----------------
On 6/20/2003 9:13:00 PM Bob Owens wrote:
As AA recovers its employees sink. Every month the shortage will compound as they work even more hours for less money than before.
I dont think that anyone wanted AA to go BK. I think that many said that they would rather take their chances than give up all that they did to avoid reorganization.
By the way most of the Vote No people were saying this would happen, just like it did in 92. We went from "the end is near" to record profits in a few short years. The quick turnaround just proves that we gave too much. It proves that the No voters were right.
Where does AA rank in performance?
Why despite the "No Checks" policy is it reported that MELs are up, delays are up, sick calls are up, overtime is up and cancellations are up? Just imagine how well the company would be doing if their employees were willing to give 110 percent like they were before the cuts!
How much do cancellations and delays cost? Is it cheaper to keep spare aircraft instead of just fixing the ones you need?
Dont they realize that its only going to get worse as the economic impact becomes more intense as time goes by? If your not working and have no money its bad, but if your working more than ever yet you have less than before its even more fustrating.
----------------
Well, of course the company is recovering - after all, that''s why Carty wanted the concessions - so the company''s finances could recover. You''d prefer the company not recover?
Of course AA has spare airplanes right now; the schedule is down at least 20% from August 2001 - would you prefer that AA fly even more seats (at what would be even cheaper fares than now)?? So yes, right now, flying spares is probably cheaper than fixing them. Look at the 14 762s and 28 MD-80s going to the desert for a few years to defer heavy overhauls.
It''s too bad that AA was running out of cash and could no longer pay the employees 100% for their 110% output - but since it is illegal to print money (unless you''re the feds), AA had no choice but to cut expenses. I know, I know, AA should have just raised fares and everything would have been all better.
It''s also too bad that AA can''t swiftly fire the ass of anyone not giving 100% right now.
When I identify an employee of mine who is not contributing 100%, they are shown the door. Slackers don''t succeed in the real world.
Here''s to hoping that AA can identify slackers and begin the long slow process to their eventual termination.
