Shuttle Flying, Bankruptcy Financing, & Gecas

[usair_begins_with_u]

any way you slice the pie, Uair will never be the same, and its common stock will be worthless..

Cheers Munhoi

 

[USA320Pilot]

I find the emotion by the usual posters and the usual discussion interesting. Denial can be “lethalâ€￾ and it appears GE and the ATSB have sealed the fate of those unions who do not want to participate in the new business plan.

"Imposition" hearings begin on Thursday and will end in less than 3 weeks, when Judge Mitchell will likely put an end to this debate.

What is sad is that failed union leadership has already hurt employees and more needless "pain" is about to occur, which could have been avoided if certain leaders would have had the courage to face reality.

In regard to the GECAS agreement, every union was warned this could occur, without new labor accords, and guess what...it did.

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[CynicalResAgent]

I bet he does not decide until January...

 

[Dizel8]

"Finally, if ALPA's RC4 and the other union's had cooperated with the company US Airways may have avoided bankruptcy and still would have the 279 aircraft fleet count in place."

It would have taken all unions to capitulate, and then some further miracle, to have kept U out of Ch.11. To believe otherwise is delusional! Oh yeah, almost forgot, the company would have had to actually present a proposal and negotiate with the unions, however; they were tied up with the pilots and were paying scant attention to the other unions on the property.

"Correct, they're not on the website yet, but that does not mean US Airways will not obtain them in the future."

I also hear that Sukhoi is thinking about developing a new SST. Now the aircraft only exist in some engineers mind, but that does not mean a certain U pilot will not be flying them. Perhaps, they will come shortly after that boatload of Airbi someone kept talking about!

"There are no infidel American soldiers in Baghdad"!

 

[700UW]

Denial can be “lethalâ€￾ .
Best regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="204561"][/post]​

You are in denial that your future is in the hands of the AFA, CWA and IAM and the status of reaching T/As do not look good, even the CWA has said the company's last proposal was a step backwards. The AFA is not close as neither if the IAM both groups.

And according to Sharon Levine esq has informed the IAM and the 1114 committees is expect the judge to rule on 12/17.

 

[BillLumbergh]

Time to put a cap on the wild emotions folks.

 

[delldude]

Time to put a cap on the wild emotions folks.

[post="204829"][/post]​

yeah baby...heehahh...arghh...

 

[BillLumbergh]

Nice.

 

[USA320Pilot]

700UW:

700UW said: "You are in denial that your future is in the hands of the AFA, CWA and IAM and the status of reaching T/As do not look good, even the CWA has said the company's last proposal was a step backwards. The AFA is not close as neither if the IAM both groups. And according to Sharon Levine esq has informed the IAM and the 1114 committees is expect the judge to rule on 12/17."

USA320Pilot: History keeps repeating itself with the company's proposals getting worse, but you and everybody else should not be surprised. Why? You witnessed the RC4 do it to the pilots and you were repeatedly warned this would occur on this forum. Moreover, who first said on this board that Judge Mitchell would likely rule on December 17? Surprised, again?

Mitchell normally rules at the end of a hearing from the bench and US Airways will argue that it needs the cuts by December 17 to meet ATSB requirements, especially with fuel prices rising again.

Every day a union waits to cut a deal the worse it gets for its members. The company knows it has negotiating leverage because costs remain too high with today's fundamentals. The company proposals are getting worse because management can take more because it has leverage and it’s up to the union leadership to “stop the bleedingâ€￾.

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

P.S. In my opinion, the AFA and CWA will obtain deals and the IAM will have "imposition".

 

[whlinder]

USA320Pilot comments: The only time you get alliance revenue is if people fly on your aircraft, thus there is an incentive for US Airways to obtain feed for long-haul operations.

Really? Once again you are wrong. If US Airways issues a ticket entirely on US* flights operated by other airlines (no segments flown by US, all codeshare) and the customer reissues the ticket ($100 or whatever fee) US keeps that fee revenue. And if the customer pays a $5 fee to speak with a US res agent, US keeps that revenue. The entire ticket value that is sold is pro-rated among the operating airlines, but don't pretend that the only time you get revenue from the alliance is when you fly someone.

 

[mrman]

Really? Once again you are wrong. If US Airways issues a ticket entirely on US* flights operated by other airlines (no segments flown by US, all codeshare) and the customer reissues the ticket ($100 or whatever fee) US keeps that fee revenue. And if the customer pays a $5 fee to speak with a US res agent, US keeps that revenue. The entire ticket value that is sold is pro-rated among the operating airlines, but don't pretend that the only time you get revenue from the alliance is when you fly someone.

[post="204852"][/post]​

You forgot to add that the customer gets pissed for paying all these change fees and fees to buy a ticket and walks over to the WN counter which charges no such fees

 

[700UW]

Well since you know little about negotiations and good faith and bad faith, if offers get worse from the company is clearly bad faith.

But since you are niether an elected rep nor a member of the negotiating committee and your past statement about wrong labor boards and labor laws, your opinion actually means nothing.

There is a deal to be had by the IAM, it will just take a lot of work between the union and the company.

 

[funguy2]

During the past year I have signed ALPA and Company confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements and sat at the MEC table as a MEC Rep. I have attended multiple confidential meetings with every senior company and top ALPA official.

Do these folks with whom you "agree" to confidentiality know that you almost immediately break these supposed agreements? Let's look at a few big topics you have discussed here which have never been made public, or you made public before the company did...

Furlough out of seniority.

The 150 aircraft / all Airbus plan

The "UCT"

The date on which BK would be declared (I believe you might have done this twice, probably an SEC violation, by the way).

The FLL expansion

I am sure there are a few more, but that's enough. Makes me wonder why these folks are still talking to you.

This doesn't seem to happen as much or as bad at any other airline. Sure, you sometimes hear of new service loads a few days early as the service gets loaded in one rez system or another prior to the offical announcement, etc, but certainly not with the topics, "big-ness", and frequency of your US Airways "leaks". That is something that makes me wonder. It certainly doesn't seem like good management either.

 

[700UW]

Ever hear of being used and manipulated?

 

[funguy2]

Let's add the revelation of who may be "kicking the tires" as an equity investor for emergence from BK as pointed out on another thread. From the tone of Lakefield's quotes, he certainly didn't seem to want to reveal whom he might be havong discussions with. But you had no problem doing so.