I agree with this take.
Some of the successful execution of that requires genuine
leadership - as well as employees understanding their choices clearly: help build a successful airline or choose self-destruction.
EAL was a "self-destruct" case, and Viação Aérea Rio-Grandense S/A - VARIG showed not even an ESOP can get everyone on the same page. (Well, it wasn't as much an ESOP as ownership by the Fundação Ruben Berta, which existed to benefit the employees and was primarily employee-owned - similar.) The foundation and others rejected the ideas of CEO Fernando Abs da Cruz Souza Pinto - who went on to successfully reorganize and restore to health Transportes Aéreos Portugueses - TAP. And then there was Gol Transportes Aéreos... and now LATAM, Azul, etc.
Probably
nothing can save an airline with poor leadership, insufficient vision and poor judgement, uninvolved employee participation (not to mention mutually disharmonious goals and interests of management and front line employees' organizations) - particularly if there is an energized competition.
Is AA up to it? IMO, that's the crucial question. With some of the interesting moves we have seen recently,
maybe?
Originally Posted by
rploehn
US chases AA. Unions tip the balance based on Doug's generosity. AA succumbs. DOJ says no.
Fight fruitless. No negotiations can remove legal assertions. Timing off. BK can't wait years. All dominant hub states (ex NC) say no to both home-town airlines. Doug and unions lose. AA management wins.
So now where do the unions stand? They are emasculated. No merger, bankrupt airline, voided contracts renegotiated. How can they win?
With no union leverage, they can follow Eastern (self-destruct) or agree to a really "new AA." AA's profits and prior game plan seem plausible, if not probable. There is a real niche for a well-executed legacy airline business. Not the largest. Not dominant in Asia and Europe. But well executed.