realityman
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2004
- Posts
- 782
You apparently have a short memory about "Industry leading contracts"
Remember "United plus $1"?
Two years later, all the carriers were either in bankruptcy or on the edge of it.
"United Plus $1" led to massive furloughs, concessions and industry downsizing for all the legacy carriers
(The industry doesn't consider Southwest a legacy because they only fly domestic)
And before you go with this stupid blame it on management crap, all the legacy management that gave record profits and contracts between 1996 and 2000 didn't all take a universal "stupid pill" at the same time causing the industry to tank. The failing ecomomy with the massive labor contracts they were railroaded into caused that.
The NJ guys should enjoy it while they've got it. If it holds up, good for them. If the economy doesn't though, the turmoil will far exceed the happiness they have now.
Just ask any USAir, Delta, United or American pilot about the fun once the bar is set high and the carriers can no longer support it. They are the living, walking and breathing evidence.
B19,
Once again, you only paint partial pictures to try and make your point. I can't remember which thread it was on, but I countered one of your arguments with my own. I thought I made some good points. wondering what your response would be. Someone else on the thread called you an idiot. Which of us did you respond to? Hint: It wasn't me. So I'm guessing that anyone with good, logical points that disproves your arguments is something you can't stomach in a discussion. Easier to respond to the name calling. But I'll try again.
Let's examine United's previous great contract. I notice that you keep blaming their downfall singularly on the union and that contract. So, there were no other forces at work that could have caused United's financial pain? No slowing economy? No 9/11? No soaring fuel prices? No costly government regs (airlines had to pay a lot of the cost for the new security)? Maybe some bad management? Nothing?! It was allll the union's fault? I notice you fail to mention anything whatsoever about the humongous bonuses upper management walked away with as their legacy carriers were going down the tubes. But maybe that's because you'd have to argue that they were entitled to the money they negotiated for when they were hired, which of course would be completely contrary to your opinion that the unions are jerks for not renegotiating contracts fast enough for the employees to give concessions when things are tough for their employer. Managements' contracts should be honored, but a union shouldn't expect their contracts to be honored. Is that what you're saying?
Now lets talk industry. I will start off by agreeing with you (gasp!) that things could go south for NJA. But as I've already mentioned in another post (which you failed to respond to), things can go south for ANY company. Heck, Microsoft could one day find itself on the verge of bankruptcy! Any number of factors can bring down ANY company. There was a time when no one would've though Pan Am would vanish. Point is, it's not about "can NJA go under". Yes, they can. They could also continue to prosper for many many more decades, expanding and growing, providing greater opportunities around the globe for the clients, employees, and investors in the company. You like to site the vagaries of the economy as reason to worry about our company's health? So what, in Netjets' history, leads you to believe we have anything to worry about? We're NOT an airline. Our clients aren't going from rich to poor to rich to poor along with how the economy moves. As an example, let me tell you about Eagle, CO. On a recent weekend, it was quite busy (as it usually is this time of year). One person that works at the FBO was asked about business this year. She said business was up 50% over this time last year! Holy high dollars batman! Now think about it. The cost of jet fuel is now well over $6/gallon in many locations, and yet business aviation if going stronger than ever!! How much more proof do you need that our segment of aviation is not as affected by the economy as the airlines? Not saying things will stay strong forever, but I don't see the doom and gloom that you do about how the economy will affect our business.
Your constant underlying theme in all your posts is that unions are solely responsible for most companies' demise, and they only make their members miserable. Interesting, because I'm happier now at my job (and higher paid too!) than I've ever been, and it's because of our union. Our company is doing better than ever in part because of our union. And finally, you keep forgetting (intentionally?) that unions are INVITED in by unhappy employees (and it has to be a majority, not just a 'vocal minority'). Note: The employees are unhappy BEFORE the union gets there.
And I'm still waiting for an answer to a question I asked you in another thread that you didn't respond to: Can you name some prominent companies that went under that were non-union? I can! Are there more than a few? Maybe lots? I'm guessing that you won't start a list with me because it undermines your point that unions kill companies. Might actually point to management and a poor business model as the culprits, and we couldn't have that, now could we? No, it's gotta be the unions.
I agree with you again (gasp!) that unions can HASTEN the death of a company, but sorry B19, they don't cause it, as you want people to believe.