What management DOES care about…

[PITbull]

----------------
Aeroman,

And to you, where and when did we discuss that  I envy mangement as you implied above?

I did not imply above that you and I ever had a discussion on employee morale....The point here is that from your thread above where you first addressed me implies IMO that you did not understand my position with regard to employee morale and bottom line profits.

If you have been reading my posts and threads these past several months, you  would have a more profound  understanding of my position which has NOTHING to do with mangement envy...that's my point to you above. With morale the way it is, how long do you think the majority of employees can deliver no.#1 customer service? Wishful thinking, should, and oughta, doesn't deliver. That's reality. 

 And I figured you would not get the synapse comment....

 

[CLIPPEDWINGS]

With all due respect N628AU, it is easy to keep the ship from sinking when you throw everybody overboard!! Dave did no real justice to US. Anyone of us could have fired thousands and called it a day.

 

[CLIPPEDWINGS]

----------------
Aeroman,
   I am not sure what you do or if you are an employee!  How do you expect the "service that is known of US Airways" when we have the bare-bones crew on a flight.  Have you tried to serve 148 passengers drinks and a snack PHL-PIT on a 45 minute flight with only 2 flight attendants in coach?  Well guess what...the f/a's aren't doing it. If you don't have enough candy for the whole class....  If we can't serve all, we aren't serving any.  Management must understand that we cannot and will not bust our asses with 15% less pay. 
   I agree with all that morale sucks.  It will continue that way.  The passengers need to start complaining so that management realizes the great US Airways service is a thing of the past with a skeleton crew.

 

[stewbear]

----------------
Aeroman...If you were so aware of outrageous contracts why didn't you run to give the "parity plus 1%) money back? We all noticed how quiet you all were after that hit the paydeck...another example of ..oh well I got mine too bad for you. How bout when the agents got screwed back in the early 90s? Where was all the morality then? Oh wait...I think I know the answer.

 

[MrAeroMan]

----------------
On 4/22/2003 5:38:30 PM PITbull wrote:




Aeroman,

And to you, where and when did we discuss that I envy mangement as you implied above?

I did not imply above that you and I ever had a discussion on employee morale....The point here is that from your thread above where you first addressed me implies IMO that you did not understand my position with regard to employee morale and bottom line profits.

If you have been reading my posts and threads these past several months, you would have a more profound understanding of my position which has NOTHING to do with mangement envy...that's my point to you above. With morale the way it is, how long do you think the majority of employees can deliver no.#1 customer service? Wishful thinking, should, and oughta, doesn't deliver. That's reality.

And I figured you would not get the synapse comment....

----------------​

Well Pitbull ...never mind....your head is still in the sand.

 

[MrAeroMan]

----------------
On 4/22/2003 11:18:13 PM stewbear wrote:

Aeroman...If you were so aware of outrageous contracts why didn''t you run to give the "parity plus 1%) money back? We all noticed how quiet you all were after that hit the paydeck...another example of ..oh well I got mine too bad for you. How bout when the agents got screwed back in the early 90s? Where was all the morality then? Oh wait...I think I know the answer.

----------------​

I was one of those agents Stewie. I felt the pain just like you did. No difference.

 

[MrAeroMan]

----------------
On 4/22/2003 1105 PM CLIPPEDWINGS wrote:

----------------​

Aeroman,
I am not sure what you do or if you are an employee! How do you expect the "service that is known of US Airways" when we have the bare-bones crew on a flight. Have you tried to serve 148 passengers drinks and a snack PHL-PIT on a 45 minute flight with only 2 flight attendants in coach? Well guess what...the f/a''s aren''t doing it. If you don''t have enough candy for the whole class.... If we can''t serve all, we aren''t serving any. Management must understand that we cannot and will not bust our asses with 15% less pay.
I agree with all that morale sucks. It will continue that way. The passengers need to start complaining so that management realizes the great US Airways service is a thing of the past with a skeleton crew.
----------------​

I agree with you. The whole idea about staffing a plane by a bean counter in CCY is ridiculous to say the least. My only hope is in being so angry at management about the staffing that the anger doesn''t get misdirected to the passengers.

 

[PITbull]

----------------
On 4/23/2003 8:09:10 AM MrAeroMan wrote:

----------------
On 4/22/2003 5:38:30 PM PITbull wrote:




Aeroman,

And to you, where and when did we discuss that I envy mangement as you implied above?

I did not imply above that you and I ever had a discussion on employee morale....The point here is that from your thread above where you first addressed me implies IMO that you did not understand my position with regard to employee morale and bottom line profits.

If you have been reading my posts and threads these past several months, you would have a more profound understanding of my position which has NOTHING to do with mangement envy...that''s my point to you above. With morale the way it is, how long do you think the majority of employees can deliver no.#1 customer service? Wishful thinking, should, and oughta, doesn''t deliver. That''s reality.

And I figured you would not get the synapse comment....

----------------​

Well Pitbull ...never mind....your head is still in the sand.


----------------​

I know, you''re the only one with the epiphany of how things are.

 

[MrAeroMan]

**deleted by moderator**

USaviation does not allow insulting another user's post, opinions, subject, grammar, or an attempt to pick an online fight.

 

[PITbull]

I see where you must have just looked it up...

 

[PITbull]

Bob,

I am sorry, I do not agree. This is one battle we will fight. Company may win it, but it must be challenged fiercely.

 

[PITbull]

Take it easy Aeroman....

Ask me if I was offended? Answer. No.

I respect your opinions and expressions...and your last post about a new dictionary made me smile.

 

[PITbull]

Bob,

The 5% pay cut has nothing to do with not having a postive cash flow. It had to do with the war event having a sustaining negative effect on aviation. We were not in a postive cash flow before the war, and booking were down along with revenue since 9/11.
The question that needs to be investigated and anwered to satisfy labor is are the bookings the same as they were before the war. If the answer is yes....then mangaement needs to return those particular funds back to the employee. We gave our wage concessions to the company from the summer and those were deep and severe.

We did not agree to pay for empty seats or to by RJs for this company. We contributed to the survival of our airlone, and it has survived. Now, the employees have to survive along with the company.

Bob, we are not going to quit our company because we have bad management that could care less about employee spirit.

We won't be silent. That 5% will be addressed and challenged, even if we have to do "informational picketing" to bring these necessary funds back to the employee. Mangement received $206 million from the taxpayers recently as a "war event" bail out. Part of a $2.8 billion for the industry just for the war. Our airline had no clue in Dec. that they would be getting these funds. Again, a nice, enexpected freebie for U. Don't get me wrong..I am glad our Industry received this...but U now can not look for a "wind fall" from their employees.

The war was not sustaining and the company should not have initiated this as quickly as they had.

Again, we are looking for this mangement to operate in "good faith". That is not hard to do, but for some reason, it is extremely difficult for our mangement.

 

[MrAeroMan]

----------------
On 4/23/2003 4:13:42 PM MrAeroMan wrote:

**deleted by moderator**

USaviation does not allow insulting another user''s post, opinions, subject, grammar, or an attempt to pick an online fight.



----------------​

Mr. Moderator....My comments were in no way reflective in the excuse you used to delete my post. No one was trying to pick a fight in any way only responding to a post that was made by Pitbull. If you felt my comments were insulting to another user perhaps you should review ALL POSTS on this site rather than a select few. How do you say it?

"USaviation does not allow insulting another user''s post, opinions, subject, grammar, or an attempt to pick an online fight."

Perhaps you should review some of the other threads and the posts made on them as well as this one and start to practice what you preach to all user''s.

 

[LavMan]

War/Terroism Contingency

In the event that (a) the U.S. invades Iraq (meaning that the U.S. initiates a sustained aerial bombardment of those parts of Iraq that are not within the current no fly zone or introduces substantial numbers of ground troops into the territory of Iraq), or (B) there is an act of terrorism which in either event has a material adverse impact on commercial aviation, there will be an immediate 5% pay deferral of base pay implemented for all employees for up to 18 months. (Should this condition occur, the Company will meet and confer with the Union regarding implementation of the pay deferral.) The deferral will begin to be repaid starting in the first month following the end of the deferral and will continue to be repaid in as many monthly installments as were covered by the deferral. In the event that US Airways Group reports a pretax profit with respect to any quarter during which they pay deferral is in effect, the deferral will immediately stop and repayment will begin in the next month to continue for the same number of months as were included in the deferral.