Labor Issues - United Airlines

Superman · 05-26-2005, 08:51 AM

Ready, guys?

Okay, United management has apparently handled their duties so effectively that United is in bankruptcy asking for something like SEVEN HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS in concessions and debt forgiveness. One anti-labor cretin I chatted with said that United spent too much money on a vigorous capital-improvement strategy, building new gates, buying new planes, etc. and that this is what caused the bankruptcy, but with the same breath also said the unions are to blame. And he admitted that the United labor contract which is also under consideration at this same time calls for a few bucks per hour in wage CONCESSIONS and benefit REDUCTIONS. It is interesting how conservative folks can blame management problems on unions insisting on unreasonable wage increases, and with the same breath acknowledge that wage DECREASES are on the table. Hmmmm. I guess Logic courses in the South must use a different text from the ones used up here.

Anyway, the union says it will strike viciously to kill the company if the bankruptcy court approved United's request to completely walk away from all its pension obligations, to pilots on down to baggage handlers. No kidding. United is hoping to walk away from all its pension obligations. Analysts say the union should be able to kill this company in roughly two days of striking. Deadline has been extended until the 31st.

If United gets to walk away, then guess who picks up the tab for those pensions? The federal government, funded by hard-working conservative salts of the earth, will pay. Not 100%, but a substantial portion. Are you guys thinking that this is a good use of tax money?

And then there is the broader question. Most of you are probably aware that in my country it's okay to fire individuals a week before their retirement plan vests? And there's more. It's okay for a company to buy another company which has plenty of dough in its retirement coffers, then raid the retirement account for cash and sell off the other parts of the purchased company for more cash. It's been a popular gambit for some time now. Decades.

In bankruptcies, management salaries are not raided. Capital assets are preserved for the most part. It's open season on workers retirement funds.

I'd like to see what union-hating neocon has the balls to post here their support of this practice. Then go on to tell of the wonders of capitalism.

Moses · 05-26-2005, 09:08 AM

The airline industry is strange. The public seems to shop price only when travelling by air. Many of the bigger traditional carriers have been selling safety. They hire the best pilots, crews and mechanics and pay them well. The discount airlines use less experienced personnel, older planes and run packed schedules. Guess what? Southwest and JetBlue are eating the big guys lunch! Apparently the public doesn't want the most experienced pilot with his big salary and pension. They want to fly SF to Vegas for $49.

American Airlines is in trouble. They can cut salaries and pensions or liquidate and sell the planes to Southwest. Big problem. I really feel badly for the pilots, flight attendants and mechanics who are caught up in this mess.

Moses · 05-26-2005, 09:52 AM

Hey Supe, I just noticed someone gave your post one star. What happened? Piss somebody off?

bryanthompson · bryanthompson's Garage

I think we should stop propping up companies that can't make it. A little competition could be good for the industry. Instead, we have a ton of airlines, none making money, all of them complaining, bankruptcies every 6 months... it's ridiculous. Let 'em die off and maybe a good one will rise from the dust.

legion · 05-26-2005, 10:37 AM

I make no secret of being a conservative libertarian. I believe that in most instances the free market is best for rewarding good management and punishing bad.

We have this theory called "too big to fail". It basically says that once a company gets so big, letting it fail will have a more adverse economic impact than propping it up with taxpayer money. I think its a load of BS. It creates an environment where corporate management knows it does not have to deal with the consequences of its decisions. A 'moral hazard' if you will.

Companies who make bad deals with their unions should be punished for the mismanagement by being forced to abide by those contracts. Same with pensions and health insurance. The only time a company should be relieved of its pension duties is when it ceases operations and actually goes out of business.

An argument can be made that the airline industry is "critical" and therefore we must prop up those companies on the verge of failure, but these are not the only companies! There are profitable airlines...they can and will pick up the slack if the "major carriers" are allowed to fail.

The problem is these people are pitching corporate welfare as a 'conservative' issue. I am a conservative, and I don't believe many things should be subsidized, individuals or corporations.

I say let United crash and burn under its own mismanagement. It will make airlines cautios to give in to bad union contracts. It will make them more careful about how pensions are managed. It will make corporate managers accountable for their mismanagement.

turbo6bar · 05-26-2005, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Moses
Hey Supe, I just noticed someone gave your post one star. What happened? Piss somebody off?

Maybe he's pissed off at himself???

bryanthompson · bryanthompson's Garage

Step 1: give self one star, make self look like victim
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!

dd74 · 05-26-2005, 10:49 AM

The big point here are the pensions of those who have worked for the airlines for 25+ years. Those who have relied on that pension to some degree to see them through the rest of their lives. And finally, if not propped up, the thousands of employees who will lose their employment if United goes under.

By the way, I think the flight attendants were thinking of striking in lieu of having pensions taken away, but a judge ruled that action illegal given United's dire circumstances.

targa911S · 05-26-2005, 10:53 AM

My wife is a Northwest Airlines retiree and we are waiting for NWA to bail out the same way. Knowing those scumbags, they are waiting to see just how scott free United gets off before they screw their employees too. You gotta know ALL of them are watching this in the airline biz. The next step is for ALL major companies to do the same. They are scared to death now that all us boomers are ready for retirement. In the mean time all the CEO and COO's are fat. You don't see them giving anything back do you.

Moses · 05-26-2005, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dd74

By the way, I think the flight attendants were thinking of striking in lieu of having pensions taken away, but a judge ruled that action illegal given United's dire circumstances.

What's strange is that the employees are forbidden to strike while they are under contract, yet United has issued pay cuts at least twice. Doesn't that void the contract? I do not understand labor law.

lendaddy · 05-26-2005, 10:55 AM

Sup,

1st, after decades of milking the company cow the union offers concessions.........uhhh gee thanks

You think last minute concessions forgive the previous actions, or render them harmless? Get real, maybe you need a new textbook?

Second,

The union management agreed to the asinine accounting practices used to fund [read NOT fund] these pensions. If the union management had required the money be put in personal accounts then they would all have their money today. Personal accounts you say.....

So now you're pissed off because a private company did roughly what your beloved government has been doing with our own "American Pensions" [read SSI]. pssst....they're not really putting ou money in there either. shhhhh

Third,

These employees deserve what they were promised and less is not right or fair. But guess what......not much is fair. The banks taking the debt service in the cornhole don't think it's fair either, nor do the vendors they have been azz farking for a decade. That's life.

Finally, strike away you morons and see how far that gets ya. It is this kind of stupidity that gives unions a bad name. Like I've said, it's not about "what is right or mutually beneficial" with unions today, it's about "what can we get away with".

Guess what dumbasses......even the gravy-train has a caboose...toot tooot

widebody911 · widebody911's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by legion
I say let United crash and burn under its own mismanagement. It will make airlines cautios to give in to bad union contracts. It will make them more careful about how pensions are managed. It will make corporate managers accountable for their mismanagement.

The execs will cash out with huge golden parachutes and move on to other endeavors. They won't give a flying **** (pun intended) about the former employees or their silly pensions. The only "accountability" in Corporate America is if you get caught doing something highly illegal, and don't have the connections to get around it.

island911 · 05-26-2005, 10:58 AM

stock options, pensions, SS. . .

y'yeah "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

People buy in to a "contract" like these, and then cry when it ends up being a Wimpy deal.

lendaddy · 05-26-2005, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by widebody911
The execs will cash out with huge golden parachutes and move on to other endeavors. They won't give a flying **** (pun intended) about the former employees or their silly pensions. The only "accountability" in Corporate America is if you get caught doing something highly illegal, and don't have the connections to get around it.

So what, you want the rank and file to have a little more company? What difference does it make? Now, if you tell me that the CEO is getting a package sooo huge that when split up between ALL the employees, it would be a worthwile amout....well then I would listen. But..."hey we want you in misery too, holds little water with me. Besides, they negotiated their deals with the company and the union negotiated theirs. Actions have consequences.

targa911S · 05-26-2005, 11:07 AM

Stock options. What a joke! NWA gave my wife stock 10 years ago as a concession and made the promise to buy it back in 10 years at the original price...like $33.00 per. Then when the note was due, and stock was at like $3.00 per share they said "No we're not going to honor that deal. Seems they had done the deal in like Deleware and the employees had no legs to stand on. My feeling all along was that they never intended to pay them.

Moses · 05-26-2005, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by widebody911
The execs will cash out with huge golden parachutes and move on to other endeavors. They won't give a flying **** (pun intended) about the former employees or their silly pensions. The only "accountability" in Corporate America is if you get caught doing something highly illegal, and don't have the connections to get around it.

That is the problem in it's entirety. T. Boone Pickens set the corporate mark for callousness and it's been a huge-ass money grab since then.

widebody911 · widebody911's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by lendaddy
So what, you want the rank and file to have a little more company? What difference does it make? Now, if you tell me that the CEO is getting a package sooo huge that when split up between ALL the employees, it would be a worthwile amout....well then I would listen. But..."hey we want you in misery too, holds little water with me. Besides, they negotiated their deals with the company and the union negotiated theirs. Actions have consequences.

No idea where you came from, or where you were going. Take pictures and don't forget to write

I was trying to point out that despite management augering in, they still walk away with substantial jingle in their pockets.

An interesting note is how one minute you hear 'damn greedy unions' and the next, when the union members get fscked over, you hear 'well, that's what they wanted!'

dd74 · 05-26-2005, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by island911

People buy in to a "contract" like these, and then cry when it ends up being a Wimpy deal.

That's right. Problem is, the union negotiates the contract, rendering the employee helpless. In any deal like this, I blame the union as much as the employer -- well, sort of, as the union has no way of forecasting the company's future health. So a little bit of empathy has to be given to the union.

targa911S · 05-26-2005, 11:31 AM

At least at NWA, I feel the union has been in bed with Mgmt. for some time.

dd74 · 05-26-2005, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by lendaddy
So what, you want the rank and file to have a little more company? What difference does it make? Now, if you tell me that the CEO is getting a package sooo huge that when split up between ALL the employees, it would be a worthwile amout....well then I would listen. But..."hey we want you in misery too, holds little water with me. Besides, they negotiated their deals with the company and the union negotiated theirs. Actions have consequences.

Len - I just can't except this while knowing the Enron history...

But I do understand your pov, so to speak, as it can relate to you being a small business owner.

But there's a huge ocean between small business owners and hundred-million dollar executive buy outs, options, et al, when at the same time, Joe Schmoe is shafted out of his retirement.