MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15720 posts, RR: 48 Posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1738 times:
I was just thinking, if the national unions let UA succeed in both dumping their pension obligations and avoiding chapter 7, and potentially thriving, that will mean that every other legacy carrier (except US) will be at a disadvantage since they will still have to fund their pension plans.
Wouldn't it be worse for the national unions to have all the legacy carriers swing through Chapter 11 to dump their pension plans than just have UA fold? No matter how many people are affected by a UA shutdown, many more national union members will be affected worse if all the legacy carriers dumped their pension obligations to become competitive? What if the dump-your-pension-program spreads to other industries, like the auto industry? It seems like this could be an opportunity for the national unions to stem the spread of something that would be far worse for their membership and raison d'etre. What do you think?
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15720 posts, RR: 48 Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1698 times:
"If they do that, hundreds of thousands of dues paying members will be out of jobs."
But they can find new, possibly union, jobs. The alternative is 10 times that number being subject to the pension reduction, and many of those people are not able to find jobs again. It seems to me like the latter is a lot uglier for the unions than the former.
FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4003 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1646 times:
Yeah, but where are there hundreds of thousands of openings for employees, many of who don't even have a college education and have been working for an airline for 20+ years.
Tu154 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 366 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1616 times:
maverickm11, arent you tired of trying to kill off UAL??
So if you were sick but you could get better with time and money should your family just let you die because it's not worth it or someone (like you) is tired of reading about you in the paper so you're just bettor off dead!
Does it really matter to you if UAL dies?? It matters to 60,000 people at UAL alone, not to mention creditors, suppliers, passangers, etc.
I hope you never find yourself hurt in the street and the only person who comes across you is someone that thinks like you cause buddy they would let you bleed to death!
FIRST ON THE ATLANTIC.....FIRST ON THE PACIFIC.....FIRST IN LATIN AMERICA...FIRST 'ROUND THE WORLD.....PAN AM!!
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15720 posts, RR: 48 Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1579 times:
"Yeah, but where are there hundreds of thousands of openings for employees, many of who don't even have a college education and have been working for an airline for 20+ years."
Most will slowly but surely be absorbed into other carriers, and a lot of those positions, although maybe lower paying, are unionized as well.
"Does it really matter to you if UAL dies?? "
Yes, but that's not important. My question is whether the unions would be better off seeing UA survive or terminate since letting it survive might mean the end of pensions as we know it, not only in the airline industry but in all unionized industries.
Thanks for the heartwrenching bullsh!t nonetheless.
UALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1581 times:
Your thread askes the wrong question.
Should the Unions stop trying to KILL UA?
That's what they are doing. That's what the Unions are doing to all carriers older than 40 years old. Until Unions realize that it's 2005 not 1955 and that the world and the industry have changed then the Unions are going to keep trying all of the old tactics that have brought the industry to its knees.
CORULEZ05 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1566 times:
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 1): That's a lot worse than them all losing their pensions.
you are forgetting the employees who aren't exactly very young and will most likely not get a job again. What will do they?
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2): But they can find new, possibly union, jobs.
again, most of them are not young and getting another job won't be easy.
Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 3): Yeah, but where are there hundreds of thousands of openings for employees, many of who don't even have a college education and have been working for an airline for 20+ years.
exactly my point.
Either way, everyone is loosing out one way or another...it is truly a very sad situation.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 89 Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1525 times:
Quoting CORULEZ05 (Reply 7): you are forgetting the employees who aren't exactly very young and will most likely not get a job again. What will do they?
The PBGC will help them. It won't be perfect, but it will be most of what a 20+ year vet at the company should get.
These pension funds are insured by Federal mandate. They don't just "go away".
AADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 1831 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1443 times:
Like I have said before, it is possible that UA may become the new Eastern. The militant machinist and flight attendant unions may decide to take a stand even if it costs them their jobs, as the machinists did at Eastern, but I do not think that will happen this round.
Unions having strike authorization is not the same thing as striking. If the unions have to negotiate more concessions without strike authorization, they have little to bargain with. The unions also needed to have the vote to make the membership feel better.
While UA's unions are unhappy, Eastern's were even angrier because Frank Lorenzo was handing Eastern's assets to Continental at a steep discount. UA is in bad shape, but not that much worse than the rest of the industry. Striking will not bring the pensions back and US had done the same thing a few years ago but they workers continued to work.
The IAM 141 also had a strike vote but theirs was mostly for show because most of the members they represent are mostly unaffected by the pension disposal since some members did not receive the pension plan and most would not exceed the payout that the PBGC would guarantee anyway. The strike authorization is just a chip to hold while negotiating the next round of concessions.
Aa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1385 times:
Quoting Tu154 (Reply 4): It matters to 60,000 people at UAL alone
Wake up and smell the Folgers dude. If it meant "that" much to the 60,000 UA employees, the airline wouldn't even be in the current situation that they have dug themself into.
FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4003 posts, RR: 6 Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1275 times:
Quoting Aa777jr (Reply 11): If it meant "that" much to the 60,000 UA employees, the airline wouldn't even be in the current situation that they have dug themself into.
Yeah, like the regular line employees could have really done much. They've given UA just about everything they've asked for. What else do you want them do? Work for free, give up 100% of their retirement, and start paying UA for the privledge to work there? If you want to blame something else, fine. But NEVER blame the everyday Joe Employee for UA's mess.
Tu154 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 366 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1253 times:
Quoting Aa777jr (Reply 11): Wake up and smell the Folgers dude. If it meant "that" much to the 60,000 UA employees, the airline wouldn't even be in the current situation that they have dug themself into.
we did not dig ourselves into any situation ASS%^LE!!!! We are try to dig ourselves out! Don't hold all of us accountable for a few bad apples. Union elections are coming up and there will be a change. We didnt get here without the help of unions and management. think before you post!
FIRST ON THE ATLANTIC.....FIRST ON THE PACIFIC.....FIRST IN LATIN AMERICA...FIRST 'ROUND THE WORLD.....PAN AM!!
PA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1949 posts, RR: 26 Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1239 times:
Quoting Aa777jr (Reply 11): Wake up and smell the Folgers dude. banghead If it meant "that" much to the 60,000 UA employees, the airline wouldn't even be in the current situation that they have dug themself into.
That has to be one of the most idiotic posts I've read on UA's situation. DL is almost in UA's situation, and it weren't for a better cash position prior to the economic downturn, so would AA, NW and CO. Dude, you need one HUGE reality check.
The reason ALL legacy carriers are in the state their in is because NONE of them saw the changes coming their way. Entrenched atttitudes throughout the entire company (management and union alike) could not allow the company to react quickly enough to the huge economic downturn, the drop in traffic due to 9/11 and subsequent Iraq War, and the rapid growth of LCC's. But underlying all these changes is the permant change in consumer attitudes towards air travel. Only A.nutters living in permanent nostalgia still care about the amenities. Consumers in droves have sent a clear message to the entire industry. They want CHEAP fares. That's not going to change anytime soon.
Kahala777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1219 times:
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 1): hundreds of thousands of dues paying members will be out of jobs
You mean 60,000+ ....
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 5): Most will slowly but surely be absorbed into other carriers
Not to sure about that one! You do remember what happened to most of the Pan Am, Eastern, and TWA employees?
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 5): "Does it really matter to you if UAL dies?? "
Sure, it will effect many. However, in the long term our country can do without a few airlines. We in the United States have way to many available seats, and way to much competition. We need to consolidate, become strong, or flounder. A or B.. There is no longer room for a C in the United States.
-What United flies from Chicago, is flown by American Airlines, and other airlines.
-What United Airlines flies from Washington, is flown by US Airways, and other airlines.
-What United Airlines flies from San Francisco(Bay Area), is flown by American, Southwest and other airlines.
-What United Airlines flies from Los Angeles(Southern California Area), is flown by American, Southwest, Alaska and other airlines.
-What United Airlines flies from Denver, is flown by Frontier, and other airlines.
-What United Airlines flies from Tokyo, is flown by Northwest Airlines, and other airlines.
United Airlines offers nothing special!
Quoting CORULEZ05 (Reply 7): again, most of them are not young and getting another job won't be easy
It is sad, you always need a backup plan! Always!
Quoting Aa777jr (Reply 11): 60,000 UA employees, the airline wouldn't even be in the current situation that they have dug themself into.
United Airlines ... Remember the ads??
"The Worlds Largest Employee Owned Airline"
Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 13): But NEVER blame the everyday Joe Employee for UA's mess.
True, but unfortunately the employees of United Airlines did not step up to interceed to stop this mess from happening in the first place!
Quoting Tu154 (Reply 14): we did not dig ourselves into any situation ASS%^LE!!!!
You were/are "The Worlds Largest Employee Owned Airline"
Quoting Tu154 (Reply 14): We are try to dig ourselves out!
You are at the bottom of Mt.Everest, you have the entire North Face to climb..
Quoting Tu154 (Reply 14): Don't hold all of us accountable for a few bad apples.
Tu154 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 366 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1187 times:
Hey Kahala777............seems like you have alot of time on your hands and think about nothing else but the demise of UAL. It's too bad you find so much time to hate! Maybe you should redirect that hate and do something positive. You are really wasting so much energy.
You must really have low self esteem to be this hateful towards an airline and it's employees. Are you a former UAL employee? Were you fired or layed off?
According to your profile, you are much to young to have such a negative energy. May I suggest proffesional help?
You live in Hawaii dude...........relax and go look at the mountains or something!
FIRST ON THE ATLANTIC.....FIRST ON THE PACIFIC.....FIRST IN LATIN AMERICA...FIRST 'ROUND THE WORLD.....PAN AM!!
Aa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1105 times:
Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 13): Yeah, like the regular line employees could have really done much.
It's called being part of a corportation. As a stockholder or owner of a pension (haha) you should be very much proactive in the company as much as possible. Especially being a member of a Union, they get a ton more done when the get together. The employees of UA shouldn't have let this go so far as it did. Ten years ago when UA management started to nosedive the company into the ground the employees should have gotten an arbitrator at least to formulate plan of action to get rid of ineffective upper management.
I've never slammed UA, and I'm not starting now, but this has been going on at UA for sometime. I wish the employees the best. I don't want anything bad to happen (Chp. 7) to UA.
Regardless of the list of positives the UA haters can list in the event of liquidation on the company, it will do more damage (immediately) to the industry.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11308 posts, RR: 17 Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1091 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
If the Unions let UA die then oh dear, thousands of union member will have to search for another job, if the union bosses had a brain then they would work this out and not let the strikes go ahead
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11705 posts, RR: 52 Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1013 times:
Quoting Tu154 (Reply 4): Does it really matter to you if UAL dies?? It matters to 60,000 people at UAL alone, not to mention creditors, suppliers, passangers, etc.
No, in the big scheme of things, UA liqudating means nothing, just like Eastern, Pan Am, Braniff, etc.
Yes, it does matter to the UA employees, both labor AND management, all are employees.
Chances are, those creditors that hold unsecured UA debt are not getting paid anyway. The lease companies are not getting paid, or they would not go to court to secure their assets from UA.
The suppliers are getting paid, or they would not supply anything to UA. But, chances are they also supply other airlines, too. They would just loose one customer.
The passengers have other choices, so most really don't care if UA survives or not. Yes, there are a some passengers who are loyal to UA, but it isn't like they cannot ever fly somewhere again. They can.
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 25, posted (8 years 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 956 times:
Quoting UALPHLCS (Reply 6): Your thread askes the wrong question.
Should the Unions stop trying to KILL UA?
That's what they are doing. That's what the Unions are doing to all carriers older than 40 years old. Until Unions realize that it's 2005 not 1955 and that the world and the industry have changed then the Unions are going to keep trying all of the old tactics that have brought the industry to its knees.
UALPHLCS is absolutely right. When an airline fails, it's rarely just the fault of ownership or management. Unions/labour are ALWAYS a big cause of the failure also. Seeing the militancy of the UAL unions, it is clear that they are part of the problem.
Quoting CORULEZ05 (Reply 7): you are forgetting the employees who aren't exactly very young and will most likely not get a job again. What will do they?
NO company owes ANY employee anything more than your next paycheque. Those UAL employees near retirement shoul count themselves lucky to have been employed for so long. They have also had many years with which to save for retirement. No sympathy from me.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15720 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 6352 posts, 
If it meant "that" much to the 60,000 UA employees, the airline wouldn't even be in the current situation that they have dug themself into.
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11308 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
