US Airways Dividend Miles (Pre-FlightFund Merger) - Charlotte Observer article re: FA union leaders' attitudes

From today's Charlotte Observer:

"[Teddy] Xidas[, Pittsburgh local flight attendant leader], 44, says she is determined to protect workers, even if it means management decides to shut down the airline.

"'My focus should not be on whether the company survives, but on whether the employees can survive financially with any further concessions," she said. "I take the position that I want to maintain the integrity of the profession, the salaries and the quality of life at all costs.'"

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NYCommuter:
From today's Charlotte Observer:

"[Teddy] Xidas[, Pittsburgh local flight attendant leader], 44, says she is determined to protect workers, even if it means management decides to shut down the airline.

"'My focus should not be on whether the company survives, but on whether the employees can survive financially with any further concessions," she said. "I take the position that I want to maintain the integrity of the profession, the salaries and the quality of life at all costs.'"</font>

There are some interesting comments on the FA workrules by ijap in another thread. The workrules are very important. But then again, so is the attitude. Im watching this play out and I hope US survives and does well. But by the end of April I will be at about 50,000 miles on UA, close to 10,000 on AA and 1000 on US. My initial FF targets are 50,000 each on UA and AA then decide which of those 2 I will go to 100,000 with first. After hitting one, I will do the other. US will only come into play if they have a very attractive promotion. That is after about 7 years as a CP. Im basically bailing and burning miles at this point. The FA attitude isnt the only thing, or even the major thing. But it is part of the picture.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NYCommuter:
From today's Charlotte Observer:

"[Teddy] Xidas[, Pittsburgh local flight attendant leader], 44, says she is determined to protect workers, even if it means management decides to shut down the airline.

"'My focus should not be on whether the company survives, but on whether the employees can survive financially with any further concessions," she said. "I take the position that I want to maintain the integrity of the profession, the salaries and the quality of life at all costs.'"</font>


I've never figured out this "highest pay until the final day" mentality. It's pretty tough to 'survive financially' when you have no job.

Flying in and out of STL, I've talked to many TWA pilot's and FA's now either out of work, on to other jobs, or flying for regional carriers when they once flew mainline jets.

Do union leaders have advisors that are economists, business leaders, etc., or are they all 30-year FA's? (not trying to be elitist, but I get the impresstion there aren't a lot of MBS's, PhD's, etc. in the FA profession - correct me if I'm wrong)

Just hop on over to www.usaviation.com, (http://www.usaviation.com,) and look for the posts by Pitbull. Thats Teddy. Her narrow-mindedness over there is legend and will do nothing but run her employer into the ground. She also spends her entire time speaking in the third person when she quotes the "AFA PIT president."

I think that after a certain point, the FAs need to decide if the job they are being asked to do is still worth it for them, in light of the concessions they have endured.

If enough FAs answer "No," US may very well be screwed.

------------------
Don't feed the trolls.

Airlines are in one of the unique positions of being totally unable to replace striking workers. Every work group member(except the airline counter folks) is required to be certified, licensed, and extensively trained. So, clearly, many carriers are hobbled by the inability to compete owing to the restrictions that 1800's era contracts/law have placed them into.

[This message has been edited by MisterEbola (edited Mar 21, 2004).]

Comments like this from the leader of the FA union are unfortunate.

This smells of the union mentality of "all or nothing...no more givebacks" that is so troubling. This thought process is what contributed to the demise of many organizations including airlines that are no longer in flight. How many companies can each of us recall that were destroyed by such reckless union leadership.

The reality is this...if US goes belly up we as fliers and the senior management of the airline will experience nothing more than temporary inconvenience. Fliers will all migrate to other airlines and those of us in the top-tiers will be welcomed with open arms. Senior management will find jobs elesewhere.

The real victims will be the employees of US and communities like PIT and CLT that are dependent on the presence of a hub airline for jobs and access. PHL will be fine if not better without US as its O&D potential can be cultivated by the LCCs.

I hope Teddy will be able to sleep well at night knowing that her noble stance might cost thousands of people their jobs...in an industry where jobs are becoming more and more scarce. If I were a US FA I would be thinking about voting her out of her position before the only place you'll find US is on ebay.

What's even more worrisome is that the mechanics make the flight attendants look like apologists for the company. The almost completely broken labor relations are the most dangerous problem U is facing, I think.

Removing the spin, this is what Teddy really means:

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">"[Teddy] Xidas[, Pittsburgh local flight attendant leader], 44, says she is determined to protect herself, even if it means management decides to shut down the airline.

"'My focus should not be on whether the company survives, but on whether the union can survive financially with any further concessions," she said. "I take the position that I want to maintain the integrity of myself, my salary and my quality of life at all costs.'"</font>

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by JS:
Removing the spin, this is what Teddy really means:

"[Teddy] Xidas[, Pittsburgh local flight attendant leader], 44, says she is determined to protect herself, even if it means management decides to shut down the airline.

"'My focus should not be on whether the company survives, but on whether the union can survive financially with any further concessions," she said. "I take the position that I want to maintain the integrity of myself, my salary and my quality of life at all costs.'"</font>

JS

Having met Teddy I would have to say you are wrong. I do not agree with 95% of what she says but I will say this about her, she believes she is right and is willing to fight for what she believes in until her last breath. I'm about as conservative as the come having worked for a long time Senator from NC, but I respect her for her dedication and conviction of her beliefs.

I will have to admit that she has an interesting negotiation style. As we say in the south, you catch more flies with honey than salt, but since she is a Yankee it goes right over her head. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif In her world, this management team has lied to her folks too many times and at this point she sees no value in trusting them again. I’m not saying she is right in her position, but I can understand her frustrations.

How many concessions must one make before they draw the line? If they continue making concessions they may as well find new jobs because the ones they have won't be worth having. Pretty soon you will all enjoy boarding your next US Airways flight and being welcomed by your crew whose only job experience is welfare and McDonalds. Enjoy!!!!

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by GadgetFreak:
There are some interesting comments on the FA workrules by ijap in another thread. The workrules are very important. But then again, so is the attitude. Im watching this play out and I hope US survives and does well. But by the end of April I will be at about 50,000 miles on UA, close to 10,000 on AA and 1000 on US. My initial FF targets are 50,000 each on UA and AA then decide which of those 2 I will go to 100,000 with first. After hitting one, I will do the other. US will only come into play if they have a very attractive promotion. That is after about 7 years as a CP. Im basically bailing and burning miles at this point. The FA attitude isnt the only thing, or even the major thing. But it is part of the picture.

</font>

I can't stress the education point enough. While there are many bright US FAs out there, all too many are completely clueless when it comes to US business economics. I would be suprised if any key leaders even posessed an MBA let alone a BA. I can't imagine why so many don't understand that their contract is completely void when US is liquidated, and furthermore in the extremely unlikely event of a merger, as with TWA and AA, their contracts become worthless anyways. In an era when there are tens of thousands of FAs laid off throughout the country, surely they should all be eductated by the union that liquidation and bancruptcy = no US Airways = no job regardless of a contract. But try explaining that to a 30-year veteran with little or no higher education--it's hopeless. Too bad for US that all the educated bright young stars were laid off months ago.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by AS Flyer:
How many concessions must one make before they draw the line? If they continue making concessions they may as well find new jobs because the ones they have won't be worth having. Pretty soon you will all enjoy boarding your next US Airways flight and being welcomed by your crew whose only job experience is welfare and McDonalds. Enjoy!!!!</font>

There is as wide range between totally inexperienced people and people with a lot of experience operating under untenable work rules. US and the FAs are going to have to figure out how to work in the margin between those points somehow.

If management coudl replace us with vending machines, they would. Yes it is good to have a job, but at what cost? It seems like US has given given given and their management wants more more more. I hate to generlaize, but the other poster is correct. The more you will cut, you will start seeing a work force that A) doesn't care at all about service. B) a whole new class of workers who have only worked in mimumum paying jobs. If you think service is bad now wait till that day.

How does Southwest do it with employees that make 40% to 50% less than US? Personal opinion, but it seems these folks will either be making less with USAir or less with a LCC or less by taking unemployment checks. Pick your poison, it seems to be reality.

Near as I can tell, WN doesn't do it with FAs paid 40-50% less. They just pay the same but get more productivity out of them.

When you try to rule (not manage) via fear and intimidation a funny thing happens. Some people say "Screw you, if I'm going down you're going with me" and logic takes a back seat as what should be business becomes deeply personal as does the urge for what is seen as revenge.

US Airways will have no one to blame but itself if Teddy Xidas's view is the prevailing one at US and ultimately sinks the airline.

They don't pay less; they're just more efficient. Flight attendants assist in cabin cleaning, rampers back out aircraft, agents lend a helping hand when needed.

Owing to the fortress mentality at US, FAs refuse to assist with cabin cleanup (extending the turn times), mechanics making $24 an hour push back aircraft at the big airports, and any effort by an employee not within a work group daring to help out another employee or a passenger (i.e., a pilot helping carry and old lady's bag down the jetway) is met with an immediate threat of a grievance filing by the other employee.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by longing4piedmont:
...she believes she is right and is willing to fight for what she believes in until her last breath.</font>


Her problem is that she looks at the situation within the context of the FA's previous situation vs. their current situation and only in the context of US Airways. If she took a few steps back and looked at the forest from the trees, she'd see that US simply won't survive in today's environment even with some cost cutting.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by geo1005:

Her problem is that she looks at the situation within the context of the FA's previous situation vs. their current situation and only in the context of US Airways. If she took a few steps back and looked at the forest from the trees, she'd see that US simply won't survive in today's environment even with some cost cutting.

</font>

Agreed. My only point was she is not doing this solely to protect her job as an union employee.

Sorry, Dupe

[This message has been edited by longing4piedmont (edited Mar 22, 2004).]

Hi folks. I don't usually join these discussions but this one propts me to respond. In PHL we have a few slogans about the companys attitude, "the beatings will continue until moral improves" for employees, and "we're not happy until you're not happy" for the customers. I don't know Teddy and I'm not in her group but I do understand how she feels. Before the bankruptcy was filed US made promises and agreements to get concessions and pay cuts from all their work groups. We were told there was a plan that took into account all aspects of the airline and every possible problem that might come up. We cooperated and took heavy pay cuts, relocations and benefit reductions. But, today we're being told it wasn't enough, fuel prices are higher than they thought, the RJ's were slow being certified etc -and somehow this is the workers fault. Those of you who fly thruogh PHL remember waiting on airplanes with the jetway off and being told the plane hadn't been loaded yet. That was last summer when management changed the baggage transfer program that had been in place for years, and I might add worked rather well, and made the people loading the flight also responsible for transfering the connecting bags. When they saw it didn't work instead of responding to your complaints and ours they let it continue through the summer and misconnected thousands of bags. Now they've reinvented the wheel again and these same type of delays are occuring but this time because of a flawed personel assignment system. Those of you who have seen my previous posts know I'm not a negative company basher. But ther are some things to understand about what Teddy says. All the unions at US have submitted work rule and productivity changes to the company and have basically been rejected out of hand. The IAM for one has offered 45 pages of changes in work rules and concessions that could save US $80 to $100 million a year. There has been no response to this offer and except for the pilots none of the other unions offers for changes have even been considered. This attitude by the company predicates Teddy's response. As a point of information an agent at Southwest with my same seniority makes about $2.50 an hour more. Some of you are thinking but Southwest makes money and that's true, but they can't fly you from Manchester NH to Manchester England and they never will. US can never make money the same way Southwest does but give us their work rules, contracts and productivity level or something similar and I think we can certainly improve our profits and our product and save this airline. Thanks again for flying US you are still the ones who really matter. And by the way, I still believe we'll make it in the long run.

You've got to remember that this is the F/A's who are some of the lower paid members of the airline staff.

Pilots will make much less starting over in seniority somewhere else. Mechanics likely somewhat less, although have more transferable skills.

F/A's will likely get a pay RAISE if they go work somewhere else, in a completely different industry (without flight benefits and with much worse work rules). But if I'm in that situation, I'd fight for every nickel. They just don't have the incentive of the other work groups to make the same concessions.

It's nice to know that some employees in at US still belive in the airline and the quality that was US in the 90's. formerPI makes some valid points..if only everyone at US thought along the same lines.

I think the most serious issue facing US now is the complete destruction of the management-labor relationship. The place has become so hostile that everyone continues posturing while the plane's losing altitude. It's like watching your parents suffering through a long divorce and they finally reach the point where they just want to keep hurting each other while the kids have to just sit back and watch.

When relations reach this level there are few options left: bring in new management, find new labor, close up shop or the most painful of alternatives - sit down at the table, leave the personal agendas at the door, identify areas of mutual agreement and build on these areas to reach compromise that works for labor, management and the organization. From there trust can be re-established as long as agreements are honored. Since the first three tactics seem either unlikely or undesirable, one would think the last option is the best chance for US.

Part of the reason WN is so successful is BECAUSE of the relationship between frontline employees and management. There is trust and mutual respect. The lines of communciation are always open. Employees are treated like they're family and not corporate assets. In turn, happy employees (granted they have better work rules) are more productive, happier, more engaged in the operations of the organization and provide a better product in terms of customer service than any other airline (and I hate to admit that becuase I do not like WN).

US can't survive if labor and management take out their frustrations on each other and on the passengers.

> How many concessions must one make before they draw the line? If they continue making concessions they may as well find new jobs because the ones they have won't be worth having. Pretty soon you will all enjoy boarding your next US Airways flight and being welcomed by your crew whose only job experience is welfare and McDonalds. Enjoy!!!!

Explain then how Southwest and Jetblue run their airlines at 6-7c cost per available seat miles and their flight attendants and other employees have quite high morale, while USAir's flight attentdants, whose pay contributes to a 12-13c cost per ASM, are so close to poverty.

JS

she believes she is right and is willing to fight for what she believes in until her last breath. I'm about as conservative as the come having worked for a long time Senator from NC, but I respect her for her dedication and conviction of her beliefs.


The easiest way to be fatally wrong in a decision is to let your beliefs cloud your judgement. I don't think one should admire people because of their conviction, but their reasoning. I don't know Teddy's reasoning, but it differs from my perception of the basic things USAir unions need to do to bring the company's costs to a competitive level.

I also doubt I will also hear an argument that convinces me that shutting down the airline is more in the FA union's interest than lowering salaries onerously.

Shutting down the airline is counterproductive. Given the current management's track record, giving further concessions won't stave off the shutdown of the airline anyway, so it makes all the sense in the world to flip the current occupants of CCY the bird.

Some employees of Southwest make MORE than their counterparts at US Airways ESPECIALLY the express carriers. The issue of labor costs is not just wages, it is also workrules.

There are many changes which could be made on the operations and revenue side which could improve US Air's financial picture (and I DON'T mean nickel and dime schemes like the new club fees, which, by the way, are AGAINST Star rules).

Where are the rational fares? I have been told by members of U management that they COULD be done, but when pressed for a reason why they hadn't done it they couldn't give me an answer.

Where are the operational improvements--like rolling or depeaking PHL, increasing utilization of the aircraft AND crews as well as ground staff??

Where are the logical routes and added point to point service they keep talking about--what they have done so far is almost nothing.

It is apparent by management's actions that they have only one "plan"--and that is to bust the unions at all costs. They could care less about the customers or the employees. Let's face it. You have a company whose employees have already given billions in givebacks and seen no improvement for it. While management cries for more and blames everyone but themselves, they REFUSE to make these other improvements. Furthermore, they have stolen work from the IAM by farming out overhaul work on Airbus aircraft which they are obligated by contract to keep internal.

US has the best employees in the industry. If I were management I would be exploiting my greatest asset--the employees, instead of demoralizing them and driving the place into the ground. Unfortunately the words management and Crystal City are an oxymoron.

I fear the fat lady is fast approaching the stage. I send my best wishes to all at US.

There are many changes which could be made on the operations and revenue side which could improve US Air's financial picture (and I DON'T mean nickel and dime schemes like the new club fees, which, by the way, are AGAINST Star rules).

Where are the rational fares? I have been told by members of U management that they COULD be done, but when pressed for a reason why they hadn't done it they couldn't give me an answer.

Where are the operational improvements--like rolling or depeaking PHL, increasing utilization of the aircraft AND crews as well as ground staff??

Where are the logical routes and added point to point service they keep talking about--what they have done so far is almost nothing.




exactly. the time to do these things was last october, when it became public that WN was arriving, or last summer. after all, what's to come is not unexpected-- US is used to watching itself be PacMan-ned in CA and at BWI. The time lost will, with strong likelihood, prove fatal.

to awaken in April STILL plan-less really removes much need to decide on a plan. management will just be managing the turning out of the lights, at this rate.

STILL thinking about what classes to offer? STILL considering "various" cost-cutting moves? STILL somehow hoping to cobble together enough credibility to exact a third round of clawbacks from labor groups it has treated like dirt? meanwhile the draining down of PHL fares has ALREADY begun to drain the hourglass.

How does Southwest do it with employees that make 40% to 50% less than US? Personal opinion, but it seems these folks will either be making less with USAir or less with a LCC or less by taking unemployment checks. Pick your poison, it seems to be reality.

The old "low pay at Southwest myth" is as persistant as the new "x-ray's are read in India myth" (think about the second one and how silly it is!). Senior LUV FA's now make more than senior U FA's. With the next round of cuts Seagull wants, U will have the lowest paid FA's in the industry (excluding express carriers of course), just what he wants.

Rewarding years of incompetent managemnet with more give backs seems a strange way to preserve an airline. There comes a point where the emloyees at US have to maintian some of their diginity and move on, someone in this industry has to draw a line in the sand or they'll all be paid like Wal-Mart employees. This also just keeps the downward wage spiral in this industry going. Seagul said all the right things when he was hired, but it is obvious he is as cluless as Wolf and everone who has run this company for many years. It's time to put this old dog out of it's misery. I'll miss her, but she's had her day. Let Seagul go ruin some company in another industry.

"My focus should not be on whether the company survives, but on whether the employees can survive financially with any further concessions" :confused:

One way to look at her comments is to say that she's posturing for tough negotiations and flying the flag as a union rep. At least that's what I hope she is doing as otherwise, the attitude of the FA union is completely out of touch with reality.

Because the majority of the US FAs I encounter are nice folks trying to do their job, I've always been inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. But I have noticed on our last couple of flights ( PHL- LGW ) a certain recalcitrance among some of the FAs regarding the plight of US as the airline continues to struggle. This puzzles me as where do they think the money comes from?

Hopefully calmer minds prevail as I want to remain a US customer and to see
this airline succeed.

Barry

The old "low pay at Southwest myth" is as persistant as the new....

..Seagul said all the right things when he was hired, but it is obvious he is as cluless as Wolf and everone who has run this company for many years. It's time to put this old dog out of it's misery. I'll miss her, but she's had her day. Let Seagul go ruin some company in another industry.


I hope it doesn't come to that, but you make some painfully valid points. The sad, but obvious, point is that the rank and file staff have been paying and will pay the price for years of lackluster management. If US does joins the airline history page, just as at every other major company to under, the CEO and his ilk will still be able to pay their mortgage and send their kids to college. Many of the employees will not be in that position but will pay the price for the failure of their leadership.


Thank you for flying US Airways....I do hope that you will be still be able to do
so.

I don'y buy the line that US has never had good management and that is the (internal) reason US is going down the tubes. Labor and management have never agreed on a plan that would make US wickedly profitable and allow it to expand into a global airline. No legacy carrier in the USA has been able to do this. US's unions have always held their ground until the last minute, then made some givebacks and the airline keeps flying in its same old horrible financial situation. We'd like to think that management at the legacy carriers are the ones in charge but they are not. They are like the parents who are foolish enough to go to the children and ask them to sign off on every major decision. Bad move. (That's an analogy btw, and I'm not calling US's employees children). Management doesn't get to make decisions it gets to make suggestions for approval by the non-managers. Again, a very bad way to do business.


The problem is that US is now at the end of the "legacy airline business cycle":

- start-up
- profits
- expansion
- growth
- labor wants and gets better $
- airline matures, labor gets more senior, planes get older

(turn the corner now)

- airline takes on debt to replace old planes with new
- labor gets more senior and costs more
- profits go out the door
- layoffs! (low paid junior employees go first!)
- "Why are we not making money?"
- BK/reorg
- "Why are we not great anymore?"
- BK/reorg again?
- sell assets to pay mounting debt (now below junk level)
- close doors and sell-off money making assets (slots, some routes) to another carrier

:(

I remember a time about five or six years ago when the US Airways ALPA refused to grant management anything more than 35 stinkin' regional jets.

This was at a time when Comair, ASA, CO Express, and Eagle had plans to exceed 100 RJs.

I'll also note that the last round of concessions passed by about a percent or so for the IAM. So, what could US possibly have asked for in addition to what they got without losing the vote?

I remember a few years ago thinking how insane it was to fly CLT-FAY-CLT (in FC) on a 737 with about 35 passengers. Those polots were earning the same rates as the guys who used to fly the 737-300's to SFO! :eek:

I will say it again and again. It's more a labor issue than a management issue. Yet poor management allowed terrible union contracts to be allowed in the business in the first place.

Regardless, it would take three FF'ers, without unions to deal with, about five days to turn the airline around. When it all shakes out, it will be the labor restrictions and rules that have been the nail in the coffin. This is nothing new.

I will say it again and again. It's more a labor issue than a management issue. Yet poor management allowed terrible union contracts to be allowed in the business in the first place.

Which airline currently has and has had for some time the largest percentage of unionized employees?

Southwest.

Labor will work with management that threats labor fairly and honestly and has a realistic plan and sense of business acumen.

The current crowd in CCY does not, does not, and has none--in order.

I would not work for US in my field of endeavour if they paid me %30 over the market rate--who wants to work for a bunch of losers?

I don't disagree with what you said CLUE. I'm saying the monkey is out of the bag with those contracts and I agree that CCY will not be able to get it back in the bag. As I said, 3 FF'ers could do it better than the current management but not with the Union Contracts they have now.

I might also mention the USairways contracts are far more limiting to work flexibility than the SWA contracts. I know people on both airlines and it is funny to listen to them compare notes.

Southwest doesn't seem to have cornered the market on labor/management harmony at all...

http://www.forbes.com/management/2004/04/14/cx_0414southwest.html?partner=yahoo&referrer=

I might also mention the USairways contracts are far more limiting to work flexibility than the SWA contracts. I know people on both airlines and it is funny to listen to them compare notes.

Depends on the contract. From what I understand, for instance, US has been able to cross-utilize ramp and gate agents in small cities for a long time from a contract standpoint, but they don't do it.

If that's the case (CCY having a tool, but not using it) would you really blame the unions for the current status quo? I'd make 'em do what they already can do first, and then come back and ask for more.

Southwest doesn't seem to have cornered the market on labor/management harmony at all...

I'd submit that LUV is having "problems" with a union during Section 6 negotiations. One union. CCY has problems with every major union on the propery, save perhaps the TWU (simulator engineers). I boldly predict that the LUV flight attendants will reach an agreement without a strike of any kind.

Clue,

Dave has been honest with all labor groups. The unions want you to believe that management is at fault.

Clue,

Dave has been honest will all labor groups.



Excuse me! But I've been informed that "flyonthewall" is none other than Dave Siegel himself. Interesting this was your first posting here on FT too. Care to dispute this rumor?

Clue,

Dave has been honest with all labor groups. The unions want you to believe that management is at fault.

Really?

Chris Chiames wrote in a very public fashion that the Airbus heavy maintenance would not be outsourced post-concessions. That same line was repeated to M&R employees during the Chapter 11 roadshows.

I guess that one could argue that Dave did not say that, but his direct reports did. Guess what? The Airbus work went to Alabama. Not only a lie, but one whopper of a lie.

Witness the real truth that has come to light about the health of the pilots DB plan now that's it's gone.

Witness the latest LOA with ALPA: one of the big selling points of MAA was a "soft landing" for furloughed pilots (100% of Mid-Atlantic seats are to be offered to furloughed US pilots). The latest LOA would allow those planes to be placed at affiliate carriers, which would result in fewer and lower paying positions available to US furloughees.

Contractually, US must offer voluntary furloughs before involuntarily furloughing any flight attendants (it's in the AFA contract). US attemped to furlough without offering voluntary furloughs around the turn of the year. AFA took US to court and then arbitration and won.

Shall I continue? I've posted examples where US management has lied to, attempted to cheat, or plain ignore the promises made in the first two restructuring agreements (and/or collective bargaining agreements) with every major union (save the TWU--what 18 simulator guys?) on the property.

Just for good measure, let's talk about lies to the public:

Telling the ACAA everything was swell, and cancelling the Pittsburgh leases with 10 minutes left to go in Chapter 11.

Annoucing that both the EMB-170s and the CRJ-700s would have first class.

Need I go on, or can we call a management shill a management shill?

Effective leaders don't need to pull this type of crap. Calling CCY open and honest is like calling the seats on an ERJ-145 comfortable--it only works if you are vertically challanged.

Come to think of it, perhaps that's why Dave can think in his own mind that he's actually being honest with his employees :p .

Excuse me! But I've been informed that "flyonthewall" is none other than Dave Siegel himself. Interesting this was your first posting here on FT too. Care to dispute this rumor?

I guarantee that you are wrong as to who flyonthewall is.

Really?

Need I go on, or can we call a management shill a management shill?

Effective leaders don't need to pull this type of crap. Calling CCY open and honest is like calling the seats on an ERJ-145 comfortable--it only works if you are vertically challanged.

Come to think of it, perhaps that's why Dave can think in his own mine that he's actually being honest with his employees :p .

Pretty amazing when a board moderator is descending into namecalling.

Pretty amazing when a board moderator is descending into namecalling.

:confused:

Honest question, ITRADE: Did I miss the "wink" on this one or are you serious?

Cx4 may be the moderator of the US forum but he (like the rest of us) is certainly entitled to express his opinions. Namecalling when it comes to a fellow FTer is another issue altogether but in this case, there is nothing wrong, is there?

Given the definition of the word "shill," (in terms of the context of the originally quoted message) and the actual vertical measurements of the indivudal in question (who is not a flyertalk member to my knowledge and who is shorter than the median US male), I stand by my remarks.

I urge anyone with any further questions or concerns regarding moderation to PM or email me, and if my answer/response is not sufficient to PM/email Randy.

Mods are not freakish beings that hatches from an egg--we are FT members, and as such, have and often express opinions on various programs.

This thread is about " Charlotte Observer article re: FA union leaders' attitudes" and will resume discussion of such. Metadiscussions can go backchannel or into the "Only Randy Peterson" forum.

Clue,

Dave has been honest with all labor groups. The unions want you to believe that management is at fault.


Just FYI! According to our very own PITbull on US Aviation "Fly on the Wall" is none other than Jerrold Glass, who's name ryhmes with a slang for a body part. In fact a nickname for jerrold is often Jack. By removing the "GL" and using the nickname you have the perfect description of many of US's HR/Labor Relations staff.

Just FYI! According to our very own PITbull on US Aviation "Fly on the Wall" is none other than Jerrold Glass, who's name ryhmes with a slang for a body part. In fact a nickname for jerrold is often Jack. By removing the "GL" and using the nickname you have the perfect description of many of US's HR/Labor Relations staff.


Thanks for correcting me on this PB. I was told it was Dave himself. But Glass is just as good.