AA to furlough 178 more

[rider850]

Aa

For all you guys involved in this supp W letter 3 stuff, let me ask you this; would things have worked out a lot better if the healthy airlines back in 2000-2001 just let TWA die via Chapter 7, because thats where they were ultimately headed, and just have picked up the TWA assets and routes in a fire sale? Then there wouldn't be all this fuss about whether they should have been considered a new hire or not. It would then be quite clear! AA must be kicking themselves over that purchase.

Yes,it would have worked out better. I wouldn't have a senoirity number at AA for the past 8.5 years. It is like the kiss of death.
VS Chapter 7. When did you get your crystal ball out. That's where they were ultimately heading? You mean like all the legacy airlines? Do you know there were other options for TWA. Who's to say,it wouldn't have gone the other way,you? OK PATZER.

 

[75M]

I always found it odd that an Airline that declared bankruptcy on a Sunday and was purchased out of bankruptcy later that same Sunday never:

- Went to the employees for concessions,
- Attempted to renegotiate aircraft leases, or
- Attempted to renegotiated property/facility leases

It just went straight into BK with DIP financing and a purchase agreement already in place. A purchase agreement that had language about "Fair and Equitable" seniority integration. Oh, and for the "What's fair for for me, might not be fair for you" crowd, that is a ridiculous rationalization that has nothing to do with fairness.

As far as the financial performance of TWA, from 1996 to 2001, the long term debt was reduced from $1.5B to $500M, that's a reduction of one billion dollars. Not too bad by today's standards.

 

[Jeff Helgeson]

good observation...

I always found it odd that an Airline that declared bankruptcy on a Sunday and was purchased out of bankruptcy later that same Sunday never:

- Went to the employees for concessions,
- Attempted to renegotiate aircraft leases, or
- Attempted to renegotiated property/facility leases

It just went straight into BK with DIP financing and a purchase agreement already in place. A purchase agreement that had language about "Fair and Equitable" seniority integration. Oh, and for the "What's fair for for me, might not be fair for you" crowd, that is a ridiculous rationalization that has nothing to do with fairness.

As far as the financial performance of TWA, from 1996 to 2001, the long term debt was reduced from $1.5B to $500M, that's a reduction of one billion dollars. Not too bad by today's standards.

....This is right from the playbook of AMR when they purchased Air Virginia. AMR asked VA to declared BK. AMR purchased the operation already in the AE coclors for pennies on the dollar and there was no disruptio9n in air service, no concessions or restructuring.

TWA declared BK at the request of AMR. It was part of the condition of the deal.

 

[Jeff Helgeson]

Yeah......

Woulda coulda what he said!shoulda. It was a great deal....... right up until 9/11 and the ensuing dismantling of commercial aviation.

Gup

....What he said!

 

[pipejockey]

Apparently contractual obligations are not important to the Eaglets when it isn't in their favor, or more than 800 furloughed AMERICAN AIRLINES pilots would have been allowed to flow back to Eagle.

The flow through to AA never adversely affected AA pilots but 800 AA pilots flowing back to Eagle would cause Eagle FO's with years on the job to be furloughed so an AA new-hire could take a CA seat Eagle. Not to mention the 800 CA's that would have had their pay cut in half to make room for AA new hires, many of which had absolutely no airline PIC time. Do you think that is any where within the realm of reasonable? And even as it stands, far more AA pilots made out great in the flow back(about 400), as opposed to the Eagle pilots that actually flowed through(about 150).

 

[pipejockey]

Yes,it would have worked out better. I wouldn't have a senoirity number at AA for the past 8.5 years. It is like the kiss of death.
VS Chapter 7. When did you get your crystal ball out. That's where they were ultimately heading? You mean like all the legacy airlines? Do you know there were other options for TWA. Who's to say,it wouldn't have gone the other way,you? OK PATZER.

Yeah, it worked out better for the all the Eagle pilots who had seniority numbers at AA, and were fulfilling their seat lock as Eagle RJ CA when TWA was acquired, who instead of being AA pilots now, are still Eagle pilots and will remain Eagle pilots due to age issues.
BTW, my chess playing is just fine, thanks!!

 

[pipejockey]

As far as the financial performance of TWA, from 1996 to 2001, the long term debt was reduced from $1.5B to $500M, that's a reduction of one billion dollars. Not too bad by today's standards.

And compared to the other airlines at the time, it stunk! Why are you comparing apples to oranges? 1996- Sep.2001 was a time of record profits for some airlines. Didn't AA or UAL actually post a one year profit of over 1 billion around that time?

 

[75M]

Okay, first of all, AMR announced the acquisition of TWA in January of 2001, not September. By September, just about everybody was starting to bleed, but that's another story. Secondly, an airline that chose to paydown a billion in debt incurred by a corporate raider over the previous ten years cannot be compared to AMR or UAL during the same time period. The point is, that the financial performance of TWA during that time frame did not put the airline in the dire straits that so many think that it was. Had BK not been a condition of the AMR purchase agreement, there were still options available for the TWA BOD to explore.

And as far as the speculation as to whether TWA would have survived after 9/11, you probably didn't know that TWA was the first airline to operate at 100% schedule completion after 9/11 (i.e., not a lot of excess capacity to reduce) or that the Air Transport Stabilization Board would have infused an airline of that size with over $400M in cash. Again, no crystal ball, but I think the demise of TWA was not as certain as some might like to think.

All of that aside, the bottom line is that the profitability of an airline is mostly the result of the decisions made by management over a period of time. The pilots have a limited impact on the profitability of an airline. A pilot who flies for a profitable airline, is no better or no worse than a pilot who flies for an airline that is being driven into the dirt by a poor management team. Fortunes change very quickly in this business, therefore, it's a dangerous policy to penalize a labor group for poor management decisions.

 

[pipejockey]

it's a dangerous policy to penalize a labor group for poor management decisions.

On that, we can agree!!

 

[Vastly Underemp]

The flow through to AA never adversely affected AA pilots but 800 AA pilots flowing back to Eagle would cause Eagle FO's with years on the job to be furloughed so an AA new-hire could take a CA seat Eagle. Not to mention the 800 CA's that would have had their pay cut in half to make room for AA new hires, many of which had absolutely no airline PIC time. Do you think that is any where within the realm of reasonable? And even as it stands, far more AA pilots made out great in the flow back(about 400), as opposed to the Eagle pilots that actually flowed through(about 150).

Eagle MEC signed the agreement, including the unlimited flowback provision, and when it didn't go their way they sued to have it overturned. You either honor your contracts or you don't. I hope they're enjoying their RJs cause they'll never see anything bigger.