Article on AA profit sharing

[FWflyer]

Seeing as this has been a recent topic of discussion, here's an article on potential profit sharing at American Airlines:

http://startelegram.typepad.com/sky_talk/2...ployees-wo.html

 

[FWAAA]

Here's a link to the article itself: http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/398035.html

Interesting that the profit sharing is calculated solely on AA's profits, not AMR's profits.

 

[Hopeful]

I wouldn't put the down payment on that new Mercedes Benz just yet.

 

[WingNaPrayer]

Interesting to read that the amounts the other carriers have already set aside for their employees is about half of what the AMR Executives took for themselves last spring.

Your bonus will consist of a giant tube of K-Y and a great big stick!

 

[Hopeful]

Interesting to read that the amounts the other carriers have already set aside for their employees is about half of what the AMR Executives took for themselves last spring.

Your bonus will consist of a giant tube of K-Y and a great big stick!

After the last concession package, who needs K-Y anymore?

 

[eolesen]

Interesting to read that the amounts the other carriers have already set aside for their employees is about half of what the AMR Executives took for themselves last spring.

1) Putting away money for profit sharing doesn't mean anything if they wind up in the red for the year... which is likely for some carriers.

2) AMR's executives took their money from the stock market, not AMR's bank account

 

[TWU informer]

1) Putting away money for profit sharing doesn't mean anything if they wind up in the red for the year... which is likely for some carriers.

2) AMR's executives took their money from the stock market, not AMR's bank account

Oh well then just gives us back $1.6 Billion in Stock Options and we will take from the Stock Market too and leave the AMR bank alone.

 

[The Goose]

1) Putting away money for profit sharing doesn't mean anything if they wind up in the red for the year... which is likely for some carriers.

2) AMR's executives took their money from the stock market, not AMR's bank account

From the stock market? Come on, man - you know better than that (or are you really still employed by AMR spreading propragAAnda?)

When the brand new and shiny shares minted with the S3 form filed with the SEC during August 2006 were given to the damnable executives in April 2007 and sold to provide a "bonus" they did not merit, their money came from dilution of the share price; i. e. , the Shareholders, not the "stock market". Anyone that held as little as one share of AMR's common stock picked up the tab for those ill-gotten gains.

The devils are going to do it again in April '08, but at least it won't be nearly as much - $11.00 and change per share and dropping today.

 

[eolesen]

Who do you think bought the shares that were being dumped on the market?....

It wasn't current shareholders. It was new shareholders, investment banks, hedge funds in Iceland, etc...

True, shareholders stand to take a hit on their investment value whenever new shares are issued, but that's not exactly money out of their pocket, unless they bought high and sell low.


And no, I don't have any ties to AMR, aside from being a customer. I don't like what's happened to my former co-workers at all levels (management, union, and non-management-non-union), and I don't like the PUP plan at all. I think it's morally wrong, and the board should have said "no" before it even became an issue. But they didn't.

Be that as it may, you need to ask yourself whether or not it's really smart to expect clauses in the executive's contracts to be voided or ignored simply because the unions don't like them.

If it is OK to do to the execs, then the reverse would also have to be true, i.e. management should reserve the right to void clauses in the unions' contracts when they don't like the result.


Again, the methodology behind PUP is horribly flawed, but the undeniable fact is that your unions signed off on keeping the plan during the restructuring, and it had existed since Deregulation without anyone questioning it. They have to share some of the blame for not paying attention to the details, and not making sure that there wasn't any inequity built into the RPA's.

 

[Wretched Wrench]

If it is OK to do to the execs, then the reverse would also have to be true, i.e. management should reserve the right to void clauses in the unions' contracts when they don't like the result.

This happens quite often on the local level. I can only assume it is in concert with the upper levels of both company and union. We constantly have to spend money and effort to keep the company following the contract. With little or no help from the International.

 

[FWAAA]

Oh well then just gives us back $1.6 Billion in Stock Options and we will take from the Stock Market too and leave the AMR bank alone.

Funny you should mention this; I realize that you despise your worthless union for many reasons, but if I were you, #1 on my list would be the worthless bastards' refusal/failure to extract a much larger percentage of AMR in April, 2003 than the paltry 19% granted to the nonmanagement employees. Something on the order of 50% or even 75% wouldn't have made everything all better ( the concessions would have still been expensive to the affected employees) , but it would have provided a much larger possible payback than the maximum value of $1.26 billion that was reached last January when the stock peaked at $41.

Anytime employees sacrifice annual wage reductions of $1.62 billion for five years, they deserve a bigger slice of the potential upside than just 19%. Collectively, the employees placed a large bet and even though the outcome was the one hoped-for (no bankruptcy filing, continued pilot pensions, decent job), the employees didn't get the risk-based payoff they deserved.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

looks like continental is at it again

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/080211/lam035.html?.v=101

:huh:

% received of annual
profit between: CO AA DL NW(1) UA US(2)
$0 - $1 million 30% None 15% None None 15%
$1 - $10 million 30% None 15% 10% None 15%
$10 - $250 million 30% None 15% 10% 15% 15%
$250 - $500 million 25% None 15% 10% 15% 15%
> $500 million 20% 15% 15% 10% 15% 15%

Total Payout for
2007 (millions) $158 $0 $158 $80 $110 $49
Total Number of
Employees 45000 72000 55000 30000 55000 36000

 

[eolesen]

Do you want to work for CO's work-rules? I think that offer was on the table at one point as well.

They're non-union on the ramp and contract out 60+% of their maintenance, including all of their overhaul.

 

[TIME FOR CHANGE]

Do you want to work for CO's work-rules? I think that offer was on the table at one point as well.

They're non-union on the ramp and contract out 60+% of their maintenance, including all of their overhaul.

you forgot the part about how they have a great profit sharing formula
unlike AA

 

[eolesen]

And you conveniently overlook one of the reasons CO is more profitable... they're less prone to featherbedding and aren't nearly as hamstrung by scope clauses or restrictions against outsourcing.

All those pennies saved add up.

As I said, propose to work for CO's workrules.