US Airways must cut more or may lose loan guarantees

[chipmunn]

[P][A href=http://www.post-gazette.com/businessnews/20021107usair1107p4.asp]http://www.post-gazette.com/businessnews/20021107usair1107p4.asp[/A][/P]
[P]The airline continues to keep the stabilization board informed of its financial position, and yesterday it met with the leadership of the Communications Workers of America, which represents its reservation and gate agents. In anticipation of the meeting, union officials said they expected that the airline might ask for changes in work rules in order to reduce labor costs rather than seek further wage and benefit concessions. The union has already agreed to about $70 million in annual concessions.[/P]

 

[tadjr]

[P][BR]A couple of items that could be changed in the CWA contract to reduce overtime and sick calls would be to do away with the swap restrictions currently in place. As long as someone is willing to work a shift, it should be allowed regardless of how many days in a quarter you've traded off and you should be able to work more than 12 hours 2 days in a row (if I cant swap I'll call in sick and let them cover it with overtime way of thinking). If you can work as many hours as the company needs for overtime and its not a safety issue, then why is it an issue when its a swap? Also if they are afraid of someone being on the payroll and never working, then a 50% shift work requirement a quarter would be much more fair and equitable a solution. [/P]
[P]There are days when I could work for someone to pick up some extra hours (since I've been downgraded and OT is hard to come by), but the hours are the same as mine and people dont want to swap their shift with me so I can pick up the extra hours to work because it counts toward THEIR swaps to do this. Stupid rule.[/P]

 

[N628AU]

Tadjr...

This is the same issue Mechanical and Related has been dealing with for some time. About a month ago the IAM sent a request to the Company to drop the back-to-back swap restriction, to aid employees having to commute due to being bumped. This is seemingly not a safety issue, as you can work back-to-back on OT. Interestingly, I have not heard anything else on the subject since then. Sure would make life easier on some people.

 

[dash8ter]

The company might want to rework the current setup of mainline express employees working in the hubs. I understand the Teamsters (representing ALG and PSA gate employees in PHL, LGA, BOS, and PIT) have initiated a lawsuit regarding this issue... possibly a legal battle that the company does not want to fight.

 

[AP Tech]

We have been fighting over this swap issue for some time now. You are permitted to work 5 OT doubles in a row but not back to back swaps. After the contract was voted in a letter was sent to HR requesting to waive the no back to back rule but with no sucess so far. What does this cost the company? Swapping cuts down on sick calls and boosts morale for those who are forced to commute. But once again when it helps out the employee's it is not permitted by this so called labor friendly company!

 

[ITRADE]

Since when did ATSB require additional changes up and above those required/requested in the initial conditional approval notice?

 

[mrplanes]

Itrade, they didn't. The stipulation however is that we must show a minimum profit (7% I think) and with the latest numbers regarding revenue the original forecast Dave put out will not meet that minimum target. The ATSB is not changing the rules. The lack of traffic is. That is why he needs to cut more.

 

[chipmunn]

Mrplanes:

Mrplanes said: Itrade, they didn't. The stipulation however is that we must show a minimum profit (7% I think) and with the latest numbers regarding revenue the original forecast Dave put out will not meet that minimum target. The ATSB is not changing the rules. The lack of traffic is. That is why he needs to cut more.

Chip comments: Mrplanes, you are correct and this information has been provided to the US unions. The company is reducing costs through a number of avenues to address the revenue shortfall with more cuts expected from creditors, vendors, and aircraft lessors; as well as additional layoffs and proposed productivity and pension changes to obtain the Fitch recommendation on the 7 percent profit margin.

The good news is the company and the ATSB are working together on the problem and I believe US will obtain the loan guarantee, provided the company can get the required savings.

Chip

 

[mrplanes]

Chip:

The company and the union (alpa) need to be thinking outside the box on additional savings. IMHO this pilot group will NOT allow Mesa to be flying their 70 seat jets with their pilots on routes that we just vacated to furlough our own people. If Dave thinks he's going to get that I submit he is barking up the wrong tree. If they fly on our routes, then they must be flown with our furloughed pilots. Otherwise you have a New York Air all over again. I also feel that any further givebacks we negotiate MUST be conditioned with a snapback clause to our original concessionary contract. Notwithstanding the open items we agreed to discuss further. This management needs to change a whole lot more than working condition, pay and benefits to make this pig fly. I'm talking about fare structure, route structure, management structure etc... . I hope for all of our sake that these people can get it done. There is no reason for us NOT to fly RJ's. We will see if Dave and the boys are just trying to set up an alter ego airline, or make this airline more efficient. As far as pensions go, that is a very negotiable item at this point. But sooner or later the interest rates will go back up and when that happens so should any concessions we give on that front.

Dave announced, and we agreed, to no snapbacks in the original concessions. Now we must insist on them.

 

[chipmunn]

Expect a MEC resolution regarding 69-seaters, 70-seat jets, and Freedom Air as early as today.

Furthermore, I believe there will be an announcement regarding enhanced/increased RJ flying and a resolution of the Freedom Air dispute in the immediate future.

Chip

 

[Eris]

How about Dave Siegel and Michelle Bryan agree to take a pay cut down to 1$ per year(like Lee Iacoca did at Crysler when they got a government loan. The 1$ per year wage would be for the duration of any furloughed employees.

Dave and Michelle would receive 10% of the company to be granted only when all employees on property as of September 11, 2001 are once again employed at mainline with a 10% raise.

And any non-executive pretending Chairman of the Board gets squat. Since he isn't here anyway.

 

[LDKIAM]

Unless Orenstein agrees to either get rid of Freedom or agree to union certification on that property and bring back the CC Air pilots ALPA will not agree to anything.

 

[AOG-N-IT]

I honestly can't blame ALPA for not working with anything that smacks of Jonathan Orenstien.

The man is as anti-union..and as labor un-friendly as they come. CCAir's downfall started with Johnny O...and ended with ALPA.

So being caught between a Tyrant and attempted Union Buster..and ALPA Union Politics...our friends at CCAir didn't have a hope in hades of surviving. When I left CCAir..it was 27 Acft Strong...and a hell of a work group...less than a year later , it was cannon fodder..and many lives were ruined or at least horribly disrupted...and for what? Is that the penalty for hard work and dedication?

The treatment that CCAir's Pilots and Employee's recieved should be a Benchmark of what to avoid...or be fearful as all outdoors of.

My thoughts on our furloughed pilots recieving jobs at the other contract carriers are not hopeful ones. Many are aligned with other healthier carriers..and could likely shift thier focus and colors in a flash , should the need present itself?..Remember that loyalty is green..and we are in the red.

With that in mind...our Flyers need to insure that J4J is in the form of being with our own WO's...and make sure the langauge is engraved in stone..with documenatation being signed in blood too.

Anything short of deals within the confines of our own structure...is a deal waiting to be broken or side-stepped....then the only J4J deal will be if you have a Reserve Obligation with the USAFRes..or the USNRes.

Just be real cautious of what you wish or bargain for...You might screw up and really get it? Proceed with caution regarding any dealings with Jonathan Lorenzostien.

 

[chipmunn]

It appears there will be an acceptable Freedom Air agreement announced shortly between Mesa, Mesa ALPA, US Airways, and US Airways ALPA.

This should bring additional RJ's (70-seaters) into the US system, in the near future, which will provide J4J opportunities.

Chip

 

[1ab]

since RJ's are needed immediately maybe U should contract out as soon as possible to any airline that can fly them maybe ALPA and AFA should put clauses or any legal binding language that would make such agreement with other airlines that would operate these RJ's to be temporary and with a deadline of say 2 years when U will have their own RJs on property with mid-atlantic up and running..