ERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6692 posts, RR: 18 Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 10718 times:
From what I understand, january is when the Federal Court said they would decide on the labor union contracts. But as was evident in November and December, that could be pushed back again. And even then, the courts may force the non-cooperative unions to continue to work. So I doubt if a Jan liquidation would occur. But, as is stated a gazillion times on this forum.. only time will tell.. But I wish US the best of luck. I hope they pull through this.. they really are a great airline.. And I am so glad they are getting rid of some of their 733's.. they are loking rather rough. Bring in some E190 to replace them and I will be happy.
Scootertrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 569 posts, RR: 9 Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 10657 times:
US Airways May Liquidate In January
Pure flamebait. There is nothing new here. I agree with the other poster who said that the judge will probably not let the unions walk off the job. Besides, CWA now has a TA with management. The more unions that come to agreements with management, the less likely ANY union will strike. For a work action like this to be successful, you need support from other unions. I will bet that behind the scenes there is a race to not to be the last union to get a TA with management. The judge will most likely not deal kindly with the last employee group to be "out in the cold."
Byrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2265 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10446 times:
I agree with the other poster who said that the judge will probably not let the unions walk off the job.
I personally don't think the judge can do jack sh!t. What is he going to do have all x-thousands of employees arrested for contempt? US can't fire all it's striking employees and expect to have new staff up and running in time to avert liquidation.
And then there's CHAOS, and sickouts which the judge can't do anything about either.
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10416 times:
If they want to walk out then let them...then they can explain to their children that Mommy/Daddy doesn't give a rats ass about supporting them. The thing that gets me is we will end up paying for their unemployment. What a disgrace!
The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
Jfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2958 posts, RR: 5 Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10405 times:
I think it's best if they do go under. It will do a few things for the workers:
1. Closure to an awful and never-ending situation.
-Can you imagine living this nightmare as an employee for the past 3
2. Giving the employees a descent shot at moving on.
-There is no future at US Airways. Stringing these people along with
less and less is a horrible thing to do. They could be out ther looking
for employment that is actaully secure going forward.
I really feel that what they are doing to their employees now is pure evil. This isn't a wage cut. This isn't a give back. This is a pure 3-year massacre. Anybody with any business background knows USAirways CAN NOT SURVIVE. To keep saying that if they get cuts they will survive is manipulating data and common sense. Management is acting without any moral guide here.
Think about this--they have pulled this pay cut theory two times now. It hasn't worked yet . . . it won't work now.
UALGSO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10315 times:
I find it so hard for those who are not directly involved with US to make negative comments about the workers who keep the day to day operation going. Now while I agree with a statement like you can't put all your eggs in one basket as far a pensions are concerned, but it's a little late to try to start building up a 401K at age 55 or 60 and anything like you were counting on from your pension. Working along side the US employees here in GSO most have second or third jobs to support kids in college or mortgages. So while it may seem absurd to be upset at the hourly wages so many outside the industry groan at, most of the employees earn this while working 80-90 hr weeks, holidays and children's birthdays. So when I see someone make a post about Mommy and Daddy not supporting the kids I do tend to get a little upset when over half of the airline employees at US, UA are already eligible for Government assistance but are to proud to accept.
ERJ170 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 6692 posts, RR: 18 Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10286 times:
2. Giving the employees a descent shot at moving on.
Move on where? To what? It won't be into another airline position because almost every airline is laying off or reducing in some way. Most of these people have airline experience only. And this is NOT the time to be trying to get into another industry. Now is the time to weather the storm and try to hang on as long as they can. Even if US goes under and other airlines increase destinations/frequencies to cover US.. they probably will not hire any new employees. They will most likely bring in furloughed employees. So the US employees will just be assed out! I don't think that is what anyone wants. Sometimes it is better to just hold your breath and go with the flow than try and be a martyr... or your could martyr your ass right onto the unemployment line. And the unemployment line is ugly right about now...
7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10252 times:
These employees knew the airline is having some big problems for a while...they could have been looking for other jobs. THey knew what they were getting themselves into...there will be no sympathy from me.
The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
UALGSO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10178 times:
I do not disagree about looking for other jobs, but how many companies do you know of that are hiring people in the 50-60 year old age group that the majority of US employees are in. No one that I know if is asking for sympathy, we would like management to come up with a viable business plan that will work in today's economy. I have yet to see one of the legacy carriers change anything about how they operate.
Ord From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1371 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 10070 times:
Scootertrash - You are wrong saying this thread is nothing new. It is new. Not until this article have I seen anybody involved in the bankruptcy give a possible liquidation time (whether it happens or not is a different story). It was an article that appeared in today's USA Today with current information. I did not express any opinions, just posted an article I thought people would want to see.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 23906 posts, RR: 86 Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 10050 times:
"I have yet to see one of the legacy carriers change anything about how they operate."
That's a very interesting statement. A change in thinking would require a CEO of vision, and at the moment it is all about survival and crisis management.
Looking back, a good example is what Gordon Bethune did at Continental - radical surgery that transformed the airline "from worst to first."
But such CEO's are not thick upon the ground. Sadly. So what we have is the traditional wage cuts to keep the airline flying as that airline is now. Or even, as in the case of US, expanding - more of the same.
I don't see anyone at one of the "troubled" airlines actually rethinking the shape and structure of the airline.
7E72004 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 10010 times:
I don't like to see anyone lose their jobs but this issue with US is not new. The problems started developing a while ago...especially after 9/11. The employees have known this for a while and i can't see why they moan and groan.
The next generation of aircraft is just around the corner!
AZjetgeek From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 235 posts, RR: 2 Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 9914 times:
These latest revelations about US and its "We must cut or die!" approach to survival is strangely reminiscent of the Continental debacle in the early 80's. Under the ownership of the infamous Frank Lorenzo, CO filed for bankruptcy. Lorenzo's aim was to get out from under the union contracts.
Is this theme starting to sound familiar?
The employees are getting screwed. How will US' efforts to make further cuts guarantee the airline's survival? Who on Earth would want to work for them under such terms? It has become very clear that US hasn't changed its approach. It's about time the bankruptcy court stepped up to the plate and take action against US' board of directors and executive team. I suggest the following:
1. Order US to be put on up for sale.
2. Remove the board of directors and order an immediate election to replace them with an equal balance of stockholders AND employees.
3. Give the executive team (CEO, COO, CFO, President) a 30-day deadline to completely re-organize the airline. If they fail to present a valid plan, they should be fired and replaced with leaders who understand that blaming their plight on LCC's is a farce and a total cop-out.
The bankruptcy court should not cut US any slack. After all, this is their second trip to Ch 11 in two years. Also, US deceived employees into taking pay cuts the last time around and then placed a $4.3 billion order for RJ's from Embraer and Bombardier a month after emerging from bankruptcy.
Frankly, I'm sick and tired of legacy carriers blaming the LCC's and the unions for all their financial woes. If you can't learn how to change the way you do business on a day-to-day basis and in the long-run, then GET OUT!!!
Ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12675 posts, RR: 13 Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 9811 times:
Apparently US will also be asking the Bankruptcy court to close out the pension plans (even though they are probably badly underfunded). Once the pensions are killed off, then many employees (except maybe the pilots) facing significant pay cuts and benefit reductions, will have no incentive to stay with US and will quit in droves. Maybe this is the 'grand plan' of US's management - to get enough older, more expensive and set in ways employees out of the airline and replace them over time with lower paid, more flexible employees.
As to the January time point of a potential demise of US, isn't there some major loans or financing due then? I just hope they can downsize or do something to survive for the sake of the workers and for those customers with few options for other airlines.
Milesrich From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1902 posts, RR: 7 Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 9676 times:
My wife works for Delta, so I am definitely coming at this issue with bias; however, one must realistically look at the labor situation in the airline industry. USAirways and UAL being allowed to continue to operate in Chapter 11 hurts the bottom line of every other carrier.
If US Airways is allowed to abrogate their current labor contracts after two bankruptcy induced rounds of concessions, or was it three, and a Court forces the workers to work for even lower wages, it will not be long before American, Delta, Northwest and Continental all claim that they need even larger concessions to survive. Perhaps a 777 captain should work for $80,000.00 a year. There are people willing to fly that can pass the government tests that will fly for a living and do not care about making money. They do it because they love to fly, AND IT SHOWS.
But the problem with this, is that the Courts are interfering with the free market. If US Airways and United are allowed to fail, then perhaps, Delta, American, Northwest, Continental, Southwest, AirTran and others, can raise their fares to levels that actually cover their operational costs.
Once the public gets used to paying higher fares, the perception that coast to coast airfares should be less than $200.00 roundtrip may go the way of the Ten Cent Cup of Coffee. Then the industry as a whole will enter a more healthy period, and many of the former UA and US employees will be hired at the surviving carriers, and be able to earn a living wage.
Labor is more than a commodity. Eventually, the American public will come to realize that low wages hurt all of us. If the downward pressure on wages continues, who will buy consumer goods that we still produce? Who will be able to afford a new home? Only the very wealthy, and believe me, you can't fill airplanes every day depending on those with incomes of $100,000.00 per year or more.
This "Race to the Bottom" must be stopped. And unfortunately, it will take the US Airways Bankruptcy Judge to do it.
NWAFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1893 posts, RR: 16 Reply 20, posted (9 years 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 9570 times:
Very well said!!! I have wonderful friends that work both at US and UA. They have been beaten up so bad how much more can one take? It is time for the courts to say enough is enough, US, time to liquadate and UA time to get a plan or sell.
Both companies are only hurting themelfs, the industry and the economy by hiding in BK court.
THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
Planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3492 posts, RR: 5 Reply 21, posted (9 years 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 9546 times:
alrite boys and girls, check this out. This is the irony of the US airline industry today...the rock and a hard place, if you will, of the legacy carriers.
The Legacy carriers offer a product. The LCC offer a product as well. The legacy product is a bit nicer than the LCC's, more services, amenities, destinations, etc..etc... Along with this you have higher fares. I would say approximately 25-40% higher in many major markets. If People want to travel just to go from A-B, and it is served by an LCC, and they don't care about Frequent Flier Miles, high quality of service, etc... Then most people will take the LCC. Most Americans will do whatever is cheapest. That is a fair assumption.
So. In offering more services and amenities and airplanes and destinations, the legacy carriers cost a bit more to operate. All these people and airplanes and services cost money, so their operating expenses are considerably higher than the LCC's. Makes sense right? yes.
Where am i going with this? Right now, the legacy carriers need to have people on their airplanes, so they have to meet the LCC prices in a lot of markets. Thus filling their airplanes, but making money? no.
If a one seat on one airplane flying one leg is considered the product, and the LCC and the legacy carrier are charging near the same amount on that same flight, then they both receive the same amont of money for said product. Obviously the LCC keeps more of it because it doesn't need to spend as much of it on operating expenses. For the LCC, the product is paying off. For the legacy, the product is losing money.
To make money, the Legacy carriers only option is to cut it's operating expenses. But in doing that, the product is diminished. People don't feel they are getting the value of that product for their money. However, if this legacy carrier was charging lets say $100 more for this product, they would be making a profit.
Now I am getting to the point of this post. People won't pay that much more if they can have near the same thing for $100 less. Legacies can't cut op expenses without diminishing their product.
In the United States, the market for a high class airline product is decreasing, less and less. As long as the LCC's are around, the legacy carrier will ultimately go the way of the dinosaur. People won't pay for higher fares. If thet LCC's went out the window, and the legacies raised their fares, only the people who could afford these seats will buy them. If they are more expensive, not as many people will be purchasing them. Not as many people will be flying and they wont' need as many employees or airplanes.
I hate to admit it. But the legacy carriers are doomed to either become
LCC or die. and thats where the game is at right now.
sorry for the long post...i kinda got carried away. i like to write.
Scootertrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 569 posts, RR: 9 Reply 22, posted (9 years 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 9409 times:
You are obviously not familiar with the APA sickout at AA. When that happened, the union was held in contempt of court and extremely heavy fines were levied against the union and it's membership. Believe me, no national union wants to go through what APA went through. The membership will be made to understand that as members, they are ultimately responsible for legal assessments against the union. No one will risk there credit and financial future over this thing (well, any more than they already have by having their jobs at risk).
If the judge says don't walk the membership won't walk. Period.