AA in dilemma on when to replace aging fleet

[FrequentFlierCA]

There is so much bitterness and rancor on this topic. You accuse me of making assumptions, but you all assume that I'm an outsider to the industry.

The comparisons between contract negotiations and the Revolutionary War are so ludicrous as to be hardly worth addressing. I really don't follow your reasoning most of the time. Your "democratic right" and (another poster's) "rewards on the back of the workers". This isn't Czarist Russia.

All you are sharing is empty and inflammatory rhetoric about slave wages and greed. I've done my homework (courtesy of Yahoo! Finance) and here are some facts:

* Your pay is almost entirely non-risk (more than 95%). The majority of exec pay is linked to performance, and much of it comes in shares. Someone else mentioned AMR's stock price dipping under $10 today. Would you like some of that executive pay right about now or would you like a guaranteed paycheck? So much for greedy suits getting rich.

* If AMR's board is overpaying the execs so much, why isn't there shareholder activism to stop it? Where's the outrage? In the era of Carl Icahn you would think somebody would cause a major fuss.

I'm not opposed to labor asking for its share. What I find particularly offensive is the inflammatory rhetoric. We've already heard about the "blood money" and "slave wages". This sort of thing is as wildly inaccurate as it is counterproductive. Why don't you focus those energies on constructive negotiations?

 

[North by Northwest]

There is so much bitterness and rancor on this topic. You accuse me of making assumptions, but you all assume that I'm an outsider to the industry.

The comparisons between contract negotiations and the Revolutionary War are so ludicrous as to be hardly worth addressing. I really don't follow your reasoning most of the time. Your "democratic right" and (another poster's) "rewards on the back of the workers". This isn't Czarist Russia.

All you are sharing is empty and inflammatory rhetoric about slave wages and greed. I've done my homework (courtesy of Yahoo! Finance) and here are some facts:

* Your pay is almost entirely non-risk (more than 95%). The majority of exec pay is linked to performance, and much of it comes in shares. Someone else mentioned AMR's stock price dipping under $10 today. Would you like some of that executive pay right about now or would you like a guaranteed paycheck? So much for greedy suits getting rich.

* If AMR's board is overpaying the execs so much, why isn't there shareholder activism to stop it? Where's the outrage? In the era of Carl Icahn you would think somebody would cause a major fuss.

I'm not opposed to labor asking for its share. What I find particularly offensive is the inflammatory rhetoric. We've already heard about the "blood money" and "slave wages". This sort of thing is as wildly inaccurate as it is counterproductive. Why don't you focus those energies on constructive negotiations?

You know...your typical tone of managerial arrogance is beyond boring. Your song and dance is so old it moves like the watootsie. You sound like one of those "well, Steenland's pay is tied to performance". Performance of WHAT, employee paycuts?

The problem with most US carriers is a failure of amature NON Aviation people (usually lawyers) to create profit form a superior product and service.
CEO pay should be tied to employee pay JUST LIKE IT WAS before GREED and SLAVE wages arose in the 1980's. For you to even condone the outrageous difference in pay between airline management and Labor speaks volumes of your biased, microscopic mentality. You agree with it, because you must be a part of the corporate GREED FEST that has infected this country for the last 25 years.

You have YET to comment on the valuation of REAL wages (surprising since you've "done your homework") over the last 20 years. vs. the pigs at the trough party in the Board room.

Here's some CONCRETE info for ya, study up and come back with the facts and figures:

The United States long has had the industrialized world's largest gap in pay between chief executives and blue-collar workers. CEO compensation swelled from 85 times what workers earned in 1990, to 209 times in 1996, and 326 times the following year. In 1999, CEO pay surged to a record 419 times the average worker's wage, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The gap then declined, to 282-to-1 in 2002, before surpassing 300-to-1 the following year, according to the research and advocacy group United for a Fair Economy (UFE).

Comparable figures for other wealthy nations generally do not exceed the double digits. (THAT'S DOUBLE NOT TRIPLE DIGITS!!)

U.S. CEOs' pay rose 313 percent from 1990 to 2003, UFE said. By contrast, the Standard & Poor's 500 stock index rose 242 percent and corporate profits gained 128 percent.

During the same period, average worker pay rose 49 percent while inflation climbed 41 percent.

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/4526.html

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...15/b3778012.htm


P.S. "The comparisons between contract negotiations and the Revolutionary War are so ludicrous as to be hardly worth addressing"

The British thought so too...

 

[Hopeful]

There is so much bitterness and rancor on this topic. You accuse me of making assumptions, but you all assume that I'm an outsider to the industry.

The comparisons between contract negotiations and the Revolutionary War are so ludicrous as to be hardly worth addressing. I really don't follow your reasoning most of the time. Your "democratic right" and (another poster's) "rewards on the back of the workers". This isn't Czarist Russia.

All you are sharing is empty and inflammatory rhetoric about slave wages and greed. I've done my homework (courtesy of Yahoo! Finance) and here are some facts:

* Your pay is almost entirely non-risk (more than 95%). The majority of exec pay is linked to performance, and much of it comes in shares. Someone else mentioned AMR's stock price dipping under $10 today. Would you like some of that executive pay right about now or would you like a guaranteed paycheck? So much for greedy suits getting rich.

* If AMR's board is overpaying the execs so much, why isn't there shareholder activism to stop it? BUT
Where's the outrage? In the era of Carl Icahn you would think somebody would cause a major fuss.

I'm not opposed to labor asking for its share. What I find particularly offensive is the inflammatory rhetoric. We've already heard about the "blood money" and "slave wages". This sort of thing is as wildly inaccurate as it is counterproductive. Why don't you focus those energies on constructive negotiations?

WHOA there!

The execs are still getting their PAY!!!!!!!!!!!! Guaranteed.....
Don't confuse their PAY with the added stock OPTIONS....

I will say this again as I have before..
I have no problem with anyone at any level making what they make..

BUT IT IS WHEN THIS COMPANY THREATENS ITS EMPLOYEES WITH BANKRUPTCY OR ELSE WHILE PRESERVING THEIR OWN BANK ACCOUNTS IS WHERE THE PROBLEM IS!

OH BOOOOO HOOOO FOR DON CARTY WHO RESIGNED AFTER IT WAS REVEALED HE WAS GUARANTEEING HIS TOP EXECS PAY AND BONUS IN THE EVEN OF BANKRUPTCY...


BOOHOOO FOR CARTY WHO LEFT AMR WITH $20,000,000 AND $80,000 PENSION,


OH BY THE WAY CARTY GOT THAT MONEY WHEN THE STOCK WAS AROUND $2 A SHARE....




BOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

You know...your typical tone of managerial arrogance is beyond boring. Your song and dance is so old it moves like the watootsie. You sound like one of those "well, Steenland's pay is tied to performance". Performance of WHAT, employee paycuts?

The problem with most US carriers is a failure of amature NON Aviation people (usually lawyers) to create profit form a superior product and service.
CEO pay should be tied to employee pay JUST LIKE IT WAS before GREED and SLAVE wages arose in the 1980's. For you to even condone the outrageous difference in pay between airline management and Labor speaks volumes of your biased, microscopic mentality. You agree with it, because you must be a part of the corporate GREED FEST that has infected this country for the last 25 years.

You have YET to comment on the valuation of REAL wages (surprising since you've "done your homework") over the last 20 years. vs. the pigs at the trough party in the Board room.

Here's some CONCRETE info for ya, study up and come back with the facts and figures:

The United States long has had the industrialized world's largest gap in pay between chief executives and blue-collar workers. CEO compensation swelled from 85 times what workers earned in 1990, to 209 times in 1996, and 326 times the following year. In 1999, CEO pay surged to a record 419 times the average worker's wage, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The gap then declined, to 282-to-1 in 2002, before surpassing 300-to-1 the following year, according to the research and advocacy group United for a Fair Economy (UFE).

Comparable figures for other wealthy nations generally do not exceed the double digits. (THAT'S DOUBLE NOT TRIPLE DIGITS!!)

U.S. CEOs' pay rose 313 percent from 1990 to 2003, UFE said. By contrast, the Standard & Poor's 500 stock index rose 242 percent and corporate profits gained 128 percent.

During the same period, average worker pay rose 49 percent while inflation climbed 41 percent.

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/4526.html

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...15/b3778012.htm


P.S. "The comparisons between contract negotiations and the Revolutionary War are so ludicrous as to be hardly worth addressing"

The British thought so too...

Thats the facts jack

 

[The Goose]

There is so much bitterness and rancor on this topic. You accuse me of making assumptions, but you all assume that I'm an outsider to the industry.

The comparisons between contract negotiations and the Revolutionary War are so ludicrous as to be hardly worth addressing. I really don't follow your reasoning most of the time. Your "democratic right" and (another poster's) "rewards on the back of the workers". This isn't Czarist Russia.

No - not Czarist Russia yet, but the management elite and our own government are both working hard to marginalize the USA's citizens.

All you are sharing is empty and inflammatory rhetoric about slave wages and greed. I've done my homework (courtesy of Yahoo! Finance) and here are some facts:

* Your pay is almost entirely non-risk (more than 95%). The majority of exec pay is linked to performance, and much of it comes in shares. Someone else mentioned AMR's stock price dipping under $10 today. Would you like some of that executive pay right about now or would you like a guaranteed paycheck? So much for greedy suits getting rich.

Yes that's what we're told - explain the millions these corporate rats get when their companies are on the skids.

* If AMR's board is overpaying the execs so much, why isn't there shareholder activism to stop it? Where's the outrage? In the era of Carl Icahn you would think somebody would cause a major fuss.

There is shareholder activism, but unfortunately not enough. AMR is, by large, institutionally owned (funds, etc.) As long as shares are issued to them at the time of the executive bonuses in order to keep their respective NAVs from tanking due to the share price dilution caused, all is cool - take care of the majority shareholders and the BOD will stay in place guaranteeing more of the same. Watch the SEC website for the ownership reporting (I believe SEC form 13D) of additional shares at the end of the 2nd quarter, around 30 June.

I'm not opposed to labor asking for its share. What I find particularly offensive is the inflammatory rhetoric. We've already heard about the "blood money" and "slave wages". This sort of thing is as wildly inaccurate as it is counterproductive. Why don't you focus those energies on constructive negotiations?

There will be no constructive negotiations until AMR's (mis)management decides to follow through with their promises of "winning together" that now have been shown to be lies, but what else is any management good for other than telling lies?

BTW - what many of us that actually work for a living find extremely offensive is a management type or wanna-be cubicle-dweller attempting to defend America's infestation of corporate garbage in any way, shape, or form.

 

[FrequentFlierCA]

It's pretty bold of you to imply that I don't "actually work" for a living. You are clearly trying to distract me from the issue at hand by making this personal. Nice try.

I'm pretty clear now that union propaganda has poisoned your thinking to the point that you can't see the economic realities in front of you, so I'll boil it down to just this one question:

Where do you think the money you're demanding is going to come from? From a 2002 baseline, the industry's fuel cost has increased by about $25 billion. Labor savings over the same period? $7 billion. I'll leave you with a thought from a popular airline industry blogger:

"Will we ever hear the end of the refrain that the industry recovery has been built on the backs of labor? First, and again, what recovery? Then, and again, what is the industry’s ability to repay that $7 billion?"

I think my useful contributions to this thread have come to an end. I sincerely wish you good luck in your negotiations.

 

[North by Northwest]

It's pretty bold of you to imply that I don't "actually work" for a living. You are clearly trying to distract me from the issue at hand by making this personal. Nice try.

I'm pretty clear now that union propaganda has poisoned your thinking to the point that you can't see the economic realities in front of you, so I'll boil it down to just this one question:

Where do you think the money you're demanding is going to come from? From a 2002 baseline, the industry's fuel cost has increased by about $25 billion. Labor savings over the same period? $7 billion. I'll leave you with a thought from a popular airline industry blogger:

"Will we ever hear the end of the refrain that the industry recovery has been built on the backs of labor? First, and again, what recovery? Then, and again, what is the industry’s ability to repay that $7 billion?"

I think my useful contributions to this thread have come to an end. I sincerely wish you good luck in your negotiations.

I know, why don't we add up all the billions in extra fuel costs ( opposite the skilled hedging from competent management like SW), hundreds of millions of dollars in excessive pay and bonuses for management pretenders, then we can see how much of that ate into the $7Billion. I am sure we can see where the bulk of labor's savings went. When a company's only form of profit comes from employee pay cuts, that demonstrates failure AND managerial incompetence.

And I'll leave you with the thought of "Where exactly did those BILLIONS" come from.The airline Fairy?

 

[Hopeful]

It's pretty bold of you to imply that I don't "actually work" for a living. You are clearly trying to distract me from the issue at hand by making this personal. Nice try.

I'm pretty clear now that union propaganda has poisoned your thinking to the point that you can't see the economic realities in front of you, so I'll boil it down to just this one question:

Where do you think the money you're demanding is going to come from? From a 2002 baseline, the industry's fuel cost has increased by about $25 billion. Labor savings over the same period? $7 billion. I'll leave you with a thought from a popular airline industry blogger:

"Will we ever hear the end of the refrain that the industry recovery has been built on the backs of labor? First, and again, what recovery? Then, and again, what is the industry’s ability to repay that $7 billion?"

I think my useful contributions to this thread have come to an end. I sincerely wish you good luck in your negotiations.

Once again you fail to address the executive PAYOUTS ...(AND I AM NOT SPEAKING OF BASE SALARY)
The way I understand you is that the market dictates executive pay...and the lowloy workers just have to suck it up!

 

[The Goose]

Once again you fail to address the executive PAYOUTS ...(AND I AM NOT SPEAKING OF BASE SALARY)
The way I understand you is that the market dictates executive pay...and the lowloy workers just have to suck it up!

That's the way I understood this person's posts also. Executive pay is based on the 'Golden Rule'; ie, Those who have the gold make the rules.

 

[The Goose]

You make a lot of assumptions. Its like saying that Mercedes has to lower their price because there's a Hyundi dealer in town. Both are cars but they are different markets.

AA is filling seats from JFK to NRT, SWA fills seats from ISP to PVD. How does a cheap SWA fare from ISP to PVD affect the cost of a JFK to NRT? It doesnt, SWA is competeing with the car, the bus or the train, not with AA, the only way to get to NRT is to fly.

If the planes are full they have pricing power.



With oil nearing $110 we must raise our expectations in order to put food on the table. You speak as if the airlines are the only ones affected by rising oil prices.

Bob - Just to add a bit of humor, check out this site and rethink your statement re: getting to NRT.

http://www.floatingcubans.com/

 

[FWAAA]

There is shareholder activism, but unfortunately not enough. AMR is, by large, institutionally owned (funds, etc.) As long as shares are issued to them at the time of the executive bonuses in order to keep their respective NAVs from tanking due to the share price dilution caused, all is cool - take care of the majority shareholders and the BOD will stay in place guaranteeing more of the same. Watch the SEC website for the ownership reporting (I believe SEC form 13D) of additional shares at the end of the 2nd quarter, around 30 June.

The bolded portion is nonsense. Nothing but gibberish.

I've looked at the filings under Rule 13 and find no issuance of new shares to anyone other than the lucky 847 or so PUP/PSP execs.

Care to provide a link to a single filing supporting the nonsensical bolded portion?

Not only have no new shares been issued to any funds (contrary to your claim), but the premise makes no sense. The PUP/PSP shares issued to the execs have been too few to matter to Vanguard's or Fidelity's net asset values.

With gibberish like your bolded portion, it's no wonder the company and the TWU have had no problems continually oppressing you.