Anaconda said:
comair mgt. isn't laughing...
to quote from a recent memo:
I'm glad you posted that. There are some interesting nuances in this management rhetoric that would be clearly recognized by those that have previously been seated across the table from them. Let me see if I can pick it apart and lend some insight into their thinking.
"More importantly we have made our position very clear – we are only interested in furthering the growth and security of Comair and Comair pilots."
Ahh yes. Funny thing about that is they once had the ability to take action that would have "furthered the growth and security of Comair and Comair pilots" (before the Delta buy out). They deliberately and consistently refused.
However, while explaining to Comair negotiators how it was impossible for them to protect our security or the security of the Company itself, they were busily and quietly renegotiating their own contracts with Comair's Board, enhancing their retirements and benefits, and reducing their tax burden, all in anticipation of a potential takeover by Delta.
The fact is that with two sentences that the pilots wanted, they could have protected both the security of the Company and that of its employees. Instead they protected themselves and left us to the wolves. Their statement rings with hypocrisy.
While the issue of control is glossed over by the Association, there is a limit to the authority that this management has to consider solutions outside the corporate entity that is Comair.
Unfortunately for Comair's pilots, that is a true statement. However, there is nothing that would prevent them from recommending a course of action to Delta. Perhaps they have internally.
Even if we did have the power to deal with these considerations there are practical matters that could haunt us in the future. While ASA pilots may be willing brides in this marriage, there is no doubt that they could become a daunting force in a potential divorce if one of these companies is taken public again.
The words are slightly different but the thought process is identical to the one used when they refused to protect Comair from a takeover and refused to protect our pilots in the event of a takeover. What they said then was that they wouldn't give up their "flexibility". That's what they are saying now.
If Comair is "taken public" again it would almost certainly be done in the same way that Continental took Continental Express public. An IPO with a long term contract that leaves Delta in full control. That may protect their jobs, but it won't make Comair independent nor will it protect the job security of Comair employees.
If ASA and Comair were merged into a single entity, it would not preclude Delta from selling the joint Company and effecting the same level of continued control that it could by selling CMR individually. Their arguement is specious.
Looking out for Comair’s interests, using language that would prevent growth at a non-owned carrier could be devastating if we potentially became a public company again. These things fall in the category of being careful what you ask for."
Are they perhaps aware of a future plan to take Comair public? If not, what "potential" event are they protecting from and who are they protecting? Is it more advantageous for Delta to have two separate small companies that it could "spin off" rather than one large company to which it could do the same? Yes, it sure is. However, that isn't "protecting the security of Comair or of Comair's pilots". It is protecting Delta's options, Delta's flexibility.
Delta will not spin off either ASA or CMR, unless it can retain full control of what ASA and CMR do (after the sale) over the long term. They couldn't afford to lose that much lift over a short term. An IPO that did not include a long term contract with Delta or someone else, would render the IPO virtually worthless. If the terms of that contract precluded the future growth of the "new" Company, who would invest in a dead end Company? Probably noone. That's the substance of their argument. Who is that "protecting"? Once more, the answer is Delta, not Comair or Comair's people.
Is it unreasonable for Delta to want to protect its options and the potential value of a new IPO? No, it isn't. What bothers me isn't what they're doing but rather the attempt to couch it in language that implies they are looking after "our interests" and not their own. Again patently hypocritical.
They've just told us that the MEC's joint proposal is not in the best interest of the pilots, and they have to reject it so that they can "protect" us from ourselves. Whomever drafted that memo (never mind who signed it) has a very low opinion of the ability of Comair's pilots to comprehend what they read.
It's deceptive double-speak, with just enough truth to make you listen.
Caveat Emptor.
