delldude
Veteran
i hear ya but they aren't cleared for security and/or type trained.would take a bit of time for sure.
Consequences Of Section 1113
- Thread starter vc10
- Start date
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
delldude,
"i hear ya but they aren't cleared for security and/or type trained.would take a bit of time for sure."
I can see the cockpit wallpapered with MEL stickers now....
BTW, isn't there some regulation that at least some metal has to be showing on the a/c logbook cover?
Jim
"i hear ya but they aren't cleared for security and/or type trained.would take a bit of time for sure."
I can see the cockpit wallpapered with MEL stickers now....
BTW, isn't there some regulation that at least some metal has to be showing on the a/c logbook cover?
Jim
If Lakefield already has the financing in place for 7 new aircraft a month, why is he waiting? Becuase he wants to save IAM jobs???? ROTFLOL
Of course, why hasn't a lot of structural changes been made already?
Of course, why hasn't a lot of structural changes been made already?
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
Winglet,
The financing for the "6-7" aircraft per month is for the RJ's, and even that is only firm through the end of September.
[2Q04 report] The Company has entered into interim agreements with its primary sources of financing for new regional jets - General Electric (GE) and airframe manufacturers Empresa Brasilica de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer) and Bombardier Inc. (Bombardier). The agreements were necessary when Standard & Poor's (S&P) downgraded the Company's and US Airways' corporate credit ratings from B- to CCC+ on May 5, 2004, causing US Airways to fail a condition precedent for continuing to finance new aircraft. The interim agreements provide for continued financing of regional jet deliveries through September 30, 2004. Financing for deliveries subsequent to September 30, 2004 is subject to further negotiations that will require that the Company demonstrate its ability to achieve the cost savings and low-cost carrier-competitive operating cost structure encompassed in its Transformation Plan.
Further, US Airways agreed to secure third-party financing in lieu of financing from Bombardier for four aircraft. DVB Bank AG has provided US Airways with 18 month bridge financing for two of the four aircraft and has agreed to provide similar financing for the two remaining aircraft, with the objective of arranging long-term market financing for these aircraft upon successful implementation of the Company's Transformation Plan.
Jim
The financing for the "6-7" aircraft per month is for the RJ's, and even that is only firm through the end of September.
[2Q04 report] The Company has entered into interim agreements with its primary sources of financing for new regional jets - General Electric (GE) and airframe manufacturers Empresa Brasilica de Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer) and Bombardier Inc. (Bombardier). The agreements were necessary when Standard & Poor's (S&P) downgraded the Company's and US Airways' corporate credit ratings from B- to CCC+ on May 5, 2004, causing US Airways to fail a condition precedent for continuing to finance new aircraft. The interim agreements provide for continued financing of regional jet deliveries through September 30, 2004. Financing for deliveries subsequent to September 30, 2004 is subject to further negotiations that will require that the Company demonstrate its ability to achieve the cost savings and low-cost carrier-competitive operating cost structure encompassed in its Transformation Plan.
Further, US Airways agreed to secure third-party financing in lieu of financing from Bombardier for four aircraft. DVB Bank AG has provided US Airways with 18 month bridge financing for two of the four aircraft and has agreed to provide similar financing for the two remaining aircraft, with the objective of arranging long-term market financing for these aircraft upon successful implementation of the Company's Transformation Plan.
Jim
The bleating of the pro-concession individuals is deafening. You folks just don't get it and sadly you never will.
Market realities is a term used to justify exactly what you are witnessing at UAIR. It's called union busting. An all out assault on the wages and benefits of our employees. Something Jerry GlASS is no stranger to.
Right before your eyes this company is headed on the road that leads to the likes of Valujet. Everything on the cheap. Everything outsourced. And you know the rest of that story.
So tell me where does one draw the line? When is enough, enough? When do you hold the management accountable for their ineptitude and force them to actually run the airline?? It is apparent that many of you have not asked yourselves these questions. Yet you are so willing to open your wallets once again to these swindlers!!!!
For years the employees have given excellent suggestions to management in an effort to improve the operation. I can speak for the maintenance group and can cite many instances where hundreds of thousands of dollars in possible savings were simply IGNORED by our highly educated dunces. These were real issues that didn't require any great expenditure to implement. Nevertheless, it was still NO. And we are supposed to subsidize this sort of idiocy??? Get real already.
Threaten us all you want with your liquidation talk and outsourcing tactics. You can't kill us......were dead already. Get it??? If it takes a last stand type of showdown to defend what is rightfully ours then so be it. I for one will shove this job up your labor friendly butt if necessary!! That is a promise. Many have dedicated the better part of their careers to this company only to be treated with such disregard??? Well go to hell yourself :angry: !!!! Bring it on!!!
For those of you who continue to listen to our blathering capt on why you should submit to yet more, bear this in mind. ALPA has their own agenda......ALPA's. Period. They need all groups to knuckle under so their "sharing of the pain" <_< can work out. I just cannot wait to see what the next bait-n-switch will be for the pilot group courtesy of the management. If you folks haven't figured it out yet then you get what you deserve.
If the Airbus arbitration is found in the company's favor then just shut it down. It will not even be worth turning the lights on should it come to that. So vote yes, stand on your head or whatever. I could care less. I can only control my vote. And it will be a resounding NO. At the very least I will be able to look at myself in the mirror each day knowing I attempted to stop this injustice.....that I did my part.
So my sheepish friends.....tell me.....what will YOU see in that mirror???
Market realities is a term used to justify exactly what you are witnessing at UAIR. It's called union busting. An all out assault on the wages and benefits of our employees. Something Jerry GlASS is no stranger to.
Right before your eyes this company is headed on the road that leads to the likes of Valujet. Everything on the cheap. Everything outsourced. And you know the rest of that story.
So tell me where does one draw the line? When is enough, enough? When do you hold the management accountable for their ineptitude and force them to actually run the airline?? It is apparent that many of you have not asked yourselves these questions. Yet you are so willing to open your wallets once again to these swindlers!!!!
For years the employees have given excellent suggestions to management in an effort to improve the operation. I can speak for the maintenance group and can cite many instances where hundreds of thousands of dollars in possible savings were simply IGNORED by our highly educated dunces. These were real issues that didn't require any great expenditure to implement. Nevertheless, it was still NO. And we are supposed to subsidize this sort of idiocy??? Get real already.
Threaten us all you want with your liquidation talk and outsourcing tactics. You can't kill us......were dead already. Get it??? If it takes a last stand type of showdown to defend what is rightfully ours then so be it. I for one will shove this job up your labor friendly butt if necessary!! That is a promise. Many have dedicated the better part of their careers to this company only to be treated with such disregard??? Well go to hell yourself :angry: !!!! Bring it on!!!
For those of you who continue to listen to our blathering capt on why you should submit to yet more, bear this in mind. ALPA has their own agenda......ALPA's. Period. They need all groups to knuckle under so their "sharing of the pain" <_< can work out. I just cannot wait to see what the next bait-n-switch will be for the pilot group courtesy of the management. If you folks haven't figured it out yet then you get what you deserve.
If the Airbus arbitration is found in the company's favor then just shut it down. It will not even be worth turning the lights on should it come to that. So vote yes, stand on your head or whatever. I could care less. I can only control my vote. And it will be a resounding NO. At the very least I will be able to look at myself in the mirror each day knowing I attempted to stop this injustice.....that I did my part.
So my sheepish friends.....tell me.....what will YOU see in that mirror???
USA320Pilot:
All of your scenario's rely on a big IF. IF the company wins the arbitration. This is not guaranteed, and based on my small understanding of the issue, they shouldn't win it (of course, OJ was guilty too, sometimes these things don't go the way you expect...)
In any event, the company is financing 6-7 Embraers per month with a financing agreement to which the company is not adhering (due to credit rating). Why would someone else loan US Airways more money when they cannot meet the terms of their financing agreement with GECAS (credit rating) or the ATSB guaranteed loans (unrestricted cash balance)?
(Thanks for that reminder Boeing Boy!)
Furthermore, the MD-95 was financed by MCDonnell-Douglas to TWA and ValuJet because they basically had no other customers for the MD-95 and no customers for the MD-11. Boeing inherited that problem (and renamed it the 717). Airbus, on the other hand, has lots of other potential customers for the A320 family. They just signed a deal with America West for 17 new jets (+ 5 used leased jets), and they always have the possibility of jetBlue or Frontier ordering more... And thats just in the USA. Airbus does not need US Airways like McDonnell-Douglas needed ValuJet and TWA.
Revisionist history will get you everywhere.
All of your scenario's rely on a big IF. IF the company wins the arbitration. This is not guaranteed, and based on my small understanding of the issue, they shouldn't win it (of course, OJ was guilty too, sometimes these things don't go the way you expect...)
In any event, the company is financing 6-7 Embraers per month with a financing agreement to which the company is not adhering (due to credit rating). Why would someone else loan US Airways more money when they cannot meet the terms of their financing agreement with GECAS (credit rating) or the ATSB guaranteed loans (unrestricted cash balance)?
(Thanks for that reminder Boeing Boy!)
Furthermore, the MD-95 was financed by MCDonnell-Douglas to TWA and ValuJet because they basically had no other customers for the MD-95 and no customers for the MD-11. Boeing inherited that problem (and renamed it the 717). Airbus, on the other hand, has lots of other potential customers for the A320 family. They just signed a deal with America West for 17 new jets (+ 5 used leased jets), and they always have the possibility of jetBlue or Frontier ordering more... And thats just in the USA. Airbus does not need US Airways like McDonnell-Douglas needed ValuJet and TWA.
Revisionist history will get you everywhere.
unit4clt said:
Sorry, but the bankruptcy judge's job is to protect the creditors first and foremost. Fair has little to do with it. His/her job is to decide if the "reorganization" plan has the best chance of getting money back in the creditors' pocket, or liquidation is a better bet.
The creditors have the upper hand. The bankruptcy judge is there to handle the details and make decisions about how the company continues to operate. He is the go-between for the creditors and company. Bankruptcy judges are also officially known as "referees," for good reason.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
Hope,
I'll give you my 2 cents worth....
First, I think the question is ALPA crossing a picket line is somewhat misplaced. Why? Because whatever other group struck, say the IAM, there would be members of that group that would cross the picket line. How many? I certainly don't have the answer to that question.
Now to the question at hand...
First, I doubt that the ALPA leadership (national, and certainly not the MEC) would issue a call to honor the picket line. That would ensure that most pilots (all, possibly) would cross the line. Without the call from the leadership I think another groups picket line would be viewed as "their" problem and not "ours".
Second, the urban myth (I presume) of $70K a year "cleaners" and $100K a year mechanics is alive and well among the pilot group. At least in some corners of ALPA, there is little sympathy (or downright animosity) for those seen as "sitting in the breakroom and making more than some pilots".
Now, on the general subject of strikes and picket lines...
I thought for years that a strike is not necessarily the best way to achieve an end - at least for pilots. As soon as pilots walk out of the cockpit we've given up most of the leverage. At that point we are dependent on management to decide it better to resolve the issues than it is to replace us.
Much better, as least to my way of thinking, is to remain in the cockpit where I control the "levers of power", both literally and figuritively. I control whether the flight is on time or late. I control whether the flight is operated efficiently or not. To some degree, I control whether the flight even operates or not.
Which brings us to an interesting point. There is more than one way to support a strike by another group. Of course the obvious method is to honor the picket line, at the obvious risk of penalties for doing so. The not so obvious is to subtly disrupt the operation by operating differently - the so-called "book operation
Given the level of "sympathy" I anticipate among the pilot group, a relative hand-full of pilots could have a disproportionate effect.
Jim
I'll give you my 2 cents worth....
First, I think the question is ALPA crossing a picket line is somewhat misplaced. Why? Because whatever other group struck, say the IAM, there would be members of that group that would cross the picket line. How many? I certainly don't have the answer to that question.
Now to the question at hand...
First, I doubt that the ALPA leadership (national, and certainly not the MEC) would issue a call to honor the picket line. That would ensure that most pilots (all, possibly) would cross the line. Without the call from the leadership I think another groups picket line would be viewed as "their" problem and not "ours".
Second, the urban myth (I presume) of $70K a year "cleaners" and $100K a year mechanics is alive and well among the pilot group. At least in some corners of ALPA, there is little sympathy (or downright animosity) for those seen as "sitting in the breakroom and making more than some pilots".
Now, on the general subject of strikes and picket lines...
I thought for years that a strike is not necessarily the best way to achieve an end - at least for pilots. As soon as pilots walk out of the cockpit we've given up most of the leverage. At that point we are dependent on management to decide it better to resolve the issues than it is to replace us.
Much better, as least to my way of thinking, is to remain in the cockpit where I control the "levers of power", both literally and figuritively. I control whether the flight is on time or late. I control whether the flight is operated efficiently or not. To some degree, I control whether the flight even operates or not.
Which brings us to an interesting point. There is more than one way to support a strike by another group. Of course the obvious method is to honor the picket line, at the obvious risk of penalties for doing so. The not so obvious is to subtly disrupt the operation by operating differently - the so-called "book operation
Given the level of "sympathy" I anticipate among the pilot group, a relative hand-full of pilots could have a disproportionate effect.
Jim
High Iron
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 495
- 0
Boeing Boy:
Second, the urban myth (I presume) of $70K a year "cleaners" and $100K a year mechanics is alive and well among the pilot group. At least in some corners of ALPA, there is little sympathy (or downright animosity) for those seen as "sitting in the breakroom and making more than some pilots".
Yes, that's an unfortunate angle; Attaching one's opinion to an extreme view to justify an opinion, and it's "dirty pool" debate-wise.
It's every bit as wrong as the ignorant idea that every pilot makes "a quarter mil a year to sit and push buttons" because the planes "fly themselves". Same with the bus driver angle. Not every mechanic makes 100K ( unless they want to live at the airport ) and not every pilot makes 300K a year ( very few in fact, if any at all anymore ) yet the urban legend persists, continually ressurected by those willing to extrapolate situations based on snapshots and heresay.
This happens in the corporate vs prole level as well, with the selective use of statistics: Companies in negotiations are glad to be quoted by inflating employee compensation figures with the "60 dollars and hour......with "in wages and benefits" added further on down, after the big figure has its impact. CEO compensation can be juggled down by not including not stock options and parachutes. The facts are what they are, no problem there, but it's the cherry-picking bit that's intellectually dishonest.
Second, the urban myth (I presume) of $70K a year "cleaners" and $100K a year mechanics is alive and well among the pilot group. At least in some corners of ALPA, there is little sympathy (or downright animosity) for those seen as "sitting in the breakroom and making more than some pilots".
Yes, that's an unfortunate angle; Attaching one's opinion to an extreme view to justify an opinion, and it's "dirty pool" debate-wise.
It's every bit as wrong as the ignorant idea that every pilot makes "a quarter mil a year to sit and push buttons" because the planes "fly themselves". Same with the bus driver angle. Not every mechanic makes 100K ( unless they want to live at the airport ) and not every pilot makes 300K a year ( very few in fact, if any at all anymore ) yet the urban legend persists, continually ressurected by those willing to extrapolate situations based on snapshots and heresay.
This happens in the corporate vs prole level as well, with the selective use of statistics: Companies in negotiations are glad to be quoted by inflating employee compensation figures with the "60 dollars and hour......with "in wages and benefits" added further on down, after the big figure has its impact. CEO compensation can be juggled down by not including not stock options and parachutes. The facts are what they are, no problem there, but it's the cherry-picking bit that's intellectually dishonest.
Jim, you did bring up some valid points. Yes you can cancel the flight in a heart beat or even have contract maintenance come out to look at something minor. One issue that is being over looked about the IAM, is Fleet Service. If the IAM-M was to strike, the ramp guys would also be required to honor their borthers strike. Again this could be done numerous ways which we will not get into but I guess you can imagine, one way...your weight and balance, it just doesnt get done leaving it up to the cockpit crew to either do or bring the aircraft back to the gate. Either way, it does not look good for U. I find it funny how CEO's have different views on how to fix a bad situation. U-TAKE FROM THE EMPLOYEES while DL looks to fix part of their problem with "customer service and amenities"
unit4clt said:
Remember, it is not the judge's option to be fair to employees, but the creditors in a Chapter 11 scenario. They could easily say we need this to be competitive long term. We tried to talk to the union but the IAM refused to talk to us. The judge most likely IMO isn't going to care how much you have given before, or how much anyone else gave. If the company and the creditors say this is what we need, that is what they are going to get one way or another.
High Iron said:
No, it is not. Ask any company in America, union or not, and the "wages and benefits" line is a big deal. Companies get hit with double digit percentage increases in health care costs every year. How long can they go on absorbing that kind of hit? When does it get to the point where they ask do we pass along costs, decline to give out pay raises, stop expanding, or worst of all, fire Joe to pay for benefits for Sally, Jim, and Bob?
Most labor actions today are not over pay rates, but benefits costs. Look at the Southern California Supermarket strike. The companies were still paying for the lion's share of benefits costs, while paying checkers to a top of scale pay rate of $20 per hour, plus time and half on weekends, shift differentials, and double time on holidays. A checker could make $60 an hour working a Sunday holiday.
A lot of people keep talking about overtime being posted constantly, they should just hire or recall people and pay them straight time to save money. No matter how grossly mismanaged a company is, they know exactly where to the overtime pay/benefit cost line is, and when it is cheaper to cross it.
N628au,
Do you recall what happened at UAL when the co went to the judge about those Mechanics? The mech group took basically the same percentage paycut as did the other groups.....till they came to an agreement with the copany!!! He DID NOT GIVE THEM AN extra 20percent cut.
Do you recall what happened at UAL when the co went to the judge about those Mechanics? The mech group took basically the same percentage paycut as did the other groups.....till they came to an agreement with the copany!!! He DID NOT GIVE THEM AN extra 20percent cut.
