I would love to email the judge to ask why management was allowed to steal 35 million dollars? Isn''t taking money when you know you are days away from bankruptcy akin to insider trading?
Does anyone know how to email the judge presiding over the bankruptcy???
- Thread starter skygirl
- Start date
no buying u stocks before the merger between U and UAL was announced would be insider trading.
and no you cant e-mail the judge see the definition of judge you wanna complain about someone e-mail a congressman but then again that may do more harm than good if you e-mail the wrong one
and no you cant e-mail the judge see the definition of judge you wanna complain about someone e-mail a congressman but then again that may do more harm than good if you e-mail the wrong one
I think the best you could do here would be to file an amicus brief (friend of the court brief) proposing the $35 million be taken back.
There are enough lawyers on this board who can explain how that would work. I assume such a thing can be done in BK proceedings. There may also be a more direct motion or brief that interested parties (employees and furloughees) could file as a class.
-Airlineorphan
There are enough lawyers on this board who can explain how that would work. I assume such a thing can be done in BK proceedings. There may also be a more direct motion or brief that interested parties (employees and furloughees) could file as a class.
-Airlineorphan
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
I guess the big question is, how much of the $35 million will the judge and possibly some congressmen and senators want to give back? We may find out Friday.
delldude
Veteran
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/26/2003 6:57:23 AM skygirl wrote:
I would love to email the judge to ask why management was allowed to steal 35 million dollars? Isn't taking money when you know you are days away from bankruptcy akin to insider trading?
----------------
[/blockquote]
ask ken from enron...he'll know.
----------------
On 2/26/2003 6:57:23 AM skygirl wrote:
I would love to email the judge to ask why management was allowed to steal 35 million dollars? Isn't taking money when you know you are days away from bankruptcy akin to insider trading?
----------------
[/blockquote]
ask ken from enron...he'll know.
PITbull
Veteran
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/26/2003 4:23:02 PM PineyBob wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/26/2003 11
28 AM Pacemaker wrote:
US Airways management may look foolish, evasive, and downright perjurous on the witness stand, but the judge is there to protect the interests of US Airways' creditors, and as such he will in all probability give Mr. Siegel what he wants.
----------------
[/blockquote
That is the key thing many on this board tend to forget. Creditors have standing and that IS who the judge is there to protect. Siegel will probably get what he wants and the short term problem of keeping the doors open will be solved.
But what of the long term damage to morale and employee relations going forward? All I think of is that old saying "be careful what you ask for"
----------------
[/blockquote]
Damage to employee relations is HUGE. I would think that our Labor Relations department would be putting into action some "damage control", if that is even possible.
And no matter how or what they do to help this cause, it may be futile, IF THEY DONT EITHER RETRAIN LOWER MANAGEMENT ON PEOPLE SKILLS OR REEDUCATE THEM ON HOW TO MANGAGE EMPLOYEES WITH RESPECT. They don't have a clue on how to resolve even simple issues that they should be able to decide. It's as though they can't make a move without some VP in Labor making the decison. They appear to be afraid to make a decison, and obviously, they have been given no "autonomy" to do so. I have also seen when they are given the ability to make a dicision, they are being tested by upper mangement on whether the discipline if any is not punitive enough.
That's the problem right now, and it is so ongoing how disrectful lower managemet is to their "rank and flile".
These managers are the front liners in dealing with daily issues regarding thier groups. They need to lighten up.
I have made many attempts to convey this to Labor Relations Dept. that they do not have a "clue" on how to relate to labor. Hopefully, this issue alone will at the very least "enlighten" those folks and all their VPs that sit in Labor Relations.
----------------
On 2/26/2003 4:23:02 PM PineyBob wrote:
[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/26/2003 11
28 AM Pacemaker wrote: US Airways management may look foolish, evasive, and downright perjurous on the witness stand, but the judge is there to protect the interests of US Airways' creditors, and as such he will in all probability give Mr. Siegel what he wants.
----------------
[/blockquote
That is the key thing many on this board tend to forget. Creditors have standing and that IS who the judge is there to protect. Siegel will probably get what he wants and the short term problem of keeping the doors open will be solved.
But what of the long term damage to morale and employee relations going forward? All I think of is that old saying "be careful what you ask for"
----------------
[/blockquote]
Damage to employee relations is HUGE. I would think that our Labor Relations department would be putting into action some "damage control", if that is even possible.
And no matter how or what they do to help this cause, it may be futile, IF THEY DONT EITHER RETRAIN LOWER MANAGEMENT ON PEOPLE SKILLS OR REEDUCATE THEM ON HOW TO MANGAGE EMPLOYEES WITH RESPECT. They don't have a clue on how to resolve even simple issues that they should be able to decide. It's as though they can't make a move without some VP in Labor making the decison. They appear to be afraid to make a decison, and obviously, they have been given no "autonomy" to do so. I have also seen when they are given the ability to make a dicision, they are being tested by upper mangement on whether the discipline if any is not punitive enough.
That's the problem right now, and it is so ongoing how disrectful lower managemet is to their "rank and flile".
These managers are the front liners in dealing with daily issues regarding thier groups. They need to lighten up.
I have made many attempts to convey this to Labor Relations Dept. that they do not have a "clue" on how to relate to labor. Hopefully, this issue alone will at the very least "enlighten" those folks and all their VPs that sit in Labor Relations.
Similar threads
