Thanks, 7x7.
If there is a “part” I have played on this and other aviation discussion forums, it is that I understand very well the economics of the airline industry and see past the hype that is often part of aviation discussion forums. Like it or not, I have been dead accurate in my predictions of where specific airlines would go over the past 10 years.
I am not “anti” anything or any airline but I am very pro-success – and my allegiances in the airline industry have long been to those companies that have demonstrated their ability to win in the marketplace.
Beyond that, I have long believed that AA wasted a whole lot of time in the first decade of 2000 fighting with or waiting for a change in the situation w/ labor that has cost it substantially in the marketplace.
AA’s creditors, well aware of this situation, are now looking for the best route forward including how to maximize recovery of their debts.
Especially over the past 10 years, mergers have proven to improve the finances of the airline industry and AMR’s creditors want a piece of that as well.
The US merger, quite frankly, does not deliver what either AA or US need entirely to compete – that is obvious and has been well discussed. AA-US will be at a disadvantage to other carriers with respect to the timing of the AA-US merger (if it happens) more than anything else, but also the financial condition of both carriers, the recent history of unresolved labor issues, and the lack of network “parity”.
Thus, anyone who thinks that AA-US will deliver results comparable to other carriers including employee pay and job security.
Other carriers are simply not going to lay down and allow AA-US to cut into their markets; the industry has always been highly competitive and is just as much if not more so now. The difference now is that the competition is that network and low fare carriers are not acting as one competitively and are competing against each other within the group instead of the LFC-legacy competition that has defined the industry since deregulation.
I am very well aware and respect that there are people at every carrier, including DL, that do not like how their company is being run, including DL. The cultural conflict between DL and what NW was is enormous esp. WRT labor relations. DL’s culture has always been patriarchal and that culture is not palatable to some people. Nonetheless, the majority of DL employees are at least content - and some are happy - w/ the way the company is being run and particularly with compensation increases, which have far exceeded what other airline employees have received since BK. Nevertheless, DL does things differently than other airlines including how the components of compensation packages are put together yet the totals consistently seem to come out as high as or higher than what it does at other airlines.
I am not here to defend what DL does with its employees, but I can say that the vast majority of employees do not believe there is a better alternative to what they have now.
I do, however, recognize the different opinions and encourage those who aren’t content with what they are experiencing to speak up. DL has a history of shelling out money in order to eliminate resistance so current resistance could translate into increased pay, even if some of the cultural issues don’t change.
This discussion is about AA-US and the only real correlation to what DL does and what AA-US does is that DL has a closed, finished merger and has employee relations on a large scale that has allowed the company to pursue its strategic purposes.
AA and US will only succeed if they can pull off essentially a flawless merger in just about every respect and move immediately to gain financial benefits from the merger and then to gain far greater financial benefits than anyone including AA or US has said up to this point.
