Will The Flight Attendants,mechanics Shut U Down?
- Thread starter Reservation Agent
- Start date
Lets not forget the Airbus work. Did we ever think that they would need to be worked? Not the group that was in charged, was that F/A not, was it Pilots not, was it Mechs, not but we told someone whom was in charged. That same group has done a great job for themself. I would like to have some of that GOLD before it ends. 
L
luvn737s
Guest
The RSA has billions. If they're interested in running an airline, why don't they front the cash for the hedges, instead of asking the employees to buy the gas for the planes?Former ModerAAtor said:
As their new motto goes, "Ya gotta steal (or extort) money to make money!"
OP
Reservation Agent
Senior
- Aug 23, 2002
- 406
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #19
If the airline is run so poorly..... 23 % of pay that takes food off our tables wont save this airline....Mabey USAIRWAYS can relocate to Bombay, India... and operate as an Indian Airline paying $1.00 an hour to make a profit...
OP
Reservation Agent
Senior
- Aug 23, 2002
- 406
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #20
up
UseYourHead
Veteran
- Apr 1, 2003
- 720
- 0
Answer: None of these, the industry is changing around us...fast. We need to morph and become a viable competitor...we do have a head-start.
Good luck to us!
Good luck to us!
USA320Pilot said:
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #22
1. Oil at $53 per barrel.
Maybe if management had been more effective, we wouldn't be in a position where $53 per barrel oil could sink us.
2. Cost increases for security post September 11.
Seems I remember that the security cost paid by the airlines is what it cost prior to 9/11. The taxpayers and passengers pick up the rest of the tab. The passenger fee hurts the LCC's worse than the legacy's since it represents a bigger % of the lower fares.
3. Revenue depression due to tremendous LCC growth and Internet booking.
Bronner shooting off his mouth didn't help with revenue depression, did it? The internet is a double-edged sword - fare transparancy on one hand and lower booking cost on the other.
4. Labor costs that are higher than every carrier except two other companies.
According to the company, which is always suspect. In addition, a traditional hub/spoke multiple fleet type carrier will have higher labor costs. Who is the carrier that has clung to that model the longest and whose decision was that?
5. Labor resistance to change, which contributed to the judicial reorganization. The formal reorganization caused the loss of over $100 million in revenue due to passengers booking away and approximately $50 million in bankruptcy legal and consultant fees.
After a decade of employees giving various managements what they wanted, you talk about labor resistance to change? The ultimate "forget what you've done before, what have you done today" argument. Wolf wanted a "competitive cost structure" and he got exactly what he asked for - parity + 1%. What did the employees get - a failed merger attempt and no plan B. Siegel wanted a "competitive cost structure" and got exactly what he asked for - including the pilot's DB pension. What did the employees get - a failed restructuring plan and demands for more. Only someone desperate to keep their job at any cost would not be resistant to more fairy tale promises accompanied by demands for concrete concessions.
Jim
Maybe if management had been more effective, we wouldn't be in a position where $53 per barrel oil could sink us.
2. Cost increases for security post September 11.
Seems I remember that the security cost paid by the airlines is what it cost prior to 9/11. The taxpayers and passengers pick up the rest of the tab. The passenger fee hurts the LCC's worse than the legacy's since it represents a bigger % of the lower fares.
3. Revenue depression due to tremendous LCC growth and Internet booking.
Bronner shooting off his mouth didn't help with revenue depression, did it? The internet is a double-edged sword - fare transparancy on one hand and lower booking cost on the other.
4. Labor costs that are higher than every carrier except two other companies.
According to the company, which is always suspect. In addition, a traditional hub/spoke multiple fleet type carrier will have higher labor costs. Who is the carrier that has clung to that model the longest and whose decision was that?
5. Labor resistance to change, which contributed to the judicial reorganization. The formal reorganization caused the loss of over $100 million in revenue due to passengers booking away and approximately $50 million in bankruptcy legal and consultant fees.
After a decade of employees giving various managements what they wanted, you talk about labor resistance to change? The ultimate "forget what you've done before, what have you done today" argument. Wolf wanted a "competitive cost structure" and he got exactly what he asked for - parity + 1%. What did the employees get - a failed merger attempt and no plan B. Siegel wanted a "competitive cost structure" and got exactly what he asked for - including the pilot's DB pension. What did the employees get - a failed restructuring plan and demands for more. Only someone desperate to keep their job at any cost would not be resistant to more fairy tale promises accompanied by demands for concrete concessions.
Jim
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #23
Thank you, Jim and Clue. It is absolutely management's responsibility to adapt to the business environment in which management chooses to place its business.
I don't know whether the employees will decide to shut US down but the employees have clearly contributed far more than any airline employees have ever been asked to contribute. The good news is that US employees really can't possibly go any lower - although I say that with the same sense of skepticism that US employees have had for a number of years.
I don't know whether the employees will decide to shut US down but the employees have clearly contributed far more than any airline employees have ever been asked to contribute. The good news is that US employees really can't possibly go any lower - although I say that with the same sense of skepticism that US employees have had for a number of years.
OP
Reservation Agent
Senior
- Aug 23, 2002
- 406
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #24
up
UseYourHead
Veteran
- Apr 1, 2003
- 720
- 0
Gee,
That worked at at UAL...yea right, start pulling the rope in the right direction!
That worked at at UAL...yea right, start pulling the rope in the right direction!
robbedagain said:
jimntx
Veteran
usfliboi said:
usfliboi said:
Seems to me that you are the one who does not have a "well balanced informed opinion." The judge does NOT have an obligation to "protect this company's assets" (translated into your version of the English language that would be "to protect my job"). The judge has an obligation to protect the interests of the creditors.
If that means liquidating the company and dispersing the assets to the highest bidder, then under the law that is the obligation the judge has. Don't assume that the judge is just there to do management's bidding.
