the airline? To meet business plan requirements, should labor provide a deeper cut to pay for new management to come onboard, if they are available?

Personally, I want the best management the company can obtain and I could care less what they make. The better the management the stronger potential for greater profit sharing checks for all employees who participate in the new business plan.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[TDR1502C]

The CEO's union (heh, heh) needs to accept the realities of the new maketplace we're in and adjust their compensation expectations accordingly. As long as the airlines remain committed to giving away tickets below cost, there just won't be the money to pay CEO's the salaries they've come to expect.

Isn't Lakefields yacht named the Managed Expectation?

[post="190248"][/post]​

Yer rotten.

 

[WestCoastGuy]

I think we'd all like the best management money can buy for this company, but unfortunantly, we seem to have the worst.

 

[ClueByFour]

It does not matter what business you operate, if you have employees whose pay and benefits are above the compensation than you are at a competitive disadvantage.

Explain to me in that light how the good folks at LUV are paid more than your counterparts to fly planes, maintain planes, staff planes, load planes, and reserve flights on planes yet manage to make more money for their shareholders?

In regard to management, US Airways has lost about 200 people in different management positions and may not have enough people to run the company. Then what? Furthermore, who is going to leave a secure position to come to the airline and even if they did, how much would headhunter and relocation fees cost the airline? To meet business plan requirements, should labor provide a deeper cut to pay for new management to come onboard, if they are available?

Given the track record of both the strategic level upper management and the operational level middle managers, this is probably not a huge loss from a talent standpoint given the results US has produced.

The only thing that will produce either labor buy-in or the impetus needed to attract talanted management and professional applicants is a winning business plan, a solid and honest corporate culture, and the ability to execute the plan. Beating on labor won't produce it. In fact, US failed to produce such a plan during and after the first bankruptcy, and the same group (for all intents and purposes) is asking both the creditors and labor to finance another crack at the apple. Surely you see the problem with this?

Personally, I want the best management the company can obtain and I could care less what they make. The better the management the stronger potential for greater profit sharing checks for all employees who participate in the new business plan.

Then why do you continue to support the current regime? It's clearly not the best that money can buy, and relative to their lower cash compensated peers they are underperforming.

 

[javaboy]

LEAD FOLLOW OR GET OUT OF THE WAY


in his statement Mr. Lakefield yet again brings the LASER LIKE FOCUS of what is wrong with USAIRWAYS. NOBODY is here to RUN it.

gee sorry its such a huge inconvenice to cause you to be in a place with out your wife (family) for DAYS at a time, yet that is the very thing FLIGHT crews have been doing for DECADES of service at this company. and your SHORT time here is too much strain?

wheres TRUMP when you need him

Respectfully, sir, step aside and let someone who WANTS TO RUN AN AIRLINE do so. in fact I will do it and I will do it for a buck a year just like IACCOA did. its that simple really. thats my offer buck a year in salary. sure you can offer me stock and if the company does well i do well if not then it costs you one dollar.

i'm willing to step up to the plate are you?