Wiskey Driver

Well Plilly is really close to ORD and CLT close to DFW so who knows maybe they could really save by knocking those two down as well The company makes that decision not the union, get it right son.

WD at AWA

CanoePilot

Why?

Let's just merge the lists put up fences on the widebodies for 5 years or less and be done with it.

R57 relay

I don't think it was fair to furloughed guys, but I think it was most unfair to the late '86 to '88 hires that were active on the day of the merger. They had the majority of the west list put senior to them, and thus would not be able to move up with the massive east attrition. The benefit of that attrition would have gone to the west.

Even though future events are hard to predict, especially in this business, let's go with the no plan B theory. If that was the case and the rational for the placement of the lower half of the east list, then why wasn't the whole list stapled. I mean, if we had no future, why put any east pilot ahead of a west pilot. Let me tell you-because it's BS. We never shutdown. We came to this merger intact, much larger than AWA and have continued to make the most money. Fact.

Do you think Freund was inside US management?

Let's look at another unbiased arbitrators thinking. Mr. Bloch:

"The Financial Picture
From the evidence, it is clear enough that the merger with AWA was a meaningful factor in U.S. Airway’s emergence from bankruptcy. Together, the two companies were able to attract investments that, operating alone, they might not have secured. However, West’s claim that U.S. Airways emerged from bankruptcy “only because it [was] acquired by a stronger enterprise”10 is reflected neither in the KPMG audit report (cited by West)11 nor in any other portion of the evidence. Instead, each carrier had something to contribute. Airways, for example, was much larger. It served almost twice as many destinations as AWA and carried twice the number of passengers. Airways has substantially more cash on hand, following the merger agreement. AWA, for its part, brought relative success as a low cost carrier operation with a meaningful presence in the Western United States.

Airways’ “fresh start”13 included a series of steps designed to strengthen Airways’ financial situation. Among other things, it entered into concessionary bargaining with its unions, ultimately securing some $1 billion dollars per year in cost reductions. Termination of certain existing defined benefit and other post-retirement benefit plans generated substantial savings. A 35 percent decrease in labor cost taken together with other cost saving measures, resulted in a positive net operating income for the second and third quarters of 2005, prior to approval of the merger agreement in September of 2005. AWA, for its part, while not in bankruptcy, was attempting to confront what it regarded as a troubled and potentially perilous future, absent the merger, in the face of rising fuel costs and depressed unit revenues as a result of over capacity, among other things. It, too, needed cash.

West characterizes the merger decision on AWA’s part as a one-way economic bailout. But there is no support for this in the record; surely, the respective companies did not endorse that view. AWA concluded, according to the statements of its CEO, that “…when we looked out at our future, what we saw wasn’t good…. Assuming we couldn’t go out and restructure or raise cash, it is possible that AWA would have been facing its own Chapter 11 at some point. Employees may like to think we “saved” US but the fact is we saved each other…

The June 10, 2005 issue of “Plane Deal”, an AWA publication, touted some of the benefits of joining fleet forces:
When merged, the combined airline will become the nation’s 5th larges airline, as measured by domestic available seat miles (ASMs). The combined airline is expected to operated a mainline fleet of 361 planes (supported by 239 regional jets and 57 turbo props for feed into the mainline system), down from a total of 419 mainline aircraft operated by both airlines at the beginning of 2005….

In the context of a “Town Hall” Q&A , the company noted
the prospect of a combined airline was more enticing to investors:
The money is being raised for the combined airline, because investors see the value in the merged entity. Frankly, airlines in their current state don’t look appealing to investors, who are savvy to know industry change needs to take place. The proposed merger represents the kind of change that investors believe will be successful. So, unfortunately, we wouldn’t garner this kind of interest if we were seeking funding for America West “as is.”

Much of West’s claimed superiority over East, in terms of what it brought to the merger, is speculative. There is, for example, scant support for West’s claim that, post-merger, “the focus of lender anxiety is clearly on the side of U.S. Airways” or that, following the merger, with the AWA CEO assuming the helm in Phoenix, “the predator king gets to have the top job, to grant fiefs to his chieftains, and to fly the flag over his castle!” Rather, what appears from the evidence is that, post-merger, the companies adopted a mixed management team and that, significantly, they adopted the US Airways collective bargaining agreement as applicable to the combined TWU force. Thus, setting aside the respective claims of who came with what, the hard evidence as to what was achieved shows significant parity as between carriers, each of which contributed complementary elements to a combined operation."

While I'm here, let me address a few claims you made in other posts. You talked about AWA's profitability. AWA was never extremely profitable, had it own Chp 11, and was the first to request an ATSB loan which was paid back by funds raised for the merger. From the AWA 2004 10-K:

"During 2004, extremely high jet fuel prices and excess capacity throughout the domestic air system began to negatively impact the low cost segment of the airline industry. As a result, several low cost carriers that had previously operated profitably, including AWA, experienced declining earnings. AWA reported a net loss of $85.3 million for 2004."

And lastly, you talked about AWA pay. I believe you said PTs numbers were off because of all you new hires. Okay, so can you remember what you hourly pay rate as a captain was in, oh let's say 1994?

crzipilot

I'm not talking about the current closing down of STL. Not saying PHX would be shut down.

But wasn't there some agreement where TWA guys were grandfathered in to X amount of capt and f/o slots out of STL or some crap like that? If they bid out of STL that seat could be bid by ex twa, and if not then it was left open or something? LIke I said I don't know the details, and have a hard enough time keeping up with ours.


So what I meant was, PHX positions could be held for PHX/AWA/US pilots could bid PHX via NIC seniority, and whatever seniority regime would prevail for the rest of the system...

CaptainBigWood

Parker and Kirby stated PHX was a low revenue leisure market. That is why there has been no expansion. Get ready for the company decision!!!!!

PurpleTurtle

You may be referring to the provision in the MOU that preserves the TWA arbitration award. TWA's arbitration award is specifically carried forward, but the Nicolau Award at USAirways was abandoned.

Wiskey Driver

Ohhh what do you think that might be? Im excited maybe its a 330 capt spot in this.

WD at AWA

cactiboss

Well guess who wants to be able to do a job action? (For those that don't know the east pilots did a job action in 2011 and are still under an injunction prohibiting them from doing so again)

eaglefly

I assume the company will highlight that since USAPA is now disputing the validity of the MOU (again, one that they not only agreed to, but negotiated themselves), USAPA cannot concurrently claim the MOU has been SUCCESSFULLY negotiated using that as one of the primary reasons for that injunction to be lifted. It's a contradictory argument and thus has no merit.

If USAPA wants to drop their dispute of the MOU and specifically reassert its validity, then they could use that assertion. Until then, I don't see any court accepting their illogical argument. I think the bull is just kicking up as much mud and feces on the wall as possible in the hope some of it sticks or everyone gets tired of the smell and capitulates.

cactiboss

the east are such liars, that's the bottom line. Notice how they now claim the mou is a contract? They vehemently denied the mou was a contract in front of Silver.