I'll bet it looks like a room full of kindergarten children arguing over who is giving up more than the other. Probably the IAM being the loudest. I wish they would get it done already. Nobody was happy with things like reduced medical and vacation etc. Any wage reduction that would eliminate those other concessions would be too big to except.
UAL will lay-off people regardless of the concessions they get. Do the lay-offs and see were we are with savings. It has become a time where seniority is everything. If you got it great if not look for other employment. I'm not saying that because I have lots of seniority. I very well may be out myself. That's life. No company will give job protection in these times. I read that in an article and believe it. US Air didn't get it and we won't either. So down size the airline and cut however many jobs as necessary and then lets talk concessions. I'll bet it would be less. Not much but less. I see many mechanics retiring. Will those numbers help with the lay-off numbers? I'll bet not. Especially that Alan Butterfield at Indy. If he tells any more lies he may start getting caught up in them. Remember you tell one lie you need another to back it up.
Is this really a surprise to anyone? I would love to be a fly on the wall in some of the discussions that are going on in these meetings. You have separate groups, all trying to protect their own interests, and I guarantee you that each group thinks the largest concessions should be made by another group. As well, they swear they had all of these cost saving ideas, but I bet when you write them down, they don't sound as good anymore. I could be wrong, but I bet things are not nearly as cut and dried as they thought it would be.
In a discussion with person from human resources, there was a point that I had not considered much but apparently the company is aware of and is in somewhat of a conundrum to the downsizing issue. Seniority is a flawed system in many ways, one of which is depending on the depth of the cuts, is that you are left with old employees. This is not necessarily a bad thing per se, but a lot of the work and jobs entail the need for a younger worker. Plus the costs are still high in regards to pay, sick time, vacation etc. Supposedly they are watching the retirements in earnest. As far as the coalition agenda, that would be a great reality T.V. show in my opinion.
As for Butterfield...A liar should have a good memory.
Marcus Fabius Quintilianus (35 AD - 100 AD), De Institutione Oratoria
Now ALPA and IAM reps are saying the proposal won't be done today. All they'd say is that it would be finished sometime this week. Like I said before, I get the feeling they're having difficulty reaching a consensus. But I think they'd be best served by not saying anything publicly until the proposal is ready.
On 9/23/2002 3:33:14 PM UAL777flyer wrote:
Now ALPA and IAM reps are saying the proposal won't be done today. All they'd say is that it would be finished "sometime this week". Like I said before, I get the feeling they're having difficulty reaching a consensus. But I think they'd be best served by not saying anything publicly until the proposal is ready.
The clock is ticking.
Somebody, either labor or management, needs to take a leadership role here.
Are there any leaders at this company? Is there a leader at this company?
It's hard to blame Tilton in this situation. He just arrived a few weeks ago. I don't think he wants to start pushing the union leadership just yet. I think he's being patient and allowing them the time to come up with this proposal. If the proposal ends up being workable for everyone involved, it will go a long way towards building a better union/senior management relationship. So in this case, I think it's important for Tilton to work with the union as much as possible. And they are in constant communication even as the union leadership continues to finalize their proposal. So I don't think it's fair to blame this delay on a lack of leadership. It's a milestone just getting all the unions in the same room working together towards a common goal. Giving them a bit more time is the right thing to do. However, if it drags on beyond this week, I think it would be time to start pressuring them to finish. Time is not a luxury that UA has at this point. This proposal will quickly demonstrate whether UA's union leaders are serious about stepping up to collectively fix what's wrong with this company. So, you can make the argument that whatever credibility they have is on the line.
I'm sure Tilton knows the key terms of the deal that they are trying to hammer out. Also...the unions should be pleased that Tilton assembled a team to examine non-labor cost redutctions. READ: outside team and non-labor.
Unfortunately, the furloughs post-9/11 got rid of a lot of the non-performers in the management ranks. I'm not talking about Directors or V.P's. I'm just talking about management employees. Whenever there are layoffs that affect management, you are let go based on performance. So those are almost always the first people to get the boot.
And your comparison to the military is not fair in my opinion. UA has stopped growing for well over a year. Job openings have been very hard to come by, as only essential jobs are being filled. So the opportunity to move up to higher positions isn't readily available for most people, and hasn't been for awhile. Granted, there are job opportunities, but they are very small in number. The structure of military officer ranks and the nature of the military doesn't make for a fair comparison in my view.
Seniority can be a good thing as far as travel benefits and boarding priority. However, as far as management of a company, seniority is a bad thing, especially under the current circumstances we find the company in today. If Glenn Tilton wants to seriously turn this company around, he should have every single management person reinterview and requalify for their positions. It would be real interesting to see how many survivors there would be? In the military officer ranks, officers do not stay forever in the same position. They move up or out! You can just look at United's ranks and see how many managers just sit in the same positions year after year after year. Is this a big part of the problem or not?
I hope you really meant Fortunately the underperformers were let go with the 9/11 furloughs?
I didn't mean to offend you, I sure WHQ management is much more aggressive in wanting to move ahead in the company, than elsewhere on the system. I agree that jobs are scarce right now and the opportunities for advancement are slim for now. My remarks were directed more for before 9/11.
No offense taken. I just take up the cause against any possible stereotyping of management as a whole. The term management employee at UA refers to thousands of people who perform vital functions for the company. Are there some lazy, malcontents? Absolutely. But you can bet that many of them were part of the furloughs from last year. And yes, fortunately they were. If people have to be furloughed, I am all in favor of letting go the non-performers and trouble makers first. It's a shame that it can't be done across the board. However, in many cases, seniority protects the lazy. But management employees don't have that luxury. So there's a bit more incentive to do your job to the best of your ability because you never know when you'll get that tap on the shoulder.
Hopefully we'll get this ship righted and become prosperous again so that down the road, when the economy rebounds, more opportunities will be present for all of us to take advantage of.
The fundamental root of United's problems is still its company culture.
How about changing attitudes so that the organizational structure is more egalitarian? Southwest does subtle things like give its Vice Prez vp in lowercase titles. And when they talk about *any* southwest group of employees, they talk about the people of southwest. Yes, management are included in the people.