ATSB guarantee...never a doubt.

DLFlyer31

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
444
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/11/2003 5:04:56 PM PITbull wrote:

Notice, pension issue not resolved? Still got approval.

----------------
[/blockquote]

You have CONDITIONAL approval. If the pension issue is not resolved OR if US falls behind on loan payments OR if US fails to meet financial targets, the loan backing can be pulled out from under US.
 
what is the sparkle for the employees at U? Did you ever doubt that we would not qualify after round #1?
Notice, pension issue not resolved? Still got approval.
We are in these agreements for many, many years to come, even if this co. makes zillions. Many of us are struggling with medical expenses and putting food on the table and financing it to boot on credit. All this chaos in 6 months only to qualify for a damn loan guarantee (so we've been told repeatedly as this gauarantee was the impedus.)
Now, ponder this...if all the airlines do this same, exact plan, what advantage is it to anyone. We will all be competing now as Low cost carriers, instead of high cost carriers. All relative.
Now, who will have the competitive edge???? Anyone????
Hate to say this, but I believe this industry needs regulated again.
Someone said that we should strive to be #1 now.
Ok.
And if we do that, will anything change for us here at U?
If we achieve #1 status, could some of us STILL be looking at possible liquidation of our own assets because of the severity of the concessions? Does being #1 change anything for the rank and file employee, other than the pride status of achieving #1? Do you think this management will really sit down with us before our amendable dates if we made millions or billions? Do you think they have honorable intentions?
Someone, please enlighten us....
 
As Alg maintenance I agree with your feelings. We never made much to begin with, and the company,(U) want concessions and a new seven year contract. We continualy ask, but what then? You throw a kabillion RJ"s at us and increase the work load and continue to run incredibly lean. Ok, we could even do that, but for what? Will we ever be compensated when the company(U) makes money. Other than threats from alg management, as well as U, we have not heard when the good stuff will appear. ARGH!
 
Does this mean the government is convinced U will have a 7% profit margin? And do you know the dirty little secret...the pilot pension issue is not resolved. As G. Gordon Liddy would say, "suckers!!!"
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/11/2003 6:21:05 PM DLFlyer31 wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/11/2003 5:04:56 PM PITbull wrote:

Notice, pension issue not resolved? Still got approval.

----------------
[/blockquote]

You have CONDITIONAL approval. If the pension issue is not resolved OR if US falls behind on loan payments OR if US fails to meet financial targets, the loan backing can be pulled out from under US.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Sorry DL flyer...called CCY today, AND WE GOT APPROVAL!

The loan guarantee is that!. WE ARE NOT BORROWING FROM THE GOVERNMENT. Do you understand the point of a guarantee, or do we have to start from scratch???

Once the lenders give money to U, if for any reason, U can not pay the lenders back, then the loans are GUARANTEED BY THE GOVERNMENT...IT'S A BACKED GOVERNMENT LOAN. The point here is that the gov. gave the approval. If the government didn't think U had a viable business plan, even with the pension piece, why would they give approval now? Why not wait for that to be resolved?

 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/11/2003 5:04:56 PM PITbull wrote:
Hate to say this, but I believe this industry needs "regulated" again.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Why? The existing LCCs make money.

Sooner or later, somebody will perfect a model that can make money on the international and small community (eg, essential air service) model.

Reregulation will never happen. The airlines that have flourished will see to that, and rightly so.
 
guys-

PBGC and ATSB and Congress. It's their political agenda to prefer republican interest groups over traditionally democratic interests groups. The Bush administration is pursuing an industrial policy of relieving corporate america from defined benefit pensions. They'll do it slowly but surely.

You know, that's why this topic is frustrating. This isn't just about U corporate trying to get the most from labor. It's U corporate realizing that the current administration is going to pursue eradicating defined benefit pensions and that if they are caught with a big exposure in that area they may be at a serious competitive disadvantage.

Hey, I'm not particularly fond of defined benefit pensions anyway... they're to actuarial and they get the corporate office TOO much involved in my finances. I don't think they're right for the 21st century. Don't chain yourself to a company, even if you're union tries to force it.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/11/2003 6:47:17 PM autofixer wrote:

Does this mean the government is convinced U will have a 7% profit margin? And do you know the dirty little secret...the pilot pension issue is not resolved. As G. Gordon Liddy would say, "suckers!!!"
----------------
[/blockquote]
you will swallow....your pride.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/11/2003 7:56:38 PM N628AU wrote:

From Rueters:

New conditions include completing concession deals, obtaining final bankruptcy court approval of its reorganization proposal, and regulatory and judicial clearance of its plan to eliminate its pilot's union retirement plan.

http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/030211/airlines_us...ays_loan_5.html

The pension issue MUST be resolved to see the loan guarantee.
----------------
[/blockquote]

PitBull,

I understand very well how the loan guarantee works, but N628AU's post backs up what I am saying.

You have CONDITIONAL approval. If U fails to meet the conditions, the gov't can refuse to back the loans.
 
I never had any doubt about the loan approval. All the employee groups have been beaten into submission, we are very close to being the lowest paid of all the major airlines, and are locked into contracts for the next several years. Hey, at least we still have a job. Now if only we can get this war going to give away some more............Kudo's to "Dave" and his new style of "Labor Friendly" managment.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/11/2003 5:04:56 PM PITbull wrote:

what is the "sparkle" for the employees at U? Did you ever doubt that we would not qualify after round #1?

Notice, pension issue not resolved? Still got approval.

We are in these agreements for many, many years to come, even if this co. makes zillions. Many of us are struggling with medical expenses and putting food on the table and financing it to boot on credit. All this chaos in 6 months only to qualify for a damn loan guarantee (so we've been told repeatedly as this gauarantee was the impedus.)

Now, ponder this...if all the airlines do this same, exact plan, what advantage is it to anyone. We will all be competing now as Low cost carriers, instead of high cost carriers. All relative.

Now, who will have the competitive edge???? Anyone????

Hate to say this, but I believe this industry needs "regulated" again.

Someone said that we should strive to be #1 now.
Ok.

And if we do that, will anything change for us here at U?
If we achieve #1 status, could some of us STILL be looking at possible liquidation of our own assets because of the severity of the concessions? Does being #1 change anything for the "rank and file" employee, other than the pride status of achieving #1? Do you think this management will really sit down with us before our amendable dates if we made millions or billions? Do you think they have honorable intentions?

Someone, please enlighten us....


----------------
[/blockquote]

As you can already see PITbull, the airline industry as a whole is under going a massive overhaul. As little as ten years ago, the majors were tracking but not worried about the low cost airlines, because the majors dominated the sky. Instead of reducing cost and asking for cut backs the moment the low fare airlines really started poping up everywhere, the majors were creating new airlines within themselves,giving raises, and placing large orders for new aircraft. The plan of sufficating the low fare airlines failed beyond belief come September 11th. It basically took away all it's savings and has now left no room to compete against the low fare airlines.

US Airways has led the way up to this point from being a cash cow to ultra conservative. It has to, not only to be able to compete at all, but to remain in business. It is all very sudden and terrible for employees and would have been much easier to scale back cost slowly starting a decade ago. Unfortuantely, for the majors, that time has long past.

The options left for employees a few and far between.

1. With US Airways leading the way at restructuring, you can bet all the other major airlines will follow in the coming year(s). The larger the airline, the harder they will fall most likely though.

2. You could leave the majors for a low cost airline that is profitable. Although, think about it, they are low cost for a reason so I wouldn't expect the pay to be much different. Plus much less of a route system if consider that an employee benifit.

3. Finding a job in another industry. Although, if you are in the industry there must be a reason why.

Being the first out of the gate is often the hardest, but best place to be in. If all the majors will follow US Airways tracks in the near future, this will become U's competitive edge compaired all the other major airlines. It also would be the first actual threat to current low fare airlines. In seven years, when contracts are up, all other major airline employees will still have years to go on their contracts.

I don't see pay rates at or above pre-September 11th figures no matter what airline you work for many years to come. In seven years, if they company is still around and doing well, there will be a jump, but don't expect a leap. So, if your stuggling to put food on the table but want to keep your carrier in the industry, it is difficult to do and say but the time has come for you drastically change your lifestyle and try to shrink to profitabilty.
 
I'm telling you guys this is the exact same plan at UA and same for AA and DL and NW, CO.

We will all end up being Low Cost Carriers competing against each other as Low Cost Carriers instead of competing as High Cost Carriers. Once every one implements this "plan", we will all be at the same place we are today....struggling against one another labeled as Low Cost Carriers. Good job Managemets! Plus, all the venders and lease holders that these airlines screw, many will have no choice but to declare BK, as well. One huge "domino"---- from Corporations, to companies they effected, to stock holders, to employees.And this is "good" for America????

2003 YEAR WILL BE KNOWN AS THE YEAR EVERYONE WENT INTO BANKRUPTCY...which is now considered being "politically correct" and the "IN" thing to do.

AND WHOSE IDEA WAS ALL THIS?????????????????
 
CLT,

Your theory of "we need to adjust our own finances and shrink to profitability" as employees so our co. can stay around, may be achievable if: Folks would forfiet any medical needs, and three sq. meals a day. Make sure you have kerosene heaters in your house, and becareful you don't burn it down, cause you ain't getting another one. And car pool for life. Think about moving in with your neighbors on both sides of you and combining incomes. If you have more than one child shrink down the family to profitability and give them away to someone else. Exercise daily at least 3 hours a day to ensure health and longevity cause you can't afford life insurance and plan on NEVER RETIRING.
 
CLT
Hey, This must have been your idea then...sounds like you sat in with Management and brainstormed this together....




Way I see it, This whole entire industry will be considsered "LOW COST carriers", and we'll be competing as LCCs having the same problems we have today with regard to competing with one another but not as High Cost Carriers. If only a couple of carriers were able to do this, than the passerger would have an advantage. But that will not be the case, as the theory of BK is attractive to all the carriers for the exact same reason it was for U's new management.

And if passengers have the slightest inclination that concessions won't touch them because of competition, then they know nothing about "supply and demand" with the downsizing to profitability concept by shrinking capacity. There is a means to this madness.