Pilots on exec payout!

[Hopeful]

bizjournals.com
American pilots say exec bonuses could outdo profit
Wednesday January 17, 5:41 pm ET

American Airlines' pilots union on Wednesday again brought up the stock option grants scheduled for payout to American executives in April.

This time the Allied Pilots Union says the executive bonuses could match or exceed AMR Corp.'s profit for 2006.

ADVERTISEMENT
click here
The comments come on the heels of AMR's earnings release Wednesday. AMR, the parent company of American, reported a 2006 profit of $231 million. Based on AMR's closing share price Tuesday, the April bonuses will total some $218 million, the pilots union claims.

"It's clear that American Airlines' financial performance has improved substantially, thanks in large measure to the deep sacrifices by our pilots and other employees beginning in 2003," said pilots association President Capt. Ralph Hunter in a statement. "The $1.1 billion improvement in AMR's results would not have been possible without the $1.6 billion in annual concessions agreed to by AA nonmanagement employees, who are the real heroes behind American's return to profitability."

American's pilots and other employees agreed to 1.6 billion in annual concessions in 2003 to keep the carrier out of bankruptcy.

AMR Chairman and CEO Gerard Arpey told analysts Wednesday that he was scheduled to meet with employee groups on Thursday, MarketWatch reported.

"I'm disappointed by some of the rhetoric that comes out. But on the other hand I'm not discouraged," Arpey said in a MarketWatch report. He added that employees also were awarded 38 million shares in 2003 which have risen eight-fold in value, MarketWatch reported.

A spokesman for American wasn't immediately available for comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny how Arpey mentions 38 million shares given to employees. Sounds like a very large number.
Compare the 38 million shares for employees and the millions of shares given to execs.

 

[TWU informer]

It appers that the Love AAffair with Arpey is about to end.

Employees are not going to tolerate this bone-us crap and "rhetoric" from management.

Maybe Arpey would give an accurate number on how many employee shares were already sold to put food on the table and never reaped any 8 fold increase as he claims? I never 8 fold from mine that's a fact!

First the shares were only offered because Carty was caught being less than honest, now Arpey uses the same shares as defense of the bone-us program.

My feelings towards him and other Management loud mouth outburst of late have sure changed my opinion of the Consultant for Hire Management group.

 

[flyhigh]

I know people never like to hear reality, but at some point you have to accept it. If you had to sell the shares you were given to put food on the table, you probably aren't very fiscally stable to begin with. I know how much line employees took in paycuts. The old man has worked there longer than a bunch of you and double more than most on this board I'd bet. And "consultants for hire"...funny. Uhm, Arpey never worked at a consultancy. He started his career with AA. He took a different path.

 

[Oneflyer]

Maybe Arpey would give an accurate number on how many employee shares were already sold to put food on the table and never reaped any 8 fold increase as he claims? I never 8 fold from mine that's a fact!

Selling stock to put food on the table, get serious.

Actually, 38 million shares wouldn't be more than about 500 shares per worker, which is about what the average employee received.

 

[AA717driver]

I know people never like to hear reality, but at some point you have to accept it. If you had to sell the shares you were given to put food on the table, you probably aren't very fiscally stable to begin with. I know how much line employees took in paycuts. The old man has worked there longer than a bunch of you and double more than most on this board I'd bet. And "consultants for hire"...funny. Uhm, Arpey never worked at a consultancy. He started his career with AA. He took a different path.

I'm pretty fiscally responsible. Try being fiscally responsible without a job!

How long was your dad laid off? Did you get pulled out of college because of it? Did he have to eat into his retirement because of it? Did you come home from school to an empty house because your mom had to go to work to make ends meet?

Take your condescending attitude and shove it! TC

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

I know people never like to hear reality, but at some point you have to accept it. If you had to sell the shares you were given to put food on the table, you probably aren't very fiscally stable to begin with. I know how much line employees took in paycuts. The old man has worked there longer than a bunch of you and double more than most on this board I'd bet. And "consultants for hire"...funny. Uhm, Arpey never worked at a consultancy. He started his career with AA. He took a different path.

flyhigh, are you management? It doesn't care I guess since you would never be able to confirm if you tell the truth anyway.


"you probably aren't very fiscally stable to begin with."

Listen, I am pretty frustrated and angry at assholes like yourself with comments like this.

I was living within my means BEFORE the UNEQUAL Shared Sacrifice. You see, I was living a normal life. THEN my union decided to take 28 1/2% of my pay and benefits to "save" AA. Now, after my sacrifice management receives more money in one payment then several AMTs would earn in a life time?

"I know how much line employees took in paycuts."

You don't know ####!

 

[TWU informer]

I know people never like to hear reality, but at some point you have to accept it. If you had to sell the shares you were given to put food on the table, you probably aren't very fiscally stable to begin with. I know how much line employees took in paycuts. The old man has worked there longer than a bunch of you and double more than most on this board I'd bet. And "consultants for hire"...funny. Uhm, Arpey never worked at a consultancy. He started his career with AA. He took a different path.

Call it whatever you want, but that doesn't change the fact that most employees have sold some or all of their shares and are not reaping any 8X gain as Arpey claimed.

Even in low cost Tulsa, going from $80-$90k per year with overtime and Holiday pay, mayabe even more for IdeAAS in Action Program benefits, to below $65k per year caused financial strain on even the Tulsa crowd and many sold the stock as they made adjustments in living style to the new lower rates of pay, not to mention the annual shaft on out-of-pocket medical increases.

I never claimed Arpey worked as a Consultant, I was referencing the fact that he has hired CONSULTING firms to run the Airline. Overland Resource Group, Boston Consulting Group, to name a few. Anyone can sit in overpaid leather seat and plush golden office, and hire the consultants to run the airline. Even I can do that.

 

[Oneflyer]

flyhigh, are you management? It doesn't care I guess since you would never be able to confirm if you tell the truth anyway.
"you probably aren't very fiscally stable to begin with."

Listen, I am pretty frustrated and angry at assholes like yourself with comments like this.

I was living within my means BEFORE the UNEQUAL Shared Sacrifice. You see, I was living a normal life. THEN my union decided to take 28 1/2% of my pay and benefits to "save" AA. Now, after my sacrifice management receives more money in one payment then several AMTs would earn in a life time?

"I know how much line employees took in paycuts."

You don't know ####!

I don't have a lot of sympathy for someone that constantly complains about their salary, but then refuses to leave their job for a higher paying one. I logical person would think their just complaining and that if things were so bad, they would leave!

If life is so bad, go get a new f-ing job, stop bitching about it. I got tired of not getting raises at AA and did just that, do I miss the industry, sure, but I don't miss my paycheck.

Even in low cost Tulsa, going from $80-$90k per year with overtime and Holiday pay, mayabe even more for IdeAAS in Action Program benefits, to below $65k per year caused financial strain on even the Tulsa crowd and many sold the stock as they made adjustments in living style to the new lower rates of pay, not to mention the annual shaft on out-of-pocket medical increases.

I never claimed Arpey worked as a Consultant, I was referencing the fact that he has hired CONSULTING firms to run the Airline. Overland Resource Group, Boston Consulting Group, to name a few. Anyone can sit in overpaid leather seat and plush golden office, and hire the consultants to run the airline. Even I can do that.

You act like concessions were an option. They were coming regardless, there wasn't option on the table that didn't include salary cuts. Yes, your union f-d you by choosing to take more of a paycut vs. more lay-offs, but that isn't Arpey's fault.

Consultants don't run the airline, they don't do much of anything at all. The company needs consultants, because the unions don't believe anything the company says and fight any kind of change (good or bad). So the company hires consultants to go about proving ideas and thus convincing the union leadership. Its sort of like a kid that won't listen to their parents, but will listen to a teacher, even though they're saying the same thing.

 

[UAL_TECH]

I don't have a lot of sympathy for someone that constantly complains about their salary, but then refuses to leave their job for a higher paying one. I logical person would think their just complaining and that if things were so bad, they would leave!

If life is so bad, go get a new f-ing job, stop bitching about it. I got tired of not getting raises at AA and did just that, do I miss the industry, sure, but I don't miss my paycheck.
You act like concessions were an option. They were coming regardless, there wasn't option on the table that didn't include salary cuts. Yes, your union f-d you by choosing to take more of a paycut vs. more lay-offs, but that isn't Arpey's fault.

I’ve dealt with self involved wads like you (and continue to kick your a$$) throughout my career (note I did not say job). Instead of having the managerial skills to confront, understand, and resolve issues, you hold the "don’t like it then quit" attitude, "my way or the highway". Nimrods like you a caught bumping your head under the desk daily to compensate for your inability to actively solve problems. There are a plethora of issues as to why one cannot walk away from a position that they have worked for many hard and difficult years.

What a myopic self centered p$%@*.
Bet you are a freeking joy to work with.

UT

 

[Oneflyer]

I’ve dealt with self involved wads like you (and continue to kick your a$$) throughout my career (note I did not say job). Instead of having the managerial skills to confront, understand, and resolve issues, you hold the "don’t like it then quit" attitude, "my way or the highway". Nimrods like you a caught bumping your head under the desk daily to compensate for your inability to actively solve problems.

That sounds exactly like someone that CAN'T find a new job, rather than someone who can. If you can't find a job that pays you more then you're not worth more, pretty simple economics, but I guess its just easier to say everyone else is screwing you than to face the facts of the situation.

 

[Bob Owens]

So what is the settlement?

AA execs turn down the bonuses but make up for it by selling some of their options? Big deal.

Not good enough. AA is showing a profit I WANT SOMETHING BACK!

The execs not taking the bonuses doesnt help me pay my bills nor does it make them "share the pain". I'm sure they are having no problem paying their bills.If not they werent stuck with a measly 400 shares like us, they can sell some of it.My shares only paid for half my roof, my paycut could have paid for the roof 10 times over.

I have to wonder if this whole bonus thing is another set up between the company and its in house unions.

"Lets make a big deal over these bonuses, at the last minute the company backs down, and the unions vow to rejoin in the efforts to increase productivity based upon the false victory that doesnt put one extra penny in the members pockets or in reality take a penny out of managements."

The fact is that our pain is not caused by their bonuses but by our paycuts, we need our pay back. Getting our pay back should be the only condition for participating in any of the companys productivity drives.

To me, I could give a crap about the bonuses. If they take them, it just shows how disconnected they are, if they turn them down, well, how does that help us pay our bills?

I say whether they take the bonuses or not we need to show them that we are the ones who do the work that allows them to make money. If we arent making money, that means able to run our households in the black, then we should not help them make money.

 

[Hopeful]

That sounds exactly like someone that CAN'T find a new job, rather than someone who can. If you can't find a job that pays you more then you're not worth more, pretty simple economics, but I guess its just easier to say everyone else is screwing you than to face the facts of the situation.

Flyer, I don't know how long you've been posting on this board or how long you've been around, but let me try to explain something to you.
Prior to the concessions that were taken from us, and yes TAKEN from us under the bankruptcy threat gun to our heads, you never heard any complaining about what ANY executive was making or what his/her bonus package was. It was only after the concession package that it became obvious that UPPER management never really shared in the same sacrifices they expected their employees to make. They still did and still do get their PUPS. We had received a nice contract prior to 9-11 which was a pleasant change.
Then the aftermath of 9-11 sent the airlines into a further tail spin and the airlines had to cut costs and used 9-11 as a once in a lifetime means of breaking the unions and the workers by threatening their livelihoods once and for all.
However, they did not cut costs FAIRLY between UPPER management and the rest of the lower tiered workers. Even though executive compensation has become such a lightning rod in this country, most of us have been around long enough to accept that we are all not created equal. We he ours and they had theirs.

The MAIN reason AMR is where it is today and the fact that the stock is performing well is BECAUSE OF EMPLOYEE CONCESSIONS, followed by a lower oil prices. It is very easy for a CEO to cut costs nowadays.....SCREW LABOR..

And as for your assumption that we CAN'T find jobs anywhere else is asinine. Aircraft mechanics have abilities in many fields,,,,electrical, electronics, plumbing, pneumatics, hydraulics, etc etc etc.
Maybe you are willing to keep moving around for that BETTER job, most of us are not.
Most aircraft mechanics enjoy what they do and many of us do it in all kinds of weather, we do it on holidays, weekends, days, afternoons, midnights. THAT IS WHY YOU DON'T SEE US QUIT IN DROVES..

We are more dedicated to the company than any EXECUTIVE. Because the minute a bigger paycheck and bonus package is waved in their faces, they run like thieves in the night.
But people like you blame unions because we complain and bring much attention to executives reaping $191 million in PUPS while they NETTED $17 MILLION FOR THE 4TH QUARTER.

So tell me again about greedy unions!

 

[Oneflyer]

And as for your assumption that we CAN'T find jobs anywhere else is asinine. Aircraft mechanics have abilities in many fields,,,,electrical, electronics, plumbing, pneumatics, hydraulics, etc etc etc.
Maybe you are willing to keep moving around for that BETTER job, most of us are not.
Most aircraft mechanics enjoy what they do and many of us do it in all kinds of weather, we do it on holidays, weekends, days, afternoons, midnights. THAT IS WHY YOU DON'T SEE US QUIT IN DROVES..

This is the point. If you continue to work at a job, that you claim, underpays you for your time and skills at a company that you feel treats you unfairly, a logical person's only assumption is that its either a. not that bad or B. you aren't really underpaid.

In the end, the only way your salary is going to increase substantially is for people to quit and move into other careers or you can wait for the demographic shift that is coming in about 10 years. Either way your union does have a damn thing to do with it.

 

[Bob Owens]

This is the point. If you continue to work at a job, that you claim, underpays you for your time and skills at a company that you feel treats you unfairly, a logical person's only assumption is that its either a. not that bad or B. you aren't really underpaid.

It would only be the assumption of a person who is limited to thinking two dimensionally along the lines of "A" or "B". Reality tends to have "C", "D", "E", "F" etc,etc.

There are a lot more factors involved.

Supply and demand are factors that can be altered in different ways.

The US turns out many more MBAs than there are jobs for them yet top paid MBAs are getting unheard of increases in compensation, supply and demand is not the determining factor there. Its more like a cartel.

The supply of MBAs far exceeds demand yet top MBA pay is still increasing.

The supply of airline workers is and has been decreasing but government restrictions prevent them from capitalizing on it. The injunction on the NWA FAs is a perfect example. The FAs were prohibited from striking because NWA admitted that they could not replace them.

Your so called basic supply and demand scenario does not apply to the reality of conditions in this marketplace. The supply and demand theory you are pushing is based upon two equals, but you are using it to pit the leverage of individual workers against the combined leverage of capital in the form of a corporation ignoring the fact that unions exist. A union simply balances the scales, at best, however you argue that workers should abandon the advantages of combined worker leverage and try to attempt to use their induvidual leverage against the combined leverage of capital. Clearly your motive is in line with combined capital.

The arguement that people with specialized skills and an investment of time should simply walk away may make jerk offs like you feel like you have made a point but that would be like telling an oil company that they have to sell fuel for less than it cost and if they dont like it to start growing banannas instead.



I agree that a massive exodus can be an effective way to restore pay, however in order for it to be effective it needs to be coordinated, its called a strike. We have other tools at our disposal such as job actions, but in our so called free society these things are frowned upon by our corporate owned government.

Our corporate controlled government has basically outlawed unions. They exist in name only. If we are prohibited by court action, in direct violation of long standing legislature, from acting in our best intersts, then we have been outlawed through judicial action instead of legislated action. The will of a corrupt judge has been allowed to supercede the expressed will of the people.

 

[Oneflyer]

The US turns out many more MBAs than there are jobs for them yet top paid MBAs are getting unheard of increases in compensation, supply and demand is not the determining factor there. Its more like a cartel.

The supply of MBAs far exceeds demand yet top MBA pay is still increasing.

What leads you to believe this? Yes, there are more MBAs, but their aren't anymore MBAs graduating from good schools. This difference is huge, I know and have interviewed many.

When the economy was down in '02 and '03 MBAs weren't getting anywhere near what they had been getting in 98-01. Many couldn't find jobs, as the economy improved salaries went up greatly, because more companies came into hiring market.

It is perfect example of supply and demand. Stable supply, demand increases or decrease and salaries increase or decrease with that demand.

The US turns out many more MBAs than there are jobs for them yet top paid MBAs are getting unheard of increases in compensation, supply and demand is not the determining factor there. Its more like a cartel.


I agree that a massive exodus can be an effective way to restore pay, however in order for it to be effective it needs to be coordinated, its called a strike.

So the MBAs, with their specialize skills and no union are being over-paid because of the "Cartel" that they have created, yet AMTs (unionized) are underpaid.

Do have any idea how contradictory this sounds? Its just stupid, its someone that is just making up beliefs to justify what they want to believe.

The arguement that people with specialized skills and an investment of time should simply walk away may make jerk offs like you feel like you have made a point but that would be like telling an oil company that they have to sell fuel for less than it cost and if they dont like it to start growing banannas instead.

No its like an oil company telling a motorist, if you don't like the price of gas, ride the bus. Its EXACTLY opposite of your example.