IAM Fleet Service topic
- Thread starter Edward
- Start date
- Status
freedom
Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2006
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 274
sorry , i haven't slept in awhile , what i meant to say when i responsed to tim's post is that he is UNDERSTATING the facts , not twisting them ...
Look we have 3 billion in cash , or less now i think .. at the current rate of burn our doors would have to shut in three years give or take a few months ..
If the union president is saying our doors will close tomorrow then that's wrong , look to get this sorted out , just watch the 2008 Q report .
OIL JUST HIT A NEW ALL TIME HIGH
read more on cnn.com in the bussiness section .
Look we have 3 billion in cash , or less now i think .. at the current rate of burn our doors would have to shut in three years give or take a few months ..
If the union president is saying our doors will close tomorrow then that's wrong , look to get this sorted out , just watch the 2008 Q report .
OIL JUST HIT A NEW ALL TIME HIGH
read more on cnn.com in the bussiness section .
3 Months Ended 3 Months Ended Percent
March 31, 2008 March 31, 2007 Change
-------------- -------------- -------
Operating revenues:
Mainline passenger $ 1,953 $ 1,906 2.5
Express passenger 657 609 7.9 Cargo 36 37 (0.8)
Other 194 180 7.1
-------------- --------------
Total operating revenues 2,840 2,732 3.9
-------------- --------------
Operating expenses:
Aircraft fuel and related
taxes 823 550 49.5 Loss (gain) on fuel hedging
instruments, net:
Realized (81) 36 nm
Unrealized (36) (90) (60.1)
Salaries and related costs 563 527 6.7
I don't think the argument for voting yes on this should be about the economy or fuel. Unions have negotiated with companies for years and the ability to make money as a company drives what they are willing to pay, not the current economic situation.
For instance, if US AIR was in a period where their product was not what people wanted anymore then that would dictate what the company could or could not pay its employees. Look at defunct companies like Montgomery Ward's etc. Their merchandise sucked and over a period of several years they declined. Negotiating a contract under a condition like that would have been difficult with the likelihood of cuts rather than raises.
If you look above you will see our revenues for the first three months were $95 million more than last year. Our salaries and related costs were up $36 million for the same period. Our fuel was up $273 million. If fuel remained the same as last year the company had $59 million more potential profit. Experts are divided on where fuel will be in the future but if the bubble bursts on oil like it did in housing US AIR would be rolling in the dough.
However, still a yes on this POS mo-fo, based on earlier reasons.
Respectfully,
P. REZ
March 31, 2008 March 31, 2007 Change
-------------- -------------- -------
Operating revenues:
Mainline passenger $ 1,953 $ 1,906 2.5
Express passenger 657 609 7.9 Cargo 36 37 (0.8)
Other 194 180 7.1
-------------- --------------
Total operating revenues 2,840 2,732 3.9
-------------- --------------
Operating expenses:
Aircraft fuel and related
taxes 823 550 49.5 Loss (gain) on fuel hedging
instruments, net:
Realized (81) 36 nm
Unrealized (36) (90) (60.1)
Salaries and related costs 563 527 6.7
I don't think the argument for voting yes on this should be about the economy or fuel. Unions have negotiated with companies for years and the ability to make money as a company drives what they are willing to pay, not the current economic situation.
For instance, if US AIR was in a period where their product was not what people wanted anymore then that would dictate what the company could or could not pay its employees. Look at defunct companies like Montgomery Ward's etc. Their merchandise sucked and over a period of several years they declined. Negotiating a contract under a condition like that would have been difficult with the likelihood of cuts rather than raises.
If you look above you will see our revenues for the first three months were $95 million more than last year. Our salaries and related costs were up $36 million for the same period. Our fuel was up $273 million. If fuel remained the same as last year the company had $59 million more potential profit. Experts are divided on where fuel will be in the future but if the bubble bursts on oil like it did in housing US AIR would be rolling in the dough.
However, still a yes on this POS mo-fo, based on earlier reasons.
Respectfully,
P. REZ
giantfan
Senior
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2008
- Messages
- 306
- Reaction score
- 0
Look, I have read some vaild arguments to vote no on this T/A....especially from o-man,roa, & dirt. I respect what they are saying and understand it. However, there are others who seem to be promoting an agenda, with a hint of self-serving and a questionable motive.
The bottom line for me folks is I think the FAT LADY IS SINGING....on this T/A
September contract=crappy
January offer= crappy (union walked away)
this T/A= crappy
There is no history whatsoever of improving this T/A....both the co. & union have said....this is it...
I for one do not want to continue making bk wages for the next umpteen years.....
Vote yes...get a little something and then fight from here on....
The bottom line for me folks is I think the FAT LADY IS SINGING....on this T/A
September contract=crappy
January offer= crappy (union walked away)
this T/A= crappy
There is no history whatsoever of improving this T/A....both the co. & union have said....this is it...
I for one do not want to continue making bk wages for the next umpteen years.....
Vote yes...get a little something and then fight from here on....
Look, I have read some vaild arguments to vote no on this T/A....especially from o-man,roa, & dirt. I respect what they are saying and understand it. However, there are others who seem to be promoting an agenda, with a hint of self-serving and a questionable motive.
The bottom line for me folks is I think the FAT LADY IS SINGING....on this T/A
September contract=crappy
January offer= crappy (union walked away)
this T/A= crappy
There is no history whatsoever of improving this T/A....both the co. & union have said....this is it...
I for one do not want to continue making bk wages for the next umpteen years.....
Vote yes...get a little something and then fight from here on....
So thats it just give up and take it, nice answer. I say don't quit now vote "NO" and show some moxy
freedom
Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2006
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 274
you want to show some moxy , how about common sense ... do you realise how much of a slashing your going to get over on the East coast ? this company is looking to save MONEY , your two stations PHL and CLT are some of the most senior stations , by reducing either one dramatically this company will be able to save BIG , now PHL can only be cut so much because they make some real money , but CLT on the other hand , you had better hope if your working there that your not just senior , but VERY senior
This TA is going to split the East between very senior/topped out , and everyone else who's not topped out or very senior ... it will also align your class two stations with us in the west and your smaller class one stations that are good targets for gettin taken out in a merger ...
What good is the united pay and contract if many of you will never be able to see it ? Look at it this way boys and girls , we vote this one in and you get furloughed , in a few years you'll be able to come back and make united money vs not coming back at all ....
You all need to weight job security vs united money ...
If you vote YES , then you can rest assured that someday , somewhere you'll be able to come back and make united money. Why gamble everything on the off hope you'll be left standing after the storm passes .. take the sure bet ...
robbedagain
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2003
- Messages
- 11,125
- Reaction score
- 2,676
gf, freedom, in our station, we had some agents who had 30 yrs even 40 yr plus who got nailed with the 60 day rule and i know some of those agents like myself who would like nothing more than to return to mainline Now tell me, IS THERE AN EXCUSE to HAVE THE 60 DAY RULE? Absolutely NOT!!!I guarantee you that if the POS TA goes thru, those 19 cities will be gone in months and those agents will be affected by it that is how mgmt operates
Get real we all know that with the merger there will be layoffs, I started in PIT been furloughed worked in GSO and no longer has ramp but I'm still working after 20 years. Voting yes wont save layoffs
pit_till_death
Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2007
- Messages
- 89
- Reaction score
- 0
Look, I have read some vaild arguments to vote no on this T/A....especially from o-man,roa, & dirt. I respect what they are saying and understand it. However, there are others who seem to be promoting an agenda, with a hint of self-serving and a questionable motive.
The bottom line for me folks is I think the FAT LADY IS SINGING....on this T/A
September contract=crappy
January offer= crappy (union walked away)
this T/A= crappy
There is no history whatsoever of improving this T/A....both the co. & union have said....this is it...
I for one do not want to continue making bk wages for the next umpteen years.....
Vote yes...get a little something and then fight from here on....
gf
Let's say you go to a car dealership to buy, yes, you guessed it, a car. They have 3 cars available---
1. a crappy car
2. a crappy car
3. a crappy car
Are you gonna buy a crappy car just because it has a spare tire, or are you gonna keep your crappy car a little while longer until they get a newer one on the lot? You know they're gonna call you when the newer one comes in, because they need your business, and they know you need a new car. C'mon g-man, hang in there a while longer and let's get this thing done right.
freedom
Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2006
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 274
do not twist my words , you know what i meant , you've been laid off , well i bet it wasn't under the 60 day rule , you and i know the sixty day rule is a whole nother world ..
Every single one of you now employeed , look at robbed , look at him , that could and will be you if we don't take this 60 day rule out of comission .. this is why you MUST vote yes .
robbed , my west pepople are educated enough to know that your 60 day rule will not effect them ... keep trying thou ...
Tim Nelson
Veteran
District Force agrees also. Interesting in that the pilots haven't even started negotiating, yet you have us in chapter 7 with a simple rejection. If you don't mind me asking, what beliefs could come to this conclusion?
regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago
Black Magic
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2008
- Messages
- 942
- Reaction score
- 552
I like the analogy...Good way to put it.
JoeDirt
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2007
- Messages
- 840
- Reaction score
- 3
I don't buy this for a minute. First of all apparently you and District Force are the only two that believe this line of BS. If there were even the remotest possibility of this being the case not only would more people be worried but you would have members of this forum that belong to other work groups on here begging us to take this T/A. Try again because your scare tactics are pretty weak.
Tim Nelson
Veteran
Huh?
Let me see if I got this right. Give up protections with the CIC, which Hemenway clearly needs. Give up scope for your very own beloved. So we can get united's money and make them money?
Please clarify.
One thing is guaranteed freedom and can't be denied. We vote this contract in and none of us will see United pay and benefits for the next decade. I think you seen this play out before when PHX voted in their last contract. What were you guys thinking? No wonder why the west is in this horrible shape. Didn't you realize that NO airline would want to open your contract up in a merger? And what makes you think United is any different? Do you think Canale will share those United profits with you?
Even after your contract was up in 2005, US AIRWAYS had no intention of negotiating your contract away since it was the cheapest contract they ever saw and you all voted your voice away and can't do anything about it unless the east votes your way. PHX has been reduced to meeting in the middle of the ramp because management doesn't have to listen to you. I dont' want that to be all of us if this contract passes. Management won't have to deal with us for the next decade and we will continue to fall backwards in industry pay and benefits.
This will be America West ramp Part 2 and we would end up being used as leverage against United much like PHX is being used as leverage against us. Leverage in the sense that Hemenway knows you guys are so hungry in PHX that you'll go for crumbs. He can count on you and part of that plays in to his calculations of shoving this at us. I think he was wrong though and played it too close since LAS and other west cities have been bitten once in 2001 and have learned.
Now, except for the names and a few other changes, you're asking the east to make the same mistake you guys made back then where you DID NOT HAVE A VOICE until US AIRWAYS needed the east CIC due to this merger?
I may be wrong but I am not convinced that even LAS agrees with you on this, let alone PHL and CLT.
regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman, 1487, Chicago
orioleman
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2007
- Messages
- 1,669
- Reaction score
- 64
freedom,
"OIL HITS ALL TIME HIGH"
Derek J. Kerr
''For the first quarter, we had 50% of our fuel consumption hedged, which resulted in a realized gain of $81 million, or $0.28 per gallon. Fuel conservation continues to be a top priority for us in 2008. As I said previously, we are in the midst of an aircraft renewal program and we continue to implement where feasible, fuel conservation strategies such as arrival fuel, APU burn, and adding wing lifts to our 757 fleet.
In terms of fuel hedging, we continue to actively increase our hedge positions, even in this environment. We have 56% hedged in the second quarter, 41% in the third, and 26% in the fourth, for 44% overall for the year. The second quarter fuel hedges are capped at $28 per barrel, or $2.62 per gallon. The caps increase throughout the year and top out at $85 per barrel in the fourth quarter. The value of our unrealized fuel hedges in place at the end of the quarter was $157 million.
Moving forward, we expect non-fuel unit costs to increase at a much slower rate, despite the reduction in capacity.
Now I'll talk about the balance sheet. We finished the quarter with $2.8 billion of total cash and investments, of which $2.4 billion was unrestricted. The unrestricted balance does include $295 million of auction rate securities that currently are reflected as non-current assets on our balance sheet.''
GOOD THING US HEDGES THERE FUEL . my god you sound just like Uncle AL ,
the sky is falling . the sky is falling . Please vote yes so I can merge and jump out with my GOLDEN parachute.
"OIL HITS ALL TIME HIGH"
Derek J. Kerr
''For the first quarter, we had 50% of our fuel consumption hedged, which resulted in a realized gain of $81 million, or $0.28 per gallon. Fuel conservation continues to be a top priority for us in 2008. As I said previously, we are in the midst of an aircraft renewal program and we continue to implement where feasible, fuel conservation strategies such as arrival fuel, APU burn, and adding wing lifts to our 757 fleet.
In terms of fuel hedging, we continue to actively increase our hedge positions, even in this environment. We have 56% hedged in the second quarter, 41% in the third, and 26% in the fourth, for 44% overall for the year. The second quarter fuel hedges are capped at $28 per barrel, or $2.62 per gallon. The caps increase throughout the year and top out at $85 per barrel in the fourth quarter. The value of our unrealized fuel hedges in place at the end of the quarter was $157 million.
Moving forward, we expect non-fuel unit costs to increase at a much slower rate, despite the reduction in capacity.
Now I'll talk about the balance sheet. We finished the quarter with $2.8 billion of total cash and investments, of which $2.4 billion was unrestricted. The unrestricted balance does include $295 million of auction rate securities that currently are reflected as non-current assets on our balance sheet.''
GOOD THING US HEDGES THERE FUEL . my god you sound just like Uncle AL ,
the sky is falling . the sky is falling . Please vote yes so I can merge and jump out with my GOLDEN parachute.
- Status
