OHHH,,
If it's heard in more then 1 place, rumor's have proven to be true-
time will telll!!!!!!
If it's heard in more then 1 place, rumor's have proven to be true-
time will telll!!!!!!
Dave,dave,dave You Have Got To Be Kidding Me
- Thread starter Doc
- Start date
Dave Siegel constantly tells the union leadership that he is being recruited by headhunters, he has other job offers, and the airline's RJ and Mainline fleet financing is tied to his continued US Airways employment.
We have heard these same type of reports on and off during the past year.
In a Washington Times interview, Siegel told the newspaper he comitted to his 11-year old daughter the family would not move again until she graduated from high school. Unless Siegel finds alternate employment in the Washington area, I doubt he will leave the company, however, money talks.
Regards,
Chip
:unsure:
We have heard these same type of reports on and off during the past year.
In a Washington Times interview, Siegel told the newspaper he comitted to his 11-year old daughter the family would not move again until she graduated from high school. Unless Siegel finds alternate employment in the Washington area, I doubt he will leave the company, however, money talks.
Regards,
Chip
:unsure:
Robbedagain:
The proposed transaction is not a merger, but an asset sale and fragmentation, similar in scope to what United did to Pan Am.
In my opinion and apparently United ALPA as well, the United employees would transfer to US Airways to fly, maintain, and support the expanded operation.
That's why United ALPA changed its Merger and Fragmentation Policy from the egregious "pre-nuptial" clause to ALPA Merger & Fragmentation Policy. The United MEC knows their company could be "splintered" and changed their seniority language to try and protect their members.
In regard to antitrust issues, with United in bankruptcy and up to this point unable to obtain exit financing, the Justice Department regulations permit an asset transfer regardless of antitrust issues if the carrier could fail. Therefore, in my opinion, Justice would take the same position with a United - US Airways deal that they did with American - TWA and not object to any transaction.
From a business perspective, the UCT or a derivative could strengthen both companies’ balance sheets and permit them to independently operate and help obtain sustained profitability.
Regards,
Chip
h34r:
The proposed transaction is not a merger, but an asset sale and fragmentation, similar in scope to what United did to Pan Am.
In my opinion and apparently United ALPA as well, the United employees would transfer to US Airways to fly, maintain, and support the expanded operation.
That's why United ALPA changed its Merger and Fragmentation Policy from the egregious "pre-nuptial" clause to ALPA Merger & Fragmentation Policy. The United MEC knows their company could be "splintered" and changed their seniority language to try and protect their members.
In regard to antitrust issues, with United in bankruptcy and up to this point unable to obtain exit financing, the Justice Department regulations permit an asset transfer regardless of antitrust issues if the carrier could fail. Therefore, in my opinion, Justice would take the same position with a United - US Airways deal that they did with American - TWA and not object to any transaction.
From a business perspective, the UCT or a derivative could strengthen both companies’ balance sheets and permit them to independently operate and help obtain sustained profitability.
Regards,
Chip
h34r:A comparison of UA's situation to that of the former TWA is about as accurate as comparing a firecracker to a 100 Mega Ton Nuclear Weapon
Come on Chip , How far do you entend to carry this flightless fantasy?
Keep in mind , I have everything to lose in this crap shoot , just like thousands of others do...but if I had to place bets on whom is going to survive the long haul between U and UA....the money would be on UA hands down.
Siegel isn't impressing anyone lately...I could care less what's tied to his being the CEO. The ATSB Money is tied to the company that's still in dire need of an actual leader...not a divestor and disenfranchiser.
Until our Harvard friend decides to try to win back the employee's? He's gonna have added disgruntled folks to deal with...I'm sure the MAA refugees will be a happy bunch ......NOT !!!!
Come on Chip , How far do you entend to carry this flightless fantasy?
Keep in mind , I have everything to lose in this crap shoot , just like thousands of others do...but if I had to place bets on whom is going to survive the long haul between U and UA....the money would be on UA hands down.
Siegel isn't impressing anyone lately...I could care less what's tied to his being the CEO. The ATSB Money is tied to the company that's still in dire need of an actual leader...not a divestor and disenfranchiser.
Until our Harvard friend decides to try to win back the employee's? He's gonna have added disgruntled folks to deal with...I'm sure the MAA refugees will be a happy bunch ......NOT !!!!
So what you are saying is based on Dave's honesty, integrity and history of doing exactly what he says he will.Chip Munn said:
Ok Chip, if you believe anything that guy says then you have enough faith to move a mountain.
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
He sure hasn't objected to making 20,000+ employees and ex-employees uproot their families. Also, with his leadership, there may be another 25,000 that are forced to change careers and/or move. We can only hope that the headhunters have a position for a failed airline CEO!Chip Munn said:
Chip,Chip Munn said:
What have you been smoking? There is no way the US unions would allow UA people to come over while they still have their own on furlough, just like I would not expect UA people to allow US people to come over while they have people on furlough.
ClueByFour
Veteran
In the defense of poor performance versus even worse performance, Mullin has not yet had the chaper 11 hammer with which to beat his labor and debt costs down. Dave-O had that, and still can't make money.ITRADE said:
ClueByFour
Veteran
This is the same guy who told ALPA that the first round of concessions was enough, told the IAM membership he was not going to outsource maintenance, told Roddey that US was satisfied with the PIT leases, and so forth.Chip Munn said:
And you think it is prudent to believe him that he is in high demand?
I suspect that the only tie between his employment and the RJ financing is the standard clause in many SEC filings and loan terms that accounts for the loss of any of the top executive ranks as a material event that can impact financial performance.
I have said it before and will repeat: hammering out two billion in cost savings with the aid of Chaper 11 is not an impressive accomplishment for a CEO. Combined with the lack of operational acument and the clear lack of revenue improvement from the current business plan is clearly demonstrating a general lack of production from the exexcutive suite.
Chip,
What makes you think Dave will get to leave on his own terms? At some point the BOD is going to realize that he has become a detriment and not an asset. I promised my daughter that she could graduate from the high school she is currently attending. Since good ol' Dave closed my station, I get to commute 1200 miles to see her.
What makes you think Dave will get to leave on his own terms? At some point the BOD is going to realize that he has become a detriment and not an asset. I promised my daughter that she could graduate from the high school she is currently attending. Since good ol' Dave closed my station, I get to commute 1200 miles to see her.
I heard a rumor this week that supports that thought. Dr. Bronner asked Dave to come down to Alabama to talk. Dave begged off for one reason or another. Dr. Bronner got on an airplane and went to Crystal City to see Dave. Dave snuck out the back door.Mike W said:
Maybe the BOD is wondering if Dave is worth having around if he can't eek out a profit when others can, given the concessions USAirways enjoys. Maybe the BOD is beginning to realize that Dave just cannot manage an airline, and something needs to be done to address that crisis. It's very obvious to all the employees, most of our frequent flyers and many airline analysts.
It's time to give Dave the boot and maybe, just maybe, the BOD is coming around to the same conclusion. Remember, this BOD is a totally different group than the one which recurited Dave in February, 2002. So, firing Dave would not be egg on their faces; it just may save the comp-any.
robbedagain
Veteran
If that rumor is true. and hopefully it is, what are the chances that we as employees would be able to get at least half if not all of the dough back that the thieves of ccy had stolen from us? And what are the chances also of may be getting some if not all stations back to mainline use including mainline pay and recalling the furloughed employees back?
Dea Certe
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 889
- 0
Maybe Dave's busy practicing his Halloween costume for this year. The Invisible Man?nycbusdriver said:
Seriously, I think the whole team needs to be reconsidered. Jerry Glass has done major damage to the work force. Ben Baldanza has alienated our best customers. We can't seem to get a grip on the fare structure, so I'm hoping we will be open to hiring some creative minds instead of the usual set-in-stone group we've had.
I'm deeply disappointed in Dave S. I'd really hoped he would bring a fresh insight to US Airways management. Labor has more than stepped up the plate with cost savings. It's time to find ways to generate revenue. I would suggest rationalizing the fares. I've seen some very strange routings our customers are forced to take because the non-stops are just too high for their travel departments to allow.
Here's an idea: Why not just try some sane fares on our highest-priced markets? I believe more business people would fly them rather than say, going PIT-CLT-PHL. Would this make sense?
Dea
