American/USAir-why not now?
- Thread starter mistified
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
did you not notice that I included - even before you said anything - that AA non-pilot benefit packages are worth over double what US provides for comparable employees? AA employees would see a 60% - $12,000 - cut in the value of their benefit packages based on what both carriers currently offer.
Did the AFA made sure that they are gaining comparable benefits to what AA has - or at leas what other legacy carriers offer before throwing its support behind the idea of a US merger? For FA wages, that benefit difference amounts to 25% of the salary.... nothing to sneeze about.
I also mentioned UA in the discussion because it is relevant to the concept of which carrier has increased salaries faster coming out of BK.
Of course you and Pit don't really want to hear about DL because it requires that you acknowledge that DL and its business plan are working better for employees.
Did the AFA made sure that they are gaining comparable benefits to what AA has - or at leas what other legacy carriers offer before throwing its support behind the idea of a US merger? For FA wages, that benefit difference amounts to 25% of the salary.... nothing to sneeze about.
I also mentioned UA in the discussion because it is relevant to the concept of which carrier has increased salaries faster coming out of BK.
Of course you and Pit don't really want to hear about DL because it requires that you acknowledge that DL and its business plan are working better for employees.
Kev3188
Veteran
There is a difference between pre-BK to present, and from using emergence from BK- to present.
Depending on which timeframe you use, the outcome can be different.
As always, YMMV, and I'm sure it will.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
Yet DL has a lower TOTAL maintenance outsourcing rate than all other US airlines except for AA, as of this year. Based on the plans which AA has announced and is putting in place, DL will have the lowest rate of total maintenance outsourcing among large US airlines.
If you factor in the revenue that DL gains from insourcing to calculate DL's NET rate of outsourcing (and you can do the same thing w/ any airline if you want), DL's rate of outsourcing is just 15%, better than 1/3 the total rate of outsourcing of WN and US which have about the same percentage of outsourcing.
Note that US has an almost identical rate of outsourcing as WN, a carrier that built its business model FROM THE BEGINNING based on outsourcing of a large part of its maintenance operation.
There was a time when US airlines owned flight kitchens and their external (travel agency) res systems - but that has all changed too. I'm not sure why it is so difficult to grasp the concept that the industry is changing. Thus, it is valid to ask what percentage of total work that an airline has retained to keep - be it total maintenance or percent of total flying (vs regional carriers) is done inhouse.
DL did a better job of keeping jobs of its employees during BK and has added to its workforce using inhouse capabilities since BK. That is probably why DL will have the largest maintenance operation in the Americas by the time AA is thru w/ their cuts and DL continues to bring flying done by regional carriers back to DL employees.
If you factor in the revenue that DL gains from insourcing to calculate DL's NET rate of outsourcing (and you can do the same thing w/ any airline if you want), DL's rate of outsourcing is just 15%, better than 1/3 the total rate of outsourcing of WN and US which have about the same percentage of outsourcing.
Note that US has an almost identical rate of outsourcing as WN, a carrier that built its business model FROM THE BEGINNING based on outsourcing of a large part of its maintenance operation.
There was a time when US airlines owned flight kitchens and their external (travel agency) res systems - but that has all changed too. I'm not sure why it is so difficult to grasp the concept that the industry is changing. Thus, it is valid to ask what percentage of total work that an airline has retained to keep - be it total maintenance or percent of total flying (vs regional carriers) is done inhouse.
DL did a better job of keeping jobs of its employees during BK and has added to its workforce using inhouse capabilities since BK. That is probably why DL will have the largest maintenance operation in the Americas by the time AA is thru w/ their cuts and DL continues to bring flying done by regional carriers back to DL employees.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
you have the data... use whatever publicly available set of data that you wish to make your point.
I welcome the discussion.
signals
Veteran
I believe the original date was in November, but it may have been a rumor...as anything else on As The Forums Turn, or Circumvent!
I hope that date arrives and shuts the rumors on the airline that cried merger(wolf) too often
signals
Veteran
Not that it matters, but it seems to me that it is AMR that is buying time. Perhaps to come up with a strategic plan to avoid a merger and emerge a restructured stand alone airline???
signals
Veteran
You would be amazed at what happens if you replace Delta with ANY (other) AIRLINE.
[sub]Lets figure the time airlines have taken in bankruptcy. [/sub]
usair 232 days
usair 378 days
delta 593 days
nwa 624 days
cal 876 days
ual 1150 days
america west 1155
Now are we really that worried about AA?
usair 232 days
usair 378 days
delta 593 days
nwa 624 days
cal 876 days
ual 1150 days
america west 1155
Now are we really that worried about AA?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
The real question is not how long an airline has been in bankruptcy but how sucessfully they were in restructuring the company for long-term success and how well they have achieved it since they emerged.
Before AA filed, no US airline had been in BK for 4 1/2 years. There is ample evidence to determine how successfully each airline that went through BK is doing now based on what they did in BK - and how well their employees are doing post BK as well.
AA is 4 1/2 years behind its peers who will continue to move forward, but it is only fair to assess AA at the same points post BK that have been used to assess other airlines after their Bks.
Before AA filed, no US airline had been in BK for 4 1/2 years. There is ample evidence to determine how successfully each airline that went through BK is doing now based on what they did in BK - and how well their employees are doing post BK as well.
AA is 4 1/2 years behind its peers who will continue to move forward, but it is only fair to assess AA at the same points post BK that have been used to assess other airlines after their Bks.
Similar threads
