Light Years
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2002
- Messages
- 2,878
- Reaction score
- 0
Good point, PITbull.
U SAirways holds out cup to taxpayers while execs get rich.
- Thread starter Light Years
- Start date
Light Years
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2002
- Messages
- 2,878
- Reaction score
- 0
Just out of curiosity, just how much of a headline was the $35 million fiasco? If it was well known, like the article said, I dont think taxpayers will be thrilled about our loan unless we get that money back. And if we do, we need to bring back the unemployed workers who are indirectly paying that bill. Absolutely outrageous.
PITbull, maybe I am taking your comments the wrong way, but if you are counting this guy as a "friend" of airline employees, we sure don't need any enemies:
[blockquote]
----------------
... I will encourage the Air Transportation Stabilization Board to thoroughly question US Airways' application for federal funding support. Before any such public bailout of US Airways is completed, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court should recoup the payments made to former company executives.
...
... I also pledge to oppose any and all future legislation to assist the industry unless provisions are included requiring the provision of better service and equitable fares for our nation's smaller and medium-sized community airports.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Certainly the $35M payouts to Wolf et al. were nasueating, but it was done BEFORE U filed Ch.11 (not that that really excuses it but at the very least it makes his first pragraph misleading). And isn't supporting someone who seems willing to stop the ATSB guaranty to U at this point, even for this reason, and who is already going on record to oppose further aid to airlines which is surely going to be requested once the bombs start flying (and without which UA and U are probably going to have to liquidate) just cutting off your nose to spite your face?
Anyways, he probably won't be happy until Syracuse has hourly 747 service to all major business centers in the country.
Don't be fooled. I see no real friend of airline labor here-- only pandering to local constituents.
[blockquote]
----------------
... I will encourage the Air Transportation Stabilization Board to thoroughly question US Airways' application for federal funding support. Before any such public bailout of US Airways is completed, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court should recoup the payments made to former company executives.
...
... I also pledge to oppose any and all future legislation to assist the industry unless provisions are included requiring the provision of better service and equitable fares for our nation's smaller and medium-sized community airports.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Certainly the $35M payouts to Wolf et al. were nasueating, but it was done BEFORE U filed Ch.11 (not that that really excuses it but at the very least it makes his first pragraph misleading). And isn't supporting someone who seems willing to stop the ATSB guaranty to U at this point, even for this reason, and who is already going on record to oppose further aid to airlines which is surely going to be requested once the bombs start flying (and without which UA and U are probably going to have to liquidate) just cutting off your nose to spite your face?
Anyways, he probably won't be happy until Syracuse has hourly 747 service to all major business centers in the country.
Don't be fooled. I see no real friend of airline labor here-- only pandering to local constituents.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
Below is an ariticle written by a New York Congressman. I was very impressed with his Pro Labor stance and his recognition to balance the bottom line. I wanted to share this post.
US Airways holds out cup to taxpayers while execs get rich.
Thursday, March 06, 2003
By James T. Walsh- Payments of $35 million to the retiring leadership of a failed corporation struggling to emerge from bankruptcy while firing employees and eliminating company pension programs. Sounds like an injustice associated with the collapse of Enron, Global Crossing or WorldCom, doesn't it?
It's not. It's a recent headline describing the greed of US Airways management, the same trio that's held our own community hostage with high air fares and poor jet service for years.
The Arlington, Va.-based airline recently paid its chairman, Stephen Wolf, $15 million for stepping down as chief executive last year. Former president and chief executive Rakesh Gangwal received his own $15 million check a year earlier when he left. Another - the company's general counsel and vice president, Lawrence Nagin - received $5 million.
All the while, US Airways continues its woe-is-me struggle to emerge from bankruptcy protection by laying off longtime workers, slashing employee benefits and eliminating its pilots' pension plan.
As a former business executive, I recognize the need to balance the bottom line and to achieve cost savings in difficult financial times, especially for an airline in this current economy. But when that company lays off thousands of workers, renegotiates salaries and benefit packages with others to spare them their own job elimination, destroys its pilots' retirement security, and then rewards its failed leaders with outrageous bonus checks upon their own departure, something is just not right.
When you add to that equation the fact that US Airways has asked federal taxpayers to loan the company $900 million in public funds to stay afloat, it outright turns your stomach. There's even talk now in Washington that the major U.S. carriers will be asking for passage of a specific industry tax relief package in the 108th Congress. What can they be thinking?
For years, poor management of the nation's major airlines has forced them to balance their operations at large-scale, more profitable facilities on the backs of small and medium-sized cities like Syracuse. By eliminating jet service and increasing air fares, the airlines assist their own corporate bottom line while stifling economic growth and opportunity in dozens of medium-sized metropolitan regions across the nation.
Granted, the events of Sept. 11, 2001, did not help an industry struggling to make ends meet. Subsequent fallout only made a bad situation worse.
But here in Syracuse, US Airways has long dominated the traffic into and out of Hancock Airport. As such, it effectively controls local airfares and has decimated local jet service. Thanks to US Airways, our community can brag about having the eighth-highest airfares in the entire nation.
I respect the work of local US Airways employees. I know them well, as I commute to my job in Washington weekly aboard their aircraft. They're good, hard-working people. It's about time, however, for company management to respect and appreciate their work and sacrifice as well.
Until that happens, I will encourage the Air Transportation Stabilization Board to thoroughly question US Airways' application for federal funding support. Before any such public bailout of US Airways is completed, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court should recoup the payments made to former company executives.
I also pledge to oppose any and all future legislation to assist the industry unless provisions are included requiring the provision of better service and equitable fares for our nation's smaller and medium-sized community airports.
The airlines have had their way for too long now without any degree of commitment to the communities they serve or the people they employ. It's time for that to change. James T. Walsh, R-Onondaga, represents New York's 25th District in the House of Representatives.
US Airways holds out cup to taxpayers while execs get rich.
Thursday, March 06, 2003
By James T. Walsh- Payments of $35 million to the retiring leadership of a failed corporation struggling to emerge from bankruptcy while firing employees and eliminating company pension programs. Sounds like an injustice associated with the collapse of Enron, Global Crossing or WorldCom, doesn't it?
It's not. It's a recent headline describing the greed of US Airways management, the same trio that's held our own community hostage with high air fares and poor jet service for years.
The Arlington, Va.-based airline recently paid its chairman, Stephen Wolf, $15 million for stepping down as chief executive last year. Former president and chief executive Rakesh Gangwal received his own $15 million check a year earlier when he left. Another - the company's general counsel and vice president, Lawrence Nagin - received $5 million.
All the while, US Airways continues its woe-is-me struggle to emerge from bankruptcy protection by laying off longtime workers, slashing employee benefits and eliminating its pilots' pension plan.
As a former business executive, I recognize the need to balance the bottom line and to achieve cost savings in difficult financial times, especially for an airline in this current economy. But when that company lays off thousands of workers, renegotiates salaries and benefit packages with others to spare them their own job elimination, destroys its pilots' retirement security, and then rewards its failed leaders with outrageous bonus checks upon their own departure, something is just not right.
When you add to that equation the fact that US Airways has asked federal taxpayers to loan the company $900 million in public funds to stay afloat, it outright turns your stomach. There's even talk now in Washington that the major U.S. carriers will be asking for passage of a specific industry tax relief package in the 108th Congress. What can they be thinking?
For years, poor management of the nation's major airlines has forced them to balance their operations at large-scale, more profitable facilities on the backs of small and medium-sized cities like Syracuse. By eliminating jet service and increasing air fares, the airlines assist their own corporate bottom line while stifling economic growth and opportunity in dozens of medium-sized metropolitan regions across the nation.
Granted, the events of Sept. 11, 2001, did not help an industry struggling to make ends meet. Subsequent fallout only made a bad situation worse.
But here in Syracuse, US Airways has long dominated the traffic into and out of Hancock Airport. As such, it effectively controls local airfares and has decimated local jet service. Thanks to US Airways, our community can brag about having the eighth-highest airfares in the entire nation.
I respect the work of local US Airways employees. I know them well, as I commute to my job in Washington weekly aboard their aircraft. They're good, hard-working people. It's about time, however, for company management to respect and appreciate their work and sacrifice as well.
Until that happens, I will encourage the Air Transportation Stabilization Board to thoroughly question US Airways' application for federal funding support. Before any such public bailout of US Airways is completed, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court should recoup the payments made to former company executives.
I also pledge to oppose any and all future legislation to assist the industry unless provisions are included requiring the provision of better service and equitable fares for our nation's smaller and medium-sized community airports.
The airlines have had their way for too long now without any degree of commitment to the communities they serve or the people they employ. It's time for that to change. James T. Walsh, R-Onondaga, represents New York's 25th District in the House of Representatives.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
Dell,
In one respect with honoring contracts; there is no difference. However, there is a difference when you speak of performance. The pilots who retired did their jobs for years and years of service. No accidents; No reported major incidences. They did their jobs with perfection, dedication, and years of serving and ensuring the safety of the public. With these execs who were here only 6 years, their performance is definitely in question by many; it is not the same.
In one respect with honoring contracts; there is no difference. However, there is a difference when you speak of performance. The pilots who retired did their jobs for years and years of service. No accidents; No reported major incidences. They did their jobs with perfection, dedication, and years of serving and ensuring the safety of the public. With these execs who were here only 6 years, their performance is definitely in question by many; it is not the same.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
I wrote to the congressman above and gave him my "thanks" for recognizing the employees of our carrier and the unprecedented sacrifices given as our share and committment in repairing and remedying our airline and the industry. I conveyed to him that we will not forget his words of support.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/9/2003 1:42:04 PM Bear96 wrote:
PITbull, maybe I am taking your comments the wrong way, but if you are counting this guy as a "friend" of airline employees, we sure don't need any enemies:
[blockquote]
----------------
... I will encourage the Air Transportation Stabilization Board to thoroughly question US Airways' application for federal funding support. Before any such public bailout of US Airways is completed, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court should recoup the payments made to former company executives.
...
... I also pledge to oppose any and all future legislation to assist the industry unless provisions are included requiring the provision of better service and equitable fares for our nation's smaller and medium-sized community airports.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Certainly the $35M payouts to Wolf et al. were nasueating, but it was done BEFORE U filed Ch.11 (not that that really excuses it but at the very least it makes his first pragraph misleading). And isn't supporting someone who seems willing to stop the ATSB guaranty to U at this point, even for this reason, and who is already going on record to oppose further aid to airlines which is surely going to be requested once the bombs start flying (and without which UA and U are probably going to have to liquidate) just cutting off your nose to spite your face?
Anyways, he probably won't be happy until Syracuse has hourly 747 service to all major business centers in the country.
Don't be fooled. I see no real friend of airline labor here-- only pandering to local constituents.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Bear,
Your view is certainly different and well taken. I was NOT a big proponent of the ATSB guarantee. IMO, it became the "hammer" over labor's heads where all things originated, centered around and concluded. All this for just a damn guarantee. We still have to go out and look for the financing. And, we have to give the gov. 10% stake in exchange for that guarantee. Still don't understand how that works.
Again, U's entire restructuring plan was based on borrowing money, and threatening and forcing most of the labor employees to accept wages and benefits that acceptance would result in no longer supporting their own families which has resulted in many seeking and working another job to subsidize their income. Now some may think that that is a solution, but only if you're on the inside looking out. Many on the outside have a public opinion that the methods used by U, and now other carriers, hurts the industry more than it helps. Many outsiders have the opinion that the Industry would correct itself if some carriers who couldn't make it would just close and liquidate. So, you only see that view point because you are on the inside. I am also on the inside; but I can see all sides clearly, and I don't necessarily agree with what U has done and what they had to do to get there. These fixes are only short-term fixes. We have now dragged in the government who will have to "bail out" other industries as well, as this has set a precedence. I don't see this as good for the economy on any level accept create more unemployment, and those with jobs have far less income to put back into the system. The only thing that will survive nicely is the top execs of these corporations. Just because you have "a job" doesn't mean the "rank and filers" are going to make it. You may just see the beginning of the "iceburg" with job-related stress anxiety and depression with increase substance abuse, increases in family breakups, separations, divorces, personal bankruptcy etc. From where I sit....it ain't pretty. What we at U have done is set the "bar" for the rest of labor. No matter how you look at that; it can't be a "good thing". Just my observation. And, there is no guarantee, that U will survive with all that inplace. They still have NOT addressed the revenue problem from a marketing stand point. And if labor came to work for free, will not cushion the effects of rapidly escalating fuel prices that have not been hedged. Our business model is still not sustaining. WE still have many of the same problems as before with regard to route structure, many types of fleets, etc. And, this co. has not addressed "waste" issues. 34 Vice president overabundance to manage a "reduced work force" for starters; 8 more than we had in Jan. of 2002.
----------------
On 3/9/2003 1:42:04 PM Bear96 wrote:
PITbull, maybe I am taking your comments the wrong way, but if you are counting this guy as a "friend" of airline employees, we sure don't need any enemies:
[blockquote]
----------------
... I will encourage the Air Transportation Stabilization Board to thoroughly question US Airways' application for federal funding support. Before any such public bailout of US Airways is completed, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court should recoup the payments made to former company executives.
...
... I also pledge to oppose any and all future legislation to assist the industry unless provisions are included requiring the provision of better service and equitable fares for our nation's smaller and medium-sized community airports.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Certainly the $35M payouts to Wolf et al. were nasueating, but it was done BEFORE U filed Ch.11 (not that that really excuses it but at the very least it makes his first pragraph misleading). And isn't supporting someone who seems willing to stop the ATSB guaranty to U at this point, even for this reason, and who is already going on record to oppose further aid to airlines which is surely going to be requested once the bombs start flying (and without which UA and U are probably going to have to liquidate) just cutting off your nose to spite your face?
Anyways, he probably won't be happy until Syracuse has hourly 747 service to all major business centers in the country.
Don't be fooled. I see no real friend of airline labor here-- only pandering to local constituents.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Bear,
Your view is certainly different and well taken. I was NOT a big proponent of the ATSB guarantee. IMO, it became the "hammer" over labor's heads where all things originated, centered around and concluded. All this for just a damn guarantee. We still have to go out and look for the financing. And, we have to give the gov. 10% stake in exchange for that guarantee. Still don't understand how that works.
Again, U's entire restructuring plan was based on borrowing money, and threatening and forcing most of the labor employees to accept wages and benefits that acceptance would result in no longer supporting their own families which has resulted in many seeking and working another job to subsidize their income. Now some may think that that is a solution, but only if you're on the inside looking out. Many on the outside have a public opinion that the methods used by U, and now other carriers, hurts the industry more than it helps. Many outsiders have the opinion that the Industry would correct itself if some carriers who couldn't make it would just close and liquidate. So, you only see that view point because you are on the inside. I am also on the inside; but I can see all sides clearly, and I don't necessarily agree with what U has done and what they had to do to get there. These fixes are only short-term fixes. We have now dragged in the government who will have to "bail out" other industries as well, as this has set a precedence. I don't see this as good for the economy on any level accept create more unemployment, and those with jobs have far less income to put back into the system. The only thing that will survive nicely is the top execs of these corporations. Just because you have "a job" doesn't mean the "rank and filers" are going to make it. You may just see the beginning of the "iceburg" with job-related stress anxiety and depression with increase substance abuse, increases in family breakups, separations, divorces, personal bankruptcy etc. From where I sit....it ain't pretty. What we at U have done is set the "bar" for the rest of labor. No matter how you look at that; it can't be a "good thing". Just my observation. And, there is no guarantee, that U will survive with all that inplace. They still have NOT addressed the revenue problem from a marketing stand point. And if labor came to work for free, will not cushion the effects of rapidly escalating fuel prices that have not been hedged. Our business model is still not sustaining. WE still have many of the same problems as before with regard to route structure, many types of fleets, etc. And, this co. has not addressed "waste" issues. 34 Vice president overabundance to manage a "reduced work force" for starters; 8 more than we had in Jan. of 2002.
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/9/2003 2
59 PM Hubturn wrote:
Pitbul,
Nice posts in this thread. However, management HAS hedged fuel in the form of a 5% additional pay cut for pilots if we go to war. I guess that makes sense if you figure we're the ones that burn it. I wonder when I'm going to have to start paying for the tires? Wow, these guys really know how to form a business plan!
----------------
[/blockquote]
Hubturn,
You and I are speaking the same. That 5% is not just for pilots; its for all of the employees at U. Even still, I don't believe it will take us out of the "red" for a long time. That uncertainty is troublesome at best.
----------------
On 3/9/2003 2
59 PM Hubturn wrote: Pitbul,
Nice posts in this thread. However, management HAS hedged fuel in the form of a 5% additional pay cut for pilots if we go to war. I guess that makes sense if you figure we're the ones that burn it. I wonder when I'm going to have to start paying for the tires? Wow, these guys really know how to form a business plan!
----------------
[/blockquote]
Hubturn,
You and I are speaking the same. That 5% is not just for pilots; its for all of the employees at U. Even still, I don't believe it will take us out of the "red" for a long time. That uncertainty is troublesome at best.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/9/2003 12:53:39 PM PITbull wrote:
Below is an article written by a New York Congressman. I was very impressed with his "Pro Labor" stance and his recognition to "balance" the bottom line. I wanted to share this post.
When you add to that equation the fact that US Airways has asked federal taxpayers to loan the company $900 million in public funds to stay afloat, it outright turns your stomach. There's even talk now in Washington that the major U.S. carriers will be asking for passage of a specific industry tax relief package in the 108th Congress. What can they be thinking?
Pit,
Do you suppose that the NY congressman gets his stomach turned by any of the other government giveaways? How much does the farm or dairy industry get every year? Keep in mind that much of that money goes to not produce anything! While I agree that many of this nations top executives are robbing us blind, don't you wonder why they are allowed to get away with it? I wonder how many of our illustrious politicians are paid off... er I mean given contributions, to pass laws that allow this outright theft to continue unabated? They're all a bunch of hypocrites and thieves. The next time you write to your boy ask him how his stomach feels after giving away taxpayer money when votes are at stake. Somehow that's different. Lastly, if he and his cronies did their primary job and protected us from attack, maybe 911 wouldn't have come along to push this industry off of a cliff. Now you did it, I have an upset stomach!
----------------
On 3/9/2003 12:53:39 PM PITbull wrote:
Below is an article written by a New York Congressman. I was very impressed with his "Pro Labor" stance and his recognition to "balance" the bottom line. I wanted to share this post.
When you add to that equation the fact that US Airways has asked federal taxpayers to loan the company $900 million in public funds to stay afloat, it outright turns your stomach. There's even talk now in Washington that the major U.S. carriers will be asking for passage of a specific industry tax relief package in the 108th Congress. What can they be thinking?
Pit,
Do you suppose that the NY congressman gets his stomach turned by any of the other government giveaways? How much does the farm or dairy industry get every year? Keep in mind that much of that money goes to not produce anything! While I agree that many of this nations top executives are robbing us blind, don't you wonder why they are allowed to get away with it? I wonder how many of our illustrious politicians are paid off... er I mean given contributions, to pass laws that allow this outright theft to continue unabated? They're all a bunch of hypocrites and thieves. The next time you write to your boy ask him how his stomach feels after giving away taxpayer money when votes are at stake. Somehow that's different. Lastly, if he and his cronies did their primary job and protected us from attack, maybe 911 wouldn't have come along to push this industry off of a cliff. Now you did it, I have an upset stomach!
Pitbul,
Nice posts in this thread. However, management HAS hedged fuel in the form of a 5% additional pay cut for pilots if we go to war. I guess that makes sense if you figure we're the ones that burn it. I wonder when I'm going to have to start paying for the tires? Wow, these guys really know how to form a business plan!
Nice posts in this thread. However, management HAS hedged fuel in the form of a 5% additional pay cut for pilots if we go to war. I guess that makes sense if you figure we're the ones that burn it. I wonder when I'm going to have to start paying for the tires? Wow, these guys really know how to form a business plan!
PITbull
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2002
- Messages
- 7,784
- Reaction score
- 456
I cannot speak for the Congressman. This particular article had to do with USAirways. That is not to say he does not have other issues that are problematic in his state which he may have addressed in other articles he writes.
Not often do you hear from anyone who is for anything or anyone other than Corporate America, let alone a congressman who takes the time to recognize the employees of a corporation who have sacrificed greatly for their company. I can only express to you that I was impressed with him recognizing the blatant disregard of U's employees by mangement, and he was so moved, that he wrote about it. Remember, Syracuse is NOT a hub of U's.
Not often do you hear from anyone who is for anything or anyone other than Corporate America, let alone a congressman who takes the time to recognize the employees of a corporation who have sacrificed greatly for their company. I can only express to you that I was impressed with him recognizing the blatant disregard of U's employees by mangement, and he was so moved, that he wrote about it. Remember, Syracuse is NOT a hub of U's.
shipwrecked
Newbie
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 10
- Reaction score
- 0
Question is...was the lump sum an option for the pilots when the board handed out the 35m?
