US Airways Letter to New York Sun & Charleston Gazette

USA320Pilot

Veteran
May 18, 2003
8,175
1,539
www.usaviation.com
US Airways Letter to the New York Sun Business Columnist Liz Peek

New York Sun, Jan. 9, 2007

Dear Ms. Peek:


We have to take exception to statements made by analyst Zacharay Karabel in your Jan. 9 column. Karabel calls the proposed US Airways-Delta merger a seeming “act of desperation,†primarily because of difficulty integrating operations. We disagree.

The proposed merger would result in a better airline for employees, more choice for consumers on a much larger global network—and more financial stability to withstand economic down times that often plague this cyclical industry.

Our own track record (the US Airways-America West merger of fall 2005) conclusively proves that mergers today can and do work. Consider:

Since our merger, we have produced the highest pre-tax margins of any large, network airline. Shareholders who owned America West stock on Sept. 26, 2005, have seen their investments more than triple.

Our employees are now working for a more financially stable airline that has hired more than 4,000 new employees and recalled more than 700 to their jobs. Our profitability has allowed us to set aside $50 million for profit sharing for our employees based on results through the end of the third quarter.

Importantly, those employees are turning in the second-best On-Time Performance of the major carriers (just behind Southwest in DOT numbers through November, the last month available), and making significant improvements in other customer service measures. We’ve hit important integration milestones, including combining operations at airports, creating one frequent flyer program and one web site, reaching labor agreements with unions representing our customer service, reservations and dispatch employees (and transition agreements with other unions).

Our CEO, Doug Parker, believes in creating airlines that are financially stable for the long term, and in offering careers that will last beyond the next economic downturn. That’s the airline that he and his management team are creating with the US Airways-America West merger; a US Airways-Delta match-up will create even more stability and career potential than either carrier can provide on its own.

Andrea Rader
Director, US Airways Corporate Communications

US Airways Op-Ed

Charleston (W.Va.) Gazette, Jan. 5, 2007
by Andrew Nocella:


We’re sorry to see that the Charleston Gazette has fallen victim to the Delta Air Lines disinformation campaign regarding the proposed US Airways-Delta merger. (Editorial: Air Merger? West Virginia Problem, Jan. 5).

Quite simply, Delta’s claim that thousands of jobs and hundreds of flights would be cancelled (with resulting fare increases) is wrong. Moreover, we think it’s somewhat cruel to spread that story in the Mountain State, which has seen its share of significant change in other basic industries.

The facts—as stated by US Airways from Day One—are these:

No front-line employee will lose his or her job. And, employees at the merged airline will move to the higher of the pay scales, whether that be Delta’s, US Airways’ or America West’s, which merged to become US Airways last year.

The new Delta would continue to serve every city served by the individual airlines today.

US Airways has a history of lowering fares in West Virginia (we cut prices by as much as 23 percent to 131 markets from Huntington just this past fall). Delta led six industry-wide fare increases last year.

Take a look at the track record that supports our position.

The US Airways-America West merger in 2005 resulted in no layoffs of frontline employees, despite capacity reductions of 15 percent (compared with 10 percent contemplated in the Delta merger).

Even better news: we’ve recalled more than 700 employees laid off before the merger, and hired 4,000 new employees.

We continue to serve the same cities both airlines served before, and we’re doing it more economically, which has allowed us to lower fares nationwide in 1,000 markets—by as much as 83 percent—this past year alone.

But let’s talk closer to home. US Airways serves five cities in West Virginia through the US Airways Express brand. Delta serves just Huntington and Charleston.

Local leaders in West Virginia have been told that a merger would reduce competition to West Virginia markets. But six of eight West Virginia airports have no year-round competition today: Continental alone serves Clarksburg, Morgantown and Parkersburg; US Airways is the only carrier to Beckley, Bluefield and Lewisburg year-round (Delta does serve Lewisburg on a seasonal basis).

In Charleston, a US Airways-Delta matchup would carry 56 percent of the weekday passenger traffic (not the 70 percent mentioned in the editorial). Charleston also enjoys service from three other major airlines—Continental, Northwest and United—which operate non-stop service to their five hubs (Cleveland, Houston, Detroit, Dulles and Chicago), with connections worldwide. There will be no shortage of competitive airline service for customers flying from Charleston.

In Huntington, Delta flies to its Cincinnati hub and US Airways to its Charlotte hub on routes that are complementary, not overlapping. Although both hubs have hundreds of flights to lots of destinations, the Cincinnati hub is a convenient connecting point for Huntington residents flying to Midwest and Northeast cities, and Huntington customers will find convenient connections to the Southeast, Florida and the Caribbean through US Airways at Charlotte.

And, as noted, Huntington customers are benefiting from fares that US Airways lowered this past fall.

Rather than creating a “desperate operation eager to raise fares,†US Airways is already demonstrating that a combined airline can be profitable. Since our merger with America West, we have produced the highest pre-tax margins of any large, network airline. We are one of the few airlines that analysts predict will have a profitable fourth quarter (we’ve had three in a row now).

Most importantly, we’ve been able to put aside $50 million for profit sharing for our employees, and we still have the fourth quarter’s results to add to that amount.

Our CEO, Doug Parker, believes in creating airlines that are financially stable for the long term, and in offering careers that will last beyond the next economic downturn. That’s the airline that he and his management team are creating with the US Airways-America West merger. A US Airways-Delta matchup will create even more stability than either carrier can provide on its own.

We appreciate the opportunity to set the record straight. And we invite you and your readers to visit our web site—www.buildingabetterairline.com—and send questions or comments to [email protected].

Sincerely,

Andrew Nocella
Senior Vice President
Schedule, Planning and Alliances
US Airways

Nocella is senior vice president for schedule, planning and alliances at US Airways.
 
Someone should ask him how many of the total people employed with the combined US/HP on 9/12/2001 have their jobs today and what a stockholder in US Airways from 2001's equity is worth now.

Listening to the Tempe crowd claim the work of a bankruptcy judge as their own is really becoming old.
 
Someone should ask him how many of the total people employed with the combined US/HP on 9/12/2001 have their jobs today and what a stockholder in US Airways from 2001's equity is worth now.

Listening to the Tempe crowd claim the work of a bankruptcy judge as their own is really becoming old.


I don't know the exact details of the two bankruptcies, but I know that in April of 2001, the stock price of US was below $30. If stockholders got at least half of their shares that they owned prior to the BK in the newly reorganized company's stock, then they have been made better off (I believe the stock price is still slightly over $60). So I don't know if that's necessarily a good argument...investor's in US Airways have been made much better off as a result of the merger. Ask UA, NW, DL, AA, etc., how their stockholders have done since 2001. And on the whole, I bet every airline in the industry is working with a proportion of less employees compared to their size now than in 2001. Its just the nature of IT, efficiency, and cost crunching. I know that there was a period of time where America West had slightly fewer employees (a few hundred) than two years prior to the date or something like that, yet increased their flying by 80% or something to that effect (if someone wants a source I can dig it up).

Ask DL, AA, NW, UA, etc., how many employees from 2001 still have their jobs today. Probably will get a similar response. Unless you are a true LCC (I have yet to believe US is), your employee numbers probably haven't been surging since 9/12/2001.

When we are talking about the airline industry here, no offense, but I don't think that you are making a very good argument.
 
I know that there was a period of time where America West had slightly fewer employees (a few hundred) than two years prior to the date or something like that, yet increased their flying by 80% or something to that effect (if someone wants a source I can dig it up).

Quoting myself here, I dug up the article for anyone that is interested. It was actually a decrease of 750 employees over a 5 year period while increasing flying by 90%.

The number of America West employees dropped from 12,850 in 2000 to 12,100 in 2005, even while the airline increased the volume of its operations, as measured by available seat miles, by more than 90% and its revenue by 7.5%. In other words, though the cost of salaries and benefits rose from $557 million to $701 million over that period, the percentage of revenue required to cover the airline's labor costs dropped from 25% to 21%.

courtesy of http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,1540,2021993,00.asp

Pulled it from the second page "Helping Passengers Help Themselves"
 
In both bankruptcies, the existing stockholders received nothing, although that's the norm and not the exception.

As for employment, the BTS puts out figures monthly with some delay - the latest out is for Oct 06. They do deal with "full time equivalent" employees instead of total employees, counting 2 part timers as 1 full time employee.

Since they only give the previous 4 years numbers in their releases, the current info only goes back to Oct 02.

US - 41.5% fewer FTE employees
UA - 33.1% fewer
DL - 32.0% fewer
NW - 31.7% fewer
AA - 26.7% fewer
AS - 7.4% fewer
CO - 5.3% fewer
WN - 3.6% fewer
HP - 6.4% more

Jim

[add]

Here's the change between Oct 01 and Oct 02

US - 22.4% fewer FTE employees
UA - 17.4% fewer
DL - 12.8% fewer
NW - 5.5% fewer
AA - 8.8% fewer***
AS - 1.2% more
CO - 7.2% fewer
WN - 8.6% more
HP - 4.7% less

*** AA's 2001 employee count is the sum of AA & TW employee counts.
 
My response to that, I guess, would be that investors and employees were screwed after 9/11, but that was a factor of the airline industry, not US, and affected investors and employees of far more airlines than just US.

And secondly, since the topic is on the subject of mergers, US has shown that a merger can greatly increase investor "equity" (as stated by CluebyFour) and increase the number of employees at the same time. This is in stark contrast to other carriers operating currently, and in the cases where it isn't a contrast, it is typically much stronger. It's not just the work of a bankruptcy judge (though they do deserve a little credit).

And don't think that I am a DL-US cheerleader, because I am not. I don't really want it to go through. Yes, I did want the HP-US merger, but not this one. I wouldn't die if it went through and won't get emotional if it does, because I think Tempe has shown the benefits that can come from a merger. I don't want DL-US, I just want to show those that let emotion get in the way the facts, whether they (or even I) like them.
 
and increase the number of employees at the same time.
Well, going back to the BTS data, the combined US/HP FTE employee count went down slightly between Oct 05 and OCT 06. HP went up, but not enough to offset the loss on the US side.

Jim
 
And secondly, since the topic is on the subject of mergers, US has shown that a merger can greatly increase investor "equity" (as stated by CluebyFour) and increase the number of employees at the same time. This is in stark contrast to other carriers operating currently, and in the cases where it isn't a contrast, it is typically much stronger. It's not just the work of a bankruptcy judge (though they do deserve a little credit).

Okay, let's review:

1. The majority of the revenue (and profit) from the merger on forward (and profit) is generated by what was US-East.

2. Nothing major has truly been done to US East on an operating basis. It's (albeit smaller--but that's thank to the BK court) the same company it was before the merger.

3. The only difference is a dramatically lowered CASM and increased RASM. The former is due to the work of the judge, the latter is due to the work of the judge (abrogating leases thus lowering ASMs, thus raising both CASM and allowing for fare increases).

4. The few things that have been done (website, 320 reconfiguration, airport integration) have been a joke. The website and the 320 reconfig speak for themselves: stop out to somewhere like SFO on a weekend and watch the chaos at the checkin counter.

East was very high (relative to it's peers) RASM before either of the BKs. Lower the cost and shrink the supply, and you will get a profit.

The reasons why Parker want's DL:

1. Because they can beat up the creditors and leasholders in BK a bit more, and accomplish the same thing again.

2. This will (as they basically admit) drive up fares, drive down supply, and murder the airline consumer, particularly on the East Coast.

3. DL has lower costs, and Parker knows that if DL survives on it's own, it's going to cause trouble for US-East whence they exit.

It's short-term value creation. It's a quick hit. That's why the street people dig it. Own it long term, and it'll be problematic. The "shrink forever" won't scale--the LCCs are reaching into smaller markets.
 
Synergies still speak for themselves. Your point #2 isn't fully true. One of the reasons for US's better performance is because of greatly increased aircraft utilization. Flights like PHX-DEN,LAX,SAN,MSP,DFW,SEA,ORD,MIA, and LAS are a repositioning of aircraft to increase revenue without doing much for cost. Some of the midday PHX-SAN flights just decrease time that US's planes were potentially on the ground and not making money...US could have never flown PHX-SAN pre-merger. Some of those flights like ORD, SEA, etc., are flights where they originate very early in the morning from SEA and ORD fly to phoenix, do other flying, and then fly really late at night departing PHX back to Sea and ORD. Once again, another increase in revenue with only having to worry about the cost of fuel and employees, while only minimally incurring other costs. That is a big increase in revenue for US while keeping costs low.

You can either look at it that it spreads out costs not related to fuel and flight crew over more flights, making them more profitable, or simply making an easier profit on the added flights, adding to overrall revenue and profit.

And there has to be a lot of increased revenue from the LAS redeyes like LAS-FLL,MIA,BNA,PBI,RDU, etc. Once again, flights that US could not have done, but because of HP, now can. A big revenue increase with minimal cost increases. HP already had one of the largest aircraft utilization rates in the industry and wasn't really able to alter their revenue and RASM like US was. The merger played a large part in making US East as profitable as it is today. And all of those added Europe flights (and increased possible connection opportunities from HP customers) that may not have been able to be added pre-merger, have helped to make the 2nd and 3rd quarters for US East huge. Granted, it is true, most of the profit has come from US, but HP has still generated a profit and a decent one for its size and market, for really not changing its operations at all.
 
I like the statement, no front line employee has been furloughed since the merge, even though I received my furlough notice October 1, 2006. Sounds like someone doesn't know everything going on.
 
My response to that, I guess, would be that investors and employees were screwed after 9/11, but that was a factor of the airline industry, not US, and affected investors and employees of far more airlines than just US.

And secondly, since the topic is on the subject of mergers, US has shown that a merger can greatly increase investor "equity" (as stated by CluebyFour) and increase the number of employees at the same time. This is in stark contrast to other carriers operating currently, and in the cases where it isn't a contrast, it is typically much stronger. It's not just the work of a bankruptcy judge (though they do deserve a little credit).

And don't think that I am a DL-US cheerleader, because I am not. I don't really want it to go through. Yes, I did want the HP-US merger, but not this one. I wouldn't die if it went through and won't get emotional if it does, because I think Tempe has shown the benefits that can come from a merger. I don't want DL-US, I just want to show those that let emotion get in the way the facts, whether they (or even I) like them.
I agree. I'd much rather they focus on giving their current HP/US employees fair contracts and stepping up the pace of negotiations. This is getting ridiculous. Time for the unions to make some noise?? :blink:
 
"We appreciate the opportunity to set the record straight. And we invite you and your readers to visit our web site—www.buildingabetterairline.com—and send questions or comments to [email protected]."

OK, I want to know who built the buildingabetterairline.com site. Can it be the same group that runs the LCC site?
 

Latest posts