UA-CO Merger Rumors Now Surfacing on Wall Street

[casual rat]

When Tilton says he will not depart until UAL is a profitable, sustainable enterprise poised for the long term--it sounds like the same threat a drunk gives the bartender when they say they'll leave when they sober up. Here's hoping the drunk doesn't get another round.

 

[TechBoy]

evidence? don't forget the value of the DL FA's pensions - you know the ones that only a few FAs will get partial value from the PBGC. All of those younger, not fully 30 year UA employees will see a fraction of what they were promised even with the PBGC guarantee. There's a reason the plan was terminated - because the PBGC won't pay benefits anywhere close to what UA promised,

WT, you know better. Under the PBGC limit (which most if not all FAs are), there is no difference between freezing and terminating a plan. So DL's FAs are in the exact same position as UA's. Please stick to facts. It's one thing when you're giving your rose colored glasses opinions on the board. It's quite another when you are misrepresenting the facts. Pension law is difficult enough without perpetuating incorrect information.

 

[USA320Pilot]

USA320Pilot said: “It is my understanding that the proposed United-Continental deal cannot happen unless Northwest Airlines approves of a corporate transaction because the Eagan-based carrier holds a "golden share" in Continental per their alliance. This "golden share" allows Northwest to block any Continental deal that would threaten Northwest. Considering Northwest's precarious position do you think they would want a Continental/United merger?â€￾

Bulscu said: “Incorrect.â€￾

LGA Fleet Service said: “IIRC that only comes into play if Continental is being acquired not if they are the acquiring entity.â€￾

Helane Becker, an analyst with the Benchmark Co. in New York City said: “(In regard to a United/Continental merger) one complicating factor is Continental's relationship with Northwest. Northwest owns a so-called golden share of preferred stock in Continental that would allow Northwest to block a merger involving Continental,â€￾ Becker said.

Click here for Becker's comments.

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[WorldTraveler]

There is indeed a very big difference between a freeze and a termination for an employee who is not at full years of service or age. The difference between the PBGC’s liabilities and the company’s is these type of people. For those who did not or will not work until the full retirement age and for those who took early retirement, the difference in pension benefits is substantial.

I’m glad to see I’m not the only one scratching my head as to why UA management is largely unchanged in over a decade. Yes, Tilton has a good gig and he’s not about to give it up until he is forced out. By that point, UA will be irreparably damaged and Tilton will have a pocket full of cash to last a lifetime. Why would he walk away?

 

[Fly]

Please explain it to us then. Your "depth of intelligence" never goes by unnoticed.

My retirement is very close to what it would have been for any flight attendant retiring at age 65, with my years. Because I am not that age yet, I must wait (as I would have anyway since there is no way I would ever fly that old) until I hit the BIG 65! What the cancellation did was halt the years accrual. My accrual stopped last year (just like the Delta f/a's has too). In my case, I will receive retirement for a 20 year f/a. Although I have now exceeded that number, that was the years of service when they PBCC took over the pension.


USA320: Remember about a year ago, you know, when US was about 3 weeks from the history books. A huge influx of cash put together a merger that has now allowed US to continue business. Any type of 'golden share' has and will be part of the big picture if a merger were to come about. I'm sure NW would like to remain in business and not sold out from under them, piece by piece. Whomever the $$ men are in a potential UAL/CAL merger will more than likely throw a LOT of $$$ to buy that share back. Money talks. Thank goodness of you'd be fast approaching your one year anniversary at Home Depot.

 

[767jetz]

I think it’s hysterical how scared so many outsiders are at the thought of a UA/CO merger!

Must be a good thing, otherwise why all the fear and anxiety over it?

Who knows if it will happen… But if it does IMO it would be a relatively smooth and equitable combination with similar seniorities, career expectations, and both airlines bringing a commensurate mix of large and small aircraft to the table. B)

 

[Bulscu]

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

There's a lot of misinformation about those shares, it's been addressed specifically by those that were involved creating them. And you can take this to the bank, those shares won't stop a thing, if the REAL POWER decides these companies are coming together, they're coming together with a WHOLE LOT OF MONEY and LOT'S OF SHINY NEW BOEINGS to boot.

Personally, I think it would work out nice, very nice for all involved.

Hey the rest are merging too...

...but they won't end up with the physical brute strength of this one.

imho

 

[jbguppy]

I think it’s hysterical how scared so many outsiders are at the thought of a UA/CO merger!

Must be a good thing, otherwise why all the fear and anxiety over it?

Who knows if it will happen… But if it does IMO it would be a relatively smooth and equitable combination with similar seniorities, career expectations, and both airlines bringing a commensurate mix of large and small aircraft to the table. B)

Hey jetz,
agreee on a lot of your points, but seniority and career expectations are not that similiar. We have many more airplanes over the size of a guppy than they do by a wide margin. They have about 41 75's, 36 76's other than 10 old 200's, and 18 triples. That is 94 aircraft over a guppy size. We on the other hand have 97 75's, 37 76's, 52 triples, and 31 400's. That is 217 aircraft over guppy size.

So career expectations are very different IMHO, they do have a number of 787's on order, and both airlines have narrow body aircraft on order, their 737ng and our A320.

Both airlines have around 250 other narrow body aircraft currently on property. I believe UA will order the 787 in significant quantity before the end of 2006.

With respect to seniority, they have new hires on the property, we have guys/gals with over 5 years still on the street. So seniority is very different as well.

The hub situation is very different hence the great attraction to merge. Their strong NY, Europe, and Latin with our strong everywhere else is a very good combination. Very similiar fleets and little overlap leave just the very touchy union and seniority issues to deal with.

I believe this thing could very well happen. From a pilot perspective some very long and tall fences and a prorated parking of classic 737's if required will make this OK.

Oh, one more thing I want their wages (cake) and our B/C fund (eat it too).

Cheers,

JBG

 

[TechBoy]

There is indeed a very big difference between a freeze and a termination for an employee who is not at full years of service or age. The difference between the PBGC’s liabilities and the company’s is these type of people. For those who did not or will not work until the full retirement age and for those who took early retirement, the difference in pension benefits is substantial.

Wrong again. As long as they are below the PBGC limits, there is no difference between a freeze and a termination.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I think it’s hysterical how scared so many outsiders are at the thought of a UA/CO merger!

Must be a good thing, otherwise why all the fear and anxiety over it?

Who knows if it will happen… But if it does IMO it would be a relatively smooth and equitable combination with similar seniorities, career expectations, and both airlines bringing a commensurate mix of large and small aircraft to the table. B)

You truly are on drugs, aren't you. There has been nothing about UA that has been smooth and equitable. For you to even suggest it shows your willingness to defend UA at the complete expense of all objectivity.

And Fly, your pension from the PBGC for 20 years of service is less than what you would have gotten from UA if you had been able to retire using the original formula. Guaranteed. It is precisely because of the reduced PBGC payouts that results in decreased benefits.

I could find post after post on this board where people were fighting the PBGC termination - including many by FLY. and yet you all want to deny there was any loss in turning the plans over to the PBGC.

It's no wonder UA is a sinking ship. No one is willing to admit the truth. And you say I have rose-colored glasses....!?!?!?!

 

[Fly]

NO WT, wrong as usual. The reason we didn't want the PBGC to take the pension was because we didn't want to lose accruing the additional 20+ years that most expected to work at UAL. DOH! Who in their right mind would want to stop accruing pension? Not us. And certainly not the Delta folks who have also lost the accrual.

 

[Bizman]

And Fly, your pension from the PBGC for 20 years of service is less than what you would have gotten from UA if you had been able to retire using the original formula. Guaranteed. It is precisely because of the reduced PBGC payouts that results in decreased benefits.

This is exactly correct. Had UA kept their pensions and not terminated them, years of service would have continued to accrue resulting in more money at retirement. By canceling and turning them over to the PBGC, the accrual stops and your payout is less.

 

[Fly]

Absolutely right Biz, EXACTLY the same as freezing the pensions like Delta did.

 

[UALDC767]

Hey jetz,
agreee on a lot of your points, but seniority and career expectations are not that similiar. We have many more airplanes over the size of a guppy than they do by a wide margin. They have about 41 75's, 36 76's other than 10 old 200's, and 18 triples. That is 94 aircraft over a guppy size. We on the other hand have 97 75's, 37 76's, 52 triples, and 31 400's. That is 217 aircraft over guppy size.

So career expectations are very different IMHO, they do have a number of 787's on order, and both airlines have narrow body aircraft on order, their 737ng and our A320.

Both airlines have around 250 other narrow body aircraft currently on property. I believe UA will order the 787 in significant quantity before the end of 2006.

With respect to seniority, they have new hires on the property, we have guys/gals with over 5 years still on the street. So seniority is very different as well.

The hub situation is very different hence the great attraction to merge. Their strong NY, Europe, and Latin with our strong everywhere else is a very good combination. Very similiar fleets and little overlap leave just the very touchy union and seniority issues to deal with.

I believe this thing could very well happen. From a pilot perspective some very long and tall fences and a prorated parking of classic 737's if required will make this OK.

Oh, one more thing I want their wages (cake) and our B/C fund (eat it too).

Cheers,

JBG

Two things to clean up....

the 767-200's CAL has are not old...the only started recieving them I believe in the late 1990's if not later, brand new from the factory.

and we at UAL have no 5 yr furloughees on the street, unless by their choice (bypass). Yes they may have been out that long but they don't accrue longevity while on furlough. So someone furloughed in 2002 at 2nd yr pay will be recalled at 2nd yr pay when they come back (all should be offered by early 2007)

DC

 

[Bulscu]

Oh, one more thing I want their wages (cake) and our B/C fund (eat it too).

If it happens, I'd expect 'Them', to grease the skids..

imho