Who Keeps Closing the Threads?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bob Owens

Veteran
Sep 9, 2002
14,274
6,112
To I-trade and Lakeguy67;
To answer questions that you posed on the mechanics may be free to strike,,,,.
Once the economy recovers the airlines will continue to expand, in fact long term shortages of mechanics are still in the forecasts. This is a cyclical industry, always has been. The idea is to make as much as possible while working so you can ride out the layoffs. All the givebacks in the world are not going to keep you employed if people are not flying. If USAIR does go under their mechanics will eventually be picked up by one of the surviving carriers.As I stated before when EAL went under AA hired guys that were very advanced in age. AA has accellerated the construction of thier $1Billion JFK terminal with plans on increasing operations out of JFK.
Lakeguy67, as for your question why did your union insist to staple the TWA employees to the bottom of the seniority rosters, so they get laid off first while junior AA emmployees are still employed? They did this because that is what the members wanted. Over the last few years many TWA workers saw the writing on the wall that the company would fail so they made the jump to AA. Giving up all their seniority and starting at the bottom again. We also saw many workers who had many years at EAL, Pan AM and other carriers that came to AA and started off with nothing. It was felt among the AA workers that TWA workers who failed to read the writing on the wall should not come over to AA and displace an AA worker. AA workers felt that TWA workers were thrown a lifeline in that they were getting full company seniority, full vacations and a $9/hr pay raise, unlike the EAL and Pan AM workers. If AA had not bought TWA these guys would have hit the streets with no recall rights and when they did get reemployment they would have started at the bottom.TWA was losing money in the best of times, TWA would be gone now. Most of the workers at AA would have prefered that we did not buy TWA. We did not benifit from the aquisition of TWA and we certainly dont want to aquire USAIR. The IAM gladly waived their successorship clause because of the huge pension liability they would have had if TWA had defaulted. The IAM could have nixed the whole deal but they were afraid that they would be stuck with the $500 million(?) pension liability (I''m not sure if thats the correct figure but its somewhere around there). So after they sold out, they started to fight for what they gave up. Isnt the IAM seeking a similar pension deal at USAIR?
I-trade, I have just as much right to post here as any one else. Do you work for the airlines? Are you a mechanic? Your name indicates that you are a trader. Perhaps you desire to see airline wages continue to decline so you can make more money on airline stock. Airline stock has been extremely volitile since deregulation and fortunes have been made in this industry by everyone except the people that actually do the work thats required to move $563 Billion passengers a year from point to point. Whats your motive?
 

Lakeguy67

Advanced
Aug 31, 2002
123
0
www.usaviation.com
[P][FONT color=#3333cc][STRONG]A true trade unionist would dovetail, all the mergers always dovetail, a union is about all of us, not putting one members needs above another. And you did not answer the other question, how are you gonna welcome 4,200 mechanics to AA when you are grounding 83 airplanes and laying off 7,000 workers?[/STRONG][/FONT][/P]
[P][FONT color=#3333cc][STRONG][/STRONG][/FONT] [/P]
[P][FONT color=#3333cc][STRONG]Please finally come clean and tell us the truth why you even bother posting?[/STRONG][/FONT][/P]
[P][SPAN style=FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA][?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml /][v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked=f filled=f path=m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe o:preferrelative=t o:spt=75 coordsize=21600,21600] [v:stroke joinstyle=miter][/v:stroke][v:formulas][v:f eqn=if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0][/v:f][v:f eqn=sum @0 1 0][/v:f][v:f eqn=sum 0 0 @1][/v:f][v:f eqn=prod @2 1 2][/v:f][v:f eqn=prod @3 21600 pixelWidth][/v:f][v:f eqn=prod @3 21600 pixelHeight][/v:f][v:f eqn=sum @0 0 1][/v:f][v:f eqn=prod @6 1 2][/v:f][v:f eqn=prod @7 21600 pixelWidth][/v:f][v:f eqn=sum @8 21600 0][/v:f][v:f eqn=prod @7 21600 pixelHeight][/v:f][v:f eqn=sum @10 21600 0][/v:f][/v:formulas][v:path o:connecttype=rect gradientshapeok=t o:extrusionok=f][/v:path][?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice /][o:lock aspectratio=t v:ext=edit][/o:lock][/v:shapetype][v:shape id=_x0000_i1025 style=WIDTH: 108pt; HEIGHT: 77.25pt type=#_x0000_t75][v:imagedata o:title=TransportationLogo src=file:///C:/DOCUME~1/Richard/LOCALS~1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_image001.png][/v:imagedata][/v:shape][/SPAN][FONT color=#3333cc][SPAN style=FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA][/SPAN][/FONT][/P]
[P][FONT color=#3333cc][SPAN style=FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA][v:shape id=_x0000_i1025 style=WIDTH: 3in; HEIGHT: 154.5pt type=#_x0000_t75][v:imagedata o:title=TransportationLogo src=file:///C:/DOCUME~1/Richard/LOCALS~1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_image001.png][/v:imagedata][/v:shape][/P][/SPAN][/FONT]
[P][STRONG][FONT color=#3333cc][/FONT][/STRONG] [/P]
 

us10

Advanced
Sep 11, 2002
138
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/16/2002 10:05:22 AM Bob Owens wrote:

Lakeguy67, as for your question "why did your union insist to staple the TWA employees to the bottom of the seniority rosters, so they get laid off first while junior AA emmployees are still employed?" They did this because that is what the members wanted.

----------------
They did this because that is what the (including you Bob)the members wanted.Talk about greed and fairness you and yours are despicable.
 

A320 Driver

Veteran
Aug 24, 2002
3,358
2,319
www.usaviation.com
One of the former Eastern mechanics drove the crew bus for years. What a terrible waste of his talent. This is a tragedy that I hope many of our guys will be able to avoid, but the picture on the outside is not rosey unless your wearing those rose colored glasses. Truthfully though, I think 99% of the votes are cast in stone right now. Folks have formed opinions and nothing will change that. We just have to make the best of it.

Best wishes to all,

A320 Driver
 
OP
B

Bob Owens

Veteran
Sep 9, 2002
14,274
6,112
Lakeguy67;
Who are you?
I've come clean, you have not. Are you a mechanic? Do you posess skills that can be marketed outside this industry for the wages you will be receiving?
Sure keep hiding behind an alias shouting about how the sky will fall unless they submit to the company's unreasonable demands. Keep doing managements bidding, and you are telling me about real unionism?
Same goes for you US10.
Whats even more despicable is a union that takes their money but acts in its own best interests (extra members, 1.5% match into pension fund, $1million expense reimbursement- is that so the union can pay people lost time to post under aliases about how they must vote yes?).
Try going back to the issues. Tell the mechanics why they should agree to 6 years of concessions.
 

us10

Advanced
Sep 11, 2002
138
0
[P]Owens;[BR][BR]EDITED BY MODERATOR [/P]
[P]if we fail you win.And Bob I doubt it's possible for someone like yourself to ever come clean.[/P]
 

ITRADE

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
2,860
0
DCA/IAD US2
www.geocities.com
[P]If USAIR does go under their mechanics will eventually be picked up by one of the surviving carriers. This is the hillarious part - eventually. Your reference to the EAL situation is inapt inasmuch as there were not several thousand mechanics on the street as there are today. Moreover, any other airline which intends on recalling/hiring mechanics will be doing so in line with their company's senority/recall directives. As such, you WON'T see any US mechanics hired by any major any time soon. Eventually may be true - but after 48 months of waiting, with the house foreclosed, the car repossessed, and with the college plans dashed, your scenario is laughable.[/P]
[P]As to my qualifications, no I am not a mechanic; I do not know what you mean by trader. That is an unknown and nebulous concept. Moreover, I disagree concerning your purported avaiation industry windfall. It may be true of the aerospace industry in general, but as a whole, airlines as a whole have performed horribly since deregulation. Certainly not at a level that any person interested in wealth accumulation would ever indulge. A passbook has greater yield.[/P]
 
C

chipmunn

Guest
Bob:

From an economic perspective the mature airline industry business model is broken. There is too much capacity in the industry and there has been a secular change in the buying habits of Americans.

It does not matter if a person shops at Best Buy, Costco, Sam's Club, or the airline industry, but the consumer wants the same thing: to buy products at a discount.

It is unlikely the airline industry will ever see the return to ticket price premiums once enjoyed and mature full service airlines will have to adjust to this new economic reality.

The cost pressures facing the nation's two largest carriers -- AA and UA -- were portrayed starkly through separate media reports. The Wall Street Journal recently dissected a single route on which UA and low-fare rival JetBlue compete -- Washington Dulles to Oakland, Calif. While each flies an Airbus A320, with the same number of crewmembers, their operating costs are vastly different. It costs UA $23,690 to operate one way, while the figure is $14,546 for JetBlue.

US is trying to get out of its high cost leases and operate equipment at market rates to be competitive in today's new economy. Nothing more, nothing less.

Also noteworthy, with its new cost structure do not be surprised if you see US announce a new fare pricing structure to better match consumer demands with product pricing.

Employee denial or in your case hoping US will fail so you can personally prosper, will not change this economic reality. Those airlines that adjust to this change will financially recover and those who do not adjust will die.

Could this be why your CEO said AA must cut $3 billion in annual costs and your scared and trying to get the IAM-M members to vote no?

By the way, your motivation on this board is transparent and speak volumes about yourself. Maybe it would be in your best interest to help fix your company's problems, instead of trying to see improved seniority at AA buy hoping for the failure of US.

Chip
 
Status
Not open for further replies.