Since we own Ual. Why not run it.

[N628AU]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 11/4/2002 543 AM atabuy wrote:


Revenues can no longer support the top management people at Ual.

These are the jobs that must be eliminated in order to get costs in line with revenues.

Not eliminating real productive jobs which union and non union employees do everyday.


----------------
[/blockquote]

Actually revenues industry wide cannot support high costs in any means. Whether that is absurdly high management and bonuses, pilot pay rates out of line with reality, or IAM featherbedding, it really does not matter. Unfortunately, furloughs are part of it and more are likely to come (probably getting my bump to furlough from US this week, so I know how it is). If you really want to fix what is wrong with the major network carriers you need to do two things, fix the revenue model (notice I said this first), and reduce costs. The revenue model can be fixed by partly by fare simplification (get rid of the absurdly low and high - the low makes no money and no one is buying the high), and the US-UA alliance should prove beneficial to enhance revenues.

In costs, salaries and wage rates may be part of it, but the key is work rules, work rules, work rules. The unions at US did not get this, and that is one reason Dave is now going from $1.3 billion in cuts to $1.6 billion. True, getting rid of featherbedding is sure to cause furloughs, but the fastest way to bring people back to work and the only real key to job security is a stable business platform. Fixing the problem through short term pay cuts will only lead to perpetuating the endless boom-bust cycle of the major airlines.

 

[atabuy]

I know it won''t be easy, but neither has the last 4 years.
I would rather have more say in our fate than someone making 10 times more than me and getting a bonus of more than I will make in a lifetime.
It seems ironic that we should take cuts to fund that type of salary.
I am going to paste something I wrote before:
I am not jealous about what Tilton makes. I just think he will have a hard time understanding the common working man when he has nothing invested.
I think credibility is an issue when he states we have to cut labor costs.
Ual has proven that employee ownership, without any input into the direction the company is going, does not work.
What hasn''t been proven is whether a coalition of unions could run the company better than what we have had in the last 4 years.
If half of the Ual bod had been made up of union members, do you think the U purchase, or the avolar deal, or the unseamless contracts would have been issues. We will never know, but my guess would have been not likely.
Ownership did not put us in the situation we are in today. It was the Peter principle of people making a lot of money to lead the company. Even after 9/11, the management team had no clue on how to reduce costs.
Revenues can no longer support the top management people at Ual.
These are the jobs that must be eliminated in order to get costs in line with revenues.
Not eliminating real productive jobs which union and non union employees do everyday.
The problem is; we will never know what self motivated employees can do.
Management cannot afford to see a workforce that could self govern itself.
What would that do to the management pyramid.
Or can we?

 

[AirplaneFan]

[P]I have long advocated that UAL pilots and mechanics have much more say in the running of their airline. The current situation in essence provides management with very little oversight as the employees who own the company don't have commiserate representation on the BOD.[/P]
[P]I also think that you have an efficiency question. What can employees/owners do to make the company more efficient. One suggestion is not relying totally on the seniority system for the assignment of pilot assignments. How many millions has UAL lost because when there are layoffs they have to recertify pilots on different types of aircraft.[/P]
[P]In the past the employee/owners never felt as if they were owners so they had to strike their own company to get what they thought were fair wages. It didn't help matters for the 6 years prior to 2000 when pilots and mechanics were buying shares thru ESOP they viewed that as a concession (though because of the economy, 9/11, poor management decisions and their own actions it eventually was a concession).[/P]
[P]Its remarkable the % of flights UAL has completed on-time the last few months when no one is trying to create CHAOS. As a passenger I just get sick of the squabbling and the inconvenience you put me through. The problem seems to me that airline performance and employee compensation is out of phase. UAL has been struggling financially for 2 years and its just now that employees are willing to chip-in. But in the mid to late 90's, UAL was registering record profits and employees were still working under contracts that were negotiated during leaner years, making the employees bitter.[/P]
[P] [/P]
[P] [/P]

 

[UAL777flyer]

I understand what you're saying about giving the employees more say in the running of the company. But the fact remains (and history proves this to be true) that airline unions are rarely ever going to see eye to eye and achieve a consensus on anything. Sure they're all working together now at UA. What choice do they have? If they don't, this airline will be dessimated. But what's going to happen a few years down the road when we're stabilized? Do you honestly think this coalition is still going to achieve a consensus on strategic planning and direction for the company? Every union has their own agenda. Their first priority is always to their members, as it should be. But there are going to be times when what is best for the company may not be best for one or more unions. How would they handle that?

I am all for giving the employees more say in this airline. They should be empowered to make decisions and solve problems at the lowest level possible. And their suggestions for improvements in all areas should be listened to and analyzed. But there is a limit to how much say I believe employees should have in running the airline. Please do not take this the wrong way because I mean no disrespect for any work group. But it takes certain skill sets to perform certain tasks. Employees should not involved in the decision-making process for the direction of the airline if they lack the skill set necessary to see the big picture. Just like those of us who aren't pilots shouldn't be telling pilots how to fly their aircraft. Or those of who aren't maintenance shouldn't tell mechanics how to boroscope an engine, etc., etc.

The bottom line with senior leadership of ANY company is that you get what you pay for. Did you honestly think UA was going to lure a top-flight leader to run this company and not give him some type of monetary incentive? Running this company isn't the illustrious job it may have been 5 years ago. I have absolutely no problem with what was paid to Tilton to get him to run UA, even though I soon will be taking a paycut along with the rest of my fellow employees. I'd rather we pay to get a top leader than to low-ball someone who comes in and isn't up to the task. You simply have no way of knowing when you hire an executive how they will turn out. You go through a process of interviews and vetting to get what you feel is the best possible candidate. And then you hope that you were right in your decision. Is it always going to work out? Of course not. But many times it does. And I think UA has gotten an outstanding leader. I'm fully confident that he is the right person to turn UA on its ass and put us back on top. I've heard him speak in person a couple of times and can here the conviction and confidence in his voice. Sure, he'll have to back that up with strong decisions and leadership, but I think he is off to a fantastic start. Just being able to get all the unions in the same room talking together about a cohesive solution to UA's problems was a monumental achievement. With a little time and help from all of us, we are going to fix this airline and get back to the top. It's just going to be a bit painful before we're able to do that. Nobody likes that. Least of all me. But it is what it is. Let's just get it over with and start re-building.

I'm not about to say that with more employee control of the airline, what may or may not have happened to UA. Let's remember that Peterpaul (IAM) voted in favor of the UA/US merger. Let the people with the necessary skill set run the airline. It's when we all start trying to do jobs we're not qualified for that we get into serious trouble. Instead, we should all just work hard together and focus on doing OUR jobs to the absolute best of our ability. Now I realize that doing that entails placing a lot of trust in the senior executives of the company and based on the recent past, trust is hard to come by. But the ESOP was a failure. We can find numerous reasons as to why. Let's just move on from it. We have a new leader. Major changes are going to take place in all facets of this company. Some will be applauded. Some won't. Profit sharing will be instituted so that we all have a vested interest in doing our best to see this company perform. We all recognize by now the need to contribute to help this airline survive. I would hope that's not in doubt anymore. So given that aspect, I think we just need to steel ourselves through this next several months in order to get our financial situation stabilized. Then, I truly think good things are on the horizon for all of us.

 

[atabuy]

UAL777flyer,

Thanks for the nice thought out response.
What I speak of here are just a few of the choices we should have as employees and owners of Ual.
First, no one should be able to make decisions of the magnitude our board members made without consulting the membership.
The U purchase was one of them.
These types of decisions which affect all of us were not for a small group to make.
Insider trading was not an issue with this information since it was not when Greenwald ask us if we wanted to buy them the first time.

That action by a few set up such a chain reaction of events, which has put us here today. All trust was lost in managements decision making capabilities, and so much money has been lost if Ual goes bankrupt.
Employees feel helpless to do anything but strike out and hurt whoever they can. Even if it hurts themselves.

If mechanics can't be swayed into believing we can get back all we have lost by taking wage cuts, it might just be over. I hope I am wrong, but seeing how everyone I talk to seems to want to strike out at anything seems to say it is going to take a lot of convincing.

If we can avoid bankruptcy, I would like to see the employees have a shot at helping to run the company. We couldn't do any worse than what we had, and might do a lot better.
We have the technology to give every employee voting rights on major moves and directions we want to go.

I said before if we worked out wage rules for all groups and they were fair for all concerned, these could be tied to revenue. If revenue went up, wages could too. Profit sharing would be a no brainer. Profits would always be there and the stock would always do well.

All this can be worked out after we get out of this hole.
It would be nice to have something to look forward too.
As you said; there are many ways to help the company help ourselves. We have to pull together now and never again become alienated with each other. We all do have special jobs to do and we must respect them all.

We do need a leader, and I pray Tilton is the man to do what has to be done to raise Ual up. Good luck to us all.




On 11/4/2002 4:18:43 PM UAL777flyerwrote:

I understand what you're saying about giving the employees more say in the running of the company. But the fact remains (and history proves this to be true) that airline unions are rarely ever going to see eye to eye and achieve a consensus on anything. Sure they're all working together now at UA. What choice do they have? If they don't, this airline will be dessimated. But what's going to happen a few years down the road when we're stabilized? Do you honestly think this "coalition" is still going to achieve a consensus on strategic planning and direction for the company? Every union has their own agenda. Their first priority is always to their members, as it should be. But there are going to be times when what is best for the company may not be best for one or more unions. How would they handle that?

I am all for giving the employees more say in this airline. They should be empowered to make decisions and solve problems at the lowest level possible. And their suggestions for improvements in all areas should be listened to and analyzed. But there is a limit to how much say I believe employees should have in running the airline. Please do not take this the wrong way because I mean no disrespect for any work group. But it takes certain skill sets to perform certain tasks. Employees should not involved in the decision-making process for the direction of the airline if they lack the skill set necessary to see the big picture. Just like those of us who aren't pilots shouldn't be telling pilots how to fly their aircraft. Or those of who aren't maintenance shouldn't tell mechanics how to boroscope an engine, etc., etc.

The bottom line with senior leadership of ANY company is that you get what you pay for. Did you honestly think UA was going to lure a top-flight leader to run this company and not give him some type of monetary incentive? Running this company isn't the illustrious job it may have been 5 years ago. I have absolutely no problem with what was paid to Tilton to get him to run UA, even though I soon will be taking a paycut along with the rest of my fellow employees. I'd rather we pay to get a top leader than to low-ball someone who comes in and isn't up to the task. You simply have no way of knowing when you hire an executive how they will turn out. You go through a process of interviews and vetting to get what you feel is the best possible candidate. And then you hope that you were right in your decision. Is it always going to work out? Of course not. But many times it does. And I think UA has gotten an outstanding leader. I'm fully confident that he is the right person to turn UA on its ass and put us back on top. I've heard him speak in person a couple of times and can here the conviction and confidence in his voice. Sure, he'll have to back that up with strong decisions and leadership, but I think he is off to a fantastic start. Just being able to get all the unions in the same room talking together about a cohesive solution to UA's problems was a monumental achievement. With a little time and help from all of us, we are going to fix this airline and get back to the top. It's just going to be a bit painful before we're able to do that. Nobody likes that. Least of all me. But it is what it is. Let's just get it over with and start re-building.

I'm not about to say that with more employee control of the airline, what may or may not have happened to UA. Let's remember that Peterpaul (IAM) voted in favor of the UA/US merger. Let the people with the necessary skill set run the airline. It's when we all start trying to do jobs we're not qualified for that we get into serious trouble. Instead, we should all just work hard together and focus on doing OUR jobs to the absolute best of our ability. Now I realize that doing that entails placing a lot of trust in the senior executives of the company and based on the recent past, trust is hard to come by. But the ESOP was a failure. We can find numerous reasons as to why. Let's just move on from it. We have a new leader. Major changes are going to take place in all facets of this company. Some will be applauded. Some won't. Profit sharing will be instituted so that we all have a vested interest in doing our best to see this company perform. We all recognize by now the need to contribute to help this airline survive. I would hope that's not in doubt anymore. So given that aspect, I think we just need to steel ourselves through this next several months in order to get our financial situation stabilized. Then, I truly think good things are on the horizon for all of us.
----------------
[/blockquote]

 

[atabuy]

One thing more I would like to say about having wages tied to revenue.
Right now the bean counters know most of where Ual is with respect to cost and revenue.

What would be more enlightening to employees if there pay reflected current revenues every three months or so?
Do you think it might help to give a little more prospective to them. They might be a little more aware about waste, productivity, un-neccessary costs like mishandled bags, running apu's, ect.?

Like they are at home when they turn out the lights in rooms no one is in, or tell the kids to shut the refrigeretor, or turn down the heat at night, or check their milage, and buy gas at the cheapest station.

I think it would help.