AMR may be sold off
01-24-2012, 05:41 PM
#72
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Posts: 262
Originally Posted by eaglefly
You can be sure the APA as one of 3 of 7 labor representatives on the creditors committee will act in the best interests of the pilots of AA whether that involves a merger or not (hopefully not). The labor reps on this committee will be angling for whatever deals best serves their careers and not the padding of those at other carriers. I have no problem of foreign ownership in part if AA becomes stronger and remains independent and saves as many AA pilots jobs as possible, although I understand your giddyness at the possibility of advancement on the carcasses of pilots of another carrier.
If we come out of Chpater 11 still #4 and have a foundation and cost-structure to expand and compete anywhere and with anyone, be it legacy, LCC or regional, that's how you get BACK to #1. If AMR's cost structure is what it sounds like it's likely to be (which cannot be acheived through merger with another and operating under a more expensive contract), it may indeed be more attractive to investors who intend to keep it essentially whole and turn it into something formidable (and extremely profitable). As such, remaining independant and expanding is in the best interest of ALL AMR employees and that will be the focus from inside looking out.
If we come out of Chpater 11 still #4 and have a foundation and cost-structure to expand and compete anywhere and with anyone, be it legacy, LCC or regional, that's how you get BACK to #1. If AMR's cost structure is what it sounds like it's likely to be (which cannot be acheived through merger with another and operating under a more expensive contract), it may indeed be more attractive to investors who intend to keep it essentially whole and turn it into something formidable (and extremely profitable). As such, remaining independant and expanding is in the best interest of ALL AMR employees and that will be the focus from inside looking out.
The UCC has a voice in the proceedings but not veto power!
Your other points are well taken.
01-24-2012, 05:52 PM
#73
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by Tomahawk58
A point of clarification, the APA is represented on the Unsecured Creditors Committee along with six other reps. While this committee is consulted, they hold no veto power on the ultimate outcome of the restructuring. That power rest with the "secured" creditors committee and the judge.
The UCC has a voice in the proceedings but not veto power!
Your other points are well taken.
The UCC has a voice in the proceedings but not veto power!
Your other points are well taken.
01-24-2012, 05:58 PM
#74
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by eaglefly
You can be sure the APA as one of 3 of 7 labor representatives on the creditors committee will act in the best interests of the pilots of AA whether that involves a merger or not (hopefully not). The labor reps on this committee will be angling for whatever deals best serves their careers and not the padding of those at other carriers. I have no problem of foreign ownership in part if AA becomes stronger and remains independent and saves as many AA pilots jobs as possible, although I understand your giddyness at the possibility of advancement on the carcasses of pilots of another carrier.
If we come out of Chpater 11 still #4 and have a foundation and cost-structure to expand and compete anywhere and with anyone, be it legacy, LCC or regional, that's how you get BACK to #1. If AMR's cost structure is what it sounds like it's likely to be (which cannot be acheived through merger with another and operating under a more expensive contract), it may indeed be more attractive to investors who intend to keep it essentially whole and turn it into something formidable (and extremely profitable). As such, remaining independant and expanding is in the best interest of ALL AMR employees and that will be the focus from inside looking out.
If we come out of Chpater 11 still #4 and have a foundation and cost-structure to expand and compete anywhere and with anyone, be it legacy, LCC or regional, that's how you get BACK to #1. If AMR's cost structure is what it sounds like it's likely to be (which cannot be acheived through merger with another and operating under a more expensive contract), it may indeed be more attractive to investors who intend to keep it essentially whole and turn it into something formidable (and extremely profitable). As such, remaining independant and expanding is in the best interest of ALL AMR employees and that will be the focus from inside looking out.
This is the major problem with foreign ownership, there is no framework in place to protect labor from each other. You think the RJ whipsaw was bad, your ain't seen nothing yet. Once foreign entities can buy up us airlines, we will be reduced to feed. Airlines and their labor groups like DAL at least have framework in place that could be used in a international court of law. APA not so much. That is what this possibility could be worse for you than fragmentation. What is even worse is it will be sold as saving jobs when in reality it will be saving politicians jobs and quite possibly not yours.
Just realize that what may seem like a savior may actually result in a far worse situation.
01-25-2012, 05:09 AM
#75
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by Tomahawk58
A point of clarification, the APA is represented on the Unsecured Creditors Committee along with six other reps. While this committee is consulted, they hold no veto power on the ultimate outcome of the restructuring. That power rest with the "secured" creditors committee and the judge.
The UCC has a voice in the proceedings but not veto power!
Your other points are well taken.
The UCC has a voice in the proceedings but not veto power!
Your other points are well taken.
01-25-2012, 05:16 AM
#77
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
Problem with foreign ownership wrt to AMR is that your contract means nothing to any corporation or pilot group outside the US. Ergo your protections are worth squat. Without the JV framework that the other airlines and their respective unions have been building for the better part of the decade, there is no structure there to hold anyone's feet to the fire. Foreign ownership with a 51% or greater stake could result in less jobs and less growth for AMR employees. The growth that would be yours would be at the foreign carrier and you could be reduced to feed to their jets.
This is the major problem with foreign ownership, there is no framework in place to protect labor from each other. You think the RJ whipsaw was bad, your ain't seen nothing yet. Once foreign entities can buy up us airlines, we will be reduced to feed. Airlines and their labor groups like DAL at least have framework in place that could be used in a international court of law. APA not so much. That is what this possibility could be worse for you than fragmentation. What is even worse is it will be sold as saving jobs when in reality it will be saving politicians jobs and quite possibly not yours.
Just realize that what may seem like a savior may actually result in a far worse situation.
This is the major problem with foreign ownership, there is no framework in place to protect labor from each other. You think the RJ whipsaw was bad, your ain't seen nothing yet. Once foreign entities can buy up us airlines, we will be reduced to feed. Airlines and their labor groups like DAL at least have framework in place that could be used in a international court of law. APA not so much. That is what this possibility could be worse for you than fragmentation. What is even worse is it will be sold as saving jobs when in reality it will be saving politicians jobs and quite possibly not yours.
Just realize that what may seem like a savior may actually result in a far worse situation.
Frgmentation should dead last on the pilots list of outcomes, unless each fragment individually is the best out one for those subject to that fragment and that's a very tall order, if not impossible.
01-25-2012, 10:54 AM
#78
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by eaglefly
Have to disagree. Fragmentation has the highest probability of immediate job loss. Other scenarios like your hypothesis, would take more time for damage to become evident.
Frgmentation should dead last on the pilots list of outcomes, unless each fragment individually is the best out one for those subject to that fragment and that's a very tall order, if not impossible.
Frgmentation should dead last on the pilots list of outcomes, unless each fragment individually is the best out one for those subject to that fragment and that's a very tall order, if not impossible.
Both hard times in BK and great times on the upswings, we need to place far greater emphasis on the full ramifications of how we choose to proceed rather than target fixating on "date of signing" only as if nothing else matters ever.
I know you are most concerned with your seniority number and you seem very willing to take an almost unlimited pay and benefits cut to preserve that number. All I'm saying is don't be so myopic. If you are, you may not only end up with a career crushing long term deal that is much worse that whatever your initial "date of signing" terms were (i.e. with scope sales and the like that often take a while to fully play out) but permanant long term trends toward mass outsourcing (particularly if foreign airlines come into the equation beyond today's limits) that will almost guarantee that you end up on the street.
With the dammage a scorched earth "by any means necessary" stratedgy focused on date of signing only to over all pattern bargaining, there won't be any port in the storm to go to when the dust settles. Not only that, but if you engage in predatory bargaining that threatens to take down the entire industry, other pilot groups will be forced to respond in kind by actively making it easier for their respective managements to finance an assett only purchase. By focusing on DOS only as if there is no other consideration, you could end up causing more harm to your own career footprint than a liquidation would in the first place.
01-25-2012, 12:12 PM
#79
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 161
HAHAHAHA!!! Excellent. Of course, NEVER is the answer. Well, except of course for the broken clock concept.
I peruse this web site occasionally wading through 95%+ garbage to hopefully a few facts or decent opinions on specific topics.
I am constantly amazed by the great geniuses, fortune tellers swamis here who generate silly rumors and make all sorts of silly predictions. I still remember my favorite one of all time from here: Skywest was to get a contract to fly 100 E-190s for Southwest Airlines- from a "good source in management", of course.
Thanks for nailing the overall experience here in a nutshell.
I peruse this web site occasionally wading through 95%+ garbage to hopefully a few facts or decent opinions on specific topics.
I am constantly amazed by the great geniuses, fortune tellers swamis here who generate silly rumors and make all sorts of silly predictions. I still remember my favorite one of all time from here: Skywest was to get a contract to fly 100 E-190s for Southwest Airlines- from a "good source in management", of course.
Thanks for nailing the overall experience here in a nutshell.
Originally Posted by newKnow
When's the last time a pilot correctly predicted anything dealing with what was going to happen with the airline industry?
01-25-2012, 12:20 PM
#80
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by gloopy
Its a matter of degree though. Would a 5% pay cut to avoid fragmentation and survive as a stand alone be "worth it"? OK, how about 10%? 50%? 85%? Would you work for free? There is clearly some point where walking away is far superior long and medium term than a "by any means necessary" deal with the devil to avoid a fragmentation.
Both hard times in BK and great times on the upswings, we need to place far greater emphasis on the full ramifications of how we choose to proceed rather than target fixating on "date of signing" only as if nothing else matters ever.
I know you are most concerned with your seniority number and you seem very willing to take an almost unlimited pay and benefits cut to preserve that number. All I'm saying is don't be so myopic. If you are, you may not only end up with a career crushing long term deal that is much worse that whatever your initial "date of signing" terms were (i.e. with scope sales and the like that often take a while to fully play out) but permanant long term trends toward mass outsourcing (particularly if foreign airlines come into the equation beyond today's limits) that will almost guarantee that you end up on the street.
With the dammage a scorched earth "by any means necessary" stratedgy focused on date of signing only to over all pattern bargaining, there won't be any port in the storm to go to when the dust settles. Not only that, but if you engage in predatory bargaining that threatens to take down the entire industry, other pilot groups will be forced to respond in kind by actively making it easier for their respective managements to finance an assett only purchase. By focusing on DOS only as if there is no other consideration, you could end up causing more harm to your own career footprint than a liquidation would in the first place.
Both hard times in BK and great times on the upswings, we need to place far greater emphasis on the full ramifications of how we choose to proceed rather than target fixating on "date of signing" only as if nothing else matters ever.
I know you are most concerned with your seniority number and you seem very willing to take an almost unlimited pay and benefits cut to preserve that number. All I'm saying is don't be so myopic. If you are, you may not only end up with a career crushing long term deal that is much worse that whatever your initial "date of signing" terms were (i.e. with scope sales and the like that often take a while to fully play out) but permanant long term trends toward mass outsourcing (particularly if foreign airlines come into the equation beyond today's limits) that will almost guarantee that you end up on the street.
With the dammage a scorched earth "by any means necessary" stratedgy focused on date of signing only to over all pattern bargaining, there won't be any port in the storm to go to when the dust settles. Not only that, but if you engage in predatory bargaining that threatens to take down the entire industry, other pilot groups will be forced to respond in kind by actively making it easier for their respective managements to finance an assett only purchase. By focusing on DOS only as if there is no other consideration, you could end up causing more harm to your own career footprint than a liquidation would in the first place.
Of course, it sounds as though you'd rather AA pilots fall on their swords to grease your wheels in the future.
Thanks for the offer, but I'll pass.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
