US Pilots Labor Discussion 9/23- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[nic4us]

Why? I have not claimed it's glory or that it would be anything. Why, when I counter the delusional claims of west pilot past glory do you guys always say "yeah, but US really sucked!"?

Because I agree with Ames.

I would gladly go back to 2005 undo the merger and take our chances with AWA. We had an airline and management team that weathered the post 911 era without going into bankrupcy, by coming up with new inovative means of making money, (buy on board, tray table ads, etc). Again after the merger it was LCC ( AWA management) that started the whole "a la carte" pricing fad to counter high fuel prices, and now that has become the industry standard. We made a run at ATA, and when that was unsuccessful, ended up merging with AAA, followed closely by an attempt at DL.

The point being, that probably every West pilot would take that offer. How many east pilots would say the same thing?

Ames made four statements.

1. AWA was growing. True statement.
2.AWA had three consecutive quarters of profit. True statement.
3.Had US liquidated the entire industry would have benefitted.........True statement, but the amount of benefit to AWA would be speculative at best.
4. Parker's move to merge with DAL would not have been rebuffed if we were little ole AWA....Complete speculation on his part, but I do not see how this rises to the point of delusional.

 

[Pi brat]

You mean you're giving the canned response - countering requires at least some facts. West pilot says US would have liquidated, East pilot says HP would have too. East pilot says HP was falling on hard times, West pilot says US would have liquidated.

The facts say that 3 of the 4 claims you're trying to "counter" are true - HP was growing, had 3 straight quarters of profits, and the liquidation of US would have benefited the industry (including HP).

Jim

Facts? Facts? How can a guess about the future that never happened be a fact? You lists these "facst":
1)HP was growing-agreed, depending on when you look at it. They had to retreat from their trans-con expansion because it didn't work.
2)HP had 3 quarters profit-the link I provide counters that and has Doug Parker saying 2005 would be difficult. The 1st quarter 2005 only had a net profit due to special items.
3)US liquidation would have benefited the industry(including HP)- you don't know that! How much did EA's failure help US? Not much. We will never know as it didn't happen, so it is not a FACT

Make sure facts are really facts.

 

[Phoenix]

Forget about what may or may not have happened to AWA absent the merger.

And tell us, where would AAA be now absent the merger.

Stop already. The moderators have already said this conversation is not allowed.. and even if it were allowed, the ninth has already given the standard for evaluating a DFR. It has nothing to do with who bought who or who saved who.

 

[Pi brat]

Because I agree with Ames.

I would gladly go back to 2005 undo the merger and take our chances with AWA. We had an airline and management team that weathered the post 911 era without going into bankrupcy, by coming up with new inovative means of making money, (buy on board, tray table ads, etc). Again after the merger it was LCC ( AWA management) that started the whole "a la carte" pricing fad to counter high fuel prices, and now that has become the industry standard. We made a run at ATA, and when that was unsuccessful, ended up merging with AAA, followed closely by an attempt at DL.

The point being, that probably every West pilot would take that offer. How many east pilots would say the same thing?

Ames made four statements.

1. AWA was growing. True statement.
2.AWA had three consecutive quarters of profit. True statement.
3.Had US liquidated the entire industry would have benefitted.........True statement, but the amount of benefit to AWA would be speculative at best.
4. Parker's move to merge with DAL would not have been rebuffed if we were little ole AWA....Complete speculation on his part, but I do not see how this rises to the point of delusional.

AWA/US announced the merger May 19, 2005 right? So three quarters prior to the merger would include the 4th 2004, right? I show a net loss of 49 million for 4th 2004, and 89 million loss for 2004. Are my numbers wrong, because you, Ames, and Jim claim otherwise, but I can't find anything to back that up. See my answer to Jim.


You might like to go back and take your chances, we can't. It's done, we are stuck with each other, we pays our lawyers and takes our chances, the die is cast.

 

[Run Like Hell]

Anyway, I just heard the Nic has been declared the official list.

 

[nic4us]

Stop already. The moderators have already said this conversation is not allowed.. and even if it were allowed, the ninth has already given the standard for evaluating a DFR. It has nothing to do with who bought who or who saved who.

I am not making any statements about the who saved who. I am exploring sentiments concerning expectations.

The 9th did not give the standard for evaluating a DFR, they merely affirmed a bright line test for when it would become "unquestionably ripe".

 

[nic4us]

AWA/US announced the merger May 19, 2005 right? So three quarters prior to the merger would include the 4th 2004, right? I show a net loss of 49 million for 4th 2004, and 89 million loss for 2004. Are my numbers wrong, because you, Ames, and Jim claim otherwise, but I can't find anything to back that up. See my answer to Jim.


You might like to go back and take your chances, we can't. It's done, we are stuck with each other, we pays our lawyers and takes our chances, the die is cast.

Well I can't argue with the USA Today. I was going from memory, and quickly agreed with Ames. But it looks like you are correct and AWH had a 4th quarter loss in 2004.

I tried to look at the annual report for 2004 but I have run out of time and need to be off to other errands. Perhaps Ames was thinking the first 3 quarters of 2005 when we still had seperate accounting.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I show a net loss for 4th quarter 2004, so one of us has wrong numbers.

My mistake and I apologize. I sorted out the quarterly reports to save wading through all the SEC filings on the website, meaning to go back and get the annual report for 2004 then forgot to get it. So I skipped the 4th quarter 2004. So 2 quarters of profits prior to the merger.

As far as those airplanes go, how many Airbus were scheduled to be delivered to US this year? How many actually will be?

19 A320/321's (that's 2009 & 2010), but 54 planes leaving the fleet between the merger and 2009. Net loss - 35 airplanes. Nothing beyond 2010 except the A350's, listed as 2011 but we know what happened with deliveries of those with Airbus' problems.

Now for HP:

18 deliveries through 2009, with 11 retirements for a net gain of 7 airplanes through 2010

Jim

 

[flybynite]

Because I agree with Ames.

I would gladly go back to 2005 undo the merger and take our chances with AWA. We had an airline and management team that weathered the post 911 era without going into bankrupcy, by coming up with new inovative means of making money, (buy on board, tray table ads, etc). Again after the merger it was LCC ( AWA management) that started the whole "a la carte" pricing fad to counter high fuel prices, and now that has become the industry standard. We made a run at ATA, and when that was unsuccessful, ended up merging with AAA, followed closely by an attempt at DL.

The point being, that probably every West pilot would take that offer. How many east pilots would say the same thing?

Ames made four statements.

1. AWA was growing. True statement.
2.AWA had three consecutive quarters of profit. True statement.
3.Had US liquidated the entire industry would have benefitted.........True statement, but the amount of benefit to AWA would be speculative at best.
4. Parker's move to merge with DAL would not have been rebuffed if we were little ole AWA....Complete speculation on his part, but I do not see how this rises to the point of delusional.

Correct me if I'm wrong.....

You weathered the post 911 event by being the first airline to belly up to the Government bar. Remember?

And 3 profitable quarters is not something to crow about.

Well, we didn't liquidate and we've been a thorn in every one's side ever since. Ha!! Your's included.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I tried to look at the annual report for 2004 but I have run out of time and need to be off to other errands. Perhaps Ames was thinking the first 3 quarters of 2005 when we still had seperate accounting.

After being corrected by pi I looked at it and it doesn't break out the 4th quarter of 2004 (but it does show a loss for 2004). Just as now, the 4th quarter was reported separately via press release instead of via form 8K like the other quarters.

Jim

 

[767jetz]

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2005-01-21-amwest-earnings_x.htm

Yeah jetz................with those great economy resistant markets in PHX and LAS I can see how you would come to those conclusions. Jeeze.........this is just getting funny!

I think it's out of context. Show me one report that says Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, or Charlotte real estate is booming. In fact, show me where any real estate market is booming in any major airline's hub cities. I think we can agree that the recession has effected everyone in this country, granted to varying degrees. It doesn't mean that PHX passenger traffic would have collapsed and made AWA suddenly go from profit to extinction absent a merger. And it doesn't change my original argument that trying to infer one particular outcome would have happened exactly like it did, even if circumstances were different. (Like absent the merger.) All we can say with any certainty is what was happening when the decision to merge occurred.

This is why the argument of basing seniority on what would have happened or will happen in the future doesn't pass the reasonable test. Of course one side will claim their crystal ball is more accurate than the other. Career expectations do not take wildly subjective factors like predicting future events into account.

 

[767jetz]

Anyway, I just heard the Nic has been declared the official list.

Care to elaborate? Or are just kidding?

 

[crazystnic]

Good for you. Retire under LOA93. Then why all of the screaming for the east demanding that the west help you get a contract?

So you since everyone on here has said that they are super senior and not effected by the Nicolau you all are just supporting the junior guys. Most of you have claimed that. Sit back retire under LOA 93 and leave. All you east guys are trying to tell us how valuable the attrition is. Great. What about the guys that are the attrition? What is in it for them?

clear you keep trying to claime that the mid to bottom of the east list is screwing the top of the AAA east list..

bottom line is the difference in CAPT and F/O at AAA is about 3 years. Many of us were hired in 86 and 87. vs 84 for those that are captains.
those Captains have benefited since 84 in the left seat vs us in the F/O seat since 87. We don't have to do anything to save there butt/s They have made 45 K or more per year more than us for over 20 years. WE OWE THEM nothing. If we hold out to not have the nic inflicted on us, it's the least they can do. ... the F/O's have taken enough in the shorts. So stop trying to guilt us that we are screwing the senior.

 

[crazystnic]

also from closed post.


I'm disgusted by reading of the 20 East pilots over the cap for JUNE.

Some flying over 100 hours... From F/O's to CAPT's...

I regullarly fly 70-75 hours... sometimes under minimum and encourgage you to do the same...

This is one of the single best things we can do to force recalls and upgrades...

There is no excuse and the excuse of I had to does not fly with me....

Don't blame it on LOA 93......

we all should be on board... East and West.

 

[mikey60]

Anyway, I just heard the Nic has been declared the official list.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!