Us Air Outlines Case For Additional Concessions

[USA320Pilot]

US Airways Outlines Case for Additional Concessions

Company spokesperson: "The labor council clearly "had a realistic understanding of the depth of the problem the company faces, and it appears to be ready to confront the challenges facing the company"

NEW YORK (Times) - fficials at US Airways, which is struggling to meet the conditions of federal loans that lifted it out of bankruptcy last year, began making the case for more wage and benefit cuts yesterday to skeptical union leaders who have already publicly declared that "the concessions stand is closed."

See Story

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

The last line in the story tells it all...

Jim

 

[ClueByFour]

I wonder at what point (or if) the current US management will start to realize that revenue performance and strategy is perhaps more important than trying to beat labor until it bleeds to drop labor costs BELOW those of the LCCs.

If the labor groups have any sense, they demand that the top execs at US take the LCC compensation package, since if their "plan" is sucessfull, it should amount to raises all around....

Were it me, I'd tie executive compensation to further labor concessions, and find out just how deeply Dave believes that "everything is on the table....."

 

[AOG-N-IT]

I wonder at what point (or if) the current US management will start to realize that revenue performance and strategy is perhaps more important than trying to beat labor until it bleeds to drop labor costs BELOW those of the LCCs.

If the labor groups have any sense, they demand that the top execs at US take the LCC compensation package, since if their "plan" is sucessfull, it should amount to raises all around....

Were it me, I'd tie executive compensation to further labor concessions, and find out just how deeply Dave believes that "everything is on the table....."

CluebyFour,

Bless your heart my friend !!! I have been saying this for months , if Seigel and crew want to draw the comparision between us and the LCC's on a cost for cost basis ?...Then they cannot exclude themselves and their compensation levels in this situation....I will not even bore people with the differences in the performance levels the Executives at the LCC's obviously enjoy over ours.

OK Unions....it's gut check time, call them out as they try to do to us. Lets's see if they are willing to "walk the walk" or just "talk the talk"?

 

[PITbull]

I wonder at what point (or if) the current US management will start to realize that revenue performance and strategy is perhaps more important than trying to beat labor until it bleeds to drop labor costs BELOW those of the LCCs.

If the labor groups have any sense, they demand that the top execs at US take the LCC compensation package, since if their "plan" is sucessfull, it should amount to raises all around....

Were it me, I'd tie executive compensation to further labor concessions, and find out just how deeply Dave believes that "everything is on the table....."

Clue,

That is where I'm heading. AFA will hear the "plan", and management better have its own plan all lined up to present their participation in bringing their OWN costs in bonuses, perks, salaries, heads etc... down to the managment of the LCC. Just for starters.

That's plan number #1. B)

 

[youngblood]

I am certainly happy to hear others reiterating what's on my mind. If Dave and his buddies aren't willing to cut their pay down to size, why should we? I can say it a thousand times - I can't afford any more cuts. And for those of you who will reply "So quit", pay my bills, tuition, or relocation expenditures and then we'll talk. Quite frankly it is NOT an option right now! (I have a degree and am certainly qualified for other positions but the job market bites.)

No CEO should get bonuses or so called "perks" while a company is operating in the red!!!!!! The bottom line is this - we narrowed our margin of loss at the cost of the employees. (You know - the ones who actually bust theirs butts to keep things going!) In the mean time I have a wonderful suggestion. If - ands its a BIG if - there are more concessions we should demand two things. 1. Management match us dollar for dollar. 2. Top management should be required to do at least one day, on-the-job training for every front line position in this company. Perhaps then they would have a better understanding of where we are coming from.

Another thing. If you want me to even dream about accepting more concessions, I want them to account for every penny we've already given in black and white.

 

[Bear96]

I am certainly happy to hear others reiterating what's on my mind. If Dave and his buddies aren't willing to cut their pay down to size, why should we?

Because, should the unions play hardball and Dave & Dave tire of the game, they will just pull the plug and then go on to rape & pillage another airline at a six-figure salary.

Meantime you will still be left with your bils and tuition and much dimmer job prospects.

I am not saying it is right, but it is what it is.

 

[delldude]

I wonder at what point (or if) the current US management will start to realize that revenue performance and strategy is perhaps more important than trying to beat labor until it bleeds to drop labor costs BELOW those of the LCCs.

If the labor groups have any sense, they demand that the top execs at US take the LCC compensation package, since if their "plan" is sucessfull, it should amount to raises all around....

Were it me, I'd tie executive compensation to further labor concessions, and find out just how deeply Dave believes that "everything is on the table....."

Were it me, I'd tie executive compensation to further labor concessions, and find out just how deeply Dave believes that "everything is on the table....."
lets go one step further ClueByFour...
why can't we tie their compensation to corporate performance??
no performance....no pay...great motivator.

 

[fatburger]

My opinion on what the unions should do:

1) Demand management concessions before any union concessions.

2) When the company turns profitable, at certain levels, triggers are hit
where the unions and management ALL share in the companys
success.

3) Hard language that says the 60 addtional AB bring the contracted
minimum fleet to 339 aircraft.

-fatburger-

 

[76200]

They're using the oldest negotiating tactics in the book......
The ATSB loan requirements.

It's always some other criteria that is just beyond our means.
I'm not saying the ATSB requirements don't exist.

The point is, management knows about the ATSB requirements.
That is their job.

But what do they do, they park airplanes to dispute with the mechanics.

What we need to know, how much revenue did we lose with the those
9 or 10 airplanes out of service, during the IAM dispute ?

Remember Siegel's vision of our airline, large east coast regional similar
to Alaska Airlines.

But what do they continue to do, outsource our flying.

They want us to fund the further reduction of mainline.

What is the true vision of UAIR ?

Who decided to park 10 airbus because of a dispute with
the IAM ?

Who decided to cut back on mainline flying ?


We need to outline case for Additional REVENUE.

How is it that other carriers flying out of PIT have shown an increase in
boardings ?

Do you think that some of those boardings would have flown with us ?

How can they if we don't have the airplanes available ?



76200

 

[700UW]

According to the company's appeal they are losing $43,000 per airplane per day in lost revenue, it is in the tens of millions of dollars all ready.

 

[flyin2low]

No CEO should get bonuses or so called "perks" while a company is operating in the red!!!!

Why do you people not understand how compensation for upper management works.

It may look like the common worker is taking pay and benefit cuts while the CEO is rewarding himself and others on his team. Because that's the way it works. They whip the workers into shape and for accomplishing that, they get rewarded. Dave will never take a pay cut because the common worker did. Now I'm not saying that his compensation is in line for his title, just that because you had to, he doesn't.

 

[Diesel8]

As someone else has suggested, just get the SWA contract and use that. IIRC that would be a payraise for most, of course a paycut for Siegel. He gets the cost he wants, U employees get paid accordingly to the LCC.

 

[76200]

Thanks 700UW for the reply.


Let's see how the math works :


9 airplanes X $ 43,000 per day = $ 387,000 per day in Lost Revenue.


Lost Revenue per month :

30 days X $ 387,000 = $ 11,610,000.00. That is Eleven Million dollars per mo.


Are we financially supporting managements ultimate end game of continuing to downsize mainline as well as financially supporting their continuous attacks on Labor ?



76200

 

[PITbull]

Because, should the unions play hardball and Dave & Dave tire of the game, they will just pull the plug and then go on to rape & pillage another airline at a six-figure salary.

Meantime you will still be left with your bils and tuition and much dimmer job prospects.

I am not saying it is right, but it is what it is.

Sorry Bear96,


Life does not begin and end with USAirways. There are 250,000,000 Americans who have lives outside of any existence with USAirways, and I am sure they don't have "dismal" jobs.

Perhaps in your world; not in ours.