Since it's always management's fault when there are losses, then by association, it is management's fault when there are profits, thus to the victor go the spoils, right?
And yes, that comment is unbridled sarcasm, since it's foolish to believe you can blame management or labor individually for the situation a company finds itself in. In the case of GM, it was a mutually assured destruction that took many years to occur.
Other companies seemed to realize the error of the Big Three earlier on, and took steps to prevent it from occurring. Most notably amongst the auto industry are the US workers at Toyota, Honda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, etc. who entered the industry on the heels of GM's massive plant closings and layoffs in the 1980's.
You could easily draw parallels between the second generation auto manufacturers with the second and third generation air carriers (i.e. who were founded from 1970 onward). And, as Bob Owens and others love to point out about WN, they're not under-compensated despite managing to avoid the Ghosts of Contracts Past.
Actually, it's not kept quiet at all. It's included as part of the SEC filings if you bother to dig into the detail.
If AMR were privately held, as TWA was during the early Icahn years, then you'd have no way of knowing all the secret handshake type deals that are made with various execs, so beware the next time you hear someone discussing the benefits of taking the company private.
Personally, I don't really care what any one executive has negotiated, because it's a fact that if their peers in other industries are able to ask for a certain level of compensation, it's probably appropriate that they be able to get to a midpoint of parity either in salary dollars, benefits, retirement funds, or a combination of all three. It may seem unfair, but there's always going to be a double standard when you're one of a couple hundred people capable of holding a particular position vs. one of tens of thousands.
