On 12/17/2002 8:29:08 PM A320 Driver wrote:
Can RSA really demand Chapter 7? I thought the company had been granted an extension on the filing of a plan until Jan 31, 03. I might be wrong, but can someone else weigh in on this?
I think you're right, except that apparently U doesn't qualify for the financing under whatever the terms are. Therefore, they have to get new financing under different terms or RSA could just "pull the rug out from under" U. Since we don't meet the terms of the deal, Bronner (aka Scrooge) could end the deal at any time, I guess. God bless us, everyone!
I'm about 75% sure that part, or all, of an upcoming trip to London (ticketed and paid for on US) is going to end up on someone else, at a somewhat enourmous expense to me personally. I also know that I am driving home for the holidays instead of flying.
That said, management's actions are not my only causes for concern. I don't know that anybody but RSA is running the show, and I don't know if they'd give things until the pushed deadline to file a plan in Jan.
What makes you think that the company won't actually do it?
I hate to say this, but at this point the goal of upper management is to recover value (now via Chapter 7, or by emergence from Chapter 11) on behalf of creditors. If they feel the best shot is to shut it down, they just might do it. Bear in mind that RSA is probably the largest creditor (thanks to the DIP finance instrument).
That having been said, if they need to get the remaining 100 million, it's probably a forgone conclusion that they'll either attempt to abrogate contracts with the judge, or terminate pensions (although I personally think that RSA would rather liquidate than been seen as having messed with somebody's _retirement_).
On 12/17/2002 8:54:00 PM ClueByFour wrote:
As chip had alluded to some weeks ago, I'm now convinced that if the eventual goal is _not_ to close the doors than pensions of any group which does not negotiate (submit?) is history.
Then I guess Fleet Service and Customer Service are safe.They froze our pensions eleven years ago.
CluebyFour (and other US1's, US2's, US3's and US4's)
In your opinion, what has caused most of you to book away from US Airways? Was it the Bronner Chapter 7 statement in the press? Was it the cutting back of your FF program? Was it losing flights to the cities you most frequented?
I'm really interested in knowing. Thanks for taking the time to let me know what you think.
Honestly, what makes me less inclined to fly US the most is the management-labor negotiations taking place in public. Things that have been posted on both the CWA and IAM web sites (and AFA and ALPA web sites in the past) is completely inappropriate to be posted on a public web site. Let the negotiators represent your best interests and communicate with you in a secure forum. No party should post things publicly, let the media pick up the story and then spin it to sound even worse than it already does.
On 12/17/2002 8:55:54 PM Biffeman wrote:
In 18 years no judge has ever thrown out a section 1113 or 1114 letter, AMR tried last year in regards to TWA, the court said no.
AA never asked for an arbrogation of contracts that I know of, but TWA was prepared to do so if neccesary to close the deal. The unions agreed to it before it even had a chance to be ruled on.
As with any law, someone almost always gets to be first. The question now is will it be UA or US who gets to test the waters first?
Bronner doesn't have to provide the next tranche of DIP financing, just like DL backed out on providing additional DIP to Pan Am in 1991. Once that financing is no longer in place, US starts to run out of cash quickly. If cash drops below what the judge feels is required to protect the creditors, he'll move to liquidate of his own accord.