United Pilots Say US Airways deal potential deal "extremely negative"

[767jetz]

I would, but I WOP'd the month. You'll have to junior someone else into the 'village' this time.



~ Jetz, they seem agitated with us. Wonder why :jerry:

No idea. I guess the truth hurts. B)

 

[767jetz]

Herein lies the issue that many of us have with you, 767jetz. You take the notion that SOME means all 35,000 employees of US Airways! Besides your dislike for a certain captain and a few others, what exactly IS your beef with US Airways?

Actually it seems to be YOUR notion that some means all. When I say some I mean some. When I say most I am referring to the East pilots, who we (UA) are very well versed on dealing with since 2000. (Not the 35,000 other employees.) No disrespect intended, but the integration of pilots and their careers are far more complicated than any other work group by nature of the way our pay and progression works, with it's vast disparities. That's why the DOH that seems to work for F/A's, mechanics, CS, etc. is not so simply applied to pilots, regardless of what a small minority of pilots in this industry (the East) would like everyone to believe.

My opinion of the East pilots has been shaped not through rumor or speculation, but through direct interaction and dealings over the years, not just on message boards with a few of them, but in person with many. So that has been my personal experience. Sure, maybe I just happened to run into the only rotten apples. But maybe not. There are things I have heard in person that would not be said in mixed company because it would make it crystal clear to others where their intentions lie. It is not a secret or coincindence that a large majority of the pilots at almost every other major airline holds a similar opinion. And it is not due to their "seniority over everyone else" as they want everyone to believe. It is because of their consistent actions, words, and behavior and disregard for reason, discussion, compromise, or respect for others. "My way or the highway" rubs people the wrong way very quickly. Please try to keep in mind that the problem that exists with the East pilots runs much deeper than what it may appear to you on the surface.

I would have to say that 90% of US Airways employees are not attempting to see US conquer the world and would just like to see the company we know as US Airways survive and prosper.

I agree. I think the vast majority of employees at each of our airlines are currently victims of poor management.

I take issue with those who seem to love to exaggerate and spin everything UA as evil, while using false or inaccurate information. You'll notice that most of my comments are usually in response to someone else firing the first shot.

I do disagree with the notion that "things are just as bad at every airline," or "UA is no different than US." Yes, I agree that poor employee relations exist at both airlines, but that culture has been around at US far longer than UA. Not due to worse people, but longer periods of adversity and repeated mergers and integrations over the years.

I have also traveled extensively on many airlines to include not only US & UA, but LH, DL, AA, NW, CO, JB, Frontier, TWA, Pan Am, Eastern, to name some. And I am not talking about just jumpseating or as a non-rev, but as a paying passenger. So with respect to service, overall appearance of infrastructure, comfort, etc. IMO UA has a better product than US. This is not an insult to US employees, because it really has to do with management and not employees. And this is not to say that UA's product has not seriously declined over recent time. It has. And I wish both of our airlines would invest in the product and it's employees to improve it all. But IMO UA (the product) has not slipped quite as far as US overall.

You THINK your airline is better because you are bigger but all UAL IS is a big sh*tty airline with no aspirations.

Again, I think this is what you are reading into it. I can't control that. Hopefully my explanation above helps you understand. If not, then I'm sorry you feel the way you do.

The sooner this merger is squashed, the better.

On this we agree. I am of the opinion that the right merger could be a good thing. I just don't believe a
UA/US merger is the right merger. I think the integration problems and lack of international expansion would outweigh any financial gains or "synergies." Both airlines should concentrate on improving on their own strengths and fixing their own labor relations.

 

[767jetz]

i swear 767jetz . your like the 700UW of the usairways forum and the worldtraveler of the delta forum. i guess we need posters like you guys to keep things interesting

Thanks for the compliment.

 

[767jetz]

British Airways says it is looking at ways to cooperate with American and Continental

UAL Corp.-owned United and US Airways Group Inc. are now in advanced talks on joining their businesses to create what could be the world's largest carrier

And then there is this article that seems to think CO is smarter than you might think...

"Perhaps, CAL is only waiting for a better deal or for a bid from United Airlines (UAUA)."

"CAL is currently the strongest of the majors in several ways. It has the youngest fleet, the best relations with employees, the most extensive code sharing system and the most advanced computer technology. CAL is going to survive and then prosper. It remains to be seen if it is waiting for a better deal to be had in regard to UAUA or another carrier. My Dad was famous for walking away from a deal if he could not get his terms. It was often the case that there was a lot of movement toward his terms after he walked away."

It's like a battle of the cut and paste news articles, with both sides finding and posting only the ones that support their hypothesis.

Only time will tell. (But my source is 2 pilots, so it must be true! )

 

[azfyer]

When I called payroll, Employee Travel, Inflight, Res, etc... I ALWAYS had someone (with experience no less) pickup the phone and resolve whatever issue was at hand, no matter what and this was when we had close to 60,000 employees.

Did you ever stop to consider that maybe that had something to do with the fact that you were in BK twice and were on the verge of having NO job what so ever? Sorry, but you can’t run things like that anymore. Trust me…I HATE the fact that we are always (AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN) the CHEAP’O airline! BUT…I am also glad to still have a job these days.

 

[Hi-C-Camp]

Did you ever stop to consider that maybe that had something to do with the fact that you were in BK twice and were on the verge of having NO job what so ever? Sorry, but you can’t run things like that anymore. Trust me…I HATE the fact that we are always (AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN) the CHEAP’O airline! BUT…I am also glad to still have a job these days.

Thats not the reason you still have a job.... Furthermore, the corporate greed and lack of mgmt, along with the fact that everyone thinks you should be able to fly for anywhere for $100 and be treated like royalty is the reason we don't make a livable wage and the reason our companies are in BK... Your cheapo execs are sure not hurting in the finance dept....

 

[DCaf]

Has there ever been a merger where the employees came out thinking it was a success?

I'm sure there are others, but I thought the US-PI merger was a success. The beginning was rocky but eventually PI-US became successful, in the late '90s especially. I know the PI folks probably disagree, for no other reason that their beloved name wasn't kept. I wonder if the surviving name had been Piedmont how things would have been different.

Anyway, to stay on the topic, I agree a US-UA merger would be very messy and painful, with lots of layoffs. It would take someone like Jack "The Knife" Welch, to make it work.

 

[Benz M-100]

I know the PI folks probably disagree, for no other reason that their beloved name wasn't kept. I wonder if the surviving name had been Piedmont how things would have been different.

PI MANAGEMENT would have made it a great deal more successful. Guess where Bethune was...

 

[john john]

If you take away the debt repayment the difference is even greater.

Bloomberg News recently reported Credit Suisse analyst Daniel McKenzie in New York told investors in a report "UAL's standalone plan is not viable," and he projected drop in the Chicago-based carrier's cash to $1.3 billion by the end of 2009.

So UA had to pay some debt and US did not
The money is gone.If there is more debt to pay it will affect the cash flow of UA

 

[rvolkcpa]

PI MANAGEMENT would have made it a great deal more successful. Guess where Bethune was...

I sometimes wonder if US would be in better shape now if Piedmont had been the acquirer.

I can see potential headaches with a US-UA merger, but I think the short term headaches will result in a stronger airline for all parties.

 

[john john]

Piney, I have said all along if we can get East Revs with West productivity we have a winner.

Do you mean QIK/SHARES
Al Hemenway did follow up on the CWA's last request to revisit the staffing model they used to determine the head count, which was a Sabre based computer system. The company found that the Shares system does not allow agents to complete transactions as quickly as Sabre did, which is what we have been telling them all along. We hope this will convince them to improve staffing which will in turn, improve the customer's experience.
http://www.cwa.net/

 

[Ignacio]

Thanks for the compliment.

You look nice today - compliment
Have you lost weight - compliment
Your hair is beautiful - compliment
You are like the Worldtraveler of the Delta forum - ughhh...


I assume by that statement you are a rah rah cheerleader for United
Your post seem to be not so rah rahish though. Pretty informative.

 

[767jetz]

So UA had to pay some debt and US did not
The money is gone.If there is more debt to pay it will affect the cash flow of UA

What are you talking about? All airlines carry debt. And some actually pay it down from time to time to save interest payments in the future and shore up the balance sheet to make borrowing money easier in the future. It is called a trade off. Use some cash now to pay down debt so we'll be better off tomorrow. Any idea how much in future interest payments UA saved by paying down a quarter BILLION dollars?

US did not pay down their debt, because they didn't want to show an even bigger loss. It's a numbers game. So even with the debt repayment, UA still had a lower negative cash flow than US. Again, I still don't think it's great for UA, but not as bad as US.

 

[john john]

What are you talking about?

DEBT
And who has the better balance sheet
"UAL's standalone plan is not viable,"

 

[USA320Pilot]

In addition to the Delta-Northwest merger, British Airways, American, and Continental publicly announced they are in discussions to form a broad marketing alliance.

Continental said last weekend it was reviewing whether to remain a member of the SkyTeam Alliance, presumably to join the Oneworld alliance with BA and American.

And, the Financial Times reported today that "the three carriers are considering an eventual application to the US and European competition authorities for antitrust immunity for a transatlantic joint venture."

See Story

These two "corporate transactions" will have a material change on the industry and place US Airways at a serious competitive disadvantage because of the revenue shift that will occur if the Tempe-based company does not respond.

It appears if the two transactions above proceed US Airways and United may have no option but to integrate if they want to remain competitive and survive the recession and skyrocketing energy prices.

In the case of United, the company posted a Q1 net loss of $537 million, which is about a loss of about $6 million per day. Furthermore, Credit Suisse analyst Daniel McKenzie in projected drop in the Chicago-based carrier's cash to $1.3 billion by the end of 2009. If true the Chicago-based airline will lose about $1.6 billion in the next 20 months.

According to Forbes, "The company's first-quarter earnings report fueled speculation by analysts that the airline was not fulfilling loan covenants. Covenants are agreements with lenders that require the company to perform to certain standards or be forced to immediately redeem its bonds. On a conference call with analysts, United management said it remains well above the requirements on its two bond covenants, but acknowledged that the company's trajectory is downward due to soaring fuel costs and revenue challenges, making it difficult to project compliance in coming quarters. The company added that publicly held data was not sufficient to determine its loan situation."

See Story

J.P. Morgan wrote an excellent review on the synergies that exist between the two Star Alliance companies and this is the fifth time the two airlines have held advanced discussions on a merger or fragmentation. And, the Wall Street Journal recently reported "Another person familiar with the matter said United and US Airways have been in talks about a potential merger for over a month. The companies have done "a lot of work together" on what the synergies could be and are floating around a number that could be at least as attractive as synergies in a United-Continental linkup, this person said. Those synergies would be driven by the strength of US Airways' route network in the East, this person said, adding that the synergies would also be "meaningfully higher" than the $1 billion-plus in annual revenue and cost savings number that Northwest and Delta have said they expect to generate in a merger."

In conclusion, the United pilots may not like the proposed US Airways-United merger; however, with the potential for no other dance partner the options for the United pilots appear to be much worse than merging with US Airways.

Regards,

USA320Pilot