Here is a wordy yet interesting read I found on another board.
Will The Wolf Survive?
Amid all the speculation and anxiety surrounding UAL's future course, it's important to remember that certain 'patterns' tend to rear their ugly head, each and every time this company finds itself in crisis. It's actually rather amazing to me, that people feel 'in the dark' about what's going on.
The evidence is everywhere:
An ill-advised quarter BILLION dollar payout in January. The skyrocketing price of oil. The failure of half a dozen airlines within the past six months. Our CEO's continual, myopic obsession with what he calls "consolidation." The merger at NWA/Delta.
The list gets kinda boring, after that...but you know very well, I could name another six factors.
Fact is, it's all out in the open, and nobody's been hiding anything--least of all, Glenn Tilton.
Some may call me a "conspiracy theorist," if I mention that the 'perfect timing' of Tuesday's MEC briefing at WHQ was very strangely 'synchronized' with
A.) The quarterly report of a half BILLION dollar loss at UAL B.) The resulting stock crash--wherein, United lost 36% of its total value. Breathtaking stuff, yes.
Not even the upcoming 'golden parachutes' could slow it down.
But one harkens back, to the pre-bankruptcy days...or even to the post 9/11 days....
and one clearly recalls a few similar "Come on over, let's talk" meetings, between union and management.
They were never pleasant affairs.
Nobody came to play paddy-cake.
In fact, what transpired at each and every such meeting was a "Presentation of Doom," designed to elicit 'cooperation' from the blood-enemy of management: its unions.
It has been a result of those meetings-- and not Section 6 negotiations--that our worst concessions have always come about.
Mind you, these 'presentations' only happen when management has all of its ducks in a row, including considerable publicly-acknowledged, fresh evidence of impending doom. They then declare it necessary to supposedly "open the books," and at the day's end, it's all about demanding even more concessions.
It usually goes something like this: "Either you let us postpone your raises and cancel any further ones for two years, or we close six domiciles tomorrow.
Your choice...get back to us!" Who's your buddy, hah? Who's tryin' to woik with ya, here!?!
(In reality, it's more of a "Who's your Daddy" situation...if you know what I mean.)
"Crisis concessions," as I'll call them here-- to distinguish them from those achieved through normal contract negotiations--
have exhibited a VERY predictable pattern, in this company's recent past.
I hate to bum you out, folks...but whenever there's going to be a merger (and for immediate reference, simply recall the UAL bankruptcy filing),
concessions are usually achieved on a three-tiered basis.
Not one time, nor two.
Three.
Three full rounds of serious concessions--in exchange for our vvery existence.
First, in order to create a more appealing scenario--be it for a bkk judge or (in the current situation) a potential suitor--
immediate, 'emergency' measures will be demanded.
So whether it's a pay freeze (in anticipation of our upcoming raise) or base closures,
or even a proposal to bend the rule on layoffs for foreign nationals--whatever form it takes, that is where we are at the moment.
At least, I think so.
No suitor (or merge partner) would go forward, without FIRST wringing a round of new concessions and 'belt-tightening measures' from their employees,
as well as demanding the same of its potential business partner, or "bride."
It's Standard Operating Procedure--allowing a kind of good cop/bad cop 'phasing in,' of the new realities--
and if, by some chance, the topic of new concessions (read: ultimatums) didn't come up yesterday, believe me...
It soon will.
What's particularly depressing is that, after those first measures, along will come the pre-merger negotiations to merge union contracts, and in that process--no matter what union prevails--there WILL be significant further concessions, or "efficiencies" demanded.
The pressure from Wall Street will be seismic, to immediately begin demonstrating that, in fact, this merger was a good idea.
In addition, believe it or not, your AFA-CWA has a vested interest in concessions.
I know...how can that possibly be?
Well, just suppose it comes down to NO AFA-CWA at the new company...or big concessions.
Who do you think they'll throw under the bus?
...themselves?
Hardly.
And in that connection, we have seen (over and over) evidence that concessionary contracts actually STRENGTHEN the union's grip on its membership.
(You will recall all of those comparative contracts we were shown. "It could be worse! Look what Continental's duty rigs look like!"
Ironic, eh?
"Without the AFA, we'd have lost everything...not just half of everything," seems to be the going line, in times of crisis.)
As counter-intuitive as it sounds, your union actually has, as its primary interest,
a third party at the negotiating table,
in addition to management and the employees:
...ITSELF.
So you can expect both new work rules (duty rigs, staffing, etc.), new disciplary rules, new pay charts,
pretty much everything you do not want to see--in advance of any merger.
But wait...that's only "Round Two!"
The coup d'etat comes after most operational systems have actually been combined,
a year or two down the line...and the company "suddenly' finds itself in a serious financial crunch, due to everything from oil prices
to unforseen ("one time") charges surrounding the merge itself, to balance sheet problems, to regulatory roadblocks, or even just...bad weather.
Whatever the story has to be, it will be.
But believe me, there will be a narrative--and it will be told with further concessions in mind.
And at every single stage of this process, these will NOT be requests.
They will be ultimatums.
Just like in the past:
"If you don't do this, this and this...we simply cannot save the company!"
Your choice is: "Job? Or no job!"
And you will vote, as even I probably will, to save the job...even as it goes further downhill.
How do I know that's how it goes?
...because, that's how it's already gone.
I can't help but think it doesn't have to be this way. But then, that's like asking the fox who watches the hen house not to get hungry.
It's as much a law of nature as anything else.
Survival of the fittest; the law of the jungle.
So put on your best "Goldilocks" outfit, grab that picnic basket, and start skipping through the woods!
Only one question remains:
Will the wolf survive?
