Usapa objects to POR
08-07-2013, 03:32 PM
#111
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: Airbus
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by Wiskey Driver
Of course no one ever has to sign a contract but no entity has ever done what you in the east have done and that much is for certain. The east failed to get their way so they grabbed all their marbles and went home refusing to play anymore. These were the actions of spoiled children and as a result you have paid with years of the industries worst pay and benefits.
I believe that the results of that arbitration will come full circle next month and the fence you all erected will come crashing down. Now we will see a bunch of east screaming and whining but remember, it never ever had to be this way. Some made captain over there and i am happy for that as they will sit at that bottom and some on res for the rest of their careers. This is what the east wanted and we are all to happy to help with that. Now this wont effect me as I have no desire to leave my a/c but for you it will hurt some.
WD at AWA
I believe that the results of that arbitration will come full circle next month and the fence you all erected will come crashing down. Now we will see a bunch of east screaming and whining but remember, it never ever had to be this way. Some made captain over there and i am happy for that as they will sit at that bottom and some on res for the rest of their careers. This is what the east wanted and we are all to happy to help with that. Now this wont effect me as I have no desire to leave my a/c but for you it will hurt some.
WD at AWA
08-07-2013, 03:58 PM
#112
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,486
Originally Posted by R57 relay
Wrong again wiskey breath. US emerged for bankruptcy concurrent with the merger, just as AA will do, so we didn't bring bankruptcy. As a matter of fact, the guy that will soon run the largest airline in the world said that the money we brought along with us save YOU from bankruptcy. What we also brought was 270 aircraft, the only widebody aircraft, a good trans-Atlantic operation and what is now the top 3 profitable hubs in the company. You are right, we brought the lowest pay scales, that were modeled after AWA, but you benefited from that.
You know, I got some clarification on that remark about what Parker said. America West was never going into bankruptcy. You brought no money to the merger, AWA made the last US Air payroll before the merger closed so you wouldn't liquidate. What Parker actually aid was that we had some ATSB loans coming due and we would have had to find a way to refinance the loans. CH 11 was not on the horizon. Parker went to Wall Street and lined up the investment to make this merger go. He screwed up by not nailing you guys down on the labor front, but he certainly learned from his mistake. He will not let usapa or the east affect this merger.
There will be a lot of changes coming in the next 8 weeks. You guys better put on the big boy pants and be ready. You won't be able to duck out of the next arbitration coming.
08-07-2013, 06:31 PM
#114
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,294
Originally Posted by cactusmike
You know, I got some clarification on that remark about what Parker said.
You know we went through all of this just a few months ago, right. Where I showed you the documents. Remember?
Here's a snippet for you to Google:
Published: Thursday, May 18, 2006
America West Holdings would have declared bankruptcy in 2005 if it hadn't merged with US Airways Group last May, said its CEO at US Airways' annual meeting Wednesday.
Read more: http://triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib...#ixzz2bLGYZqyp
Follow us: @triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook
Last edited by R57 relay; 08-07-2013 at 06:48 PM.
08-07-2013, 09:50 PM
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,486
Yeah, that was if we could not raise the capital. The reality was that we could and he knew it. He said that as a placating nod to you guys, trying to put us all on the same level, which somehow morphed into US Airways saving America West. We had a lot better merger options as well. You guys were the worst possible merger partners. Credit Doug for making it work. He took one weak airline and one defunct airline and he is now merging with a neglected airline to form the big airline of his dreams. And I believe he will pull it off, at least long enough to give me 10 more years of flying. 
08-08-2013, 05:43 AM
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,294
Originally Posted by cactusmike
Yeah, that was if we could not raise the capital. The reality was that we could and he knew it. He said that as a placating nod to you guys, trying to put us all on the same level, which somehow morphed into US Airways saving America West. We had a lot better merger options as well. You guys were the worst possible merger partners. Credit Doug for making it work. He took one weak airline and one defunct airline and he is now merging with a neglected airline to form the big airline of his dreams. And I believe he will pull it off, at least long enough to give me 10 more years of flying.
I'm not saying the US in any manner "saved" AWA. What did happen is the MERGER brought much needed capital to your airline and made you much bigger overnight, with better structure to compete overnight, WITH NO MONEY INVESTED by AWA-because you guys didn't have it. You may have made it, but Doug says your best scenario would be like Frontier. Even with all that has happened the last 7 years would you rather be looking at your last 10 years with the new AA or the future Frontier has? The new Frontier might be a huge success, but I'll take my chances with the new AA.
The worst partner? Really? It set you up to be part of the biggest airline in the world, something that would not be happening if you had been successful in merging with ATA, or Doug had gone for say, Frontier. Had you merged with someone like DL, UA, or AA LAS would have been shuttered as it was anyway and PHX would not be as necessary. Look at AA's history with the small airlines it bought. With Parker being in control of the new US, it kept PHX as big as it could because US needed it.
The one thing we agree on it to credit Doug. That's why I don't get how you guys ignore what he says about our merger. US might have needed the merger more, but AWA needed it too.
Here's what a different respected arbitrator than Nicolau had to say about it in the dispatchers arbitration:
"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[will you take KPMG's word over mine?] (cited by West) 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.12 Airways has substantially more cash on hand, following the merger agreement. AWA, for its part, brought 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. 14 Termination of certain existing defined benefit and other post-retirement benefit plans generated substantial savings.15 A 35 percent decrease in labor cost16 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…18
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….19
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. The quote is derived from CEO Doug Parker’s published answer to a question of why it was necessary for AWA to integrate when “it wasn’t AWA that needed the merger in order to survive?” At the hearing, Arbitrator Harris properly overruled AWA’s hearsay objection. The about US publication is not, as East counsel suggests, a business record. However, the statement may be accepted not for the purpose of proving the truth of the matter asserted - - that AWA was facing imminent bankruptcy -- but rather, that AWA Executives perceived a rocky future as justification for pursuing the merger."
NONE of this matters!!!!!! We would all be better served to forget the past and move on. I'm sure the APA is laughing it's rear off as it prepares for the next merger as we fight the last one in court. But, if you guys want to keep the BS flowing I'm hardheaded enough to counter it. I suggest we move on and just see what Judge Silver says.
08-08-2013, 07:22 AM
#118
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 1,353
Originally Posted by R57 relay
Here's what a different respected arbitrator than Nicolau had to say about it in the dispatchers arbitration:
"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[will you take KPMG's word over mine?] (cited by West) 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.12 Airways has substantially more cash on hand, following the merger agreement. AWA, for its part, brought 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. 14 Termination of certain existing defined benefit and other post-retirement benefit plans generated substantial savings.15 A 35 percent decrease in labor cost16 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…18
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….19
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. The quote is derived from CEO Doug Parker’s published answer to a question of why it was necessary for AWA to integrate when “it wasn’t AWA that needed the merger in order to survive?” At the hearing, Arbitrator Harris properly overruled AWA’s hearsay objection. The about US publication is not, as East counsel suggests, a business record. However, the statement may be accepted not for the purpose of proving the truth of the matter asserted - - that AWA was facing imminent bankruptcy -- but rather, that AWA Executives perceived a rocky future as justification for pursuing the merger."
NONE of this matters!!!!!! We would all be better served to forget the past and move on. I'm sure the APA is laughing it's rear off as it prepares for the next merger as we fight the last one in court. But, if you guys want to keep the BS flowing I'm hardheaded enough to counter it. I suggest we move on and just see what Judge Silver says.
"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[will you take KPMG's word over mine?] (cited by West) 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.12 Airways has substantially more cash on hand, following the merger agreement. AWA, for its part, brought 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. 14 Termination of certain existing defined benefit and other post-retirement benefit plans generated substantial savings.15 A 35 percent decrease in labor cost16 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…18
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….19
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. The quote is derived from CEO Doug Parker’s published answer to a question of why it was necessary for AWA to integrate when “it wasn’t AWA that needed the merger in order to survive?” At the hearing, Arbitrator Harris properly overruled AWA’s hearsay objection. The about US publication is not, as East counsel suggests, a business record. However, the statement may be accepted not for the purpose of proving the truth of the matter asserted - - that AWA was facing imminent bankruptcy -- but rather, that AWA Executives perceived a rocky future as justification for pursuing the merger."
NONE of this matters!!!!!! We would all be better served to forget the past and move on. I'm sure the APA is laughing it's rear off as it prepares for the next merger as we fight the last one in court. But, if you guys want to keep the BS flowing I'm hardheaded enough to counter it. I suggest we move on and just see what Judge Silver says.
"Lets just move and see what Judge Silver says" Hmmm Let me move my clock back to 2006 where the east mantra coming out of the MEC was " 'lets just go to arbitration and what ever the arbitrator says we will just have to follow". Heard it all before relay and your side doesn't honor its word.
WD at AWA
08-08-2013, 07:37 AM
#119
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,294
Originally Posted by Wiskey Driver
As is usually the case with you, you leave out the meat of these little stories. I went ahead and bold typed those areas that you really didn't want others to see.
"Lets just move and see what Judge Silver says" Hmmm Let me move my clock back to 2006 where the east mantra coming out of the MEC was " 'lets just go to arbitration and what ever the arbitrator says we will just have to follow". Heard it all before relay and your side doesn't honor its word.
WD at AWA
"Lets just move and see what Judge Silver says" Hmmm Let me move my clock back to 2006 where the east mantra coming out of the MEC was " 'lets just go to arbitration and what ever the arbitrator says we will just have to follow". Heard it all before relay and your side doesn't honor its word.
WD at AWA
If I didn't want anyone to see it, I wouldn't have posted it. I've conceded that the merger was necessary for US. Did you even read the rest? Do you understand that it is from non-US east pilots?
You whine about east pilots not honoring their word, but ignore the FACTS of the transition agreement. Splinter-Log.
08-08-2013, 08:08 AM
#120
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 1,353
Originally Posted by R57 relay
Can you read, or do you have your handlers feed this stuff to you?
If I didn't want anyone to see it, I wouldn't have posted it. I've conceded that the merger was necessary for US. Did you even read the rest? Do you understand that it is from non-US east pilots?
You whine about east pilots not honoring their word, but ignore the FACTS of the transition agreement. Splinter-Log.
If I didn't want anyone to see it, I wouldn't have posted it. I've conceded that the merger was necessary for US. Did you even read the rest? Do you understand that it is from non-US east pilots?
You whine about east pilots not honoring their word, but ignore the FACTS of the transition agreement. Splinter-Log.
WD at AWA
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
