Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

World / NAA aquisition completed

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

atafan

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
432
From the Company web site:

Great News! Today, Global Aero Logistics Inc., ATA’s parent company, completed the acquisition of World Air Holdings, Inc. We signed the “Merger Agreement” on April 05. Until now, we were working to secure the financing and getting legal matters sorted out in order to reach this goal line. Here are some facts and figures:

· The holding company, Global Aero Logistics Inc. (GAL) will have more than 4,500 employees, 56 aircraft, and 2006 revenues exceeding $1.6 billion. GAL will have 3 independent airlines – ATA, World Airways, and North American Airlines – under its umbrella.
· World Air Holdings shares ceased trading today. The shareholders of World Holdings will receive $12.50 per share – or a total of approximately $315 Million.
· The new company will be stronger, more diversified and will have access to the resources of all 3 airlines. Leveraging these considerable synergies will help increase market share, presence, and profitability. To do that we will:
o Build upon our Scheduled Service codeshare agreement with Southwest.
o Continue to increase market share of both the AMC charter and the
commercial charter business, and
o Focus on the air cargo business, which is expected to grow at a high pace in the coming years.

What kind of IMMEDIATE impact will this have on all of us? We, at ATA, will continue our daily focus on achieving our “5C” goals. And the folks at World and North American will focus on their individual and company goals. Also, in the coming weeks, we will announce the GAL Executive Management team and embark on employee “road shows” – so you can ask questions directly of us.

After that, as we develop and roll out plans to grow, taking advantage of the synergies that exist across the 3 airlines to improve our overall revenues and our cost efficiency, I will make sure that we communicate our plans in the most transparent manner possible – so that we can all be chasing the same dream!
 
Great News!

For who? The rich guys who just keep getting richer at the expense of everyone else?

Good luck to all the pilots involved at all three airlines. Hopefully you'll be able to work together to prevent a massive whipsaw.
 
Single carrier filing... TC
 
For who? The rich guys who just keep getting richer at the expense of everyone else?

I agree!

I'm just cutting and pasting the story as published.
 
I agree!

I'm just cutting and pasting the story as published.

Yeah, I know. I was just responding to the text in the story. It wasn't directed at you.
 
o Build upon our Scheduled Service codeshare agreement with Southwest.
Now this is what intrest's me! I have a feally good friend at ATA that has told me you guys have heard nothing about new a/c or routes.
 
I have a feally good friend at ATA that has told me you guys have heard nothing about new a/c or routes.

True statement. Vewry, vewry, Quiet.
 
Where are the aircraft coming from? North American obviously.

Then ATA pilots would be doing the flying. The codeshare as it states right now is for ATA Airlines. This has been confirmed.

As ATA puts more DC10s on line, then they will take B757's off of military charter. ATA also has options on additional B737-800s that we have not commited to yet.

If NA or World does any codeshare flying, even in subservice, there will be holy he11 to pay. This is the prime definition of whipsaw. SWA might have something to say about it too, but then again, maybe not.
 
This is great for ATA, as the scope clause causes immediate integration of seniority and prohibits any other companies doing the flying. As the acquiring company, ATA crews could gain alot.

Can be a win/win for all!!!
 
Right now there is no hotter issue at SWA than scope and codeshare. This is going to get verry interesting. Personally I don't care if we get even get a raise if it is without scope and codeshare protection it means nothing.
 
From the Company web site:

After that, as we develop and roll out plans to grow, taking advantage of the synergies that exist across the 3 airlines to improve our overall revenues and our cost efficiency, !

Mngt speak for "someone's gettin' screwed"
 
This is great for ATA, as the scope clause causes immediate integration of seniority and prohibits any other companies doing the flying. As the acquiring company, ATA crews could gain alot.

Can be a win/win for all!!!

ATA is not the acquiring company. The acquiring company is Global Aero Logistics (Formerly ATA Holdings or something similiar to that).
 
NOA = B757/B767 whipsaw
That may be true but every ATA pilot I've spoken to wants to do the right thing regarding NAA. The problem is the decision will ultimately be the suits and they never have our best interests as a priority.
 
ATA is not the acquiring company. The acquiring company is Global Aero Logistics (Formerly ATA Holdings or something similiar to that).

I think a judge should rule on that, otherwise all any airline would have to do is change the name of the holding company to throw out scope.
 
ATA is not the acquiring company. The acquiring company is Global Aero Logistics (Formerly ATA Holdings or something similiar to that).

Agreed. ATA Airlines did not aquire or merge with anyone. A holding company, GAL owns all three as separate entites. Sooo..... the scope clause is worth nothing. The last thing I want to see is a former ATA PFE sitting to my left in the MD11. Vice versa an ATA crew looking at a WO or NAA crew operating an SWA code share. I think an alliance rather than a messy as hell, two union, three airline merger would be much more effective. However it would require much transparency and cooperation between the groups. (Not always our strongest trait!)
 
SWA code share

heard it from a SWA crew 2weeks ago that swa And ATA holdings altered the wording of the code share to include World and NorthAmerican.
Don't know if it's true but that is what I heard.



as far as scope: all contracts should be very careful of the wording to include the airline and any holding company that controls the airline
 
ATA Holdings managment is now GAL managment. Mattlin-Patterson was and is the owner.

ATA bought the DC10's before the "merger." The PFE-Capt. issue has been a pain, but they won't have the time to hold wide-body captain for quite a while.

All three carriers have one very large client that is the biggest reason they exist. It is the US military. If GAL shops the three airlines it owns, then we are competing with each other for the same client we've had for years. This is the essence of whipsaw. This is the reason for single-carrier status. No scope clause can cover this, not to mention three scope clauses. You're deluding yourself if you think that maintaining three separate carriers is in your (our) best interest.

I know that some (most?) at World and NA think they will lose something if there is a merger. According to Airline Pilot Central, I could hold captain at both carriers. I won't see the left seat again for at least 3 or 4 years, assuming age 60 holds. I've heard many mention that DOH with fences is the way to go. I'm one of those. I'm not interested in screwing NA and World Captains from their earned and deserved seats.

I've heard that NA has a TA. Great! If you don't vote for it, you'll have no protection, and the NA management might just roll you into ATA or World anyway. Stapled. If you do vote for it, you may not get the scope or merger protection you want. I'm sure management has this in mind. I don't know the details of the NA contract, but right now ATA with it's concessionary contract is probably better than both World and NA's exept for MD11 pay. I don't know how long World will keep those MD11's however.

ATA's contract is amendable next year, so those rates will be going up.

A deal can be worked out. I could care less if ALPA is the surviving union, but I think IBT is worse.

Ques: Why hasn't NA showed up for two 3-way meetings? One was in ATL recently with managment.
 
Last edited:
NAA union reps were in the final negotiations for the contract TA. It was unfortunate that our guys were unable to attend due to this, but a contract is and was the priority. We now have a TA, but won't probably see it until the final language is worked out in a week or so. We won't miss the next meetings, I have strong faith in our unon leadership.
 
I don't know the details of the NA contract, but right now ATA with it's concessionary contract is probably better than both World and NA's exept for MD11 pay. I don't know how long World will keep those MD11's however.

How so Hal?

scope? Ours is with any holding company WOH sells to. Now GAL

retirement? Ours 1.92 plan. Is yours still 2% cmp?

rig? (we get rig everyday during layovers)

homebasing? Most of us do not live in LAX,DFW,ORD,IND or N.Y. (I forgot how to jumpseat and I want command of the remote where I crash)

note: If I read your side letter XXXVIII correctly, your DC-10 Captains make less than 30 cents more in the 12'th year. All other years WOA DC-10 Captains make more. You are correct about the MD-11 pay.

You do have a higher monthly Guar. tho.

Only 3 MD-11's leaving (our power by the hour ex-Delta birds). The rest are on long term lease

Bel
 
I don't know the details of the NA contract, but right now ATA with it's concessionary contract is probably better than both World and NA's exept for MD11 pay. I don't know how long World will keep those MD11's however. "Concessionary" is the key word here.

How so Hal? Don't sit around and wait for something to happen. Be on the offensive.

scope? Ours is with any holding company WOH sells to. Now GAL I prefer Altoids. No scope is ironclad. There are many at ATA that think our scope has been violated in this deal.

retirement? Ours 1.92 plan. Is yours still 2% cmp? Yes, plus a 401k match.

rig? (we get rig everyday during layovers) No rig at ATA. One thing we need to change.

homebasing? Most of us do not live in LAX,DFW,ORD,IND or N.Y. (I forgot how to jumpseat and I want command of the remote where I crash) No home basing, but for the widebodies, our long call out is almost just as good. Homebasing doesn't work for scheduled service.

note: If I read your side letter XXXVIII correctly, your DC-10 Captains make less than 30 cents more in the 12'th year. All other years WOA DC-10 Captains make more. You are correct about the MD-11 pay. See below.

You do have a higher monthly Guar. tho. I believe this covers the above.

Only 3 MD-11's leaving (our power by the hour ex-Delta birds). The rest are on long term lease To be replaced by DC10's intended, orgionally, for ATA. This is what we were told last winter when we got them. This is a contentious issue out our company.

Bel

Right off the bat, we have something that puts ATA in conflict with "3 separate companies."

From Subodh Karnik, GAL CEO, concerning the GAL "aquisition:"

• And some more figures – we will be somewhere around 890 in the Fortune 1000 list, probably be the biggest charter airline in the world (if you include our Military Charter flying) and have more than a 75% share of the AMC business.

So what does this mean operationally and financially and how does this impact all of us at ATA?

Are we one, or are we three?

• Financially, these synergies will help us cushion the impact of turbulent markets – especially, gas prices, uncertain business climates, changes to the structure of the War on Terror, you name it.

How so? By whipsaw is my answer. MP/GAL will play us off against each other. They claim that "the whole" can be more efficient by remaining separate. It's sort of like polygamy. If you have three wives, how can that be more efficient than having one? How are the three families better taken care of when "management" is dividing its time and energy? If the wives know about each other, how well do you think that will go over in effieciency and profitability?

As you've stated, we're under a concessionary contract. ATA begins negotiations Oct. 1. The contract is amendable in 12 months. The "company" is compelled at that time to enter arbitration. I would expect that we would recieve significant improvments in our contract, unless we have to give up parts to save our jobs from being "side-sourced" to one or both of our partners. Now, its possible that we can gain conditions in our contract that would inhibit opportunities at World and NA. How would that make you feel about remaining separate?

When I said, "it doesn't have to be that way." This is what I'm talking about. I'm sure neither one of us wants to fight with the other two for advances in our careers. Why not work together towards single-carrier status?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom