What's new

New Liquidity Initiative

I don't buy it Callaway. The average wage gap between CEO's and workers continues to grow. Last I checked a CEO pay was around 400 times that of the average worker, compare that in 1989 it was only 71 times.
 
DP has run a hap hazard, fits and start, kind of airline. When compared to what DL was able to pull off (so far) he is not the poster child for running a good or profitable airline and does not deserve to rank with other more successful airline CEOs.
 
I visited Communist countries while Tempe was in diapers. Saw magnificent villas on the Black Sea.

I asked our interpreter "Who lives in those houses?"

"Common people, the workers."

"How do they decide" I asked?

No answer.

Work hard, make your country (company) better. You will prosper.

Our capitalists are no better than Communist bosses.

Hope your nine year old enjoys his Callaway driver on Christmas while the workers make your company better.

Greed knows no ideology.

Back on subject. Callaway Golf is a perfect example of why USAirways keeps sinking lower.

It is all about personal benefit. At the expense of productive employees.
 
You missed most of my points but you are asking questions, so:
1. SEC reports on officer earnings does not equal actual pay so comparing company financial performance is not a precise measure. At-risk stock options only have value if the stock performs and right now executive stock options will pay nowhere close to what was reported - as it should be if we're talking pay for performance.

2. The free market sets the value of fares which in turn determines the amount of wages that can be paid for certain functions. The more efficient the company and its employees the more the individual wages can be given the constraints of pax revenue and other expenses. A less efficient company goes into bankruptcy (legacy US) and employees pay for inefficiencies and uncompetitiveness through wages concessions to allow the company is to survive.

3. Tempe like all the other airline HQs managed the business in the most difficult environment since deregulation. Multiple airlines in the US and abroad have liquidated in the face of the same conditions.

4. I suggest you use actual compensation instead of unconverted stock option values if you really want to compare Kelly vs. Parker in the wage game. Of course Kelly was really only successful financially in 2008 because of the fuel hedges put in place by his predecessor's administration.

No didn't miss any of your points. I suggest YOU go onto EDGAR and read the company's financial

I took enough business and economics in college to "understand" a free market economy. I am just not going to be lectured about the airline industry and free markets from someone that has limited recall of the facts. Without the Government ATSB loans in 2002 AWA, yes AWA nor US would even be in existence right today - much less "merged". Socialize losses - Privatize profits and extortion through the bankruptcy court - the hallmark of the free market society as long as it benefits your interest.

And for me to somehow concede that US Airways is now remotely more "efficient" because my colleagues have had their lives irrevocably changed because of their pay, and pensions being robbed at gunpoint in BK, only then to have their seniority looted, then have the audacity to somehow imply Parker and his management team had something to do with our success and still being viable is more than just revisionist history, it's delusional. Losing almost BILLION dollars (for a multitude of reasons which are irrelevant) this management team still felt that they were deserving of multi-million dollar bonuses. Well it's only .09 per employee per month - why not.

Tempe and Parker (AWA) have done only ONE thing - scratched out an existence up against SWA in PHX. I'll give them credit for that- but that was when they were AWA. Were no longer America West or US Airways for that matter. We are now some "kind of low-cost, legacy, big six, niche airline" now and how to run this operation is above Tempe's head and pay grade. We very well might become one of those liquidated airlines you speak of if these guys don't bring their "A" game and start actually running an airline rather than playing airline.

Kelly was successful for the same reason Kellerher was successful. They believed in the 1-2-3 business model.

1. Hiring quality employees and treating them well make happy employees, and they are your most valuable asset - if they are happy the passengers will in turn be happy.
2. Happy employees = Happy Passengers
3. Happy Passengers = Happy Shareholders

1+2+3= Successful airline (fuel hedges or not) although they didn't hurt.

The reason why the country and the airlines are in the condition they are today is because of another administration's predecessor as well - and on that we can definitely agree.
 
I actually welcome Calloway's insight. I don't have a problem with Parker and others making millions, but they should earn it. They started with about 3 Billion in cash and after doing nothing more than they had always done and abdicating their leadership on pilot integration (bring both sides in and tell them how it's gonna be and if they don't like it they can meet them in court), they are back in the poor mouth condition US was 5 years ago. The BOD should have the common sense and fortitude to demand better from their leaders or find better leaders.

Calloway explained the theory behind compensating executives to prevent them from hopping to greener pastures, but in practice, do these same execs ever have to answer the question, "What the heck have you been doing for the past 5 years at USAirways besides test driving Porches on your lunch hour" during their job interviews? How do underperformers use the industry-wide pain to justify their lack of stellar performance when they go hunting for another position?

No, rich execs don't make for poor employees. Lousy ones do.
 
Kelly was successful for the same reason Kellerher was successful. They believed in the 1-2-3 business model.

1. Hiring quality employees and treating them well make happy employees, and they are your most valuable asset - if they are happy the passengers will in turn be happy.
2. Happy employees = Happy Passengers
3. Happy Passengers = Happy Shareholders

1+2+3= Successful airline (fuel hedges or not) although they didn't hurt.

The reason why the country and the airlines are in the condition they are today is because of another administration's predecessor as well - and on that we can definitely agree.

i completely disagree ...

to be successfull you must

1. have the lowest fare .

and that's it ... the pax don't care if you treat them nice or your happy with your job , all they want are low fares , that's it period ...and i can't say i blame them , if i was going to fly somewhere , the only thing that would matter to me is saving money .

Every employee here except for U6 employees should just be happy with their jobs ... we as Americans are going to have to start to learn to live with less ... i for one am preparing myself to live under the old east bankruptcy contract .
 
I actually welcome Calloway's insight. I don't have a problem with Parker and others making millions, but they should earn it. They started with about 3 Billion in cash and after doing nothing more than they had always done and abdicating their leadership on pilot integration (bring both sides in and tell them how it's gonna be and if they don't like it they can meet them in court), they are back in the poor mouth condition US was 5 years ago. The BOD should have the common sense and fortitude to demand better from their leaders or find better leaders.

Calloway explained the theory behind compensating executives to prevent them from hopping to greener pastures, but in practice, do these same execs ever have to answer the question, "What the heck have you been doing for the past 5 years at USAirways besides test driving Porches on your lunch hour" during their job interviews? How do underperformers use the industry-wide pain to justify their lack of stellar performance when they go hunting for another position?

No, rich execs don't make for poor employees. Lousy ones do.

Do you actually believe what you just wrote? What CEO in their right mind would step into the pilot drama to unify that work group only to see them turn againt the company and demand higher wages etc ? Do you have any idea how much money the company has saved by letting this drag out ? Do you really think the BOD cares if your happy with your pay and working conditions?
 
It does in fact work. Under Reagan average family income rose 37% vs. the Carter years. Taxing the wealthy will never produce wealth for the other income brackets.

37% over 8 years is meaningless unless it is adjusted for inflation. Given that Reagan turned this country from the largest creditor nation into the largest debtor nation by writing bad checks during his 8 years (and oversaw the largest expansion of the federal government by any White House to date), I sincerely doubt that the purchasing power of the average family even kept pace with inflation.
 
37% over 8 years is meaningless unless it is adjusted for inflation. Given that Reagan turned this country from the largest creditor nation into the largest debtor nation by writing bad checks during his 8 years (and oversaw the largest expansion of the federal government by any White House to date), I sincerely doubt that the purchasing power of the average family even kept pace with inflation.

You should have continued farther along in the Wikipedia listing:

In the last year of the Carter Administration (1980) the US inflation rate climbed to a peak of 14.8%, the top individual tax payer rate was 78%, unemployment was 7.4%, federal outlay was 17% higher than the economy's growth rate, and the federal government grew while enacting loads of new spending programs. During this period, the US economy was the worst it had been since the Great Depression of the 1930s.[citation needed] The nation was in quite a deep hole of economic collapse when the new president Ronald Reagan took office in January 1981.[citation needed] Reagan had to devise a constructive, sound tax and monetary policy to pull the US out of its economic low point.[citation needed]

Stephen Moore of the Cato Institute stated that "no act in the last quarter century had a more profound impact on the US economy of the eighties and nineties than the Reagan tax cut of 1981." He claims that Reagan's tax cuts, combined with an emphasis on federal monetary policy, deregulation, and expansion of free trade created a sustained economic expansion creating America's greatest sustained wave of prosperity ever. The American economy grew by more than a third in size, producing a $15 trillion increase in American wealth. Every income group, from the richest, middle class and poorest in this country, grew its income (1981-1989). Consumer and investor confidence soared. Cutting federal income taxes, cutting the US government spending budget, cutting useless programs, scaling down the government work force, maintaining low interest rates, and keeping a watchful inflation hedge on the monetary supply was Ronald Reagan's formula for a successful economic turnaround. The economic principle that business expansion, jobs and wealth follow low tax rates is widely accepted.[
 
"GI

All you TEMPE pom-pom wavers please weigh in.....Please - Please explain to the rest of us the logic of why this level of compensation is remotely acceptable.
http://www.fhsolutionsgroup.com/showservice.aspx?show=67
Compensation
The way you pay your employees reflect your operating priorities, culture and values. In addition, your programs should be cost effective and motivational. A compensation program:
• Communicates to your employees how their work is valued and a sense of fairness;
• Communicates to your customers the importance that you place on attracting and retaining quality employees;
• Communicates to your shareholders and investors the cost-effective use of compensation dollars; and
• Communicates to your community your interest in being a quality employer who wants to attract the best available people.
F&H Solutions Group works hand-in-hand with our clients to provide sound compensation plans that are cost effective and properly award your employees. We design traditional and non-traditional compensation plans, which may include incentives such as commissions, profit sharing, and / or equity-based plans.
View Consultant Bios
> Mary H Converse
> Jerrold A. Glass
> Joseph C. Godwin
> David J. Pincus
> Richard L. Reinhardt
 
So you're proposing that we abandon the seniority system for a merit-based one? Hmm, interesting. Tell me more.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top