Fyi - Dave Recorded His Weekly Msg Today

[USFlyer]

Siegel left an interesting message today. Basically he's blaming the union leadership for the delay in the business plan. He did confirm the intent to add 60 mainline aircraft, though.

 

[ClueByFour]

The hint is there that they won't do it without workrule changes.

I'll tell you this: If I were to be offered a chance to work for US (obviously in a nonunion capacity, as my skillset does not fall under an organized labor group on the property at US) or work at Wall-Mart, I'd be taking orders from the 😀 . This management team can't lead a camel to drink in the desert.

 

[flyguy121]

Interesting.... He said "we are on hold at this point because of the labor leadership and will have to spend the next few weeks looking at ALTERNATIVES to meeting our financing goals".
Rest assured those alternatives won't be pretty. He goes the finger pointing and remember who started it.

 

[cavalier]

Siegel left an interesting message today. Basically he's blaming the union leadership for the delay in the business plan. He did confirm the intent to add 60 mainline aircraft, though.

True sign of a leader. Blame the other guy for ones shortcomings. I know in the maintenance department this guy will get absolutely zero cooperation! He is actually loathed with comments such as: When we get a real CEO then we may have a chance, all he wants to do is downsize us into a RJ factory. He has no one's trust and no one believes he is capable of saving this airline. He has lost any respect he had left by relentlessly trying to screw us out of our airbus work when he started out saying we would keep it. He and not labor is at fault. This guy is like a pathological liar and in total denial that he is the problem.

 

[USFlyer]

So, curious ... if we can look past the blame game clearly evident in the message ... what do people think about his reasons for wanting to add 60 mainline aircraft? And, take the 279 + 60 + 85 EMB-170s (which are in essence slightly smaller F100s/DC-9s), we end up with a fleet of 424 planes. Isn't this what the fleet size was like four years ago? (Plus tack on the PSA CRJ-200s and CRJ-700s, we have an even bigger jet fleet.)

 

[PhillyFlyGuy]

"Fasten your seat belts folks looks like we are in for a bumpy ride"

 

[ClueByFour]

The truly funny thing about this, and something which would be worth looking into:

How many "relatively" new birds has US parked since 9/11? I'm talking 733/734/757/A32x and even MD-80s? It has to be close to 60.....

 

[CaptBud330]

Could someone possibly explain to me how they can honestly oppose productivity enhancements? If we have to work smarter, what's the problem?

 

[Light Years]

CaptBud330

Everyone would like to work smarter. This has been said for years. What management means by productivity enhancements is layoffs, outsourcing, and even elimination of work groups. This company has laid off 20,000 people. There are more furloughed flight attendants than working ones. Not everyone has the seniority to be an A330 captain. Where is the line drawn? Just how senior must one be to be the most junior at US Airways? 15, 20, 30 years?

:down:

 

[linemech]

Dave and his team have no one to blame but themselves for any delay in the yet to be seen business plan. The same labor groups that he has chosen to blame for his failures are the same groups that gave him everything he said he needed to turn the airline around.
It would appear that Daves true goal is to be a CEO of a company with no employees, since he has used every opportunity to contract his employees work out to the lowest bidder with total disregard for the collective bargaining agreements.


Who will he blame next ?

 

[ByTheBay]

Just a few Questions from the uniformed. Wouldn't 60 additional airframes pick up the slack created by productivity enhancements? Couldn't any new productivity enhancements be negotiated with no furlough language like ALPA's contract and the new bid system and other productivity changes? Could the company implement the enhancements and add aircraft and routes as enhancements kick in maintaining current headcount? I get from most of the posters on here that work for U, that the think the current model or way of doing business has had it. If thats the case isn't the only way of fixing it or competeing by prodcuing a lot more revenue with only margianlly higher cost? The only way I can see that happening is U finds some way of producing the number of ASM's with roughly the same head count as its LUV or other competitors. Somebody posted in a previous thread that the current managemnt stated the only way to remake the airline into a LCC was shed one of the narrowbody fleets, regionals, widebodies and over 60% of the workforce. I would think that as a current employee a growth plan, even if it meant productivity changes would be better than a downsizing or a remake into an LCC. Certainly the furloughed will never come back under that scenario. Under present cinditions the only chance they have is if U can find some way to compete and make money. Otherwise no matter what productivity clauses are held it won't matter for anyone.

I am just wondering what harm could be done by the Union leaderships hearing the plan and discussining it with their rank and file. I am sure the rank and file have the final say in changes per vote, right? Before I get flamed I am just a passenger who has always enjoyed the quality and serivice and typically flies where U has frequent service. I am just trying to make heads or tails of what is going on. Whatever happens, I hope U makes it. First for all the employees and their families and also because it is my preferred flying choice.

 

[a320av8r]

The problem is that we're working with the old Pennsylvania attitude.
The same one that put the steel mills and railroads under, the same one that has gangs running the ramp in PHL.
Its all about the NUMBER of jobs, not the QUALITY.

If you speak up you are summarily shot down.
No room for common sense.
We could work much smarter, not harder- but that would mean a new way of thinking.

NOT IN PENNSYLVANIA!

We've never done it that way before and we're sure as hell not going to start now. I'll let this company go under and then apply at a new carrier at 1/3 wages and no work rules first, but I'll have my pride!
:angry:

 

[robbedagain]

Just a bit curious: is that so-called dave seigel, the incompetent mgmt team he leads, is blaming each union for a different things or just for the company's position?

 

[cavalier]

The problem is that we're working with the old Pennsylvania attitude.
The same one that put the steel mills and railroads under, the same one that has gangs running the ramp in PHL.
Its all about the NUMBER of jobs, not the QUALITY.

If you speak up you are summarily shot down.
No room for common sense.
We could work much smarter, not harder- but that would mean a new way of thinking.

NOT IN PENNSYLVANIA!

We've never done it that way before and we're sure as hell not going to start now. I'll let this company go under and then apply at a new carrier at 1/3 wages and no work rules first, but I'll have my pride!
:angry:

For the record. What's your seniority number?

 

[PITbull]

CaptBud330

Everyone would like to work smarter. This has been said for years. What management means by productivity enhancements is layoffs, outsourcing, and even elimination of work groups. This company has laid off 20,000 people. There are more furloughed flight attendants than working ones. Not everyone has the seniority to be an A330 captain. Where is the line drawn? Just how senior must one be to be the most junior at US Airways? 15, 20, 30 years?

:down:

Light years,

You hit it "right on".