700uw
- Thread starter umech
- Start date
Hmm, True Jim...
But my self interset is the survival and success of a company that employs 34,000.
Outsiders looking for some windfall in/from the demise of US Airways own self interst means 34000 out of a job.
Not much of a comparison, nor reason for me to feel bad about it.
But my self interset is the survival and success of a company that employs 34,000.
Outsiders looking for some windfall in/from the demise of US Airways own self interst means 34000 out of a job.
Not much of a comparison, nor reason for me to feel bad about it.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #6
Rico said:
Seems like you have said your self interest is the survival and success of MDA (and that chance at the left seat of the 170/190). Didn't you post something about the liquidation or failure of mainline while MDA lived on? Not many of those 34,000 employees at MDA, and 0 there are being asked to "fall on their swords" to keep this enterprise going.
As for numbers, maybe Bob is interested in "the survival and success of a company that employs" considerably more than 34,000 - say, AMR. Seems natural.
So you want MDA to survive (regardless of whether mainline does or not) because it's in your best interests, Bob wants AMR to survive (regardless of whether U does or not) because it's in his best interests - where's the difference?
Jim
Bla bla bla Jim...
The Difference is that I do not go and try to stir up dissent upon the AMR boards. I look instead to make my own company work, rather than gain at the expense of another operation folding.
So what if I want to see both MDA and Mainline succeed...? We are each PART of the same whole, and our success feeds the overall success of US Airways. I look to a more positive future, rather than lamenting the past, or wishing for a bitter end, can you say that Jim...?
FYI, I will never see the left seat of any MDA A/C until recalls have brought home enough pilots to the Mainline, that a left seat is left open. (I knew that coming in) Now honestly, are you jerk enough to not want that to happen too Jim, to not want to see the 1879 recalled (just to keep me from finding my own success)...?
And when it comes to MDA, would you rather see your nephew over at CHQ doing this flying instead of me, and the hundreds of US Airways furloughees from ALPA, AFA, IAM on the street rather than working by choice at MDA...?
You are a strange guy Jim. <_<
Yeah, the greatest payback from all of this only comes if US Airways is successful. So yes, I have been unabashedly FOR this place being successful. Sorry if I do not want to join with you and the rest of the people rooting for failure.
Did I mention you are a strange guy Jim...?
Nope, I look for a better future for all of us, one in which a profitable and competitive company can support better wages and contracts. But it is a transformation into that strong of a company that scares guys like Bob Owens, who would much rather see us fail and not have another serious competitor to deal with.
Yeah, that's the difference Jim.
The Difference is that I do not go and try to stir up dissent upon the AMR boards. I look instead to make my own company work, rather than gain at the expense of another operation folding.
So what if I want to see both MDA and Mainline succeed...? We are each PART of the same whole, and our success feeds the overall success of US Airways. I look to a more positive future, rather than lamenting the past, or wishing for a bitter end, can you say that Jim...?
FYI, I will never see the left seat of any MDA A/C until recalls have brought home enough pilots to the Mainline, that a left seat is left open. (I knew that coming in) Now honestly, are you jerk enough to not want that to happen too Jim, to not want to see the 1879 recalled (just to keep me from finding my own success)...?
And when it comes to MDA, would you rather see your nephew over at CHQ doing this flying instead of me, and the hundreds of US Airways furloughees from ALPA, AFA, IAM on the street rather than working by choice at MDA...?
You are a strange guy Jim. <_<
Yeah, the greatest payback from all of this only comes if US Airways is successful. So yes, I have been unabashedly FOR this place being successful. Sorry if I do not want to join with you and the rest of the people rooting for failure.
Did I mention you are a strange guy Jim...?
Nope, I look for a better future for all of us, one in which a profitable and competitive company can support better wages and contracts. But it is a transformation into that strong of a company that scares guys like Bob Owens, who would much rather see us fail and not have another serious competitor to deal with.
Yeah, that's the difference Jim.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #9
I guess I am a strange guy.....
Unlike some, I would like to see the entire company and all employees succeed and prosper, not just some employees and the company.
Unlike some, I wish this company would do what was really necessary to achieve a competitive pposition and stop trying to fruitlessly do it all on the employee's backs.
Unlike some, I don't theorize about ways for parts of the company to survive even if it means the end of other parts of this company.
Unlike some, I don't constantly tell others what to do for my best interests.
Unlike some, I don't whine about how miserable my life will be if others don't face "reality".
So, yes, I am something of a strange bird in these parts. And that suits me just fine....
Jim
Unlike some, I would like to see the entire company and all employees succeed and prosper, not just some employees and the company.
Unlike some, I wish this company would do what was really necessary to achieve a competitive pposition and stop trying to fruitlessly do it all on the employee's backs.
Unlike some, I don't theorize about ways for parts of the company to survive even if it means the end of other parts of this company.
Unlike some, I don't constantly tell others what to do for my best interests.
Unlike some, I don't whine about how miserable my life will be if others don't face "reality".
So, yes, I am something of a strange bird in these parts. And that suits me just fine....
Jim
Harry Callahan
Veteran
Way to go Jim
I might add I have meet Jim & I know he is sincere in everything he says.
I might add I have meet Jim & I know he is sincere in everything he says.
Well, I never said Jim was insincire in his attitude. I think it is genuine. I just think we differ in our peception of what "the general good" is. IMO it is survival first, success second. In Jim's case, it is that we should somehow magically be able to be successful enough to maintain what we had, or we deserve failure otherwise.
Hell ya I would like to see us growing, and each work group sharing in the gains. But I think that wishing for such a thing, or getting upset because such a thing does not exist right now is being unrealistic.
Coudla, shoulda, woulda is nothing but a waste of effort right now. Clearly the doors will close unless the labor concessions were obtained. No matter how people like Jim or I feel about it, that is just the way it is. The ATSB, GE, and other creditors/investors see it no other way.
Making it into some grand "Labor Crusade" is just cover for getting people to do something to help your own personal agenda. An dit makes little sense anyways, Why...? Because it is putting the cart before the horse. High wages and good contracts are only a result of working for a healthy and competitive company. Not shrewd labor negotiations or union bluster.
The amount of leveage a union has to gain/maintain pay and working conditions is directly related to the financial health of the company, period. Thus the less than zero leverage any US Airways Union has had this year, as US Airways nears the financial edge.
Remember that the envy some feel towards the pay and contracts at Southwest is a recent thing. For many years it was the othe way around, in which they sacrificed and worked harder/for less than you to build their company to where it is now...
Where they can make gains in pay/rules while still allowing their SWA to remain stronger and more competitive than everyone else.
Who deserves the credit for that at SWA, IMO it is both the smart management, AND the ongoing sacrifices that their workforce has made.
So unlike Jim, IMO it is morally "ok" to ask for mutual sacrifice so that we have a chance to find that kind of success someday in the future, rather than risking everything to maintain/retain the contracts we had before.
For it comes down to this key point. If you do not like the way things have turned out you have the CHOICE to leave. IF this place goes under, no one will get that choice. And that is not fair to those who do want to stay, and those that do want to see this place succeed.
End of story
Hell ya I would like to see us growing, and each work group sharing in the gains. But I think that wishing for such a thing, or getting upset because such a thing does not exist right now is being unrealistic.
Coudla, shoulda, woulda is nothing but a waste of effort right now. Clearly the doors will close unless the labor concessions were obtained. No matter how people like Jim or I feel about it, that is just the way it is. The ATSB, GE, and other creditors/investors see it no other way.
Making it into some grand "Labor Crusade" is just cover for getting people to do something to help your own personal agenda. An dit makes little sense anyways, Why...? Because it is putting the cart before the horse. High wages and good contracts are only a result of working for a healthy and competitive company. Not shrewd labor negotiations or union bluster.
The amount of leveage a union has to gain/maintain pay and working conditions is directly related to the financial health of the company, period. Thus the less than zero leverage any US Airways Union has had this year, as US Airways nears the financial edge.
Remember that the envy some feel towards the pay and contracts at Southwest is a recent thing. For many years it was the othe way around, in which they sacrificed and worked harder/for less than you to build their company to where it is now...
Where they can make gains in pay/rules while still allowing their SWA to remain stronger and more competitive than everyone else.
Who deserves the credit for that at SWA, IMO it is both the smart management, AND the ongoing sacrifices that their workforce has made.
So unlike Jim, IMO it is morally "ok" to ask for mutual sacrifice so that we have a chance to find that kind of success someday in the future, rather than risking everything to maintain/retain the contracts we had before.
For it comes down to this key point. If you do not like the way things have turned out you have the CHOICE to leave. IF this place goes under, no one will get that choice. And that is not fair to those who do want to stay, and those that do want to see this place succeed.
End of story
D
deano
Guest
BoeingBoy said:
