We made a profit;when do we get the 5% back?

[sabre]

----------------
On 5/14/2003 7:27:09 PM diogenes wrote:

Joesy, (one of the all time great movies, in my view. "Whupped ''em again, Joesy")

Note the icons I used in the original post - the question was intended to be ironic - perhaps I was too subtle for my own good.

More than one union is posing this question to management. Do you really think the Palace is going to say "ohmigod, of course we''ll give the 5% back?" Also, I haven''t seen any union at any property perform much better or worse than another during the last 2 years - even ALPA is taking an whipping.

I don''t think for a minute this management team would post a profit that would cut short the 5% extraction. Moreover, if they did, they''d claim some technicalitiy, and the thing would be in court forever.

We share many of the same issues regarding the IAM. I just don''t think AMFA/AGW is the solution - I view them as distractions hindering us from reforming the IAM and bearing down on management. I am fully aware the IAM Politburo stacks the deck for District elections, and squashed bylaw proposals at the last convention. That pisses me off, too. I also know there is a surprising number of IAM folks holding positions of influence that think the slate is appalling.

Rome wasn''t built in a day, brother, and repairing this union will take time as well.

----------------​

At least ALPA stood up and went to the judge. If you remember, US AIRWAYS wanted to give ALPA a $750 million pension package for 7 years but ALPA knew the judge didn''t have horns and fought its case. We all know that the judge didn''t bow down to US AIRWAYS and give in, but rather the judge said this is a labor matter that shouldn''t be handled here. So before arbitration, ALPA settled with US AIRWAYS on a new pension plan that brought in I believe $950 million over 7 years, although it could have been $850.
Whatever the case, ALPA negotiated millions of more dollars in their pension plan.
Our union was going around acting like the company mouthpiece.

Also, the idea of reforming the IAM is shortsighted and doesn''t recognize the real problem which is the system of governance.
So Diogenes, exactly how are you going to reform this system of governance which you already know doesn''t recognize democracy or any station smaller than a hub?

For instance, your last negotiating committee was appointed and and your next one will be appointed so how do you reconcile that with democracy which I assume you support?

love

 

[delldude]

www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/business/s_134497.html
www.forbes.com/business/newswire/2003/05/14/rtr971567.html
now explain to me so a three year old can understand it,why you need my 5%?

 

[a320av8r]

Except JetBlew is sooo new that they don't have to pay for vacation, sick leave, retirement, etc. They don't have a 12 year payscale since nobody has been there more than 3. They are all new and energetic, they haven't been put through the wringer as people here have. Their management likes employees and views them as assets rather than liabilities (for now). They can grow into markets rather than shrink from them. It's much easier to make a profit by choosing your markets than it is trying to maintain old ones. They don't have to replace their technology, they start with the newest. It's like maintaining an old car vs buying a new one. Eventually the new one gets old too. The classics keep on going and going and...

 

[a320av8r]

It''s a race to the bottom. America demands Wal-Mart.

 

[PITbull]

It was a pre-tax profit.

 

[lownslow]

The latest "profit" wasn''t a profit at all. Reporting it to be a profit is gross negligence, IMO. The entire amount which was reported to be a profit in the media was created through discarding debt in bankruptcy. On an operational basis, U was significantly improved over last year, considering the increase in fuel costs. However, a year and a half of continued losses such as that experienced in Q1 will have U right where it was when it entered bankruptcy, only it will find it harder to reorganize a second time around so soon after the first.

 

[X-U]

----------------
On 5/15/2003 551 AM PineyBob wrote:


The airline industry is reeling under record losses! They will take from any pool of money that is available, including your 5%. WHY? Because they can! Please understand that it''s not persoanl with guys like Dave, it''s just business. These guys will not be satisfied until they have a work rule structure similar to Jet Blue. I have heard on several occassions "If we would have had Jet Blues work rules and pay scale US Airways would have been profitable in 2002" That quote tells it all really. Fasten your seat belts.

----------------​

How about JetBlue''s management compensation package? How about JetBlue''s Frequent Flyer program? How about JetBlue''s single-class service?
It''s never personal to anyone until it is their own ox getting gored.

 

[PITbull]

----------------
On 5/16/2003 736 PM lownslow wrote:

The latest "profit" wasn't a profit at all. Reporting it to be a profit is gross negligence, IMO. The entire amount which was reported to be a profit in the media was created through discarding debt in bankruptcy. On an operational basis, U was significantly improved over last year, considering the increase in fuel costs. However, a year and a half of continued losses such as that experienced in Q1 will have U right where it was when it entered bankruptcy, only it will find it harder to reorganize a second time around so soon after the first.

----------------​

Those were one time charges..court costs and attorney fees, charge offs..

Are you implying above that you think we will go into BK again? We are purchasing small jets to the tune of $4.3Bills. If we are still in survival mode, why are we purchasing?Don't get what you mean.

FYI, IMO, if this company can't profit in the future with all the tools (concessions in every form; every aspect) we as labor have given, in addition to the gov. "bail out" funds, renegotiated leases, and contracts with vendors, the advantage of BK protection and getting rid of unsecured debt, along with investor monies, then it would be time to close up shop, cause that means this mangement can't run a company.

 

[lownslow]

The one-time charges went dramatically in favor of improving the balance sheet, not against it. USAirways LOST $282 million before extraordinary charges and gains. These gains, caused by the elimination of debt through bankruptcy, are what created this false profit to which I speak. The business itself lost a large amount of money ($282 million before tax) on operations. THAT is the number you have to look at. At that loss rate, it will take just under 6 quarters (1.5 years) to burn through the improvement to the balance sheet created by the bankruptcy filing. At that point, U will be looking BK square in the face again.

As for purchasing aircraft being a signal of the airline being out of the woods, don''t count on it. TWA ordered 125 new 717s, 318s, and 320-family aircraft in Dec. 1998, with options for 100 more. The value of the firm orders alone was about the same as U''s order - $4.3 billion or so. This was soon after they emerged from their 2nd bankruptcy. Had the economy been bad then as it is now, they never would have lasted another 2 years.

Don''t think for a second that the "profit" U reported and the airplanes they ordered signal that they''re in good shape. If they don''t make a profit soon, they''ll be out of business soon. And before blaming management for everything, consider that they may have been given a hand so bad no one could win with it... everyone involved (management, unions, etc) have played a part in getting the airline into the jam it is in now...

 

[a320av8r]

But you must look at the cicumstances surrounding the operational loss. Severe winter weather, not just over Presidents Day weekend, which closed all hubs for a couple of days. Impending war in Iraq and terrorist threats as well as raised national security level and missile launchers around DC. Higher costs for security. George II''s economic depression. And on and on...

The loads are picking up, hopefully things will get better. Accountig rules are rules and reporting a profit is what it was due to the loan guarantee and money received from RSA.

Why don''t you try to help make this company run rather than berate everything, either pick up a bucket and bail or jump overboard.

 

[lownslow]

No one is saying that the operational environment wasn''t tough. But a loss is a loss, and unless things improve quickly and dramatically, bankruptcy could be in U''s near future. Asking for the 5% back now is ludicrous. There was no profit, and until there is one, there should be no raises (without promotions). If profits come around, then people should start getting their raises, but not until then.

Why don''t I get on board and help run the company? Because they don''t pay me a red cent. My income comes from the CIA. But I can tell when a company makes a profit, and U didn''t come close to making one in Q1.

 

[Diesel8]

Got to agree with Lownslow. All Enron accounting aside, U did not report a profit. U were given loans, so if anything, it got deeper into debt. The 1 billion from the goverment, is a loan and must be paid back over time.

You can aliken it to maxing out your CC on a cash advance, you may have 4000 in your pocket, but would you call it a profit? I sure would not!

Discounting the special items, the loans from RSA and the goverment, U continues to loose money, at a rather alarming rate, considering all the concession the good people at U have given and the rearranged lease deals etc. 282 million is a lot of money and unless the revenue enviroment picks up, which we all hope, U will continue to loose.

 

[PITbull]

----------------
All DELETED! They just got approved for $216 million dollars of FREEE tax payer money; no loan money, no pay back to the tax payers on top of every other possible business advantage. They now have the additional 5% from all of us they legally extorted to boot. What other carrier has that?   They need to get rid of the marketing department quick. If the business model doesn't work...CHANGE IT!  Some how, some way, Southwest is profiting.. They just make things simple, simple, simple.  .AND DON'T TELL ME IT's  LOW WAGES CAUSE THATS CRAP AGAIN. They make more than we do with less people, and NOW WE HAVE LOWER WAGES THEN THEM WITH  LEESSSSS PEOPLE. They have a workable business model and U keeps the SAME business model. They only change management  faces...THIS TIME, with more management than they know what the hell  to do with.

Sorry, Charley Bown, at least old mangement knew how to make a profit for YEARS. And you can't deny this if you were watching U back then.   These yo yos only ATTEMPT to know how to turn a company around by screwing labor, vendors, lessors, stockholders, County communities, and PAX with threats and exaggerations and down right lying.  Hell, and they still can't make money. So, what's the problem? How come other airlines can make profit but U can't IN THIS SAME ENVIRONMENT?

And don't tell me about the other Majors..they're  NOT where we are yet. But, they will get there, rest assured. They will do their BK,  Labor concessions..the whole nine yards. Funny how folks say it was the unions blame as well for where the co. sits. Crap again. Pariety Plus one was MANAGEMENT'S IDEA NOT LABOR. Funny how no one brings up the millions and millions individual (not unions) receive in compensation packages and bonsuses when TIMES are good and bad.Soon, we  will all be competing against each other, this time, as "low cost carriers" with stupid business plans.
 
Again, if your saying U can't make it now, with everything gotten, BK and all,  then CLOSE UP and shut up.

 

[A320 Driver]

----------------
On 5/17/2003 1:07:18 PM lownslow wrote:

No one is saying that the operational environment wasn't tough. But a loss is a loss, and unless things improve quickly and dramatically, bankruptcy could be in U's near future. Asking for the 5% back now is ludicrous. There was no profit, and until there is one, there should be no raises (without promotions). If profits come around, then people should start getting their raises, but not until then.

Why don't I get on board and help run the company? Because they don't pay me a red cent. My income comes from the CIA. But I can tell when a company makes a profit, and U didn't come close to making one in Q1.

----------------​

Ludicrous you say? Well then I'm a raving lunatic. Give me back that 5% that I ponied up for IRAQ WAR expenses. This management is stealing from the employees AGAIN.
Company wants voluntary fuel savings and other efforts on the part of the employees...fine, but we kick these programs off with the return of that 5%...otherwise forget it.
Think my attitude is bad? You haven't seen anything yet. I'm having to use my savings now to pay my bills after that last 5% and I'm ANGRY!

A320 Driver

GIVE IT BACK!!!!!

 

[cavalier]

----------------
On 5/18/2003 11:31:29 AM A320 Driver wrote:

----------------
On 5/17/2003 1:07:18 PM lownslow wrote:

No one is saying that the operational environment wasn''t tough. But a loss is a loss, and unless things improve quickly and dramatically, bankruptcy could be in U''s near future. Asking for the 5% back now is ludicrous. There was no profit, and until there is one, there should be no raises (without promotions). If profits come around, then people should start getting their raises, but not until then.

Why don''t I get on board and help run the company? Because they don''t pay me a red cent. My income comes from the CIA. But I can tell when a company makes a profit, and U didn''t come close to making one in Q1.

----------------​

It''s really easy for an outsider looking in to sit in judgment, and actually funny when you consider the fact that his employer is the most inefficient example of how to run an entity on the planet. Never needing to worry about job loss, pay or benefits cuts all courtesy of us, the working people in this country makes this post totally irrelevant, IMHO, which is why this board exist to express those opinions and now you have mine as well.
​