Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CNN:Possible 20,000 Layoffs At United  
User currently offlineN839MH From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 379 posts, RR: 0
Posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1712 times:

CNN is reporting that UAL may layoff 20,000 employees.

20,000 wow, that would be unbelievable. Maybe this is just a false story being told to CNN

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offline777D From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 300 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1613 times:

If this is true what CNN is reporting, it was inevitable after the slowing economy but brought on more rapidly from the events from 09-11-01. UAL must be scrambling at it's HQ on how to recover lost confidence as well how to fill their empty seats. All airlines are fighting for passengers which has instantly became smaller after 09-11-01. All these carriers cannot survive, I honestly believe that one or two major carriers will be out of business within a year. I hate to see it happen but it shall happen. With the economy, low fare carriers, trains (playing a bigger role than ever), fuel prices and raises given to all employees in a time when the industry knew that it was slowing down, layoff were/are bound to happen. I know this will affect the industry that I am in, air freight. I have noticed a dramatic slow down and with the airlines experiencing this situation, the ripple effect will almost affect everyone.

There are 7-9 major carriers can they all survive?

User currently offlineMilemaster From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1097 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1559 times:

Not to discredit United, USAir, AA, CO, etc...

But I would not be surprised that the numbers they are announcing are puffed up a bit to project the sense of urgency the $15b airline aid package warrants.

"We're all going to whither up and die if we don't get funding from the government, look at us already!"

If I were CEO of an airline, I'd be doing the same thing!

User currently offlineFlashmeister From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2917 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1534 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I suspect that you're right, Milemaster. Plus, remember, as I've now said three times:

The demand for air travel that existed on 9/10 didn't just shrivel up and disappear on 9/11. It's hiding.

When people feel more confident, they'll return to the skies. This is not a permanent situation. Within a year or so, things may be back to where they were.

User currently offlineUAL-FAN From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1521 times:

I certainly hope that the government does not intervene. I think that Market forces should prevail. If some of them go out of business, so be it. Recent events just accelerated the process which was already begun by airline employees demanding and receiving wages that the industry cannot support.

As a tax payor, I do not want to pay for this industries blunders.

User currently offlineCo/ba From United States of America, joined May 2001, 399 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1500 times:

I am an airline employee and as a tax payer I want my money to help the airline industry which is the backbone of transportation in the U.S. and not to mention my livelyhood.

User currently offline777D From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 300 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1493 times:

I see the point of having the government bail out the airline industry, but what about the rest of the economy? The stores, air freight forwarders (my livelyhood), taxi cab companies, bus companies, contract workers and etc. Should they all receive a bail out as well? Not trying to make "waves" but asking a question.

User currently offlineMilemaster From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1097 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1479 times:

There is something to be said about that..

It certainly was no secret that a terrorist attack of this magnitude was a risk to all airlines of the world. Every day they operate, they accept the assumed risk. When a new startup like Airtran, Legend, Jetblue, etc takes to the skies for the 1st time they are accepting this as a risk for the business model they have chosen.

For the sake of arguement, why should the taxpayer pay up essentially to corporations that didn't prepare themselves for crisis scenarios? It's alarming that an industry that personally handles millions of lives a year is spread so thin that if they can't operate for a few days, they're laying off tens of thousands of people and threatening bankruptcy. I do understand the anticipation of a severe drop in passenger loads as a major factor in requesting governmental aid.

Who knows...
Maybe airlines should've focused less on purchasing new RJ's and flooding U.S. business center airports and created more of a cushon for themselves. Then perhaps spent the money on security to lessen the risk of a business destroying tragedy like the WTC. I'm not suggesting airlines not be competetive by denying frequencies to major business hubs. I'm saying that they should be denied the opportunity to compete until they have established a credible security base to build & grow on.

So... because we americans have become so dependent on air travel that the economy craters without deregulated airlines, We(the taxpayers) have to bail them out for their lack of preparation.

Let me make sure I'm clear, WE NEED THE AID PACKAGE. But it's truly sad that we NEED the aid package to begin with.

If we weren't so dependent on air travel, would this even be an issue?

User currently offlineCRJCA From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1397 times:

No big surprise here. Those who said it before may be right, these may be inflated numbers. However, United was going to lose a BILLION dollars this year before the attacks. Layoffs were probably in the works anyway.

User currently offlineSforamper From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1382 times:

Bailout is the wrong word here, and for those who dont know how an airline operates and makes money please stay off the subject. someone suggested that a couple of days on the ground is no big deal, well they still have to pay the employees not to mention airport fees. No doubt the goverment is gonna help whether u like it or not.

User currently offlineOrdual24 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 60 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1352 times:

they walked oout all of the probationary CSR's tonite....guess that's a start....

User currently offlineAirplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1347 times:

This is all indicative of the effects of de-regulation in the airline industry.

Fares are too low. Profit margins are slim. Any blip on the economy can drive an airline into the red.

Wages are too low as well. The public seems to only think about the 747 captain when they speak of wages. Many car mechanics make more money than an AMT.

Maybe it's time to reduce service, increase fares and restrict flying to the rich elite. Either that, or be willing to shore up the airlines to stabilize the economy.

User currently offlineColoneh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1336 times:

I have read several articles, and the government DOES recognize that some airlines may have to shut down. And the gov't also recognizes that most of the airlines WILL INEVITABLY CUT BACK AND FURLOUGH EMPLOYEES EVEN IF GOV'T AID IS PROVIDED. As mentioned several times, and fact, the industry was suffering before this happend and is dying now.
But if the Gov't aids this industry, then what about the travel support companies? What about affected hotels? What about affected convention providers, such as Disney= who has already had 16 conventions CANCELED!?
Where does it stop?
The government is in NO way going to PREVENT any airline from cutting back, furloughing nor going out of business, they are attempting to TRY to balance things out. No guarantees here.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
CNN: Estimated 12,000 Laid Off At Delta posted Tue Sep 25 2001 21:56:52 by PanAm747
AC Announces Layoffs At Airports And Call Centres posted Mon Sep 11 2006 06:17:01 by Radarbeam
Airport Puts '65,000 Lives At Risk posted Fri Jun 2 2006 10:13:30 by NZ560
UPS To Add 5,000 Jobs At SDF & Ramp For A380, B744 posted Wed May 17 2006 23:12:20 by KarlB737
Head(s) Rolling At United posted Fri May 5 2006 04:12:03 by Bicoastal
Supervisor Pay At United posted Sat Apr 22 2006 22:00:31 by QQFLYER28
AA Hands Out 20,000 Free R/T Flights From DAL posted Thu Apr 20 2006 03:58:28 by DeltaFFinDFW
"Job Preview" For CSR At United. posted Wed Apr 19 2006 15:11:22 by Fiveholer
Internships At United posted Thu Mar 23 2006 20:37:49 by SQ_EK_freak
Are The BAE-146's Still At United? posted Mon Dec 19 2005 04:38:41 by ERAUgrad02