JAMAKE1
Veteran
Fixed your post...
That was good. Touché.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Fixed your post...
Fixed your post...
------ "God willing, maybe we will get one of OBAMA's left leaning pro worker BK judges who might finally make sure AA executives finally SHARE THE PAIN!"----- !!!!! Now that's funny! ----- That's right Hopeless, Obama will save you!!!
Maybe our asses are a little more sensitive than yours, after all yours has probably seen more action than ours. We gave up more in one round of pre BK concessions than our peers did in multiple rounds of BK. We kept the pension, which costs them less over the short haul, with no guarantee that they won't go after it over the long haul but we lost more sick time, vacation time, holiday pay and have inferior work rules. AA claimed that $100 million of the so called labor cost gap was maintenance, well when you figure that with OH in house and our costs are only $100 million more then they really are enjoying a substantial savings of around $260 million.I guess you overlook the fact that UA's employees got hosed by the ESOP first, and then bankruptcy. And US 's employees got hosed twice. The guys at NWA? TWA?
I know you think it has been so horrible, but I will say it again. Those guys got raped. You got an unwanted pat on the ass.
Because, Ken, the vast majority of people really do want a job and will put forth the effort to save their company and their job when push comes to shove.wt
"employees know that holding on to customers during BK might make the difference in whether their company survives or not."
What makes you think that employees at AA would care any more if AA files bk? You know that if AA files bk that management will still get their bonuses while labor takes it further up the exhaust pipe.
Simple question.
WHY should we care?
What makes ANYONE think that if AA files bk that once we exit bk things will be any different? After all the management team in place that lied to us with "shAAred sAAcrifice" will still be here. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
Labor could work for free and AA management would still find ways to blame labor for the company losing money.
It's fun watching you try to keep up with all of us. Keep going; you can do it!
Kev,
you can pick out a bad month or even a bad couple of months for any carrier.... just about every carrier has had their time in the cellar.
DL did not do terribly well operationally last summer
Never been a problem keeping up with you Kev.
I'm not sure what you MIGHT have learned in business school, but it costs precious little more to do things correctly than it does to screw up - both cost almost the same with respect to business operation - been there, done that. The difference was I didn't have a 128 layer (with sub-accounts per layer) accounting system in which to bury my screwups - that's the major difference between a large corporation and small business - plenty of places for the incompetents to hide the screw ups (and themselves) and keep their jobs.Given that there are costs to both running a poor operation and in running an excessively good one, there is clearly a balance that must be found for any airline and history does show that US airlines have pretty strong financial incentives to fix their operational problems... but given that the ultimate measure of success for any business is profit, when the company is generating above average profits than the industry, there has to be pretty good evidence that increased costs to improve the operation will translate into increased profitability.
Being mid-tier to slightly above appears to be the best balance between operational stats and headcount/block-time etc considerations.
.
AA has been in that territory for quite some time so they now quite well the cost of swinging to either extreme - and also why they are not likely to allow the operation to go dramatically in one direction or the other.