United's Bankruptcy Exit - What To Expect

Imagolfer

Advanced
Sep 30, 2002
192
0
Employees: The Front-Office Games May Not Be Over, Yet
United's Bankruptcy Exit - What To Expect

After more than three long years, United Airlines will finally emerge from chapter 11 next week.

When all is considered, this is hardly an event that merits popping any champagne bottles. Or, even opening a Bud Light for that matter, except for a moment or two of escape from this Kafka-esque nightmare. In fact, the rank and file may need a stiff drink if they take a look at what could unfold for United as it stands today.

Point: It's entirely possible that the pain, the cuts, and the hurt aren't over for the employees who have carried United through the past 37 months.

Lots of Expensive Advice. And They're Going To Keep At It. Let's get the picture. For a record-book period of three years, United's senior management has had the airline wallowing in chapter 11 like a brontosaurus in a tar pit. In that time, this stellar team blew through a reported $370 million spent on lawyers and "advisors" hired to tell management what to do. That's $370 million for people to come from the outside to tell people on the inside how to manage. Sure, bankruptcy requires some legal advice. But $370 million bucks for lawyers and outside "advisors" doesn't indicate a management team that has its act together.

Meanwhile, employees have taken double-digit compensation cuts that make the early-90's ESOP deal look like chump change. Their original pensions are, for all intents and purposes, gone. Their pay is cut to the tune of 25% or more. Some current and retired United employees are literally having to sell their homes because they can no longer afford them. And thousands of former United employees are simply not there anymore.

Post-Chapter: No Real Cost Advantages. The brain-dead academics will begin to chant that United now has huge cost advantages over its competitors. Wrong. What these clowns miss is that chapter 11 isn't the only way to get costs down.

Next week, when United emerges out from under the protective cloak of the judge, it's essentially an airline with no significant competitive or cost advantages over its main competitors such as American or Continental, both of which have slashed costs without entirely slashing their employees' financial jugular.

United does have a world-class customer service team, which is the main reason that the carrier's still in business. But as far as operating advantages, it's at best just neck and neck with American.

In fact, there are some real clouds on the United horizon. Reportedly, the airline's financial wizards - the same ones in control before the airline did a one-and-a-half gainer into bankruptcy - have based the future on $50 oil. Wonderful wishful thinking, especially when one considers that crude closed on Friday at just under $69. Give or take, that would indicate that United is coming out of "chapter" with its fuel-cost estimates already about 30% out of whack.

Rewards For The Patricians. The Masses Can Sing The Blues. Based on this grand performance, that same senior management has awarded itself a cushy 8% of the company's stock, with an estimated average value equal to around $350,000 for each individual. (The CEO, reportedly, had a package that initially equaled $15 million.) Sure, it vests over a period of time, but it no doubt makes all of United's senior management "whole" from any pay or compensation cuts they suffered subsequent to the bankruptcy filing.

The rank-and-file, with their enormous compensation give-backs and sacked pension plan, have made possible this wonderful windfall for their glorious leaders.

And they might want to consider preparing for more of the same.

The Buzz-Words. What's been the continuing theme from the front office at United for the past several weeks? The buzz words are all there: "over-capacity" - "consolidation" - "the need for mergers."

Face it, those $370 million "advisors" have been busy slipping media crib sheets to UA's senior management. Conclusion: the folks at the top seem to be shopping United as a merger partner.

Aside from the parrots in the media who repeat whatever they're told, the fact is that airline mergers are an excellent mechanism to separate the haves from the have-nots. More than that, mergers create the haves and the have-nots.

http://www.aviationplanning.com/asrc1.htm
 
Employees: The Front-Office Games May Not Be Over, Yet
United's Bankruptcy Exit - What To Expect

http://www.aviationplanning.com/asrc1.htm

Imagolfer,

Where do you find all this crap???

Must you post every anti-United article you come across? And the whole thing for that matter? The link would be plenty sufficient.

All I have to say to all these skeptics is "boo-hoo-hoo!" Cry me a river. They've all been predicting UA's demise for years, and now that UA is emerging and ready to take on the competition without the chains of the court and the lawyers, they all are left with egg on their face. All they can do now to save face is try to predict more gloom and doom.

News Flash... No one is listening. The remaining employees of UA are proud to have beaten the odds, and believe me when I say we have sweet revenge on our minds for all those who tried to kick us when we were down. UA is ready to kick a$$ and take no prisoners. No amount of negative drivel from these self-proclaimed analysts will take away from our moment on Februrary 1st.

Congrats to everyone at United! :up:
 
Ya know, jetz, if you don't like the points made in the article, why turn it into something personal with Imagolfer? Why not point out for us the mistakes in Boyd's thinking? Should be easy to do. But instead, you just go for the cheap shot. You're better than that, and capable of so much more.
 
I actually think Mr. Boyd has some very valid points. I have nothing against UA or it's employees, but this has been the most expensive bankruptcy in history and I question their exit as does Mr. Boyd.

My brother works for UA and I am concerned about him and his family's future.
 
Ya know, jetz, if you don't like the points made in the article, why turn it into something personal with Imagolfer?

1- Because this is the second thread he started here with a very negative and biased premise.
2- Because he posts the entire article (which is frowned upon on this site) instead of just the link and a few high lights.
3- Because by his own admission he agrees with the biased opinion of the Boyd Group.

Just seems a little too much like flame bait. And it also invites trashy comments from undesirables like MrFishy.

As for the points made in the article, I didn't think they needed rebuttal since they are so obviously off based and those points have been discussed in this forum at length. There is nothing new in the article that hasn't been talked about already.

example 1: $50 per/barrel oil assumption...

"United says the $50-a-barrel mark is a long-term estimate and that the company can break even at current prices by raising fares and extracting more revenue from premium services. "

example 2: UA has done nothing to distinguish itself...

"Its goal now, essentially, is to offer something for every customer. That philosophy is in stark contrast to where the rest of the industry is headed.

United doesn't think the "cookie-cutter" approach will work for its business. Its recent moves have included bolstering international flights and shifting flights to its Ted operation. United beefed up its first-class offering. It also introduced premium service between New York and California.

The result: Customers get a wide variety of options to choose from when flying.

The strategy seems to be working. United says its 70-seat regional jets, its premium coast-to- coast flights and its Ted service are all proving financially successful and are performing better than what they replaced in a variety of measures including profitability."

example 3: UA's route structure really isn't that good and there's no plans to expand since we dumped 100 airplanes...

Considering higher utilization and efficiency, UA doesn't need as many planes to span the globe. How do you explain the international expansion???

"Industry observers say United's greatest asset is its coveted route network.

United flies to 210 destinations in 28 countries and two U.S. territories. Add in the carrier's multiple partnerships and the carrier can bring customers almost anywhere across the globe."

Need I go on????
 
1- Because this is the second thread he started here with a very negative and biased premise.
2- Because he posts the entire article (which is frowned upon on this site) instead of just the link and a few high lights.


Actually, I did not post the entire article and am very familiar with the rules :)

I post the articles in this forum as it relates to United. Sorry it does not agree with your opinions, I guess yours are the only ones that count
 
Ssshh, be quiet. Wouldn't want to be realistic. God knows I hope you guys don't go down the same path as US with Ch. 11, Part 2, but there is alot of truth in what was posted and I personally didn't see it as an attempt to create problems. Considering almost every major has/is in Ch. 11, the "picking on us" bit is complete paranoia.

And Jetz, you aren't exactly free of questionable statements concerning other carriers.
 
I must ask....why is it bad if UA merges "like US"? I think US did the absolute smartest thing for the employees and shareholders alike. The only ones I seeing crying are the other legacies. So if UA decides to follow LCC's path and merge, I am all for it.

And I must agree with Jetz, this United bashathon has been going on for ages.
 
I must ask....why is it bad if UA merges "like US"? I think US did the absolute smartest thing for the employees and shareholders alike. The only ones I seeing crying are the other legacies. So if UA decides to follow LCC's path and merge, I am all for it.

And I must agree with Jetz, this United bashathon has been going on for ages.


Hey there Fly, hope you are well. UAL doesn't have the corner on the bashings. We had our fair share. I agree with you. The only problem I have is there is a word that we all hate to admit as airline workers.....overcapacity. If our merger is ANY indication, future mergers will have to do the same or you're in essence just putting employees and airplanes together.
 
Hey there Fly, hope you are well. UAL doesn't have the corner on the bashings. We had our fair share. I agree with you. The only problem I have is there is a word that we all hate to admit as airline workers.....overcapacity. If our merger is ANY indication, future mergers will have to do the same or you're in essence just putting employees and airplanes together.

But LCC #1, conventional wisdom is that the record-high load factors enjoyed by most airlines these days except for WN (with many majors above 80% and some at 85%) is conclusive proof that domestic overcapacity is a myth.
 
But LCC #1, conventional wisdom is that the record-high load factors enjoyed by most airlines these days except for WN (with many majors above 80% and some at 85%) is conclusive proof that domestic overcapacity is a myth.


I agree, but tell that to investors who will have to risk the money. I think it's brainwashing but someone decided that was the way it is. Frankly, I am so sick of excuses from this industry. Am I alone?
 
But LCC #1, conventional wisdom is that the record-high load factors enjoyed by most airlines these days except for WN (with many majors above 80% and some at 85%) is conclusive proof that domestic overcapacity is a myth.

Betcha if you only charge a dollar for every seat, the load factors will go even higher. :D

There is overcapacity; at least, at prices that will cover the carriers costs. The response has been for all the players in the industry to take an axe to their cost structures, but that can only go so far. At some point you're not paying enough to attract qualified mechanics or pilots. Some of the issues associated with that show up immediately, but unfortunately some of those issues don't show up for awhile and when they do are likely to occur in dramatic fashion (inexperienced pilots and mechanics lead to safety issues, which may not really become apparent until there's an accident, for example. An even more dramatic corollary: at a retail chain, reduced security expenditures leads to increased losses due to theft or whatever the correct term of art is. With the airlines and airports, reducing security expenditures apparently has no impact...until you have something like 9/11).

There is a certain level of skills required at the various jobs in the airline industry to transport people from point A to point B in a manner the public desires and at a level of safety the public will accept. It is possible that the level of capacity we have now results in ticket costs that are high enough to compensate for those skill sets.

And no, this isn't a union vs. management issue, it's a free market issue. If the auto repair places will pay me 60K/year to fix cars and the airlines will only pay me 40K/yr to fix planes, then why the heck am I going to work for an airline (of course, neither would pay me that as I'm not a mechanic, but it's an illustrative example. Work with me). The airlines will be unable to attract enough people to the industry. Unless the airlines find they can train skilled mechanics in, say Uzbekistan (and hire former Soviet fighter pilots, perhaps) and pay them all $10,000 US per year or something. :shock:

-synchronicity
 
It would appear that we at least have figured out that Imagolfer has a flavor for Michael Boyd.


HUH??????? That's all you have?

I simply am posting an opinion of an aviation analyst as it relates to UAL. I am sorry that not everyone has the same view of the future of UA you do.