U SAirways holds out cup to taxpayers while execs get rich.
- Thread starter Light Years
- Start date
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/9/2003 12:53:39 PM PITbull wrote:
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?
----------------
[/blockquote]
Here's a guy that is total out of touch. What an IDIOT!!!!! It's typical of Congress. They need more money for "their" special project so let's tax someone to get it. All the extra security and fees were mandated by the government. They should be paying for all of that. USAirways like all the other airlines needs and deserve this relief. Next time the government needs to cut costs they should take away this guys pension. Then let's see how his tone changes. He probally worked real hard for it.... maybe 4 or 5 years and we have to pay this idiot $130,000 plus for the remainder of his miserable existence on earth because he served the people. He can come and mow my lawn if he wants to really serve the people.
----------------
On 3/9/2003 12:53:39 PM PITbull wrote:
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?
----------------
[/blockquote]
Here's a guy that is total out of touch. What an IDIOT!!!!! It's typical of Congress. They need more money for "their" special project so let's tax someone to get it. All the extra security and fees were mandated by the government. They should be paying for all of that. USAirways like all the other airlines needs and deserve this relief. Next time the government needs to cut costs they should take away this guys pension. Then let's see how his tone changes. He probally worked real hard for it.... maybe 4 or 5 years and we have to pay this idiot $130,000 plus for the remainder of his miserable existence on earth because he served the people. He can come and mow my lawn if he wants to really serve the people.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/10/2003 11:00:40 AM PITbull wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/10/2003 9:53:03 AM ClueByFour wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/9/2003 11:51:34 PM PITbull wrote:
Clue,
As you know me well enough by many previous posts that I would respond as I did above to Bear. Bankruptcy for U was ALWAYS the "plan", and the other real "bail out" for U was Labor to the rescue. For as much bad press that unions have gotten over the years, when times are tough, its always labor that "saves the bloody day".
----------------
[/blockquote]
Fine. You ducked the question.
What other options did/does US have but to reduce it's labor costs dramatically? And how would they go about it?
You seem to think there is another way to keep the company around as a going concern, and that concessions were just a "plan" on the part of management.
I want to know, _exactly_ what the other alternatives were.
I fully expect that you won't answer that question directly; in fact, I expect a rant about a conspiracy "plan" or management compensation or some other tale of woe.
It would be refreshing if you had a different answer, tho.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Clue,
You make me laugh. Always taking the negative position or trying to "bait" someone.
I don't evade any questions, you just don't like the answers or you just call it ranting.
OK. We will leave the "conspiracy theory out of it since you already know about that.
My Point: Can you argue that this company is still NOT marketing this airline, and really never did? There was waste before BK and this company still has not addressed the waste issues; and I'm NOT talking about too many creamers stupid stuff either. I've written to this management on specific issues for cost savings. Know what they wrote back and said. "Good idea", will look into this, and thanks". None have been addressed from months and months ago. I even presented a marketing "pamphlet" to the company as a gross sampling. Nope, not that idea even remotely.
Now the company is expecting "concessions" from the passengers. Their present focus has been to nickel and dime the passengers with buying food on the planes and charging for valet boxes for those folks who want to check it. GREAT IDEAS? Why would passengers want to fly U?
The BK filing literally cleared the way for U to rid themselves of real estate debt, unsecured debt, and lease agreements that they did not want to pay. BK allowed them to "walk away" from these contracts that were, at one time, negotiated in good faith with the vendors and lessors.OK. Company could not sustain themselves anymore as our previous leadership did not have a "plan B" after the merger collapsed. I am not saying that Labor should not give concessions when their company is in trouble, I just do not agree with permanent concessions, mass furloughs, while senior management ranks get to increase. I don't agree with receiving major bonuses in 2005 of double or triple or quadtrople base salaries that is in our senior execs present contracts. No concession there, just for 2004. I would find management more "credible" and so would many others, if they would have made those sacrifices along with their "rank and file" employees. But, this is America. Everytime Labor wants a piece of the pie, Mangement calls that socialistic thinking. That is what sickens me.
I believe this company should have started from the top and work their way down in furloughing folks. I believe there should have been VPs that oversaw multiple departments, not just one. And put some out on the street. Company's argument is good senior management is very hard to find (yea, all 34), and that they have the best. They also stated in defending themselves that they could get better paying jobs in the open market than what they are receiving here at U. In their arrogance, they made these statements, while in the same breath they said that the "rank and file" would find it very difficult to obtain work anywhere at their present wages. So, immediately after each concession, folks within the management ranks got promoted and the VPs specifically ALL of them got to remain. I think that their bonuses should have been cut to smaller amounts starting in 2005, until all of labor was snapped back in wages, as we do not get bonuses. I believe this management should be doing everything they can to rebuild the "morale" of their rank and file, and stop with being so "punitive" with every LITTLE issue. Show some good faith and appreciation, and this company will continue and thrive in the future. This mangement has not changed their way of managing their employees, therefore, this company will have a very difficult time sustaining themselves going into the the future. The other point, is that they need to have a very dynamic marketing department that thinks of new ways to bring passengers to fly us. If you observe ORD, LGA, PHL and many other airports, the lines at the ticket counters are horrible. There is NOT enough staffing to accomodate the passengers to check them in, timely, and stress free. We have more security issues now, and we need more employees to make the flying experience for passengers more pleasant, and with much ease. I have passengers tell me that they would pay MORE of a price for a ticket if it was not so stressful flying U. Passengers are saying that the experience with us is not with ease. They experience much angst with checking their luggage, checking in for the flight, long lines at the ticket counter...and I am not talking about security at all. Just the experience with U and having a reduced work force from reservations, to ticketing, to checking luggage, boarding and In-flight, etc.
I never said that Labor should not take concessions, I believe and still do, that it should not be the entire "restructuring plan". There are other elements that make a company sustain itself in a competitive market and this company still has no CLUE on where to go from here as evidenced by the same marketing department with the same antiquated ideas. Thus far, I have seen nothing "new" with this new mangement team of educated Harvard and Brown, Yale grads. That is my disappointment. Again, this company's only endeavor was to cut only the wages and benefits of the "rank and file". So severely, that they need not do anything else.
Talk about a slanted plan and "non balanced"...
How'se that for a rant!
----------------
[/blockquote]
----------------
On 3/10/2003 11:00:40 AM PITbull wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/10/2003 9:53:03 AM ClueByFour wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/9/2003 11:51:34 PM PITbull wrote:
Clue,
As you know me well enough by many previous posts that I would respond as I did above to Bear. Bankruptcy for U was ALWAYS the "plan", and the other real "bail out" for U was Labor to the rescue. For as much bad press that unions have gotten over the years, when times are tough, its always labor that "saves the bloody day".
----------------
[/blockquote]
Fine. You ducked the question.
What other options did/does US have but to reduce it's labor costs dramatically? And how would they go about it?
You seem to think there is another way to keep the company around as a going concern, and that concessions were just a "plan" on the part of management.
I want to know, _exactly_ what the other alternatives were.
I fully expect that you won't answer that question directly; in fact, I expect a rant about a conspiracy "plan" or management compensation or some other tale of woe.
It would be refreshing if you had a different answer, tho.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Clue,
You make me laugh. Always taking the negative position or trying to "bait" someone.
I don't evade any questions, you just don't like the answers or you just call it ranting.
OK. We will leave the "conspiracy theory out of it since you already know about that.
My Point: Can you argue that this company is still NOT marketing this airline, and really never did? There was waste before BK and this company still has not addressed the waste issues; and I'm NOT talking about too many creamers stupid stuff either. I've written to this management on specific issues for cost savings. Know what they wrote back and said. "Good idea", will look into this, and thanks". None have been addressed from months and months ago. I even presented a marketing "pamphlet" to the company as a gross sampling. Nope, not that idea even remotely.
Now the company is expecting "concessions" from the passengers. Their present focus has been to nickel and dime the passengers with buying food on the planes and charging for valet boxes for those folks who want to check it. GREAT IDEAS? Why would passengers want to fly U?
The BK filing literally cleared the way for U to rid themselves of real estate debt, unsecured debt, and lease agreements that they did not want to pay. BK allowed them to "walk away" from these contracts that were, at one time, negotiated in good faith with the vendors and lessors.OK. Company could not sustain themselves anymore as our previous leadership did not have a "plan B" after the merger collapsed. I am not saying that Labor should not give concessions when their company is in trouble, I just do not agree with permanent concessions, mass furloughs, while senior management ranks get to increase. I don't agree with receiving major bonuses in 2005 of double or triple or quadtrople base salaries that is in our senior execs present contracts. No concession there, just for 2004. I would find management more "credible" and so would many others, if they would have made those sacrifices along with their "rank and file" employees. But, this is America. Everytime Labor wants a piece of the pie, Mangement calls that socialistic thinking. That is what sickens me.
I believe this company should have started from the top and work their way down in furloughing folks. I believe there should have been VPs that oversaw multiple departments, not just one. And put some out on the street. Company's argument is good senior management is very hard to find (yea, all 34), and that they have the best. They also stated in defending themselves that they could get better paying jobs in the open market than what they are receiving here at U. In their arrogance, they made these statements, while in the same breath they said that the "rank and file" would find it very difficult to obtain work anywhere at their present wages. So, immediately after each concession, folks within the management ranks got promoted and the VPs specifically ALL of them got to remain. I think that their bonuses should have been cut to smaller amounts starting in 2005, until all of labor was snapped back in wages, as we do not get bonuses. I believe this management should be doing everything they can to rebuild the "morale" of their rank and file, and stop with being so "punitive" with every LITTLE issue. Show some good faith and appreciation, and this company will continue and thrive in the future. This mangement has not changed their way of managing their employees, therefore, this company will have a very difficult time sustaining themselves going into the the future. The other point, is that they need to have a very dynamic marketing department that thinks of new ways to bring passengers to fly us. If you observe ORD, LGA, PHL and many other airports, the lines at the ticket counters are horrible. There is NOT enough staffing to accomodate the passengers to check them in, timely, and stress free. We have more security issues now, and we need more employees to make the flying experience for passengers more pleasant, and with much ease. I have passengers tell me that they would pay MORE of a price for a ticket if it was not so stressful flying U. Passengers are saying that the experience with us is not with ease. They experience much angst with checking their luggage, checking in for the flight, long lines at the ticket counter...and I am not talking about security at all. Just the experience with U and having a reduced work force from reservations, to ticketing, to checking luggage, boarding and In-flight, etc.
I never said that Labor should not take concessions, I believe and still do, that it should not be the entire "restructuring plan". There are other elements that make a company sustain itself in a competitive market and this company still has no CLUE on where to go from here as evidenced by the same marketing department with the same antiquated ideas. Thus far, I have seen nothing "new" with this new mangement team of educated Harvard and Brown, Yale grads. That is my disappointment. Again, this company's only endeavor was to cut only the wages and benefits of the "rank and file". So severely, that they need not do anything else.
Talk about a slanted plan and "non balanced"...
How'se that for a rant!
----------------
[/blockquote]
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
PITbull
I do agree with you that the marketing department at US is in dire need of a house cleaning, starting with everyone's favorite pinata - BBB on down. The total fare structure of the company needs to be revised and we need to start looking at our competitors and see what they are doing right and what we are doing wrong. Antiquated rules such as staying over a Saturday night and similar BS rules need to be tossed in the can. They need to re-think things from the ground up. I mean come on BBB - $25.00 for a cardboard box! Get your head out of your backside! We are in a recessionary economy and you feel you can continue to shake the customers for every penny. Make the price soemthing more reasonable, and I would agree with you. Pass on the actual cost with a modest profit to the customer, not gouge the life out of them!
I have recently surfed the net looking for a fare from PIT-FLL for a friend who is sick of the snow and wanted to take a 4 day cruise. (there are some awesome deals out there.) The cruise is a Mon-Thurs so for kicks and giggles I used Orbitz to check airfares fro travel Sun-Fri. I nearly fell over. AirTran - 241.00. AA, NW, CO, DL had fares ranging from 340-740. US - 1043.00! Now here is the kicker.....UAL had a fare for 640.00......on our codeshare flights! So gee.....do I book US and pay 1043.00, or do I go over to UAL, book on the exact same airplane, but pay 400.00 less! Gee....there is something well thought out. And this is not the only market this type of thing happens in. BBB - get it together or get the heck out!
Now, PITBull, I do have some issues with other things that you said. First being about there not being reductions in Senior Management levels here. You are very wrong there. Just as recent as last week there were 2 VP's that announced they were leaving the company, Michelle and someone else. Only one of those positions will be refilled. And this has happened several other times since Dave has been here. And it doesn't stop there. From VP on down, when a position becomes vacant, there has to be a strong justification to fill any vacancy. If an arguement can be made to leave the position empty, then it stays unfilled. Perhaps ITrade or someone can post a comparison of the most current executive make up versus what it was prior to Daves arrival?
You also mention that you have addressed specific issues of cost savings that you presented to the company.....care to share? Often people will come up with what they perceive as cost savings measures, but there is a cost involved in the cost savings. I would be interested in hearing where you see the waste and what your resolutions would have been.
PITBull said: I don't agree with receiving major bonuses in 2005 of double or triple or quadtrople base salaries that is in our senior execs present contracts. No concession there, just for 2004.
I would ask you to show me the proof. Everything that I have read regarding the executive concessions and any future bonuses does not support your statement. Please back up your statement with printed facts.
I realize that you feel that the restructuring of this company was laid on the backs of the employees, but how would you have handled it? Costs needed to be cut, drastically. Through the bankruptcy filing we were able to rid our selves of huge amounts of debt. We were able to use the present industry crisis as a tool to help bring leasing companies to their knees on lease rates. We were finally able to get rid of facility leases for facilities that we were no longer using and reduced or streamlined facitilities throughout the system, including CCY. We were able to look at every expense in this company and renegotiate a better deal. How would you like to have been a debtor of US? Only likely to see pennies on the dollar for monies owed to you. Everyone involved suffered. And I do not mean to belittle the sacrifices made by employees in any way at all. We, as employees, made the largest sacrifices in the whole process. My question to you would be, how would you have handled things differently. How would you have turned the airline around with no layoffs and no concessions? What would you have done to continue to fly 440 airplanes? It is great to sit as an arm chair quarter back and in hind sight say you would have done something different, but would your plan work any better?
I look at out flying partner UAL and AMR and wonder, "What is it that the employees at these companies don't get?" Their companies are litterally dying on the vine and employees aren't willing to talk about making personal sacrifices to save their jobs! How long can a company lose 10-12 million dollars a day! Do the unions and employees think that this is some sort of accounting ploy to try and put the squeeze on the unions? The business customer is not going to pay business fares anymore. Reducing business fares may spur some increases in load factor, but will not maintain the revenue streams that were there when these top dollar contracts were signed. So they have to fix both problems. Reduce business fares to a level that will increase traffic, but you are going to have to reduce expenses to close the gap between income and expense.
I guess, what I am saying is that there is not a single person at US that was happy about the concessions and furloughs. But they were a neccessity to keep the airline alive. The market place has changed, and most likely it has changed forever. Why would anyone pay 1043.00 to fly the likes of a major carrier, when you can pay 241.00 to a low fare competitor? Just because we are nice hard working employees doesn't mean we are worth 800.00 more for transportation from point A to point B. The industry will never be the same and no one should ever expect to see a return to the contracts we had prior to all these concessions. We have to learn to work leaner....making less for more work....I may not like it, but it is a fact of the industry.
Mark
I do agree with you that the marketing department at US is in dire need of a house cleaning, starting with everyone's favorite pinata - BBB on down. The total fare structure of the company needs to be revised and we need to start looking at our competitors and see what they are doing right and what we are doing wrong. Antiquated rules such as staying over a Saturday night and similar BS rules need to be tossed in the can. They need to re-think things from the ground up. I mean come on BBB - $25.00 for a cardboard box! Get your head out of your backside! We are in a recessionary economy and you feel you can continue to shake the customers for every penny. Make the price soemthing more reasonable, and I would agree with you. Pass on the actual cost with a modest profit to the customer, not gouge the life out of them!
I have recently surfed the net looking for a fare from PIT-FLL for a friend who is sick of the snow and wanted to take a 4 day cruise. (there are some awesome deals out there.) The cruise is a Mon-Thurs so for kicks and giggles I used Orbitz to check airfares fro travel Sun-Fri. I nearly fell over. AirTran - 241.00. AA, NW, CO, DL had fares ranging from 340-740. US - 1043.00! Now here is the kicker.....UAL had a fare for 640.00......on our codeshare flights! So gee.....do I book US and pay 1043.00, or do I go over to UAL, book on the exact same airplane, but pay 400.00 less! Gee....there is something well thought out. And this is not the only market this type of thing happens in. BBB - get it together or get the heck out!
Now, PITBull, I do have some issues with other things that you said. First being about there not being reductions in Senior Management levels here. You are very wrong there. Just as recent as last week there were 2 VP's that announced they were leaving the company, Michelle and someone else. Only one of those positions will be refilled. And this has happened several other times since Dave has been here. And it doesn't stop there. From VP on down, when a position becomes vacant, there has to be a strong justification to fill any vacancy. If an arguement can be made to leave the position empty, then it stays unfilled. Perhaps ITrade or someone can post a comparison of the most current executive make up versus what it was prior to Daves arrival?
You also mention that you have addressed specific issues of cost savings that you presented to the company.....care to share? Often people will come up with what they perceive as cost savings measures, but there is a cost involved in the cost savings. I would be interested in hearing where you see the waste and what your resolutions would have been.
PITBull said: I don't agree with receiving major bonuses in 2005 of double or triple or quadtrople base salaries that is in our senior execs present contracts. No concession there, just for 2004.
I would ask you to show me the proof. Everything that I have read regarding the executive concessions and any future bonuses does not support your statement. Please back up your statement with printed facts.
I realize that you feel that the restructuring of this company was laid on the backs of the employees, but how would you have handled it? Costs needed to be cut, drastically. Through the bankruptcy filing we were able to rid our selves of huge amounts of debt. We were able to use the present industry crisis as a tool to help bring leasing companies to their knees on lease rates. We were finally able to get rid of facility leases for facilities that we were no longer using and reduced or streamlined facitilities throughout the system, including CCY. We were able to look at every expense in this company and renegotiate a better deal. How would you like to have been a debtor of US? Only likely to see pennies on the dollar for monies owed to you. Everyone involved suffered. And I do not mean to belittle the sacrifices made by employees in any way at all. We, as employees, made the largest sacrifices in the whole process. My question to you would be, how would you have handled things differently. How would you have turned the airline around with no layoffs and no concessions? What would you have done to continue to fly 440 airplanes? It is great to sit as an arm chair quarter back and in hind sight say you would have done something different, but would your plan work any better?
I look at out flying partner UAL and AMR and wonder, "What is it that the employees at these companies don't get?" Their companies are litterally dying on the vine and employees aren't willing to talk about making personal sacrifices to save their jobs! How long can a company lose 10-12 million dollars a day! Do the unions and employees think that this is some sort of accounting ploy to try and put the squeeze on the unions? The business customer is not going to pay business fares anymore. Reducing business fares may spur some increases in load factor, but will not maintain the revenue streams that were there when these top dollar contracts were signed. So they have to fix both problems. Reduce business fares to a level that will increase traffic, but you are going to have to reduce expenses to close the gap between income and expense.
I guess, what I am saying is that there is not a single person at US that was happy about the concessions and furloughs. But they were a neccessity to keep the airline alive. The market place has changed, and most likely it has changed forever. Why would anyone pay 1043.00 to fly the likes of a major carrier, when you can pay 241.00 to a low fare competitor? Just because we are nice hard working employees doesn't mean we are worth 800.00 more for transportation from point A to point B. The industry will never be the same and no one should ever expect to see a return to the contracts we had prior to all these concessions. We have to learn to work leaner....making less for more work....I may not like it, but it is a fact of the industry.
Mark
On 3/10/2003 11:30:49 AM Borescope wrote:
Here's a guy that is total out of touch. What an IDIOT!!!!! It's typical of Congress. They need more money for "their" special project so let's tax someone to get it. All the extra security and fees were mandated by the government. They should be paying for all of that. USAirways like all the other airlines needs and deserve this relief. Next time the government needs to cut costs they should take away this guys pension. Then let's see how his tone changes. He probally worked real hard for it.... maybe 4 or 5 years and we have to pay this idiot $130,000 plus for the remainder of his miserable existence on earth because he served the people. He can come and mow my lawn if he wants to really serve the people.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Hey Borescope,
It looks like we have something in common after all. It's high time that people from the travel industry start screaming at the low life cowards in Washington. They have no problems at all with midnight raises or giving away boat loads of money for the price of a few votes. But when money is needed to repair the damage done to an industry, because they failed in their primary responsibility to protect us from foreign attack, you'll find that getting anything from them will be like prying a steak out of a hungry dog's mouth.
Here's a guy that is total out of touch. What an IDIOT!!!!! It's typical of Congress. They need more money for "their" special project so let's tax someone to get it. All the extra security and fees were mandated by the government. They should be paying for all of that. USAirways like all the other airlines needs and deserve this relief. Next time the government needs to cut costs they should take away this guys pension. Then let's see how his tone changes. He probally worked real hard for it.... maybe 4 or 5 years and we have to pay this idiot $130,000 plus for the remainder of his miserable existence on earth because he served the people. He can come and mow my lawn if he wants to really serve the people.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Hey Borescope,
It looks like we have something in common after all. It's high time that people from the travel industry start screaming at the low life cowards in Washington. They have no problems at all with midnight raises or giving away boat loads of money for the price of a few votes. But when money is needed to repair the damage done to an industry, because they failed in their primary responsibility to protect us from foreign attack, you'll find that getting anything from them will be like prying a steak out of a hungry dog's mouth.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
----------------
[/blockquote]
Mark,
Did not want to copy your reply above, so I will address some of the issues you state with my reply.
First, US has made the pricing structure for tickets worse IMO. Reason? If passengers are willing to buy a ticket for $1,043, where the major competitors are selling that same segment for much less, that indicates to me that our wage and benefit concessions was severe enough to allow U to experiment on ticket pricing. What do you think? outside of pure stupidity?
Second, when you want FACTS about the double, triple and quadrople base salary triggers for bonuses for senior mangement, you can get that in Siegle's contract, for example. It was in one of the stock prospectus sent to us about 10 months ago. Now, his base salary as gone down from $750,000 to $600,000, as the poor guy had to endure a 20% pay cut, but the conditions and the triggers within his contract remain the same. You do not know all the facts with regard to management concessions or contracts. With regard to what I wrote out to the co. regarding waste, they watch these boards and they know what I cited. Not something I will put out on a public board and it is indicative to our particular airline.
You have brought up some very valid points with regard to ticket restructuring that this co. has not addressed and didn't in the past in order to get folks to fly.
My point to you and others is that I do not take a position that furloughs were unnecessary or that reducing the fleet to shrink capacity was unnecessary, cause they were. I just did NOT witness our mangement behave or act ingeniusly when it came to saving an airline other than just furloughing and labor costs. And this mangement did not participate in taking those same types of cost reductions and furloughing in the upper ranks. As far as the other VP you cited that left the co, as well last week, you are TOTALLY INCORRECT, as the company made the announcement of only one VP departure and who would be the replacement. Please devulge their name as I will investigate this; I am in the position to know this and I can tell you, there was NO other VP that resigned, and did not get replaced. I make it my business to keep track of this specifically. And, THEY DID NOT DECREASE THEIR RANKS IN UPPER MANGEMENT; ONLY INCREASED, SPECIFICALLY INFLIGHT DEPARTMENT. While our rank and file flight attendants had contributed to lowering payroll cost; management saw to it to increase this by promoting and replacing middle and uppermangement jobs.
With regard to fleet size, you are mistaken, we did not have a fleet size of 440 when sigel came on board; it was 311 total. We reduced to 279; where it presently sits.
I posted this subject to get others opinions and I do not want to occupy all the threads with PITbull only.
BTW, PITbull does not mean the "dog" either; but rather Pittsburgh bull s _ _ _!
![9.gif']](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F9.gif%27%5D&hash=7c964d57bf1a67b752c7d6719c1747f7)
[/blockquote]
Mark,
Did not want to copy your reply above, so I will address some of the issues you state with my reply.
First, US has made the pricing structure for tickets worse IMO. Reason? If passengers are willing to buy a ticket for $1,043, where the major competitors are selling that same segment for much less, that indicates to me that our wage and benefit concessions was severe enough to allow U to experiment on ticket pricing. What do you think? outside of pure stupidity?
Second, when you want FACTS about the double, triple and quadrople base salary triggers for bonuses for senior mangement, you can get that in Siegle's contract, for example. It was in one of the stock prospectus sent to us about 10 months ago. Now, his base salary as gone down from $750,000 to $600,000, as the poor guy had to endure a 20% pay cut, but the conditions and the triggers within his contract remain the same. You do not know all the facts with regard to management concessions or contracts. With regard to what I wrote out to the co. regarding waste, they watch these boards and they know what I cited. Not something I will put out on a public board and it is indicative to our particular airline.
You have brought up some very valid points with regard to ticket restructuring that this co. has not addressed and didn't in the past in order to get folks to fly.
My point to you and others is that I do not take a position that furloughs were unnecessary or that reducing the fleet to shrink capacity was unnecessary, cause they were. I just did NOT witness our mangement behave or act ingeniusly when it came to saving an airline other than just furloughing and labor costs. And this mangement did not participate in taking those same types of cost reductions and furloughing in the upper ranks. As far as the other VP you cited that left the co, as well last week, you are TOTALLY INCORRECT, as the company made the announcement of only one VP departure and who would be the replacement. Please devulge their name as I will investigate this; I am in the position to know this and I can tell you, there was NO other VP that resigned, and did not get replaced. I make it my business to keep track of this specifically. And, THEY DID NOT DECREASE THEIR RANKS IN UPPER MANGEMENT; ONLY INCREASED, SPECIFICALLY INFLIGHT DEPARTMENT. While our rank and file flight attendants had contributed to lowering payroll cost; management saw to it to increase this by promoting and replacing middle and uppermangement jobs.
With regard to fleet size, you are mistaken, we did not have a fleet size of 440 when sigel came on board; it was 311 total. We reduced to 279; where it presently sits.
I posted this subject to get others opinions and I do not want to occupy all the threads with PITbull only.
BTW, PITbull does not mean the "dog" either; but rather Pittsburgh bull s _ _ _!
I would be ashamed if this man was my congressman. He bases this entire article on the premise that US is getting $900 million in taxpayer funds. Nothing could be further from the truth.
While I agree that Wolf et al do not deserve a wooden nickel for the so called "efforts", the US financing is not coming from the taxpayers. The government is only make a loan guarantee. Much like getting your parents to cosign on your first car. What a dolt this guy is. It shows how much is wrong with Washington, they are passing legislation and obviously not having a clue as to what that legislation is.
While I agree that Wolf et al do not deserve a wooden nickel for the so called "efforts", the US financing is not coming from the taxpayers. The government is only make a loan guarantee. Much like getting your parents to cosign on your first car. What a dolt this guy is. It shows how much is wrong with Washington, they are passing legislation and obviously not having a clue as to what that legislation is.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/10/2003 10:08:24 PM dogdriver wrote:
X-U wrote:
Most farming in America is no longer done by small, independent farmers, but by large corporations. That is where the subsidies are going. The few independents that remain can't qualify for the funds, hence the need for "Farm-Aid".
X-U,
A 10 year package of "farm aid" recently passed to the tune of $173.5 Billion. How's that for aid. By the way, my sister and her husband are small farmers, about 80 acres worth and 100 cows. You would be surprised with the assistance they get.
----------------
[/blockquote]
"Farm-Aid" was a reference to Willie and Co.
Facts on their website: http://www.farmaid.com/event/info/facts.asp
----------------
On 3/10/2003 10:08:24 PM dogdriver wrote:
X-U wrote:
Most farming in America is no longer done by small, independent farmers, but by large corporations. That is where the subsidies are going. The few independents that remain can't qualify for the funds, hence the need for "Farm-Aid".
X-U,
A 10 year package of "farm aid" recently passed to the tune of $173.5 Billion. How's that for aid. By the way, my sister and her husband are small farmers, about 80 acres worth and 100 cows. You would be surprised with the assistance they get.
----------------
[/blockquote]
"Farm-Aid" was a reference to Willie and Co.
Facts on their website: http://www.farmaid.com/event/info/facts.asp
X-U wrote:
Most farming in America is no longer done by small, independent farmers, but by large corporations. That is where the subsidies are going. The few independents that remain can't qualify for the funds, hence the need for "Farm-Aid".
X-U,
A 10 year package of "farm aid" recently passed to the tune of $173.5 Billion. How's that for aid. By the way, my sister and her husband are small farmers, about 80 acres worth and 100 cows. You would be surprised with the assistance they get.
Most farming in America is no longer done by small, independent farmers, but by large corporations. That is where the subsidies are going. The few independents that remain can't qualify for the funds, hence the need for "Farm-Aid".
X-U,
A 10 year package of "farm aid" recently passed to the tune of $173.5 Billion. How's that for aid. By the way, my sister and her husband are small farmers, about 80 acres worth and 100 cows. You would be surprised with the assistance they get.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/11/2003 2:05:43 PM MarkMyWords wrote:
PITBull -
I copied this from a USAirways Special Bulletine:
Vice President of Human Resources and Development John Honor has accepted a position with another employer, which will be announcing his acceptance in early March. At US Airways, Honor provided strategic leadership and direction in learning and development, rewards and recognition, performance management, diversity, compensation and benefits, employee communication and HR Management Systems. “We will certainly miss the insight, experience and leadership John brought to the Human Resources organization, and we wish him all the best as he begins his new endeavor,†said Jerry Glass, senior vice president of employee relations. Honor’s diverse 30-year career in human resources has involved work in the aerospace, automotive, professional sports, insurance and professional service industries. Honor's position will not be filled and his responsibilities will be absorbed by Vice President of Employee Relations John Hedblom and Vice President of Labor Relations Doug McKeen.
----------------
[/blockquote]
I stand corrected and I appreciate that info. That was not posted anywhere for the "rank and file".
Ironic that he was a Vice President who handled compensation, benefits, and communication, and rewards and recognition...
Compensation: which has been decreased substantially.
benefits: which the employees now have very litttle of,
communication: which obviously this new mangement does none of.
Rewards and Recognition: Completely GONE.
So, I can see his departure as timely, AS HE HAS NOTHING HERE TO DO!.
Thanks for that update. I will pass this info to my colleagues.
----------------
On 3/11/2003 2:05:43 PM MarkMyWords wrote:
PITBull -
I copied this from a USAirways Special Bulletine:
Vice President of Human Resources and Development John Honor has accepted a position with another employer, which will be announcing his acceptance in early March. At US Airways, Honor provided strategic leadership and direction in learning and development, rewards and recognition, performance management, diversity, compensation and benefits, employee communication and HR Management Systems. “We will certainly miss the insight, experience and leadership John brought to the Human Resources organization, and we wish him all the best as he begins his new endeavor,†said Jerry Glass, senior vice president of employee relations. Honor’s diverse 30-year career in human resources has involved work in the aerospace, automotive, professional sports, insurance and professional service industries. Honor's position will not be filled and his responsibilities will be absorbed by Vice President of Employee Relations John Hedblom and Vice President of Labor Relations Doug McKeen.
----------------
[/blockquote]
I stand corrected and I appreciate that info. That was not posted anywhere for the "rank and file".
Ironic that he was a Vice President who handled compensation, benefits, and communication, and rewards and recognition...
Compensation: which has been decreased substantially.
benefits: which the employees now have very litttle of,
communication: which obviously this new mangement does none of.
Rewards and Recognition: Completely GONE.
So, I can see his departure as timely, AS HE HAS NOTHING HERE TO DO!.
Thanks for that update. I will pass this info to my colleagues.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
This is the other information released recently regarding the MAnagement Compensation Plan. I believe that things have changed in the last 10 months. Would you care to support your statement:
Second, when you want FACTS about the double, triple and quadrople base salary triggers for bonuses for senior mangement, you can get that in Siegle's contract, for example. It was in one of the stock prospectus sent to us about 10 months ago. Now, his base salary as gone down from $750,000 to $600,000, as the poor guy had to endure a 20% pay cut, but the conditions and the triggers within his contract remain the same. You do not know all the facts with regard to management concessions or contracts.
I never professed to know all the facts about the MCP, that is why I am asking you to post the facts. Show me, in writing, with a link, something to support your statement. Please, educate me.
Management Compensation Plan
US Airways has filed the management compensation exhibit to its Plan of Reorganization with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, which provides in greater detail the reductions and compensation guidelines that the company is implementing. In recognition of the significant employee interest as demonstrated by workplace discussions, Internet message boards, and questions directed to Dave Siegel, the company is providing the following highlights:
As previously reported, annual compensation and benefit savings from management and executive employees will average nearly $50 million per year and total more than $300 million during the term of the ATSB loan.
Pay cuts implemented in the summer of 2002 for management employees will remain in place for the full term of the ATSB loan, with small annual increases beginning in 2004 on the same terms as the restructuring agreement with the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA), so that pay levels are gradually restored.
Changes to health care premiums and coverage are consistent with the increased contributions made by other employee groups.
Bonuses and other perks, including incentive compensation payouts, have been eliminated through at least 2004.
Unlike other corporate restructurings, where executives are rewarded for successful completion of the bankruptcy process, there will be no "stay" bonuses, retention bonuses, or guaranteed first year bonuses for officers of the company. At United Airlines, in comparison, management employees and officers will share $22 million in retention and emergence bonuses. At WorldCom, a pool of $25 million to be distributed to 325 executives has been approved by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court.
The defined benefit retirement plan for senior officers is being eliminated and replaced with a defined contribution target benefit that mirrors the company's proposal to ALPA for a replacement pension plan.
A meaningful portion of management compensation will be tied to the performance of the company's stock. Furthermore, potential stock and options grants available for management has been reduced from 18 percent -- as agreed to under the original equity plan sponsor with Texas Pacific Group -- to less than 8 percent of the total available stock of the company, upon emergence. In comparison, all other employees will hold approximately 32 percent of the new stock to be issued, including 19.3 percent of the equity to be granted to pilots.
The overall management compensation plan upon emergence is consistent with the philosophy that management will share in the sacrifices. What this management team is doing with its compensation is unprecedented, just as what our employee groups have done in granting concessions was also unprecedented.
Lastly, you stated: With regard to what I wrote out to the co. regarding waste, they watch these boards and they know what I cited. Not something I will put out on a public board and it is indicative to our particular airline.
If you really feel that you have valid ideas regarding cost savings at US, why not post them? Bring them to public light and open them up for public discussion. I can't see where cost savings issue would be a matter of corporate security or grounds for any disciplinary action from the company.
Second, when you want FACTS about the double, triple and quadrople base salary triggers for bonuses for senior mangement, you can get that in Siegle's contract, for example. It was in one of the stock prospectus sent to us about 10 months ago. Now, his base salary as gone down from $750,000 to $600,000, as the poor guy had to endure a 20% pay cut, but the conditions and the triggers within his contract remain the same. You do not know all the facts with regard to management concessions or contracts.
I never professed to know all the facts about the MCP, that is why I am asking you to post the facts. Show me, in writing, with a link, something to support your statement. Please, educate me.
Management Compensation Plan
US Airways has filed the management compensation exhibit to its Plan of Reorganization with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, which provides in greater detail the reductions and compensation guidelines that the company is implementing. In recognition of the significant employee interest as demonstrated by workplace discussions, Internet message boards, and questions directed to Dave Siegel, the company is providing the following highlights:
As previously reported, annual compensation and benefit savings from management and executive employees will average nearly $50 million per year and total more than $300 million during the term of the ATSB loan.
Pay cuts implemented in the summer of 2002 for management employees will remain in place for the full term of the ATSB loan, with small annual increases beginning in 2004 on the same terms as the restructuring agreement with the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA), so that pay levels are gradually restored.
Changes to health care premiums and coverage are consistent with the increased contributions made by other employee groups.
Bonuses and other perks, including incentive compensation payouts, have been eliminated through at least 2004.
Unlike other corporate restructurings, where executives are rewarded for successful completion of the bankruptcy process, there will be no "stay" bonuses, retention bonuses, or guaranteed first year bonuses for officers of the company. At United Airlines, in comparison, management employees and officers will share $22 million in retention and emergence bonuses. At WorldCom, a pool of $25 million to be distributed to 325 executives has been approved by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court.
The defined benefit retirement plan for senior officers is being eliminated and replaced with a defined contribution target benefit that mirrors the company's proposal to ALPA for a replacement pension plan.
A meaningful portion of management compensation will be tied to the performance of the company's stock. Furthermore, potential stock and options grants available for management has been reduced from 18 percent -- as agreed to under the original equity plan sponsor with Texas Pacific Group -- to less than 8 percent of the total available stock of the company, upon emergence. In comparison, all other employees will hold approximately 32 percent of the new stock to be issued, including 19.3 percent of the equity to be granted to pilots.
The overall management compensation plan upon emergence is consistent with the philosophy that management will share in the sacrifices. What this management team is doing with its compensation is unprecedented, just as what our employee groups have done in granting concessions was also unprecedented.
Lastly, you stated: With regard to what I wrote out to the co. regarding waste, they watch these boards and they know what I cited. Not something I will put out on a public board and it is indicative to our particular airline.
If you really feel that you have valid ideas regarding cost savings at US, why not post them? Bring them to public light and open them up for public discussion. I can't see where cost savings issue would be a matter of corporate security or grounds for any disciplinary action from the company.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
PITBull -
I copied this from a USAirways Special Bulletine:
Vice President of Human Resources and Development John Honor has accepted a position with another employer, which will be announcing his acceptance in early March. At US Airways, Honor provided strategic leadership and direction in learning and development, rewards and recognition, performance management, diversity, compensation and benefits, employee communication and HR Management Systems. “We will certainly miss the insight, experience and leadership John brought to the Human Resources organization, and we wish him all the best as he begins his new endeavor,†said Jerry Glass, senior vice president of employee relations. Honor’s diverse 30-year career in human resources has involved work in the aerospace, automotive, professional sports, insurance and professional service industries. Honor's position will not be filled and his responsibilities will be absorbed by Vice President of Employee Relations John Hedblom and Vice President of Labor Relations Doug McKeen.
I copied this from a USAirways Special Bulletine:
Vice President of Human Resources and Development John Honor has accepted a position with another employer, which will be announcing his acceptance in early March. At US Airways, Honor provided strategic leadership and direction in learning and development, rewards and recognition, performance management, diversity, compensation and benefits, employee communication and HR Management Systems. “We will certainly miss the insight, experience and leadership John brought to the Human Resources organization, and we wish him all the best as he begins his new endeavor,†said Jerry Glass, senior vice president of employee relations. Honor’s diverse 30-year career in human resources has involved work in the aerospace, automotive, professional sports, insurance and professional service industries. Honor's position will not be filled and his responsibilities will be absorbed by Vice President of Employee Relations John Hedblom and Vice President of Labor Relations Doug McKeen.
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
The information was posted on TheHub as a special bulletine....all "rank and file" members have access to it.
Perhaps you can address the other issues I asked about? Or do you prefer to just spout your usual anti-company rhetoric and not substantiate it with facts?
Perhaps you can address the other issues I asked about? Or do you prefer to just spout your usual anti-company rhetoric and not substantiate it with facts?
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/12/2003 2:36:33 AM MarkMyWords wrote:
The information was posted on TheHub as a special bulletine....all "rank and file" members have access to it.
Perhaps you can address the other issues I asked about? Or do you prefer to just spout your usual anti-company rhetoric and not substantiate it with facts?
----------------
[/blockquote]
The time that I veiwed the Hub, it only referenced one VP. But there is always avaition.com to get more information from folks like you, and I did validate this with Legal at CCY.
As far as my spoutting....I answered all questions above.
And my ideas would take up two pages that I sent to CCY.
So, you my friend, are out of luck, unless you DO have them in YOUR possession already and just trying to "toy" with me, as I believe you are ONE OF THE MANGEMENT FOLKS I SENT IT TO. Again, look at the prospectus for U for "contractual triggers" unless you are like Mr. Cohen, our COO, and can't remember WHAT YOUR COMPENSATION IS.
And your sly remark on implying that I am "anti-company"; I guess I am as "anti-company" as YOU are "anti-labor".
----------------
On 3/12/2003 2:36:33 AM MarkMyWords wrote:
The information was posted on TheHub as a special bulletine....all "rank and file" members have access to it.
Perhaps you can address the other issues I asked about? Or do you prefer to just spout your usual anti-company rhetoric and not substantiate it with facts?
----------------
[/blockquote]
The time that I veiwed the Hub, it only referenced one VP. But there is always avaition.com to get more information from folks like you, and I did validate this with Legal at CCY.
As far as my spoutting....I answered all questions above.
And my ideas would take up two pages that I sent to CCY.
So, you my friend, are out of luck, unless you DO have them in YOUR possession already and just trying to "toy" with me, as I believe you are ONE OF THE MANGEMENT FOLKS I SENT IT TO. Again, look at the prospectus for U for "contractual triggers" unless you are like Mr. Cohen, our COO, and can't remember WHAT YOUR COMPENSATION IS.
And your sly remark on implying that I am "anti-company"; I guess I am as "anti-company" as YOU are "anti-labor".
MarkMyWords
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,900
- 1
You may have felt that you have answered the questions above, but again you have failed to show me the proof. If you are going to post information on here, you better be prepared to support it.
As for your cost savings ideas, please feel free to hit the highlights. What is the harm in posting cost savings measures in a public forum? Again, I find it humorous that you CLAIM to have information, ideas and suggestions, but can't share them. What if I were a dues paying member of your union? Don't I have the right to know what you are advocating on my behalf? God help you and your union if you handle all of your daily affairs with the same level of unsubstantiated responses. It is time to put up or hush up.
As for me...I am a representative of management. I am not anti-labor nor am I anti-company. I believe in weighing out the FACTS and making an educated decision on what is right or wrong. I think I have a pretty good Pitbulls**t detector and all I ask is that if you are going to post information, then you better be able to back up your claims. Again, please educate me and show me, in writing or via a link, the information that supports you claims. If you can't do that, then please qualify your posts, as Chip does, buy stating that it is your opinion and not necessarily fact.
As for your cost savings ideas, please feel free to hit the highlights. What is the harm in posting cost savings measures in a public forum? Again, I find it humorous that you CLAIM to have information, ideas and suggestions, but can't share them. What if I were a dues paying member of your union? Don't I have the right to know what you are advocating on my behalf? God help you and your union if you handle all of your daily affairs with the same level of unsubstantiated responses. It is time to put up or hush up.
As for me...I am a representative of management. I am not anti-labor nor am I anti-company. I believe in weighing out the FACTS and making an educated decision on what is right or wrong. I think I have a pretty good Pitbulls**t detector and all I ask is that if you are going to post information, then you better be able to back up your claims. Again, please educate me and show me, in writing or via a link, the information that supports you claims. If you can't do that, then please qualify your posts, as Chip does, buy stating that it is your opinion and not necessarily fact.
