Bod Unrest

[700UW]

MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE

December 19, 2003

This is MEC Chairman Bill Pollock with a US Airways MEC update for Friday, December 19th, with one new item.

In this update I will reaffirm the position of ALPA with regards to the senior management team at US Airways. Simply, our goal, as pilots of US Airways, is to see the Company succeed. However, we lack confidence in its current management team led by David Siegel and Neal Cohen and seek their resignation so that the company may prosper under imaginative, resourceful and respectful airline leaders.

Additionally, the chairman of US Airways, Dr. David Bronner, publicly revealed in a press interview that I, as a Board member, left a meeting of the corporate Board in response to comments by Dr. Bronner concerning the status of senior management. Dr. Bronner has also publicly revealed his view that I somehow breached Board confidentiality because ALPA has called for the removal of senior management and has suggested that I resign. In fact, Dr. Bronner has also written to me to the same effect, and in that letter, he went even further, threatening to refer this matter to the corporate governance committee for consideration of my removal if I did not issue a public apology.

Aside from the irony of Dr. Bronner's complaint about anyone revealing Board deliberations, I have made clear that there will be no apology. I have further advised Dr. Bronner that the corporate chairman's statements are an unlawful threat of retaliation. As you know, a public call for removal of senior management was issued by ALPA, in accordance with its rights under the Railway Labor Act. As I reminded Dr. Bronner, no Board confidentiality was even involved in that public demand. I have also informed Dr. Bronner, the Railway Labor Act prohibits Dr. Bronner's threat to retaliate against me for this union statement. Finally, the agreement between ALPA and US Airways provides that the MEC decides on selection and removal of the pilot director.

ALPA regrets the necessity of a public discussion of these events, made necessary by Dr. Bronner's public statements. We continue to request that the corporate Board of Directors, and its leadership, focus on the necessity of making this airline survive and prosper.

 

[pitguy]

Sweet! Stand your ground ALPA.

 

[delldude]

yeah bill...give bronner a taste of his own sauce"southern style"...

 

[savyinvestor]

From this encounter it doesn't look like Siegel will be leaving any time soon.

 

[PITbull]

Can't imagine why any BOD member who knows that all the labor groups on the property are in agreement with ALPA and that Dave and team's removal is important to move forward with our company would not look for another CEO. Most of the legacy carriers did this. United specifically, and labor came to the plate. Happened to American, and their labor came to the plate. Here U sits, and this SAME management expects labor to come to the plate for the 3rd time in 18 months. 20,000 employees on the street later and $2 billion dollars in concessions later that most carriers who are profiting never recieved.

No one will go to the table, so Bronner must be satisfied with the consequences. If the majority of employees have "no confidence" in mangement, doesn't matter what business plan they come up with, no one is buying into it with more conessions.

Its rediculous for this management to hold on when the troops are not following.

Management is not willing to change their culture regarding employees as evidenced by the harsh policies that just came out on Dec. 19th that once again, breaks contract language for f/as. ALPA has 268 grievances last I heard and they have never experienced such an amount in their history. Management still has the letigation appeals for the "outsourcing" of the IAM work, and the fate of the reservations center and agents are very uncertain. AGain, we are all back to square 1 as if the BK and restructuring and concessions never occured. We are smack dab back in time to March 2002 with uncertainty of survival still looming

 

[USA320Pilot]

In my opinion, David Bronner will not give in to ALPA’s demands because he will lose creditability going forward. The difference between this ultimatum and those at other companies is that Bronner holds 37.5% of the stock and 51% voting power, whereas the other airlines who had labor force out CEO’s were publicly traded companies without a principal investor who controlled the board.

Thus, both labor and management will reach an acceptable Transformation Plan agreement or Bronner could simply break up the company and sell the pieces.

Why? Bronner is here for one reason and that’s to obtain a capital gain and he’s not going to lose money going forward. He has the legal right break up the airline and there is nothing anybody can do to stop him.

Regards,

Chip

 

[ClueByFour]

In my opinion, David Bronner will not give in to ALPA’s demands because he will lose creditability going forward. The difference between this ultimatum and those at other companies is that Bronner holds 37.5% of the stock and 51% voting power, whereas the other airlines who had labor force out CEO’s were publicly traded companies without a principal investor who controlled the board.

Thus, both labor and management will reach an acceptable Transformation Plan agreement or Bronner could simply break up the company and sell the pieces.

Why? Bronner is here for one reason and that’s to obtain a capital gain and he’s not going to lose money going forward. He has the legal right break up the airline and there is nothing anybody can do to stop him.

Regards,

Chip

Bronner could, but he will never recoup his investment at this point.

I believe that the "things of value" like DCA and LGA terminals and slots are backing the ATSB loan--which means Bronner won't get 'em.

The market for used equipment (half of which is in the process of coming up on heavy check anyway and/or parked) is not exactly a seller's market at this time.

Bronner, like Little Dave, is far too concerned with saving face. Were he responsive to those whose retirements he safeguargs, little Dave and crew would be on the street. They clearly have no clue. Needing a "plan C" less than a year out of Chapter 11 demonstrates this to a far-thee-well.

What Dave and company need to do is grow the airline. They have the tools to do it. They also need to stop with ego driven decisions like the Airbus overhaul--costing tons of money to litigate a losing battle, and further operational degredation from parking airplanes as they time out (and fixing the one that came back from the butcher shop).

In any other industry, little Dave would be looking at walking papers from big Dave at this point. Bronner is in way over his head, which does not help things either.

 

[mrplanes]

In my opinion, David Bronner will not give in to ALPA’s demands because he will lose creditability going forward. The difference between this ultimatum and those at other companies is that Bronner holds 37.5% of the stock and 51% voting power, whereas the other airlines who had labor force out CEO’s were publicly traded companies without a principal investor who controlled the board.

Thus, both labor and management will reach an acceptable Transformation Plan agreement or Bronner could simply break up the company and sell the pieces.

Why? Bronner is here for one reason and that’s to obtain a capital gain and he’s not going to lose money going forward. He has the legal right break up the airline and there is nothing anybody can do to stop him.

Regards,

Chip

Chippy:

He can lose crediblility or he can lose the airline. And if it doesn't matter to him which one he loses then all the employees here will lose. If a supposedly intelligent man cannot understand that he must have the support of the employees to be successful in the situation we are in trying to save this airline.then we are doomed. It's just that simple.

If people doubt that the majority of employees are not supportive of Siegel then show me the outrage and rebuttal of ALPA's statement. Or the AFA's. Or the TWU's. Or the CWA's. The employees that support Siegel must all work at CCY. Or they must all be tongue tied.

And to understand Bronner a bit more let me ask this: Has this guy ever run a business? Any business? Not a retirement fund business, but one that depends on employees to make it work. Does he understand the essential element of the success of a service business? Does he think an airline is a commodity? I am beginning to believe he is as clueless as Siegel about running an airline.

You are probably correct Chip, he can make us dissappear if he wants. But his credibility as an airline board Chairman wouldn't be all that hot now would it? That is failure in my book. Failure brought on by his foolish pride of not listening to the most important piece of this puzzle. You, me and the rest of the loyal people who work at US Airways.

mr

 

[wings396]

AHHHH....What would the Holidays be like without the annual threat of shutting the airline down? Agree to this and that or we will let Bonner liquidate the Airline to save face and his invstment. It's getting mighty old already. The way we are operating now, the Airline will shut itself down within the next year anyway. We have been on Auto Pilot in Self Destruct mode for years already...The Clock is ticking away without the Dave & Dave teams threats.

 

[pitguy]

Piney above stated "Is it a majority of employees? Or a majority of posters on US Aviation that have no confidence in management?"


Bob, again if you do not work here it is hard to understand. It is like no other place I know of. Yes, it is by far the majority of employees that have no confidence and truly have a funeral that never ends type morale. Honestly if the doors close there will be a big weight lifted off our chests. Even though I need to work I still feel there is a better (happier) life out there. I understand the job marker is tight. I have been looking (somewhat). I would like to just hang on here until the economy gets better with hopefully better job prospects. Until then most people here have drawn the line in the sand which Lorenzo and his pals have crossed and now it is time for them to go.

 

[PITbull]

Bob,

What's your point again?????

Unions are about dues. Just like airlines are about customers. No customers; no airline. No dues paying members no union. Kapeesh?

Do we try to hold on to jobs? Damn straight. It is what keeps the orgnaization going and moving so that we can maintain some "fairness" in the work place. Quite a simple concept. That's like saying all dave wants is Customers so that we can make money and profit.....like that's a bad thing. Unions are about increasing numbers because it is driven by dues dollars, and that is how it grows and provides services needed to the members that have joined.

You look at that equation in some kind of bad light; I look at that equation in the "correct" light, WITH PURPOSE.

 

[700UW]

Bob, unions are non-profit organizations, it is against the law for them to make a profit.

And Bob, why does Siegel make 4xs more then the nearest LCC carrier when all he does is compare us to them? But WN employees make way more then us here at US?

Bob you don't understand, the company has the right to discipline and fire employees with attendance problems and it happens all the time, the unions can't get someone their job back when the company properly fires them when the employee has a proven attendance problem, you seem to keep ignoring that fact.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Bob,

" You can not have a place of employment if you are overpriced and unproductive..."

Ok, just how are we overpriced and unproductive? As has been stated numerous times in various threads, most employee's pay is less than at Southwest. Personally, I make less than a JetBlue pilot who flies the same hours. If we are so unproductive, why does JetBlue (the lowest cost in the industry) have nearly as many employees per airplane as we do - and they have the advantage of point to point flying and a junior labor force.

"Many unions forget just exactly who they work for"

No, Bob. The union works for it's members. Possibly you're confusing unions with union members.

"You don't work for Dave Siegel you work for shareholders of which you and the rest of the organized workforce are!"

So we work for ourselves, I guess. Actually, Bob, we all work for the people that pay our salaries - the customer. Without the customer, there would be no jobs, no return on investment, etc.

"out of control sick calls"

If the company lumps all absense for medical reasons in one cubbyhole, the supposed 10% figure isn't surprising. I'll openly admit that I don't have data for the other employee groups, but for pilots there are nearly 10% out on long term disability. Why? The average number of LTD's hasn't increased over the last few years, the number of pilots has decreased. That's part of the reason no airline has ever successfully shrank itself to prosperity.

"See you are owners of the company so that interest overides your union. Moaraly, ethicaly & I believe legally under the concept of breach of fiduciary responsibility."

So as owners we have responsibilities. Ok, how about the rights that go with ownership - having a say in how the company is run. You can't have it both ways.

Jim

 

[BusFlt321]

Maybe Bonner can break up the company..but that is not saving face.. That is proving to the business community he is the Al "Chainsaw" Dunlap of the aviation world. Think his credibility will be "0" and we will have 25,000 USAIRWAYS employees who will make sure the world knows it! BusFlt321

 

[smallstFSA]

Yes, it is by far the majority of employees that have no confidence and truly have a funeral that never ends type morale. Honestly if the doors close there will be a big weight lifted off our chests. Even though I need to work I still feel there is a better (happier) life out there. I understand the job marker is tight. I have been looking (somewhat). I would like to just hang on here until the economy gets better with hopefully better job prospects. Until then most people here have drawn the line in the sand

Amen, Pitguy. I believe the level of self-satisfaction resulting from not having to worry about this endless soap opera would make up for lower wages in another job. I'm also always looking at different alternatives and the salary gap will close the day our station is expressed. Would anyone care to comment on the time agents spend on their cell phones taking care of their side jobs so they'll be able to survive when their station is closed. Is this a productivity issue or a personal survival issue?