AA Management Bonuses - Despite More Losses

Status
Not open for further replies.

TWU informer

Veteran
Nov 4, 2003
7,550
3,767
AMR says quarterly revenue will rise, but so will costsBy TREBOR BANSTETTERSTAR-TELEGRAM STAFF WRITERFORT WORTH -

AMR Corp., parent of American Airlines, said Thursday that its fourth-quarter revenue will exceed last year's, but costs are also likely to be higher than expected.
The mixed news, reported in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, spurred one airline analyst to raise his forecast of AMR's fourth-quarter loss because of higher costs, while another decreased his loss prediction because of the revenue gains.

Executives with AMR, based in Fort Worth, reported that per-seat revenue for the quarter should be up between 13 percent and 14 percent compared with the fourth quarter of 2004.

They also said the airline will have $3.5 billion in unrestricted cash on hand at the end of the year.
But costs will be higher than expected, they added, even when excluding the price of jet fuel.
The higher costs come from insurance expenses, write-offs related to ground equipment and accounting for future management bonuses tied to the airline's rising stock price.

The bonuses cover midlevel and higher managers under a 1998 long-term incentive plan.

That program's benefits depend on the price of AMR's stock. Shares have soared nearly 90 percent during the quarter.

That means the company must increase its estimate of what it will pay out under the plan, spokeswoman Lisa Bailey said.


Jamie Baker, an airline analyst for J.P. Morgan Securities, said in an investment report Thursday that the filing "suggests a slightly softer-than-anticipated result" for the quarter.

He revised his forecast to a $2.45 loss per share of common stock, up from $1.99 per share.
But analyst Ray Neidl of Calyon Securities improved his outlook on the report.

Citing the revenue improvements, he estimated Thursday that AMR will lose $2.56 per share, compared with his previous forecast of $2.82 per share.
The two analysts also diverged on where the airline's stock is heading.

"We believe that the stock price is fully valued, especially going into the slow winter season," Neidl wrote in a report to investors. "We may see a temporary downward adjustment."

Baker, however, said that "AMR is cheap," adding that in his opinion the airline industry has finally turned the corner to recovery and AMR is a good deal for investors.
AMR shares (ticker: AMR) rose Thursday, closing at $22.20 per share, up 75 cents, or 3.5 percent.

******END OF ATRICLE ******

To Save Time and Reading Effort,

The TYPICAL Transport Worker Union Stooge response is posted below....

We are better off giving away more pay and benefits to save jobs.

We are better off not being allowed to obtain ratification ballots on changes to our labor agreement. We must be saved from ourselves.

We are better off allowing Airline Corporate Exec's play us against each other in a race to lower labor cost instead of being united into one union.

We are better off providing $500 million in productivity improvements via pajama parties without any written guarantees of more food on our table.

We are better off partnering with recipients of the hidden Retention Bonuses that were exposed only after vote tabulated.

We are better off giving our ideas on dollar savings for free rather than be compensated for those via a suggestion or ideas program.

We are better off wearing t-shirts with slogans than to really stand together against the rich attacks on the middle class.

We are better off to fear being replaced so that we do not have to take a stand against a dismal record of 20 plus years of concessions.

We are better off not to speak out against failures of the current organized labor leadership than to be called a loud mouth that will ruin our measley paychecks and paid time off.

We are better to never see the big picture and simply be told to tow the union part line than to question anything that is currently happening within the profession.

Yep, stooges win, we are far better off this way.

We are just plain lucky to have a job brother.
 
AMR says quarterly revenue will rise, but so will costsBy TREBOR BANSTETTERSTAR-TELEGRAM STAFF WRITERFORT WORTH -


The higher costs come from insurance expenses, write-offs related to ground equipment and accounting for future management bonuses tied to the airline's rising stock price.

The bonuses cover midlevel and higher managers under a 1998 long-term incentive plan.

C'mon informer its all part of that "pull together, win together" deal. you know the "shared sacrifice". If the TWU convinces the membership more concessions are needed that could offset cost, but that would inturn produce more bonus'es for the leaders and the cycle will continue.
 
Let's see, now. Management finds a way to reward itself with bonusses even though we are still losing money.

And, you are surprised because.....???? :lol:


Because my Local Union President said "We could now trust management"?

Because "Pull Together, Win Together" would no longer be successful if management receives bonuses and union workers do not receive some snap back on concessions?

Oh Heck, I wasn't really surprised, I just wanted the TWU Company Union Stooges to attempt an explanation.

I was "Trolling" if you will!

I bet o'le Dennis Burchette's financial partner Mr. Romano in Tulsa is a recipient of this reported bonus money.
 
I honestly do not know what to think or believe anymore.

Do You?


and accounting for future management bonuses tied to the airline's rising stock price


We keep giving so they keep taking

Lets here the response from all the pro AA kool aid drinkers.
We are the step children of corporate greed
I have had enough I need to go puke :(

Shared Sacrafice :lol:
Is that what that extra 25 dollars a month is for :down:
 
I honestly do not know what to think or believe anymore.

Do You?


What's the difference between Dennis Burchette and Carmine Romano? [AA & the TWU]?

We use to have a "union" where the leadership would at least put up a fight when necessary.[Ed Wilson days]
We ACTUALLY DID WORK STOPPAGES a few times when TUL management wrongfully dismissed a TWU member.
Today's TWU- Mr.Burchette would be the FIRST IN LINE to push a TWU member out the door to look good in Romano's eyes.
 
<_< Where's Mr.Former ModerAAtor on this one???? :down: I know!I know! The arguement will be: "To keep good manegment people, you have to pay them well!" ;) But fankly, I could say the same about the man on the floor!!!
 
I haven't read the filing, but if it's related to stock options, what isn't mentioned in the statement is that those options were issued at $19-$30 per share (depending on the year), and they've been so far underwater that nobody in their right mind would think of exercising those. My last set of manager options were granted at $21/share.

So, knowing that your options were issued at $5 out of pocket, and ours were issued at $19-30 out of pocket, do you still think it's worth getting all excited about?

L5 and up managers have always had a variable compensation component that was tied to stock performance, and paid out in the form of stock options. That's money that doesn't appear in our paychecks, and it's a pretty well known fact that AA management is underpaid when compared to just about every other airline except United. Even US Airways and America West pre-merger were paying their managers more, mainly because they couldn't really offer variable compensation and be taken seriously.

The other form of variable compensation is tied to operational and financial performance. AA managers haven't seen any payouts on that in many years (and rightfully so), unlike our peers at some of the bankruptcy sisters who still got performance bonuses while the ship was sinking (which was entirely inappropriate under any excuse)...
 
I haven't read the filing, but if it's related to stock options, what isn't mentioned in the statement is that those options were issued at $19-$30 per share (depending on the year), and they've been so far underwater that nobody in their right mind would think of exercising those. My last set of manager options were granted at $21/share.

So, knowing that your options were issued at $5 out of pocket, and ours were issued at $19-30 out of pocket, do you still think it's worth getting all excited about?

L5 and up managers have always had a variable compensation component that was tied to stock performance, and paid out in the form of stock options. That's money that doesn't appear in our paychecks, and it's a pretty well known fact that AA management is underpaid when compared to just about every other airline except United. Even US Airways and America West pre-merger were paying their managers more, mainly because they couldn't really offer variable compensation and be taken seriously.

The other form of variable compensation is tied to operational and financial performance. AA managers haven't seen any payouts on that in many years (and rightfully so), unlike our peers at some of the bankruptcy sisters who still got performance bonuses while the ship was sinking (which was entirely inappropriate under any excuse)...

So what, my labor agreement had always said I get 10 paid Hoidays per year and now I only get 5.

If we are going ot justify this by claiming "it has always been there" then give my Paid Holidays Back!

If the stock is doing well enough for Management Bounses, then the Company is doing well enough to return some concessions!

I dont need to read the filing, I want the exact language of the 1998 "Long Term Incentive Plan" and an explanation as to why this wasn't altered via the so-called "Turn AArond Plan"?
 
If the stock is doing well enough for Management Bounses, then the Company is doing well enough to return some concessions!

Stock performance is totally driven by Wall Street's perception of the company, so it's not the company's to give back. Plus, all employees had the opportunity to benefit from owning stock. It's not management's fault if you chose to dump your options at $10 or $12 a share.

I dont need to read the filing, I want the exact language of the 1998 "Long Term Incentive Plan" and an explanation as to why this wasn't altered via the so-called "Turn AArond Plan"?

The LTIP's terms are found on Edgar.SEC.Gov so feel free to go thru the 1998 annual report filing and you'll gind the terms.

Again, y'all are making a lot more out of it than it really is, but that's your choice.
 
Hopefully I can shed some light on the situation and then you can do whatever you want with it. The way I understand it, these "bonuses" are not related to the 1998 long term incentive plan. They are related to the 2003-2005 performance unit plan. Some highlights of the plan:

a. Approved by the Board with full knowledge of the unions in 2003.

b. Rewards holders of performance units for stock appreciation versus the competition for the three-year (2003-2005) period. The cash paid out by each unit equals the stock price on the date of payout multiplied by a scaling factor related to how the stock has appreciated versus the competition during the period. Since AA's stock has outperformed everyone, the units would pay 175% as of today.

c. No money has been paid to anyone yet. The Board has discretion over whether the full amount is paid. The Board may elect to pay out only a portion if the company has not met its "objectives." In addition, there is no guarantee that the plan will pay out $22+ per share since the payout is calculated from the stock price on the day that the Board grants it (probably sometime in April?).

d. All of this information has been shared publicly in the company's annual proxy statement. The most recent one is available here. In addition, the specifications of the performance unit plan are also publicly available here.

IMO, the most important part of this is that these aren't discretionary bonuses that management just decided to award themselves this year. They are the product of 3 years of hard work. You should also be aware that this plan could have just as easily paid $0. Depending upon who you are in management, you could be risking anywhere between 20 and 50 percent of your pay on the success or failure of the performance units.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts