Please Explain Siegel's Sins

[delldude]

OK, if Siegel was such a bad CEO, what did he do wrong?

Should he have asked for more concessions? Maybe in hindsight, but what credibility do the unions have in making that charge? He should have asked us for something we wouldn't have agreed to? He should have asked us for something that we would have instantly responded to with a charge about management's own shortcomings?

Should he have turned this aging unionized airline into an agile low-cost carrier in only 1-2 years?

Should he have busted the hub-and-spoke model and somehow survived the resulting operational chaos to come out with an airline with higher RASM and/or lower costs (is this even proven?)?

Should he have somehow started a Jetblue-like operation within US Airways?

Should he have hedged fuel more aggressively?

What should he have done? Can there rational explanations in perhaps 10% of the posts instead of roundhouse condemnations without solutions?

ok clownman...why did he leave then?? duh.....

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Uh, Cav, I suggest you re-read the statement. It is not addressed towards Siegel. It is addressed towards YOU. I am welcoming YOU to the wonderful world of unemployment. Jeez...

I hope that means that YOU are curently unemployed. UAIR needs folks like you like it needed a lying CEO.
By the way, most of those things that you suggest that Siegel should have done are ILLEGAL, whether you are in bankruptcy or not. Shows how brilliant you really are.

 

[AgentOrange]

ok clownman...why did he leave then?? duh.....

[post="133187"][/post]​

 ok clownman...why did he leave then?? duh.....

There are lots of reasons why a CEO leaves his job. Your questions assumes a situation of simplicity that does not exist. It looks to me that Mr. Siegel departed because he longer had the trust and confidence of the unions. That situation may have come about due to his incompetence, but it also may have come about due to the irrationality of the unions. If it were so obvious that he was incompetent, the Board of Directors may have seen it obvious to replace him also, which was apparently not coming .

 

[AgentOrange]

Man, how much napom did you inhale? Hello??!! The guy LIED over and over. Fellow employees indulge AgentOrange in SIEGAL'S-LIST-O-LIES.

LIE #1 - "We aren't looking to file bankruptcy protection." Noted in Business Week in July 2002. We filed in August8. 2002.

LIE #2 - "Hi Everyone, this is Dave..." Trying to be friendly.

LIE #3- "We want to keep the pilot pension"

Keep the LIE-O-METER running. Let's refresh everyone's mental clarity on what it's been like have a guy with a Napoleon Complex at the helm the last few years.

[post="133112"][/post]​

They are not lies. They are contingent statements. The contingencies necessary did not happen- notably one union did not grant sufficient concessions in 2002, leading to the bankruptcy filing, and thus the reasonable trueness of Statement #1. Same issue with Statement #3.

 

[AgentOrange]

FWIW, my only real criticism of Siegel is that he did not seek deep and decisive enough concessions from labor during the bankruptcy process that would allow for sweeping changes to the company's business plan. Beyond that, I praise him for continuing the work begun during the Wolf/Gangwal period, which, at the VERY least, has kept US in existence for far longer than most industry observers predicted, especially post-9/11.

[post="133135"][/post]​

This is a very reasonable viewpoint, one that I cannot wholly disagree with. The irony of the situation is that these union folks who believe management is incompetent believe that 1) non-union costs can be cut and 2) management salaries can be cut to save their own salaries and keep USAir solvent. By looking at the relative sizes of each cost bucket, it is clear that this hope is entirely false.

Siegel made a reasonable tradeoff- cut salaries just enough to make it through if the economy comes back/oil prices stay OK and not entirely alienate the unions. These union folks cannot see that and blame “management incompetenceâ€￾ when the real answer in the eyes of independent observers was to cut union salaries even more, an unfortunate solution the unions obviously are doing everything they can not to believe.

 

[AgentOrange]

Dave's sins? Well, I'd have to say alienating labor, customers and the State of Pennsylvania to be the Big Three.

Dea

[post="133137"][/post]​

It is not as easy as you make it seem not to alienate people when you have to force virtually all your business constituents to make concessions so you can pull yourself out of losses.

I don’t believe Mr. Siegel is to blame for alienating labor . If it’s because he didn’t cut enough, the unions should thank him for that. If it’s because of his negotiating demeanor, it is just as much the unions fault for overrating that aspect that is so miniscule in the context of making the right decisions to save a multi-tens-of-thousand employee airline.

US Airways has had customer relation problems for some time. In Mr. Siegel’s time at the airline, the on-time record has reached #1 or close in many months. That should be to his credit as well as management’s and labor’s.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

AgentOrange,
your name wouldn't happen to be Dave, would it?

 

[javaboy]

Simply put Mr. Seigel took 2.0 Billion dollars in concessions and left the company in worse shape than when he started which is gross mismangment in even the most basic bschools. More over as pointed out in previous posts, public statements that turned out exactly opposite, made by an officer of a publicly traded corporation are infact against SEC laws. lastly as a civil action could probably prove he completely and systmatically abbrogated is fudicary responsiblity as a corporate officer.

the above is a recountment of his direct mangament skills and abilities, nothing more nothing less.


Ken lay did something similar, as did Bernie Ebbers, making false and misleading statments about a publicly traded company while an officer of that company is punishable by jail. once found guilty of this the fudicary part kicks in and then it becomes civil.

 

[AgentOrange]

AgentOrange,
your name wouldn't happen to be Dave, would it?

[post="169110"][/post]​

The whole point of using aliases in posting is to maintain anonymity.

 

[AgentOrange]

More over as pointed out in previous posts, public statements that turned out exactly opposite, made by an officer of a publicly traded corporation are infact against SEC laws. lastly as a civil action could probably prove he completely and systmatically abbrogated is fudicary responsiblity as a corporate officer.

Mr. Siegel did not make absolute statements as you make it seem. They were contingent upon achieving management’s goals in negotiations. Those did not happen. He did not violate any laws because he did not lie. You want to believe he abrogated duty as an officer, but as far as most people can see, he did the best he could with a difficult situation.

Simply put Mr. Seigel took 2.0 Billion dollars in concessions and left the company in worse shape than when he started which is gross mismangment in even the most basic bschools.

The co. is in worse shape not because of Mr. Siegel’s actions but because RASM failed to recover and oil prices have gone up. If anything, you may blame him for not cutting union wages enough, which all militant union members here fail to mention while still calling him incompetent.

He could only reasonably be called a mismanager if he did nothing to negotiate cuts while the company careened toward bankruptcy.

 

[700UW]

AO,

Do you live in fantasy island?

Dave told the employees which I heard and saw with my own ears and eyes and he told us TWICE the concessions we gave him were sufficient to make US profitable and it is also in the POR.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

 

[PITbull]

You want to know what Siegel's sin was in reality?

He should have asked the judge back in Chapter 11 to abrogate all the unions contracts, and set down new wage scales, and new work rules. He should have cleaned house of not just managers but employees as well.

He should have dumped the managers who were working no-show jobs.

He should have fired every last employee over the age of fifty, and slashed the remainders wages by 50%.

He should have closed PIT.

He should have moved CCY to CLT.

He should have grown the airline.

He should have shown more balls.

And now, inspite of his $4.5 million parachute, his name is MUD. He will never work in this industry again, all because he mistaken and foolishly believed that he could reason with unions, and politely "talk" them into changing their greedy, lazy, unionista ways. But don't worry. What SIegel and Bronner could not teach, unemployment, the horror of losing ones possesions and family life, the spectre of looking for jobs that no longer exist, and such will teach the employees in a way no CEO ever could. Welcome to the school of misery and pain.

Welcome to unemployment.

[post="133117"][/post]​

El Gastly,


Good thing Siegel didn't follow your advice...he would have landed a huge discrimination LAW SUIT for firing employees over 50!

And I promise you this, if you think morale is bad now with these concessions, if he would have abrogated agreements THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO EMERGING FROM BANKRUPTCY BECAUSE THE WORKFORCE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PRODUCTIVE AND...
THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO REPORTED PROFIT AND NO SIEGEL/COHEN PAYOUT!!!!!


The positive thing out of all of this is knowing that whatever negative happens now....it will include your butt!!!!!

 

[AgentOrange]

AO,

Do you live in fantasy island?

Dave told the employees which I heard and saw with my own ears and eyes and he told us TWICE the concessions we gave him were sufficient to make US profitable and it is also in the POR.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

[post="169132"][/post]​

It was a contingent statement then. Even you should have the competence to know that if RASM did not recover and oil prices rose to above $40 a barrel, that USAir would not be profitable. To believe that was an absolute statement from Mr. Siegel would then question the intelligence he implicitly put in you when he made it.

 

[700UW]

Hey AO,

Guess you forgot that US and WN were the only two major airlines to post a profit in the last quarter.

 

[javaboy]

respectfully i disagree, sorry it is managments job to predict the enviroment, sorry oil goes up and oil goes down, SWA every year has grown (not a big leap there)

as for the statements not only personally was i told this (which doesnt count) publicly it has been recorded in Business Week, USA today, WSJ, and other publications. for that matter Mr Wolf too did the same, and currently i am drawing from memory but it can easily be researched, testified before congress about the state of the industry, and the exit interview which i know parts of it were in USA today said ...."USairways does not need nor shall it seek an ATSB loan...." Mr Wolf never mentioned the word bankrupcty.

Either the situation exceeded his capabilites or his abilities are/were overstated.
bear in mind his previous stint as a CEO at AVIS lasted 90 days. before that at CAL well actually CAL Express, is not mainline.

lest we forget Mr. Gangwal as well left the company in worse shape than when he started as well. who did not make such statements, but gladly walked away with a lump sum AND a million dollar a year pension.


so sorry, why has AWA gone from deaths door to a viable carrier, Continental (in years past) has gone from BK (twice) to grow, order new planes, and be a viable carrier, why did AMR more than double in size during the same time U was on a steady diet of shrinkage (sorry jerry), is that because the employees showed up everyday or managment? while quick to take the credit i have yet to see one mangment team take the blame.