AA and AA executives continue to get bad press

[STAAPLED]

AA executive bonuses driven by taxpayer dollars
Updated: 2007-05-01 06:49:39-05
St. Louis - American Airlines CEO Gerard Arpey and over 874 senior managers received millions in shares of stock based upon the April 18, 2007 closing stock price. The approximate $160 million payout leaves the laid-off employees of the former TWA fuming.

Immediately following the 9/11 attacks, American was on the verge of bankruptcy and received a government bailout in the form of cash payments and loan guarantees that totaled approximately $840 million, while simultaneously American Airlines was laying off the entire flight attendant work force of the newly acquired TWA. Congress and the TWA employees were promised a fair and equitable integration of the work groups but managed to sidestep these promises once approval was given. Today, the very same former TWA employees are still without jobs and being permanently severed as their five-year recall rights to their positions expire.


Just days after American’s executives lined their pockets with an approximate $160 million in bonuses, CEO Gerard Arpey during a meeting with analysts hinted he holds little hope for these laid-off employees ever returning due to the contractual five year recall rights with American’s flight attendant union. Roger Graham an 18-year veteran of the former TWA states, “Mr. Arpey knows full well that the issue of extending these recall rights of these employees (that were affected by 9/11) can easily be solved with a letter of agreement with the flight attendant union.â€￾


The excessive bonuses coupled with terminated and laid-off employees may leave the U.S. taxpayer wondering how American Airlines spent their 9/11 taxpayer funded bailout. While labor strife abounds over the bonuses, the public should be questioning whether it was their tax dollars that saved the airline and elevated the stock price that is now becoming a windfall for a few corporate barons.


Graham stated, “Under a bill that the house began debating last month, shareholders would have the right to a non-binding vote on the pay packages of senior executives. Perhaps, it is now time, that taxpayers have the same vote when it comes to a government bailout.â€￾

 

[Imagolfer]

AA executive bonuses driven by taxpayer dollars
Updated: 2007-05-01 06:49:39-05
St. Louis - American Airlines CEO Gerard Arpey and over 874 senior managers received millions in shares of stock based upon the April 18, 2007 closing stock price. The approximate $160 million payout leaves the laid-off employees of the former TWA fuming.

Immediately following the 9/11 attacks, American was on the verge of bankruptcy and received a government bailout in the form of cash payments and loan guarantees that totaled approximately $840 million, while simultaneously American Airlines was laying off the entire flight attendant work force of the newly acquired TWA. Congress and the TWA employees were promised a fair and equitable integration of the work groups but managed to sidestep these promises once approval was given. Today, the very same former TWA employees are still without jobs and being permanently severed as their five-year recall rights to their positions expire.
Just days after American’s executives lined their pockets with an approximate $160 million in bonuses, CEO Gerard Arpey during a meeting with analysts hinted he holds little hope for these laid-off employees ever returning due to the contractual five year recall rights with American’s flight attendant union. Roger Graham an 18-year veteran of the former TWA states, “Mr. Arpey knows full well that the issue of extending these recall rights of these employees (that were affected by 9/11) can easily be solved with a letter of agreement with the flight attendant union.â€￾
The excessive bonuses coupled with terminated and laid-off employees may leave the U.S. taxpayer wondering how American Airlines spent their 9/11 taxpayer funded bailout. While labor strife abounds over the bonuses, the public should be questioning whether it was their tax dollars that saved the airline and elevated the stock price that is now becoming a windfall for a few corporate barons.
Graham stated, “Under a bill that the house began debating last month, shareholders would have the right to a non-binding vote on the pay packages of senior executives. Perhaps, it is now time, that taxpayers have the same vote when it comes to a government bailout.â€￾

Beating a dead horse. Do we need to start another thread about this?

 

[FWAAA]

I think I smell a dead horse in need of a beating. B)

The excessive bonuses coupled with terminated and laid-off employees may leave the U.S. taxpayer wondering how American Airlines spent their 9/11 taxpayer funded bailout. While labor strife abounds over the bonuses, the public should be questioning whether it was their tax dollars that saved the airline and elevated the stock price that is now becoming a windfall for a few corporate barons.

The author of this article (not STAAPLED) is dumber than a bag of hammers. And poor Mr Graham has been bamboozled.

All airlines received a portion of the $5 billion in post-September 11 bailout cash. Except for CO and AA, all other legacy recipients subsequently filed for Ch 11, several of them terminating their pensions and foisting the burden upon the PBGC.

The federal bailout didn't "save" AA. It only prolonged the inevitable and very painful concessions.

The greedy management didn't just loot the corporate treasury because of the 2001 bailout cash. They looted the treasury because they forced concessions worth at least $1.6 billion annually upon the represented employees, helping to cause the stock to recover from $1.25 in early 2003 to $41 in January, 2007. For that (and because nearly all others had canceled their stock in bankruptcy), the greedy execs looted about $160 million a couple weeks ago. Nothing out of the ordinary here.

Nobody's sadder at the demise of TWA than me. But AA didn't kill those fine employees' careers. 19 miserable worthless pieces of garbage - the bastards that wreaked terror upon the USA on September 11 - finished off TWA, and the sooner everyone makes peace with that, the better.

It wouldn't matter if AA execs spent the 2001 bailout cash on steaks and hookers; nothing's gonna make everything all better again.

 

[MCI transplant]

:angry: ---- And AA and it's Union's had nothing to do with it!!!!---- Right! You must think we're dumb as a box of rocks also!!!! :down: And didn't AA receive TWAllc's portion of that "Government Bail-out money"?

 

[mjk]

Is this a news story or a press release?

Link???

 

[STAAPLED]

I believe it's a news story from:

http://www.joplinindependent.com/display_a...dmin21178020179

 

[STAAPLED]

CNN LARRY KING LIVE
Interview with Norman Mineta and Donald Carty
Aired November 19, 2001 - 21:00 ET

COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Fulton, Indiana, we take another call for Don Carty, hello.

CALLER: Hello, my question is once business picks up, will the employees laid off from the September 11 attack, get their jobs back?

KING: Are you one of those, ma'am?

CALLER: No, I am not.

KING: OK.

CARTY: I'm glad you asked the question. Our primary objective is to get this airline rebuilt so we can do exactly that, recall all of the people that we had to furlough.

KING: How many were laid off?

CARTY: In the end, we were able to mitigate a lot of the 20,000, and it is down to -- about the 12 or 13,000 range. And what we are trying to do is very hard, is remember that those people, too, are part of the American airlines family. We are trying to stay linked to them, we have created a Web site for them. We are helping them with interim careers while they wait to be recalled.

KING: Do you expect to them to be recalled?

CARTY: Absolutely. We will get them all back to work

KING: Has government money come to you, or is that guaranteed loans?

CARTY: Some money came to us. The government actually allocated 5 billion dollars to the industry, as a grant to pay for the time that the airplanes were grounded and the ongoing economic effect of that. And then they are proffering $10 billion in loan guarantees. Of that first five billion, two and half billion of it or close to 2 1/2 billion has come to the airlines and we have received our share of that first...

The TWA Employees are still waiting for our share of the Gov bailout money! We are also holding AA accountable for the promises they made to the TWA EMPLOYESS AS WELL AS THE STATE OF MISSOURI!

 

[aafsc]

:angry: ---- And AA and it's Union's had nothing to do with it!!!!---- Right! You must think we're dumb as a box of rocks also!!!! :down: And didn't AA receive TWAllc's portion of that "Government Bail-out money"?

First, this article is mistaken, AA DID NOT receive a loan guarantee from the government (nothing like bashing AA with inaccuracies in a TWA hometown newspaper). AA did not even apply for one. Second, ALL airlines received cash for the grounding of the industry right after 9/11. Third, post 9/11, many carriers reduced or eliminated their poorest performing hubs; DL at DFW and CVG, NW at MEM, US at PIT, AW at CMH, AND AA AT STL. The economics of the time necessitated these moves. AA was not about to keep STL at 300 mainline flights a day and loose tons of money just to worship the TWA people and keep them employed. AA made a sound business decision in reducing STL and the unions, for the most part, did what they were supposed to do and protected most of their members (nAAtives) from the TWA employees. TWA failed because of decades of financial mismanagement and lack of strategic planning and we AA employees refused to pay the price for it. The TWAers can cry and whine all they want but it won't change anything; they need to move on. I just think it is strange that they are beating down the doors to work for a company that they despise so much; their actions do not match their rhetoric.

 

[nbmcg01]

First, this article is mistaken, AA DID NOT receive a loan guarantee from the government (nothing like bashing AA with inaccuracies in a TWA hometown newspaper). AA did not even apply for one. Second, ALL airlines received cash for the grounding of the industry right after 9/11. Third, post 9/11, many carriers reduced or eliminated their poorest performing hubs; DL at DFW and CVG, NW at MEM, US at PIT, AW at CMH, AND AA AT STL. The economics of the time necessitated these moves. AA was not about to keep STL at 300 mainline flights a day and loose tons of money just to worship the TWA people and keep them employed. AA made a sound business decision in reducing STL and the unions, for the most part, did what they were supposed to do and protected most of their members (nAAtives) from the TWA employees. TWA failed because of decades of financial mismanagement and lack of strategic planning and we AA employees refused to pay the price for it. The TWAers can cry and whine all they want but it won't change anything; they need to move on. I just think it is strange that they are beating down the doors to work for a company that they despise so much; their actions do not match their rhetoric.

Your anger is palpable. Those wishing to return do not despise AA. They merely wish to finish their careers. They may not like how all of this has played out but NOTHING will get in the way of consummate professionals IF they are allowed to return. AA made much over the possibility of discord between the two groups. The AA furloughed walked side by side with their active peers during the past bonus protests and just like you see on the jumpseat, complete strangers were talking, laughing, and sharing a common goal. With the many factions we had at TWA, we all learned not to carry any issues onto the plane. Years of practice! As for your "view" of the down sizing of STL, we will have to agree to disagree. Many flts and routes (profitable) were ended to support DFW and ORD. No other reason. Whether ALL airlines were given money isn't the issue. AA WAS given money, not only for their operation but additional for TWA. And finally, the people you are so vocally berating are AA employees. They are not TWA employees. And they have the same rights and responsibilities as any other AA employee. They have "moved on", to support their families, but wish to finish the job the started, 20,30, or 40 years ago.

 

[MCI transplant]

First, this article is mistaken, AA DID NOT receive a loan guarantee from the government (nothing like bashing AA with inaccuracies in a TWA hometown newspaper). AA did not even apply for one. Second, ALL airlines received cash for the grounding of the industry right after 9/11. Third, post 9/11, many carriers reduced or eliminated their poorest performing hubs; DL at DFW and CVG, NW at MEM, US at PIT, AW at CMH, AND AA AT STL. The economics of the time necessitated these moves. AA was not about to keep STL at 300 mainline flights a day and loose tons of money just to worship the TWA people and keep them employed. AA made a sound business decision in reducing STL and the unions, for the most part, did what they were supposed to do and protected most of their members (nAAtives) from the TWA employees. TWA failed because of decades of financial mismanagement and lack of strategic planning and we AA employees refused to pay the price for it. The TWAers can cry and whine all they want but it won't change anything; they need to move on. I just think it is strange that they are beating down the doors to work for a company that they despise so much; their actions do not match their rhetoric.

<_< ---- As usual, aa, you keep crying about "inaccuracies", but your the first to blatantly use them! TWA did not "fail"! TWA was still flying when AA bought/merged with them! Sad to say, in your mind everything is one way, AA and it's Unions could due no wrong!--- Well, if that's the case, why is it these articles seem to always keep popping up? It's something AA and it's Unions can't seem to keep swept under the rug for any length of time! Why is that? ------ Maybe it's because more, and more people are starting to realise how AA and it's Unions screwed TWA's employees!

 

[FWAAA]

:angry: ---- And AA and it's Union's had nothing to do with it!!!!---- Right! You must think we're dumb as a box of rocks also!!!! :down: And didn't AA receive TWAllc's portion of that "Government Bail-out money"?

No, I don't think you're as dumb as a box of rocks, you bitter old man.

But AA and its unions had nothing to do with the death of TWA. AA spent three quarters of a billion in cash and assumed a couple billion of debt and lease obligations in an attempt to save it. And as we all know, less than five months later, AA's revenue fell thru the floor following the horrific terrorist attacks.

Yep, AA received over a hundred million dollars of the bailout money based on the market share of TWA, LLC. And AA kept the STL hub operating until November, 2003, despite the revisionist history fed to us by the perpetually disgruntled. AA spent and spent and spent.

TWA employees received raises the day they went to work for AA. For over two years, those employees (the ones not immediately furloughed following Sept. 2001) received paychecks larger than their TWA paychecks.

Your unions sold you out. AA's unions (especially the FAs) refused to integrate the TWA workgroups on the most favorable basis (DOH). And AA didn't grant perpetual recall rights to the FAs. It really is time to move on.

 

[aafsc]

Your anger is palpable. Those wishing to return do not despise AA. They merely wish to finish their careers. They may not like how all of this has played out but NOTHING will get in the way of consummate professionals IF they are allowed to return. AA made much over the possibility of discord between the two groups. The AA furloughed walked side by side with their active peers during the past bonus protests and just like you see on the jumpseat, complete strangers were talking, laughing, and sharing a common goal. With the many factions we had at TWA, we all learned not to carry any issues onto the plane. Years of practice! As for your "view" of the down sizing of STL, we will have to agree to disagree. Many flts and routes (profitable) were ended to support DFW and ORD. No other reason. Whether ALL airlines were given money isn't the issue. AA WAS given money, not only for their operation but additional for TWA. And finally, the people you are so vocally berating are AA employees. They are not TWA employees. And they have the same rights and responsibilities as any other AA employee. They have "moved on", to support their families, but wish to finish the job the started, 20,30, or 40 years ago.

AA ended flights from STL that lost the most money. Six super 80s a day between STL and DSM were not money makers; same can be said for STL-ICT, STL-OKC, and all other similar routes. AA did, like ALL OTHER AIRLINES, receive money from the government for the industry grounding after 9/11; BUT THEY DID NOT GET (OR EVEN APPLY FOR) A LOAN GUARANTEE FROM THE GOVERNMENT.

 

[nbmcg01]

No, I don't think you're as dumb as a box of rocks, you bitter old man.

But AA and its unions had nothing to do with the death of TWA. AA spent three quarters of a billion in cash and assumed a couple billion of debt and lease obligations in an attempt to save it. And as we all know, less than five months later, AA's revenue fell thru the floor following the horrific terrorist attacks.

Yep, AA received over a hundred million dollars of the bailout money based on the market share of TWA, LLC. And AA kept the STL hub operating until November, 2003, despite the revisionist history fed to us by the perpetually disgruntled. AA spent and spent and spent.

TWA employees received raises the day they went to work for AA. For over two years, those employees (the ones not immediately furloughed following Sept. 2001) received paychecks larger than their TWA paychecks.

Your unions sold you out. AA's unions (especially the FAs) refused to integrate the TWA workgroups on the most favorable basis (DOH). And AA didn't grant perpetual recall rights to the FAs. It really is time to move on.

Once again you're wrong. My dollar per hour was increased BUT archaic work rules had me flying more days for less pay so I actually made less. Add in the loss of a 14% 401K contribution, the cost of AA's medical insurance, (ours was free), and even the cost of travel, and we did not begin to break even. Giving up SCOPE and Allegheny-Mohawk was a provision of AA's orchestrated BK. Got rid of the LPPs , vendor contracts, and Ichan ticket deal.

You don't get to cry "oh woe is me" and use 9-11 to keep screwing your employees. That is offensive and shameful for a Company who lost so many good people. AA is the entity that has used 9-11.

 

[aafsc]

<_< ---- As usual, aa, you keep crying about "inaccuracies", but your the first to blatantly use them! TWA did not "fail"! TWA was still flying when AA bought/merged with them! Sad to say, in your mind everything is one way, AA and it's Unions could due no wrong!--- Well, if that's the case, why is it these articles seem to always keep popping up? It's something AA and it's Unions can't seem to keep swept under the rug for any length of time! Why is that? ------ Maybe it's because more, and more people are starting to realise how AA and it's Unions screwed TWA's employees!

TWA did fail. What do you call a third Ch-11 filing followed by a Ch-7 liquidation where AA purchased certain assets for cash and assumption of certain obligations? The TWA Inc. corporate shell (bankruptcy estate) that presently exists testifies to TWA's failure. It was a not a merger (ONLY IN YOUR MIND YOU THINK IT WAS). As for these articles "that keep popping up", most of them are from STL, MCI, and other areas of Missouri which reflect the sentiment of people in those areas; which is that AA employees should have paid the price for TWA's failure and TWA employees should have reaped the benefits of what nAAtives spent decades building.

 

[MCI transplant]

TWA did fail. What do you call a third Ch-11 filing followed by a Ch-7 liquidation where AA purchased certain assets for cash and assumption of certain obligations? The TWA Inc. corporate shell (bankruptcy estate) that presently exists testifies to TWA's failure. It was a not a merger (ONLY IN YOUR MIND YOU THINK IT WAS). As for these articles "that keep popping up", most of them are from STL, MCI, and other areas of Missouri which reflect the sentiment of people in those areas; which is that AA employees should have paid the price for TWA's failure and TWA employees should have reaped the benefits of what nAAtives spent decades building.

<_< ---- We've been there so many times! TWA was purposely taken into bankruptcy by Compton to expedite the TWA merger/buyout! Can I prove that? No! Can you prove otherwise? No!-----