I have kept quiet on this subject long enough. It appears to me (no offense to some) that some are only looking at the short term instead of the long term. Yes as far as I am concerned we do have a gun being held to our heads, but this will not always be the case. We as a company are coming to the end of a rocky boat ride and the waters ahead are smooth. First when war does break out I doubt very much that any severance will be discountined. Some have implied just another way for the powers at CCY to line their pockets. Doubt that very much after the much publicied failures of other companys due to greed. Will this concession package cost the groups jobs? You betcha. This is the short term. Lets look at the long term. When all falls in place(gov loan,RSA and GE fiancing) this airline will become a lean mean flying machine. You can actually feel the glare from AA,NW,CO and DL boardrooms and hear their wishful thinking that we will vote it down therefore allowing them to move in and pick our bones clean. The end of U Period... But on the other hand if these concessions are voted in, pension question is taken care of and all financing is in the books so to speak I then can see those same boardrooms in panic mode. What we are going through now unpleasant as it is we force all other carriers not in BK to take drastic measures to compete with us....yes I said compete with us. This carrier will become a leader instead of a follower. Some might think that I am a company cheerleader however far from it...I am a realist. There is a place and a time to fight our battles, we are at the place but not at the time. All I ask for those who have not voted to look beyond the short term...look at the long term and then make your choice. If you vote no then so be it....if you vote yes then also so be it. I respect your choice. Please try and vote without the emotion.........INT BOUND IN A FEW DAYS!!!!!!!!!!
This is much longer than planned, but in trying to respond to those outstanding questions that haven't been addressed, I hope people will bear with me. I am going to be traveling for several days and will not be in a position to view subsequent posts and questions.
· With regard to the ATSB loan approval, we continue to meet with the Board on a regular basis to keep them updated on the restructuring. I am not going to speak for the ATSB and its staff, but I believe they have been favorably impressed by this management team's initiative to address the prolonged deterioration in the industry's revenue outlook. We continue to make a very strong case to the Board as to why the additional cost savings from round 2 are adequate and why we believe we are qualified for the loan guarantee once all the cost savings agreements have been ratified.
· Those who have raised questions about the pilot pension being a more pressing issue than the cost savings from a specific work group miss the point. All of these cost savings items are part of a larger equation that when taken in sum, represent a business plan that hopefully will convince the ATSB and RSA to provide us with financing. As we have disclosed to all employees in the Dec. 24 letter from Dave Siegel, the outcome of the pilot pension plan problem could be that the current plan is terminated and replaced by a less expensive plan. But that does not absolve all employee groups from participating in the restructuring with more competitive work rules and health care costs. And it also does not mean that other
employees are funding the pilot pension program, because they are not.
· There was some discussion about fare restructuring. As many of you realize, the Justice Department would not look kindly on a public discussion about our plans for air fares and pricing policies. UA put forth a pricing initiative on Sunday night that is generating lots of interest. While the media is applauding the customer benefits of reduced fares, US Airways has analyzed the business fare changes initiated by United and determined that they will have a significant negative impact on both United and the industry as a whole. While business travel demand is somewhat elastic, we question whether the UA initiative will produce positive revenue results. Nevertheless, we are not going to put the company at a disadvantage in the marketplace, and at this point US Airways has matched in competitive markets and we will continue to evaluate this and all other pricing options.
· With regard to employee suggestions posted on this site, I am not familiar with that list, nor has it been forwarded to the H.R. Department, which is in the process of putting together a new employee suggestion program that will be rolled out very soon. If it still exists, please send it along and I will forward it to H.R.
· For some of the work groups, the vast majority of savings are driven by modifications to the medical plan, and the balance is in prospective savings. In the fleet service group, for example, we said employees would not be furloughed as we transition to outside vendors for mail/cargo handling all anticipated savings are based on attrition.
· On the issue of "labor friendly, I was going to refer to a recent Dave Siegel speech, but someone has kindly done that for me. Let me just add that we have been pursuing a course of action to keep the company from going out of business. If anyone thinks that such negotiations were going to involve pay raises, more lenient work rules and expanded health care and pension benefits, then they were mistaken. Unfortunately, some of the rhetoric has been rather heated, and it hasn't been helped by our having to
debate about the "fairness" of pay cuts or more productive work rules. Not once have we said that we are enjoying asking for concessions or that it would be fun for employees - but we are doing our best to explain the necessity and the rationale of the restructuring plan.
· I'm not sure what the "conflicting" posts are with regard to war and severance pay. Each work group has negotiated severance pay provision - they are pretty clearly spelled out. Ask your supervisor or your union
rep. about your own situation.
· Finally, I think I have made it pretty clear that the personal attacks are uncalled for, so you can forget about my responding to those kinds of questions about other members of the management team. And if in-flight created some management positions, it was in the context of a department reorganization. We have the leanest management team in the industry and one that is fully sharing in the sacrifices of the restructuring. We also have several hundred open management positions, and it is becoming increasingly more difficult to fill them because potential applicants read some of the nastiness that gets posted here, and then looks at the media coverage about the company and the industry, and decides they don't want to bother with us. Given some of the questionable decisions that have been made here over the years, i.e., Business Select, employees should want good management in place that will run this company well because we ALL benefit from good management.
And as far as who said what to a reporter and when? I have several examples of CWA reps. taking confidential information and sharing it with the media or posting it on web sites, so we could debate this for days. All these accusations about "why did you say this in 1983?" are not productive and simply indicate a desire to place blame. Sometimes people are misquoted by reporters who don't fully understand the background of an issue. Sometimes comments are edited out of context in the rush to meet a deadline. Sometimes news sources are mistaken and don't say the right thing. Sometimes spokespeople get phone calls in the middle of the night and need a few minutes to gather their thoughts.
This management team is doing everything possible to improve communications with employees - from Dave Siegel's employee meetings, online chats and weekly phone messages, to information being made widely available to employees about our restructuring, to management getting out in the field to visit with employees. We are trying to improve the flow of information. And on the other end, we can only hope that employees are interested in hearing us out.
Chris Chiames
· With regard to the ATSB loan approval, we continue to meet with the Board on a regular basis to keep them updated on the restructuring. I am not going to speak for the ATSB and its staff, but I believe they have been favorably impressed by this management team's initiative to address the prolonged deterioration in the industry's revenue outlook. We continue to make a very strong case to the Board as to why the additional cost savings from round 2 are adequate and why we believe we are qualified for the loan guarantee once all the cost savings agreements have been ratified.
· Those who have raised questions about the pilot pension being a more pressing issue than the cost savings from a specific work group miss the point. All of these cost savings items are part of a larger equation that when taken in sum, represent a business plan that hopefully will convince the ATSB and RSA to provide us with financing. As we have disclosed to all employees in the Dec. 24 letter from Dave Siegel, the outcome of the pilot pension plan problem could be that the current plan is terminated and replaced by a less expensive plan. But that does not absolve all employee groups from participating in the restructuring with more competitive work rules and health care costs. And it also does not mean that other
employees are funding the pilot pension program, because they are not.
· There was some discussion about fare restructuring. As many of you realize, the Justice Department would not look kindly on a public discussion about our plans for air fares and pricing policies. UA put forth a pricing initiative on Sunday night that is generating lots of interest. While the media is applauding the customer benefits of reduced fares, US Airways has analyzed the business fare changes initiated by United and determined that they will have a significant negative impact on both United and the industry as a whole. While business travel demand is somewhat elastic, we question whether the UA initiative will produce positive revenue results. Nevertheless, we are not going to put the company at a disadvantage in the marketplace, and at this point US Airways has matched in competitive markets and we will continue to evaluate this and all other pricing options.
· With regard to employee suggestions posted on this site, I am not familiar with that list, nor has it been forwarded to the H.R. Department, which is in the process of putting together a new employee suggestion program that will be rolled out very soon. If it still exists, please send it along and I will forward it to H.R.
· For some of the work groups, the vast majority of savings are driven by modifications to the medical plan, and the balance is in prospective savings. In the fleet service group, for example, we said employees would not be furloughed as we transition to outside vendors for mail/cargo handling all anticipated savings are based on attrition.
· On the issue of "labor friendly, I was going to refer to a recent Dave Siegel speech, but someone has kindly done that for me. Let me just add that we have been pursuing a course of action to keep the company from going out of business. If anyone thinks that such negotiations were going to involve pay raises, more lenient work rules and expanded health care and pension benefits, then they were mistaken. Unfortunately, some of the rhetoric has been rather heated, and it hasn't been helped by our having to
debate about the "fairness" of pay cuts or more productive work rules. Not once have we said that we are enjoying asking for concessions or that it would be fun for employees - but we are doing our best to explain the necessity and the rationale of the restructuring plan.
· I'm not sure what the "conflicting" posts are with regard to war and severance pay. Each work group has negotiated severance pay provision - they are pretty clearly spelled out. Ask your supervisor or your union
rep. about your own situation.
· Finally, I think I have made it pretty clear that the personal attacks are uncalled for, so you can forget about my responding to those kinds of questions about other members of the management team. And if in-flight created some management positions, it was in the context of a department reorganization. We have the leanest management team in the industry and one that is fully sharing in the sacrifices of the restructuring. We also have several hundred open management positions, and it is becoming increasingly more difficult to fill them because potential applicants read some of the nastiness that gets posted here, and then looks at the media coverage about the company and the industry, and decides they don't want to bother with us. Given some of the questionable decisions that have been made here over the years, i.e., Business Select, employees should want good management in place that will run this company well because we ALL benefit from good management.
And as far as who said what to a reporter and when? I have several examples of CWA reps. taking confidential information and sharing it with the media or posting it on web sites, so we could debate this for days. All these accusations about "why did you say this in 1983?" are not productive and simply indicate a desire to place blame. Sometimes people are misquoted by reporters who don't fully understand the background of an issue. Sometimes comments are edited out of context in the rush to meet a deadline. Sometimes news sources are mistaken and don't say the right thing. Sometimes spokespeople get phone calls in the middle of the night and need a few minutes to gather their thoughts.
This management team is doing everything possible to improve communications with employees - from Dave Siegel's employee meetings, online chats and weekly phone messages, to information being made widely available to employees about our restructuring, to management getting out in the field to visit with employees. We are trying to improve the flow of information. And on the other end, we can only hope that employees are interested in hearing us out.
Chris Chiames
Mr Chiames
The way the company went in closed Tampa maint.hangar was not to labor friendly was it? The company has LIED to the employees and probably will do so again.That is why I and many more employees will vote NO. You and Alabama Dave can go ahead and threaten the employees again with liquidation.SO BE IT.
The way the company went in closed Tampa maint.hangar was not to labor friendly was it? The company has LIED to the employees and probably will do so again.That is why I and many more employees will vote NO. You and Alabama Dave can go ahead and threaten the employees again with liquidation.SO BE IT.
delldude
Veteran
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/6/2003 8:43:39 PM cat 111 wrote:
[P]Mr Chiames[BR][BR]The way the company went in closed Tampa maint.hangar was not to labor friendly was it? The company has LIED to the employees and probably will do so again.That is why I and many more employees will vote NO. You and Alabama Dave can go ahead and threaten the employees again with liquidation.SO BE IT.[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]due to tpa's track record of aircraft sabotage and employee problems do you actually have the stones to ask why?
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/6/2003 8:43:39 PM cat 111 wrote:
[P]Mr Chiames[BR][BR]The way the company went in closed Tampa maint.hangar was not to labor friendly was it? The company has LIED to the employees and probably will do so again.That is why I and many more employees will vote NO. You and Alabama Dave can go ahead and threaten the employees again with liquidation.SO BE IT.[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]due to tpa's track record of aircraft sabotage and employee problems do you actually have the stones to ask why?
delldude
Veteran
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/6/2003 7:42:56 PM US Airways, Inc wrote:
[P] [BR]· With regard to the ATSB loan approval, we continue to meet with the Board on a regular basis to keep them updated on the restructuring. I am not going to speak for the ATSB and its staff, but I believe they have been favorably impressed by this management team's initiative to address the prolonged deterioration in the industry's revenue outlook. We continue to make a very strong case to the Board as to why the additional cost savings from round 2 are adequate and why we believe we are qualified for the loan guarantee once all the cost savings agreements have been ratified.[BR][STRONG]absolutely no response to my question as to will there be anymore "contract modifications"......also convienently "out of town for a few days"..like until after friday.....don't come back to me for anymore my friend...you guys are pushing this to the limit.[/STRONG][BR][BR] only hope that employees are interested in hearing us out.[BR][BR]Chris Chiames[BR][BR][/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
![14.gif']](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F14.gif%27%5D+%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F14.gif%27%5D+%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F14.gif%27%5D+%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F14.gif%27%5D+%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F14.gif%27%5D&hash=5f06ce64817ee23628d8dc8104efefcf)
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/6/2003 7:42:56 PM US Airways, Inc wrote:
[P] [BR]· With regard to the ATSB loan approval, we continue to meet with the Board on a regular basis to keep them updated on the restructuring. I am not going to speak for the ATSB and its staff, but I believe they have been favorably impressed by this management team's initiative to address the prolonged deterioration in the industry's revenue outlook. We continue to make a very strong case to the Board as to why the additional cost savings from round 2 are adequate and why we believe we are qualified for the loan guarantee once all the cost savings agreements have been ratified.[BR][STRONG]absolutely no response to my question as to will there be anymore "contract modifications"......also convienently "out of town for a few days"..like until after friday.....don't come back to me for anymore my friend...you guys are pushing this to the limit.[/STRONG][BR][BR] only hope that employees are interested in hearing us out.[BR][BR]Chris Chiames[BR][BR][/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
Thank you Mr Chiames for posting on this board.
I sincerely appreciate your efforts to keep us
informed and clear up some of the issues, fears
that we all feel during this reorganization process.
I think we all appreciate an honest, forthright,
mutually respectful communication.
So many employees do a fantastic job every day
in spite of enormous challenges...weather, understaffing,
and ultimately we all like to believe that our efforts
will lead to a more successful company.
Thanks for taking the time to communicate with us.
I sincerely appreciate your efforts to keep us
informed and clear up some of the issues, fears
that we all feel during this reorganization process.
I think we all appreciate an honest, forthright,
mutually respectful communication.
So many employees do a fantastic job every day
in spite of enormous challenges...weather, understaffing,
and ultimately we all like to believe that our efforts
will lead to a more successful company.
Thanks for taking the time to communicate with us.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/6/2003 7:42:56 PM US Airways, Inc wrote:
restructuring. We also have several hundred open management positions, and it is becoming increasingly more difficult to fill them because potential applicants read some of the nastiness that gets posted here, and then looks
----------------
[/blockquote]
Just curious, where are these jobs posted? usairways.com lists only a handful of open positions, mainly for pricing and inventory analysts.
----------------
On 1/6/2003 7:42:56 PM US Airways, Inc wrote:
restructuring. We also have several hundred open management positions, and it is becoming increasingly more difficult to fill them because potential applicants read some of the nastiness that gets posted here, and then looks
----------------
[/blockquote]
Just curious, where are these jobs posted? usairways.com lists only a handful of open positions, mainly for pricing and inventory analysts.
also convienently "out of town for a few days"..like until after friday.....don't come back to me for anymore my friend...you guys are pushing this to the limit.[/STRONG]
He is out of town because he's meeting with employees with Mr. Seigel travelling the system. Today (Tuesday) they are in CLT and this afternoon they are heading to PHL. I believe it speaks volumes about this teams efforts to save this company.
He is out of town because he's meeting with employees with Mr. Seigel travelling the system. Today (Tuesday) they are in CLT and this afternoon they are heading to PHL. I believe it speaks volumes about this teams efforts to save this company.
The feeling of frustration at my level comes from our unilateral giving in the 90*s and the fact that we just did step to the plate and voted by 75% to help again. We did not have 17% and 16% raises built into any of our contracts. We don*t have a defined pension plan, anymore. We at this level have to ask why do we have to give up completely, some benefits while those that make much more than us don*t?
My intention is not to cause USAIRWAYS to liquidate. I got into this job because it*s what I did to fund my flight training when I came out of school. When health reasons kept me from moving up, I continued this job because I liked airplanes, airports, and yes, pilots. I just never had the luck that others had. Not bitter, just tryin to make a living now.
So, I still, must hold the opinion that the company has not been equitable with us. However, I do want to apologize to the many pilots out there that I offended with my remarks to Chip. As a private pilot, I do respect you guys that fly the big stuff. It*s just that, once-in-a-while, it*s not pleasant when someone above you in stature (and someone you respect), shows you very little.
Good luck to you, ITRADE, and all at USAIRWAYS.
My apologies,
BuccaneerBill
----------------
[/blockquote]
No need to apologize Bill. I'm not a pilot although I have always wanted to be one and admired those that have done so. Given that, I use to be in your shoes. I've had many a flight crew remind me I was "Overpaid and under worked". My family taught me long ago to consider the source and move on. It's easier to smile at them and tell them to have a nice day. Hold the door for them and then .
I agree with you the company has stepped on CSA and FSA over the years. It was awful some of the crap they came up with and all you could do is grin and bare it. I don't know why but I truly believe this team is different. Many on this thread will disagree with me but then again....so be it. They get nothing out of failure of this airline. They wouldn't be asking for these concessions if they didn't need them to emerge from BK. They are in the field FAR more than Wolfie and Rakeesh were. Rakeesh and Stevo couldn't pull themselves out of the private jet long enough to talk to the regular guys and gals let alone, God forbid, ask for their input.
Best of luck to you. Just a word of warning...you never get the airline out of your blood. I was furloughed almost 10 yrs. ago and I miss it each and every day. Luckily for me I have an enormous amount of friends and family members still with U that keeps me in the "loop".
My intention is not to cause USAIRWAYS to liquidate. I got into this job because it*s what I did to fund my flight training when I came out of school. When health reasons kept me from moving up, I continued this job because I liked airplanes, airports, and yes, pilots. I just never had the luck that others had. Not bitter, just tryin to make a living now.
So, I still, must hold the opinion that the company has not been equitable with us. However, I do want to apologize to the many pilots out there that I offended with my remarks to Chip. As a private pilot, I do respect you guys that fly the big stuff. It*s just that, once-in-a-while, it*s not pleasant when someone above you in stature (and someone you respect), shows you very little.
Good luck to you, ITRADE, and all at USAIRWAYS.
My apologies,
BuccaneerBill
----------------
[/blockquote]
No need to apologize Bill. I'm not a pilot although I have always wanted to be one and admired those that have done so. Given that, I use to be in your shoes. I've had many a flight crew remind me I was "Overpaid and under worked". My family taught me long ago to consider the source and move on. It's easier to smile at them and tell them to have a nice day. Hold the door for them and then .
I agree with you the company has stepped on CSA and FSA over the years. It was awful some of the crap they came up with and all you could do is grin and bare it. I don't know why but I truly believe this team is different. Many on this thread will disagree with me but then again....so be it. They get nothing out of failure of this airline. They wouldn't be asking for these concessions if they didn't need them to emerge from BK. They are in the field FAR more than Wolfie and Rakeesh were. Rakeesh and Stevo couldn't pull themselves out of the private jet long enough to talk to the regular guys and gals let alone, God forbid, ask for their input.
Best of luck to you. Just a word of warning...you never get the airline out of your blood. I was furloughed almost 10 yrs. ago and I miss it each and every day. Luckily for me I have an enormous amount of friends and family members still with U that keeps me in the "loop".
delldude
Veteran
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/7/2003 8:37:24 AM MrAeroMan wrote:
[P]also convienently "out of town for a few days"..like until after friday.....don't come back to me for anymore my friend...you guys are pushing this to the limit.[/STRONG][BR][BR]He is out of town because he's meeting with employees with Mr. Seigel travelling the system. Today (Tuesday) they are in CLT and this afternoon they are heading to PHL. I believe it speaks volumes about this teams efforts to save this company. [/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P] like i stated...he skipped the question as to another round of 'contract modifications'...or was i the only one who noticed?[BR][STRONG]stay tuned for round 3 or we can't emerge![/STRONG]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/7/2003 8:37:24 AM MrAeroMan wrote:
[P]also convienently "out of town for a few days"..like until after friday.....don't come back to me for anymore my friend...you guys are pushing this to the limit.[/STRONG][BR][BR]He is out of town because he's meeting with employees with Mr. Seigel travelling the system. Today (Tuesday) they are in CLT and this afternoon they are heading to PHL. I believe it speaks volumes about this teams efforts to save this company. [/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P] like i stated...he skipped the question as to another round of 'contract modifications'...or was i the only one who noticed?[BR][STRONG]stay tuned for round 3 or we can't emerge![/STRONG]
pitguy
Veteran
"And as far as who said what to a reporter and when? I have several examples of CWA reps. taking confidential information and sharing it with the media or posting it on web sites" [BR][BR]I guess you need to explain to me and others...why it needs to be confidential..seems we are paying for our unions service, and what they know should be what we know, we are living in America are we not.[BR][BR]Thanks[BR][BR]Jim
- Thread Starter
- #118
Chris:
Thanks for taking the time to post on this message baord. I have never seen a corporate officer engage in conversation with the employees and I appreciate your efforts.
Chip
Thanks for taking the time to post on this message baord. I have never seen a corporate officer engage in conversation with the employees and I appreciate your efforts.
Chip
- Thread Starter
- #119
Mlt,
Flyonthewall and DoitforDave both have done a good job of describing "labor friendly" and "labor unfriendly".
In my opinion, "labor friendly" is what has gone on at US Airways where the unions have elected to pick some of their cuts. For example, in the case of my labor group ALPA elected to take another 8 percent pay cut and phase in productivity changes versus having all productivity changes now.
I believe "labor unfriendly" would what could occur in a S.1113 hearing, which could occur here at US if the airline doesn't liquidate.
By the way, I find it interesting that the UA AFA now has lower wage rates than at US and the proposed UA F/A cuts go deeper than what has been agreed upon by US Airways and AFA.
Chip
Flyonthewall and DoitforDave both have done a good job of describing "labor friendly" and "labor unfriendly".
In my opinion, "labor friendly" is what has gone on at US Airways where the unions have elected to pick some of their cuts. For example, in the case of my labor group ALPA elected to take another 8 percent pay cut and phase in productivity changes versus having all productivity changes now.
I believe "labor unfriendly" would what could occur in a S.1113 hearing, which could occur here at US if the airline doesn't liquidate.
By the way, I find it interesting that the UA AFA now has lower wage rates than at US and the proposed UA F/A cuts go deeper than what has been agreed upon by US Airways and AFA.
Chip
ClueByFour
Veteran
[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/6/2003 2:06:27 PM magsau wrote:
For you see Mr. Chiames, we are stuck in a seniority system and cannot leave on carrier for another like yourself and get a payraise.
----------------
[/blockquote]
That's ALPA's fault. As they say "That's how he wants it, that's how he gets it."
----------------
On 1/6/2003 2:06:27 PM magsau wrote:
For you see Mr. Chiames, we are stuck in a seniority system and cannot leave on carrier for another like yourself and get a payraise.
----------------
[/blockquote]
That's ALPA's fault. As they say "That's how he wants it, that's how he gets it."
Similar threads
