LOOKS LIKE THE LIQUIDATE THREAT IS BACK
- Thread starter cat 111
- Start date
PineyBob,
If SWA is the business model that we should have been striving for,then this would have been the opportunity to impliment it.Unfortunately,Dave and co. let the chance slip away.You''re right,we do feel cheated and lied to.You''re wrong when you say we won''t be willing to give much more.I think the overwhelming majority of us are not willing to give ANY more.If the threat is liquidation,then bring your chains and padlocks and get it over with.
If SWA is the business model that we should have been striving for,then this would have been the opportunity to impliment it.Unfortunately,Dave and co. let the chance slip away.You''re right,we do feel cheated and lied to.You''re wrong when you say we won''t be willing to give much more.I think the overwhelming majority of us are not willing to give ANY more.If the threat is liquidation,then bring your chains and padlocks and get it over with.
A320 Driver
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Messages
- 3,358
- Reaction score
- 2,319
----------------
On 5/26/2003 11:40:40 AM Mike W wrote:
PineyBob,
If SWA is the business model that we should have been striving for,then this would have been the opportunity to impliment it.Unfortunately,Dave and co. let the chance slip away.You''re right,we do feel cheated and lied to.You''re wrong when you say we won''t be willing to give much more.I think the overwhelming majority of us are not willing to give ANY more.If the threat is liquidation,then bring your chains and padlocks and get it over with.
----------------
On 5/26/2003 11:40:40 AM Mike W wrote:
PineyBob,
If SWA is the business model that we should have been striving for,then this would have been the opportunity to impliment it.Unfortunately,Dave and co. let the chance slip away.You''re right,we do feel cheated and lied to.You''re wrong when you say we won''t be willing to give much more.I think the overwhelming majority of us are not willing to give ANY more.If the threat is liquidation,then bring your chains and padlocks and get it over with.
----------------
I couldn''t agree more. Fix the revenue side or let it die, but don''t dare approach me for another giveback. This management has proven that no matter what we sign, it won''t be honored anyway. I''m not going to be herding folks trying to get the metal moved either. I''ve used my cell phone for the last time trying to coordinate a flight. It goes when it goes. I didn''t always have an attitude...I got it from MANAGEMENT!!!!!
A320 Driver
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
There is no question the mature hub and spoke airlines continue to remain under economic stress.
The soft economy, war jitters, pre-war fuel prices, terrorist jitters, security costs, and the massive decline in international airline traffic have all provided miserable fundamentals.
However, it appears we have hit a bottom, and without another "shock event", I believe better financial days are ahead.
Last week UBS Warburg airline analyst Sam Buttrick said he now expects U.S. airlines'' to report losses totaling $7 billion in 2003, slimmer than a prior estimate of $7.8 billion.
In the case of US, the company has nearly $2 billion in liquidity, RSA is on the hook for $315 million, and the retirement fund would be just another creditor if US files for bankruptcy again. How likely is it Bronner would allow that to happen with his DIP status?
Let''s not forget US will receive about $35 million in savings from reduced security fees, fuel prices have dropped from $1.05 to 72 cents per gallon, strong summer traffic has returned, the company says its UA code share revenue is exceeding expectations, the airline continues to add new RJ flying each month (that will accelerate to 7 RJs per month entering the network for the next 3 years), the company has the 5% wage deferral in place for the next 16 months that provides about $8 million per month in cash flow relief, and the Lufthansa and Star alliance will come on-line later this year.
In my opinion, Siegel''s liquidation threat has more to do with ALPA''s efforts to restore its Defined Benefit Plan, the company to skirt around the ALPA scope clause to deploy the CRJ-705, or to scare Allegheny County and the State of Pennsylvania into providing concessions.
Siegel uses the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt tactic much like Stephen Wolf and because of the fundamental factors listed above, I believe Siegel''s threats are more of let''s work together guys or more appropriately do what I want, or I''ll shut the airline down.
However, I can tell you this...virtually all of the ALPA members do not buy the current threat.
Best regards,
Chip
The soft economy, war jitters, pre-war fuel prices, terrorist jitters, security costs, and the massive decline in international airline traffic have all provided miserable fundamentals.
However, it appears we have hit a bottom, and without another "shock event", I believe better financial days are ahead.
Last week UBS Warburg airline analyst Sam Buttrick said he now expects U.S. airlines'' to report losses totaling $7 billion in 2003, slimmer than a prior estimate of $7.8 billion.
In the case of US, the company has nearly $2 billion in liquidity, RSA is on the hook for $315 million, and the retirement fund would be just another creditor if US files for bankruptcy again. How likely is it Bronner would allow that to happen with his DIP status?
Let''s not forget US will receive about $35 million in savings from reduced security fees, fuel prices have dropped from $1.05 to 72 cents per gallon, strong summer traffic has returned, the company says its UA code share revenue is exceeding expectations, the airline continues to add new RJ flying each month (that will accelerate to 7 RJs per month entering the network for the next 3 years), the company has the 5% wage deferral in place for the next 16 months that provides about $8 million per month in cash flow relief, and the Lufthansa and Star alliance will come on-line later this year.
In my opinion, Siegel''s liquidation threat has more to do with ALPA''s efforts to restore its Defined Benefit Plan, the company to skirt around the ALPA scope clause to deploy the CRJ-705, or to scare Allegheny County and the State of Pennsylvania into providing concessions.
Siegel uses the Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt tactic much like Stephen Wolf and because of the fundamental factors listed above, I believe Siegel''s threats are more of let''s work together guys or more appropriately do what I want, or I''ll shut the airline down.
However, I can tell you this...virtually all of the ALPA members do not buy the current threat.
Best regards,
Chip
N305AS
Advanced
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 133
- Reaction score
- 0
----------------
On 5/26/2003 2:32:27 PM TomBascom wrote:
Let''s not forget US will receive about $35 million in savings from reduced security fees...
Let''s be truthful here. The airlines are not "receiving savings" -- they''re raising prices as the government eliminates these fees.
It wasn''t too long ago that the airlines whined and moaned to Congress and anyone else who might listen about how these add on fees were depressing sales by raising ticket prices beyond consumers pain threshold and how eliminating these fees would stimulate travel and fuel a recovery. In fact, if memory serves, Capt. Munn wrote supportive commentary along those lines. Although perhaps those were simply quotes and I''ve inferred too much... In any event now we see that the real problem the airlines had with the fees is that they were jealous that they weren''t collecting them themselves.
----------------
On 5/26/2003 2:32:27 PM TomBascom wrote:
Let''s not forget US will receive about $35 million in savings from reduced security fees...
Let''s be truthful here. The airlines are not "receiving savings" -- they''re raising prices as the government eliminates these fees.
It wasn''t too long ago that the airlines whined and moaned to Congress and anyone else who might listen about how these add on fees were depressing sales by raising ticket prices beyond consumers pain threshold and how eliminating these fees would stimulate travel and fuel a recovery. In fact, if memory serves, Capt. Munn wrote supportive commentary along those lines. Although perhaps those were simply quotes and I''ve inferred too much... In any event now we see that the real problem the airlines had with the fees is that they were jealous that they weren''t collecting them themselves.
----------------
Tom, you''ve missed the point. For many price-sensitive customers, those added costs represented the difference between flying and staying home.
So when customers called on that advertised $198.00 roundtrip which suddenly became $225.00 when all the taxes are added, many of them suddenly lost interest and didn''t book.
Of course, each of those lost customers directly translates into lost revenue for the airlines. The fees being reduced or eliminated will therefore benefit all carriers.
All six major hub & spoke carriers are saddled with arcane and antiquated work rules!
Yes, and that''s the source of their problems, not the hub and spoke system itself. All too many armchair CEOs out there are ready to proclaim the hub and spoke system dead, when in actuality it''s highly profitable when done in the right fashion.
Also, please allow me to point out that AirTran, a profitable airline, is a hub and spoke carrier.
Let''s not forget US will receive about $35 million in savings from reduced security fees...
Let''s be truthful here. The airlines are not "receiving savings" -- they''re raising prices as the government eliminates these fees.
It wasn''t too long ago that the airlines whined and moaned to Congress and anyone else who might listen about how these add on fees were depressing sales by raising ticket prices beyond consumers pain threshold and how eliminating these fees would stimulate travel and fuel a recovery. In fact, if memory serves, Capt. Munn wrote supportive commentary along those lines. Although perhaps those were simply quotes and I''ve inferred too much... In any event now we see that the real problem the airlines had with the fees is that they were jealous that they weren''t collecting them themselves.
fatherabraham
Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2002
- Messages
- 814
- Reaction score
- 354
Chip,
Good to see ya back posting.
Bob,
Ditto to the 2 post below yours. My attitude is He## NO to any and all changes to my contract till it expires! On top of that I will participate in any and all legal job actions to oust this Mgt team and send them hiking with the ZERO compensation rewards they deserve for not honoring the horrible contracts they imposed ( only thru BK ) on us.
My work ethic for this airline is lower than I ever thought possible.
Good to see ya back posting.
Bob,
Ditto to the 2 post below yours. My attitude is He## NO to any and all changes to my contract till it expires! On top of that I will participate in any and all legal job actions to oust this Mgt team and send them hiking with the ZERO compensation rewards they deserve for not honoring the horrible contracts they imposed ( only thru BK ) on us.
My work ethic for this airline is lower than I ever thought possible.
Dea Certe
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 889
- Reaction score
- 0
No more give backs. We''ve been bled white and still management can''t get it together. I guess those retention bonuses weren''t well spent, were they? Those "bright and talented" people didn''t hold up their end, did they?
It will grieve me to see US Airways fold but maybe it''s for the best. Let''s just make sure all those smart people at the top don''t leave with their pockets stuffed and bonus checks.
And we can take comfort in knowing we employees did our best. This failure will have to be laid squarely on the shoulders of management.
It will grieve me to see US Airways fold but maybe it''s for the best. Let''s just make sure all those smart people at the top don''t leave with their pockets stuffed and bonus checks.
And we can take comfort in knowing we employees did our best. This failure will have to be laid squarely on the shoulders of management.
willnotworkforfree
Advanced
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2002
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 0
----------------
On 5/26/2003 3:07:12 PM N786P wrote:
Why do''nt we all "Try" and get together, all work groups, and hold "Dave and company" feet to the fire and see who blinks first for a change??
----------------
Thats a great idea, but how would you/we go about it?On 5/26/2003 3:07:12 PM N786P wrote:
Why do''nt we all "Try" and get together, all work groups, and hold "Dave and company" feet to the fire and see who blinks first for a change??
----------------
I wish they would just shut the doors for good and give people a chance to get on with their lives. Everybody is getting very tired of Dave and all his threats. We had the first one, give or we will shut the doors, the second one, I need more or I will shut the doors. Now its reduce our leases by Jan 4 2004 or we will close the doors. Ok "Dave" all is on hold till you make your decision. Get some of these valuable management out of their office''s to see what is really going on. Most of us realize we are on a sinking ship with no rescue in sight. Most employees don''t really care anymore!!
When did the CRJ-700 Series 705 suddently become the CRJ-705? That would mean there isn''t a CRJ-700 anymore, according to ALPA, since the 70-seater is the Series 701 or CRJ-701 by their standards. Sometimes you just want to bang your head on how blatently childesh people are acting. I guess soon we''ll have the Boeing 738, 737, 739 instead of 737-800, -700, -900, etc.
God forbid this company actually try to compete for a change. If this is how it is going to be with this heavily senoir company...I say liquidate it and get it over with. See how a 20-30 year pilot enjoys flying right seat in a Saab for the next few years until they can work their way back up.
God forbid this company actually try to compete for a change. If this is how it is going to be with this heavily senoir company...I say liquidate it and get it over with. See how a 20-30 year pilot enjoys flying right seat in a Saab for the next few years until they can work their way back up.
----------------
On 5/26/2003 3
01 PM N305AS wrote:
Tom, you''ve missed the point. For many price-sensitive customers, those added costs represented the difference between flying and staying home.
On 5/26/2003 3
01 PM N305AS wrote: ----------------
On 5/26/2003 2:32:27 PM TomBascom wrote:
Let''s not forget US will receive about $35 million in savings from reduced security fees...
Let''s be truthful here. The airlines are not "receiving savings" -- they''re raising prices as the government eliminates these fees.
It wasn''t too long ago that the airlines whined and moaned to Congress and anyone else who might listen about how these add on fees were depressing sales by raising ticket prices beyond consumers pain threshold and how eliminating these fees would stimulate travel and fuel a recovery. In fact, if memory serves, Capt. Munn wrote supportive commentary along those lines. Although perhaps those were simply quotes and I''ve inferred too much... In any event now we see that the real problem the airlines had with the fees is that they were jealous that they weren''t collecting them themselves.
----------------
On 5/26/2003 2:32:27 PM TomBascom wrote:
Let''s not forget US will receive about $35 million in savings from reduced security fees...
Let''s be truthful here. The airlines are not "receiving savings" -- they''re raising prices as the government eliminates these fees.
It wasn''t too long ago that the airlines whined and moaned to Congress and anyone else who might listen about how these add on fees were depressing sales by raising ticket prices beyond consumers pain threshold and how eliminating these fees would stimulate travel and fuel a recovery. In fact, if memory serves, Capt. Munn wrote supportive commentary along those lines. Although perhaps those were simply quotes and I''ve inferred too much... In any event now we see that the real problem the airlines had with the fees is that they were jealous that they weren''t collecting them themselves.
----------------
Tom, you''ve missed the point. For many price-sensitive customers, those added costs represented the difference between flying and staying home.
No, I heard that loud and clear.
What you''ve missed is that the "big six" have cleverly winked and nudged each other into coordinated price increases that just happen to match the rollback of these fees and which are scheduled to slip into place just as the fees are rescinded.
Also, please allow me to point out that AirTran, a profitable airline, is a hub and spoke carrier.
SWA looks, in many respects, a lot like a hub & spoke operation too.
usjacket
Senior
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 310
- Reaction score
- 52
Enough of the threats! If your going to pull the plug on some of the best airline employees in the world Dave, just do it ! This is the most anti-employees CEO and management since Lorenzo! Hats off to the great job everyone has been doing in the face of such intimidation! Yes I am pissed!
