AA........Menage A Trois

[Oneflyer]

Black people sitting in the front seat on the bus was a fantasy but Dr King had a dream.

But with the leaders of todays unions I agree, even though it happens all the time in Europe.

Unbelievable that you would compare Black people sitting in the back of the bus to union workers. Just no comparison.

 

[Bob Owens]

Unbelievable that you would compare Black people sitting in the back of the bus to union workers. Just no comparison.

Just goes to show how out of touch you are. The fact is MLK was a big supporter of unions. He was in Memphis supporting a strike when he was murdered and he often recognized that the union struggle and the civil rights struggle were inextricably bound.

My guess is that no matter how you try to spin it unions are more representative of black people than boardrooms.

Just as black people were put to the back of the bus, in other words made to endure the worst and being required to accept inferior standards todays corporate leaders hold workers to inferior standards in regards to not only pay, which is to be expected but access to medical care, benifits, pensions etc. They rape pension funds, slash medical coverage and steal wages. They talk of the need for workers to accept less while they take more, the struggle for civil rights was about fighting dual standards and no one can deny thats todays corporate leaders live on double standards, concessions and give backs for the workers and raises and bonuses for them.

 

[Oneflyer]

Just goes to show how out of touch you are. The fact is MLK was a big supporter of unions. He was in Memphis supporting a strike when he was murdered and he often recognized that the union struggle and the civil rights struggle were inextricably bound.

My guess is that no matter how you try to spin it unions are more representative of black people than boardrooms.

Just as black people were put to the back of the bus, in other words made to endure the worst and being required to accept inferior standards todays corporate leaders hold workers to inferior standards in regards to not only pay, which is to be expected but access to medical care, benifits, pensions etc. They rape pension funds, slash medical coverage and steal wages. They talk of the need for workers to accept less while they take more, the struggle for civil rights was about fighting dual standards and no one can deny thats todays corporate leaders live on double standards, concessions and give backs for the workers and raises and bonuses for them.

Maybe you should come over and live the good life on the non-union side.

Oh wait, you don't want to, that's right you like your job, won't leave it, but yet somehow feel that you deserve more than what you are getting, because at one point in time the industry you worked for was regulated which artificially raised wages.

 

[Bob Owens]

Maybe you should come over and live the good life on the non-union side.

Is that an offer?

Oh wait, you don't want to, that's right you like your job, won't leave it, but yet somehow feel that you deserve more than what you are getting, because at one point in time the industry you worked for was regulated which artificially raised wages.

For your information this is the most regulated unregulated industry there is. The fact is it never artificially raised wages for mechanics in NY. Perhaps it did in Tulsa, but not here. Sure they may have allowed the airlines to set fares and fly where they want to but as an FAA liscenced airman working under the RLA I'm about as regulated as it gets.

By the way I trounced you on the Black-union connection! Is that why you changed the subject? In fact your reply sounded a lot like Reddings reply to Mike Allen!

 

[Oneflyer]

Is that an offer?
For your information this is the most regulated unregulated industry there is. The fact is it never artificially raised wages for mechanics in NY. Perhaps it did in Tulsa, but not here. Sure they may have allowed the airlines to set fares and fly where they want to but as an FAA liscenced airman working under the RLA I'm about as regulated as it gets.

Actually, it did inflate wages, because it inflated fares. If mechanics wanted more money they got it and the airline raised fares.

Deregulation worked well for everyone but the current employed union workers. It worked for the company, the unions (more workers = more dues at moderately less pay per worker), and the American public, it even worked for those who wanted to go into the business. Degregulation created vasts numbers of jobs, albeit at lower wages.

By the way I trounced you on the Black-union connection! Is that why you changed the subject? In fact your reply sounded a lot like Reddings reply to Mike Allen!

Fortunately for me, I'm just some guy on the internet, not a senior VP at the biggest airline in the world.

 

[Bob Owens]

Actually, it did inflate wages, because it inflated fares. If mechanics wanted more money they got it and the airline raised fares.

Like I said, it inflated wages in Tulsa, not NY. NY has always had trouble retaining mechanics.The fact is that aircraft mechanics wages were never much better than similarly skilled workers in the NY area.

As far as the inflated fares I would argue that the average fare declined more during the regulated era than it has during the deregulated era.

The fact is a lot of myths have sprouted up about the regulated era. Workers had to strike to get increases, the increases were not just handed to them as you imply. In fact the rate of strikes was greater during the regulted era. In the so called deregulated era there has been a dramatic increase in government intervention in airline labor relations, always to the detriment of workers. The government has artificially deflated wages through constant intervention.

Deregulation worked well for everyone but the current employed union workers.

Everyone? Everyone going from New York to LAX but what about those going from Boise to Savannah?

It worked for the company, the unions (more workers = more dues at moderately less pay per worker), and the American public, it even worked for those who wanted to go into the business. Degregulation created vasts numbers of jobs, albeit at lower wages.

Once again I would disagree. The industry expanded more during the regulated era than it has during the deregulated era.

If you want to fly from NY to LAX in February and you know about it six months ahead of time, no doubt about it, deregulation made it cheaper but deregultion made traveling much more complex and not everyone comes out ahead.

Fortunately for me, I'm just some guy on the internet, not a senior VP at the biggest airline in the world.

Fortunately for us you mean.

 

[777 fixer]

Actually the statement is fact. Opinion in your mind maybe as many facts appear to be.

No it is not. You know why it's not a "fact". Just try and prove that it is.

If you think that this crew that has worked NW for brilliant legal theft don't know what their are doing...it's clearly lost on you.

One could say the same thing about Frank Lorenzo. He used the system to extract pay and benefits from employees. However in the end he proved incapable of running an airline. The govenment said as much when they barred him from the airline industry.

The reasons for NW's coming financial success is irrelevant (my personal opinion was not invited by the BK Judge) what I pointed out IS the outcome. The operation speaks for itself (for whatever reasons employees continue to run a good airline).

Well actually it is relevant. So far you have not come up with any good reasons for it.

 

[phasersonstun2]

(Wish I could take credit for "this", as an original thought, but truth be told, I got this off the US board)

However, VERY interesting(I think).

US/Parker has a "ton of dough" to spend, so why not a 3-some, between AA/NW/US ??

AA grabs all the Asian routes, and US gets all the MSP/DTW stuff.

I'd bet, Parker would unload that PHL "TUMOR" for that nice DTW operation, in a NY minute, plus MSP would GLADLY give US a MEGA free ride, on anything that they'd want.

This kind of stuff, is RIGHT up AA's alley !!!!!!
NH/BB's

R U on crack with beta kerotene?

PHL, despite all its' "philliness" is the number 1 moneymaker for US. O&D traffic is massive since it conservatively draws from an area of about 20 million.

No way US ever pulls out of PHL.

 

[AirwAr]

I'm saying that we got the same or worse staying out of BK than we would have if we went in.

...

Since we ended up with the same or worse, whether or not they would have filed is irrelevant.

I think it's arguable that you got worse outside of BK than you would have got inside BK. I know we're talking "if" here, so it's really anybody's guess, however, I do believe you would not have your pention. Sure the PBGC would have covered most, if not all of your pention, but going forward, you would have had a matching 401k instead.

Another thing I just thought of, if we went BK, just think of all those pissed off execs whose stock would be worthless. The same execs who would have been putting the BK plan in place. I have a feeling they wouldn't be so willing to try to in-source maintenance. I believe they would have went the route of NW as much as possible.

 

[eolesen]

Sure the PBGC would have covered most, if not all of your pention, but going forward, you would have had a matching 401k instead.

First of all, go read the PBGC max guaranteed payout chart I posted in AA Cash Onhand (it's towards the end). The guy who retires at 65 might get close to what he would have otherwise received at 60, but everyone else stands to take a pretty sizeable haircut.

Second of all, while I'm sure there would be a 401K to replace a pension, what's to say there would necessarily be a company match? It's not at all uncommon for companies to only match if the employee contributes a minimum of 5% of salary into their 401K. I don't know of any airline examples, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least bit if there were at least one, especially amongst the regional carriers.

 

[AirwAr]

Maybe you should come over and live the good life on the non-union side.

You realize the reason unions were even created was because of management, right? You do realize that if management could have it's way, they would screw over whoever they wanted. Let's take layoffs for example. You assume that the lowest performing employee gets the axe. That may be relatively true on a macro level, however, it falls far short on the micro level. In actuallity, if your manager likes you, you'll be ranked higher than an employee that he doesn't like, even though that employee is a better performer. This type a crap goes on all the time.

I don't like a lot of things the unions do, especially whent they do things that only hurt their members. The issue with APA over the China route comes to mind. However, I think that "management" types find it too easy to use unions and union memebers as whipping boys and girls.

Oh wait, you don't want to, that's right you like your job, won't leave it, but yet somehow feel that you deserve more than what you are getting, because at one point in time the industry you worked for was regulated which artificially raised wages.

And you don't think that executive compensation is artificially bloated? Who decides the CEO's compensation? The board of directors. And who is the board of directors, generally? Execs of other companies. Hmmmmmm.




In my opinion, there is a place for unions in today's workforce, the problem is it appears they are trying to operate in a 1950's era. I don't think there is an easy, strait foward solution for this, but that'ld probably be a good discussion on its own thread.

First of all, go read the PBGC max guaranteed payout chart I posted in AA Cash Onhand (it's towards the end). The guy who retires at 65 might get close to what he would have otherwise received at 60, but everyone else stands to take a pretty sizeable haircut.

Second of all, while I'm sure there would be a 401K to replace a pension, what's to say there would necessarily be a company match? It's not at all uncommon for companies to only match if the employee contributes a minimum of 5% of salary into their 401K. I don't know of any airline examples, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least bit if there were at least one, especially amongst the regional carriers.

First, thanks for supporting my claim that they may not get their full pension if we had gone BK. I don't have to look at your chart to know why the pilots were so on board with staying out of BK.

Secondly, I'm pretty sure that's how AA's matching 401k works. If you don't contribute, you don't get a match. Of course I'm no exec, so I can't speak as to what their "401k" would look like.

 

[Redbone]

No it is not. You know why it's not a "fact". Just try and prove that it is.
One could say the same thing about Frank Lorenzo. He used the system to extract pay and benefits from employees. However in the end he proved incapable of running an airline. The govenment said as much when they barred him from the airline industry.
Well actually it is relevant. So far you have not come up with any good reasons for it.

Ahhhh..but lorenzo isn't expected to show a $1.2 billion profit this year 07(based on $55. oil..Bloomberg). You are working for pretty much the SAME wages as NW so don't even worry about Lorenzo.

FACT: NW WILL SHOW A PROFIT while IN BK 06.(it IRRELEVENT if I like HOW it shall make a profit...the FACT is it WILL)

As for the rest of your nonsense. Do something with those idle paws.

 

[eolesen]

The problem is it appears they are trying to operate in a 1950's era.

I agree, and it's not just the leadership. You have a lot of members who pine for the old days and want everything they've ever had and lost restored.

Secondly, I'm pretty sure that's how AA's matching 401k works. If you don't contribute, you don't get a match.

I think you missed my point -- yes, match only works if you contribute, but there is sometimes fine print attached to a match. At my new employer, if you don't contribute a minimum of 6% pre-tax, you don't get any match whatsoever. If all you can afford is a 3% or even a 5% pre-tax contribution, you won't get any match whatsoever.

That extra couple % was more out of my pocket than I planned on, but the match makes it worthwhile in the long term. If I were living paycheck to paycheck, that wouldn't have been an option, and I'd be paying a price for that at retirement.

 

[777 fixer]

Ahhhh..but lorenzo isn't expected to show a $1.2 billion profit this year 07(based on $55. oil..Bloomberg). You are working for pretty much the SAME wages as NW so don't even worry about Lorenzo.

FACT: NW WILL SHOW A PROFIT while IN BK 06.(it IRRELEVENT if I like HOW it shall make a profit...the FACT is it WILL)

As for the rest of your nonsense. Do something with those idle paws.

Wow, for someone who calls NWA manangment thieves you cretainly sound like one of their biggest fans.

You seem to be missing the point I am trying to make. What the manangment at NWA has done is niether original or ingenious. What they have done is play hard ball becasue they could think of nothing else to do. By doing so they have further poisnned the waters. And someday those chickens will come home to roost.

Speaking of nonsense you are the one who tried to use the "fact" that NWA "was the best run major airline in the history of American aviation" as an idnicator for future earnings.

 

[Redbone]

Wow, for someone who calls NWA manangment thieves you cretainly sound like one of their biggest fans.

You seem to be missing the point I am trying to make. What the manangment at NWA has done is niether original or ingenious. What they have done is play hard ball becasue they could think of nothing else to do. By doing so they have further poisnned the waters. And someday those chickens will come home to roost.

Speaking of nonsense you are the one who tried to use the "fact" that NWA "was the best run major airline in the history of American aviation" as an idnicator for future earnings.

Based on historical profitability...it was, prior to the LBO thieves...just like what almost happened to AA with the Donald.