Boeing Doesn't See AA-US Merger

[damajagua]

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/blog/morning_call/2012/04/transprt-workers-union-says-us-airways.html?ana=yfcpc

All we are hearing about the jobs US would save...But read the term sheets...sounds temporary to me.
But you would have to wonder what plan is US proposing that would make the UCC stand up and take notice.

The UCC could give a rat's arse about jobs saved.

Also don't forget the combined company that Parker is suggesting would have over 20,000 more
employees then Delta and United. I wonder how is he going to explain that to the UCC. I thought one of
the reasons why AA was not competitive was because it had way too may employees in par
to its peers. Well it looks like Parker is proposing the same scenario just to get labor onboard.
I think he is making a lot of empty promises, There is no way AA/US can have so many more employees than
it's peers and be competitive.

 

[Hopeful]

Also don't forget the combined company that Parker is suggesting would have over 20,000 more
employees then Delta and United. I wonder how is he going to explain that to the UCC. I thought one of
the reasons why AA was not competitive was because it had way too may employees in par
to its peers. Well it looks like Parker is proposing the same scenario just to get labor onboard.
I think he is making a lot of empty promises, There is no way AA/US can have so many more employees than
it's peers and be competitive.

I agree....Too bad our unions don't see this.

 

[Frank Szabo]

Also don't forget the combined company that Parker is suggesting would have over 20,000 more
employees then Delta and United. I wonder how is he going to explain that to the UCC. I thought one of
the reasons why AA was not competitive was because it had way too may employees in par
to its peers. Well it looks like Parker is proposing the same scenario just to get labor onboard.
I think he is making a lot of empty promises, There is no way AA/US can have so many more employees than
it's peers and be competitive.

Don't forget that all these agreements with AA's union by Parker are NON BINDING.

Now, one must consider if these "agreements" are real or simply by design to nudge AA's union folk into a scenario planned by Parker and Horton - ie, doing exactly what the "management" of both companies desire enabling large bonuses for the "players" upon completion of their dealing and lying. Does anyone believe any management personnel of either side would allow such an open-ended possibility where their respective butts and bonuses are involved?

"Companies can't plot and scheme this way?", you say. May I point out the rather obvious pre-bankruptcy collusion of DAL and NWA and how little attention that received by the court.

Considering the players and the secrecy in this cluster, I've not heard a single item yet from any of them that was worth believing. I'll believe when it's written and binding.

 

[Lloyd Grey]

Don't forget that all these agreements with AA's union by Parker are NON BINDING.

Now, one must consider if these "agreements" are real or simply by design to nudge AA's union folk into a scenario planned by Parker and Horton - ie, doing exactly what the "management" of both companies desire enabling large bonuses for the "players" upon completion of their dealing and lying. Does anyone believe any management personnel of either side would allow such an open-ended possibility where their respective butts and bonuses are involved?

"Companies can't plot and scheme this way?", you say. May I point out the rather obvious pre-bankruptcy collusion of DAL and NWA and how little attention that received by the court.

Considering the players and the secrecy in this cluster, I've not heard a single item yet from any of them that was worth believing. I'll believe when it's written and binding.

We can't believe anything TWU or either CEO has to say.

All we can do is vote, and I vote NO or will if I see a ballot. Where's the big link, eh?

 

[jimntx]

Also don't forget the combined company that Parker is suggesting would have over 20,000 more
employees then Delta and United. I wonder how is he going to explain that to the UCC. I thought one of
the reasons why AA was not competitive was because it had way too may employees in par
to its peers. Well it looks like Parker is proposing the same scenario just to get labor onboard.
I think he is making a lot of empty promises, There is no way AA/US can have so many more employees than
it's peers and be competitive.

Also, don't forget that Parker agreed to offer the early out that APFA had proposed to AMR and which was rejected out of hand by AMR. As I understand it, there are early out packages for pilots and mechanics as well. This would certainly take care of some of the overage.

The company has never said that it is not competitive because it has too many employees. It claims the problem is that we are paid too much (and, we are not productive, of course). But, then why all of a sudden are you believing (and using to make a point) anything the company says?

The company does not claim that there is a current overage of 2300 f/as. The overage of 2300 flight attendants will be the result of combining the international and domestic f/a corps and instituting a Delta-like reserve system and preferential bidding.

 

[Lloyd Grey]

Color me shocked!!!!..........Boeing doesn't want Airbus's biggest customer buying one of their most loyal customers.............hmmm.

Neither would Airbus with all the planes AA planned to buy. We might imagine that order being slashed too. Boeing just took $700 Million worth of Airbus in on trade for Boeing jets.

Who wants to bet they don't part them out? Airbus will lose twice on that deal.

 

[Lloyd Grey]

Color me shocked!!!!..........Boeing doesn't want Airbus's biggest customer buying one of their most loyal customers.............hmmm.

Neither would Airbus with all the planes AA planned to buy. We might imagine that order being slashed too under a merger. Boeing just took $700 Million worth of Airbus in on trade for Boeing jets.

Who wants to bet they don't part them out? Airbus will lose twice on that deal.

 

[Lloyd Grey]

Sorry for the dup, I wanted to delete it.

 

[gaucho99]

Also don't forget the combined company that Parker is suggesting would have over 20,000 more
employees then Delta and United. I wonder how is he going to explain that to the UCC. I thought one of
the reasons why AA was not competitive was because it had way too may employees in par
to its peers. Well it looks like Parker is proposing the same scenario just to get labor onboard.
I think he is making a lot of empty promises, There is no way AA/US can have so many more employees than
it's peers and be competitive.

There will be literally thousands of employees that will have to relocate to keep their jobs and many of them if not most will end up retiring or taking a severance package rather than move. For example, a lot of the office, admin etc personnel at the Tempe US hdq will need to move to Texas if they want to keep their jobs. I expect the majority will not do so. That is what happened in the US-HP merger. Very few pre merger US based office personnel moved to Tempe.

 

[jersey777]

Also don't forget the combined company that Parker is suggesting would have over 20,000 more
employees then Delta and United. I wonder how is he going to explain that to the UCC. I thought one of
the reasons why AA was not competitive was because it had way too may employees in par
to its peers. Well it looks like Parker is proposing the same scenario just to get labor onboard.
I think he is making a lot of empty promises, There is no way AA/US can have so many more employees than
it's peers and be competitive.

As far as the flight attendants go....they are offering an early out to reduce head count. I want to say the same thing for the TWU.

 

[eolesen]

As far as the flight attendants go....they are offering an early out to reduce head count. I want to say the same thing for the TWU.

Yes, it looks like they're offering an early out, and if my guess is correct, it will cost every remaining active employee somewhere around $1500 per year...

(guestimate based on the proposed reduction of the company match from 5.5% to 3% at an average salary of $55K, plus a piddly amount of incremental interest lost from the $1375 not being added into employee's 401Ks).

 

[jersey777]

Yes, it looks like they're offering an early out, and if my guess is correct, it will cost every remaining active employee somewhere around $1500 per year...

(guestimate based on the proposed reduction of the company match from 5.5% to 3% at an average salary of $55K, plus a piddly amount of incremental interest lost from the $1375 not being added into employee's 401Ks).

Can't speak for any other work group but here is what the bridge term sheet offered the APFA in regards to 401k:

9.9% age 50 +
6.75% age 40 – 50
5.5% age 39 – below
At the conclusion of the 5 year period, all FAs would receive a 3% contribution with up to a 5.5% match.

 

[eolesen]

Can't speak for any other work group but here is what the bridge term sheet offered the APFA in regards to 401k:

Is that the original AA term sheet, their latest proposal, or the US term sheet?

 

[usa1]

Can't speak for any other work group but here is what the bridge term sheet offered the APFA in regards to 401k:

9.9% age 50 +
6.75% age 40 – 50
5.5% age 39 – below
At the conclusion of the 5 year period, all FAs would receive a 3% contribution with up to a 5.5% match.

That's a good offer ...... also $1500 per employee is a small price to pay to gain seniority .... and keep your job.

 

[FWAAA]

Is that the original AA term sheet, their latest proposal, or the US term sheet?

That sounds like the term sheet from US to the APFA.