[Take a minute and read this morsel of truth. Tells it like it really is!!!!]
From a UAL retiree in response to Ben Stein's recent NYT article..... It applies equally to every current victim of bankruptcy large or small. The only differences is the equipment type).
___________________________________________________
"G'Day Mr Stein. I'm writing from my study looking out over one of the most beautiful beaches on the east coast of Australia a view and a location that helps me forget the fact that as recently as 2005 I was a pilot with United Airlines. I was reminded again of what I had walked away from when a colleague and long time friend from two air forces (the Royal Australian Air Force and the United States Air Force), one war (Vietnam), and the airline industry (he flew for Northwest, and I for United) forwarded your thoughtful article that used my ex employer as a clear example of the long decline of America's corporate morality.
A couple of decades ago, I decided that after 20 years as a fighter pilot, retiring with some real money in the bank instead of a general's uniform in the closet was the sensible way to achieve the most desirable outcome that my experience could provide, so I joined the biggest airline in the world.
To date, that decision is one of several bad ones I've made during my life, but having recovered from the others, it is the only one I would revisit if I had the chance to do it all again.
In 1969, as a newly minted pilot in the RAAF, I accepted my assignment to go fight the Communists and the domino theory in Vietnam with considerable enthusiasm. However, on my return from that war, my inner thoughts were more or less exactly what your friend returning from the Gulf War had felt. So had I simply been fighting for the corporate greed and political influence peddling that was already
emerging back then in the 70s.? The answer seemed to be in the affirmative,
because it didn't take more than a one year absence from society to see that
what was happening at home and in the US was the beginning of the loss of
corporate and governmental morality that is now rampant. Back then, the
neoconservatives were younger, albeit already influencing policies about nation building and democratization in third world places that were culturally incapable of the exercise, and Gordon Gekko's appalling "greed is good" ideas were clearly taking root in the boardrooms of the US. So I returned from my tour of duty in Vietnam minus several colleagues, but with a new view of the world, politicians, and the underlying abuse of power that was emerging in corporate America.
Anyway, the years passed, and in the end I found myself flying as a pilot for United Airlines. I should note that on several occasions, I noticed you sitting in the front of my aircraft I've since checked my logbook and saw that on one of those flights, you were flying in a 747 that I commanded on a flight to Chicago one month, and which I then flew shortly after full of marines to Kuwait City. Nothing to do with what follows of course, but it shows how a superb piece of aviation technology that transports a journalist and 350 other people to Chicago one day can be transformed into a machine of war the next .
So I flew for United. and generally enjoying doing what I'd worked much of my life to achieve, a moderately rewarding career with a good pension as the hook. Sadly, we had a succession of carpetbaggers and good old boys pass through the corporate offices of the airline, and it became increasingly obvious that their only true motivation was money – the really silly quantities they could make regardless of their true ability to run the airline or comply with the accepted requirements and responsibilities of sound corporate governance. There were apparently no true "airline men" left, just as there were apparently no "statesmen" left; just carpetbaggers and politicians.
I believe that the last real "airline man" to run United Airlines was a gentleman (and I use that word deliberately.) by the name of "Pat" Patterson and it was his name on the side of the 747 I mentioned above. Pat was from the same generation of aviation enthusiasts and airline visionaries as Juan Trippe (Pan Am) and of course, before he lost his mind, Howard Hughes.
Pat was also one of the guys who at best was only paid the lower multiples of the average employee's wage that you referred to as being typical of Harlow H. Curtice's remuneration pay for which he felt obliged to grow and build a business rather than simply plunder and mismanage. These days, the folks who bluff their way into some of the corner offices in the corporate world, and in particular the airline business, know that they are made men the minute they accept the job. Their subsequent performance is irrelevant, because they surround themselves with sycophants, pander only to the Wall Street analysts and bankers rather than the real investors, and by virtue of the employment contracts the company boards offer them, are guaranteed obscene salaries, bonuses, and ultimately huge termination golden parachutes regardless of whether they succeed or fail. If they fall upon hard times, the only tool they know how to employ is that old chestnut from the Harvard Business School grab bag of tricks that says it's alright to cut the pay, benefits, and numbers of your workforce while you cast around looking for a better idea. Of course if you graduated at the bottom of your class at East Podunck Business School like most of these guys apparently did, then there are usually no intelligent and inspired original management ideas forthcoming after you destroy your employees' careers and pensions along with your customers' demand and brand loyalty, so you then go and seek the protection of the court under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. Of course, in the end, the average employee simply wants an OK career with fair remuneration, a reasonable pension at the end, and an employer he can be
proud of and even brag about, but with a bankruptcy code like that in the US, such an outcome for the average worker is less and less likely.
As I noted above, I live in Australia, and am a citizen of that country. The laws here are such that in the event an Australian company declared bankruptcy and then revealed that it had deliberately misappropriated or underfunded contractually guaranteed employee pension schemes, the CEO and board of directors would wake up the next morning in the slammer. Any company that mismanaged, underfunded, or in any way systematically destroyed employee pension funds would feel the full weight of the law descend on those charged with the governance of such a corporation. In such an unlikely event, the employees' pension plan would always have first right to recover the full value of the plan ahead of other secured creditors.
Curiously, a situation like this did emerge in the early 1990s, when a great Australian Airline (funny how it was an airline, and not surprising that there were numerous common denominators, including greed and gross mismanagement at the top levels of the company), founded and grown by agreat Australian "airline man", Reginald Ansett, declared bankruptcy and shortly after, went out of business. It was discovered that the employee pension funds had been plundered by the company, and in order to restore the pension plans to health, the government of the time actually passed legislation adding a small surcharge to airfares in Australia that went directly back to the pension plans until the funds were restored and until the airline was wound up and its assets sold. That single bankruptcy and the plundering of the pension plans alerted the government of the time to the fact that the corporate governance laws required tightening, and hence today, any CEO or corporate officers responsible for such an eventuality would definitely do hard time regardless.
However, in the US it's different. The robber barons who have taken over
the airline business and many other key industries that the US pioneered and
built to greatness now have the bare faced effrontery to promise everything
to employees and shareholders but deliver nothing much at all, breaking
promises and contracts with these workers along the way with impunity, and ultimately using the federal government's own laws to ruin everything. And therein lies the rub. the Congress allows this to happen without penalty to corporations because the Congress simply does more or less the same thing with the county's own pension plan, Social Security. No doubt those who govern the US would have great difficulty throwing the CEO of a company like United Airlines into custody for ruining the employees' retirement plans and/or leaving the plans with IOUs instead of full funding, because that's just what the US government does with Social Security."
continued
From a UAL retiree in response to Ben Stein's recent NYT article..... It applies equally to every current victim of bankruptcy large or small. The only differences is the equipment type).
___________________________________________________
"G'Day Mr Stein. I'm writing from my study looking out over one of the most beautiful beaches on the east coast of Australia a view and a location that helps me forget the fact that as recently as 2005 I was a pilot with United Airlines. I was reminded again of what I had walked away from when a colleague and long time friend from two air forces (the Royal Australian Air Force and the United States Air Force), one war (Vietnam), and the airline industry (he flew for Northwest, and I for United) forwarded your thoughtful article that used my ex employer as a clear example of the long decline of America's corporate morality.
A couple of decades ago, I decided that after 20 years as a fighter pilot, retiring with some real money in the bank instead of a general's uniform in the closet was the sensible way to achieve the most desirable outcome that my experience could provide, so I joined the biggest airline in the world.
To date, that decision is one of several bad ones I've made during my life, but having recovered from the others, it is the only one I would revisit if I had the chance to do it all again.
In 1969, as a newly minted pilot in the RAAF, I accepted my assignment to go fight the Communists and the domino theory in Vietnam with considerable enthusiasm. However, on my return from that war, my inner thoughts were more or less exactly what your friend returning from the Gulf War had felt. So had I simply been fighting for the corporate greed and political influence peddling that was already
emerging back then in the 70s.? The answer seemed to be in the affirmative,
because it didn't take more than a one year absence from society to see that
what was happening at home and in the US was the beginning of the loss of
corporate and governmental morality that is now rampant. Back then, the
neoconservatives were younger, albeit already influencing policies about nation building and democratization in third world places that were culturally incapable of the exercise, and Gordon Gekko's appalling "greed is good" ideas were clearly taking root in the boardrooms of the US. So I returned from my tour of duty in Vietnam minus several colleagues, but with a new view of the world, politicians, and the underlying abuse of power that was emerging in corporate America.
Anyway, the years passed, and in the end I found myself flying as a pilot for United Airlines. I should note that on several occasions, I noticed you sitting in the front of my aircraft I've since checked my logbook and saw that on one of those flights, you were flying in a 747 that I commanded on a flight to Chicago one month, and which I then flew shortly after full of marines to Kuwait City. Nothing to do with what follows of course, but it shows how a superb piece of aviation technology that transports a journalist and 350 other people to Chicago one day can be transformed into a machine of war the next .
So I flew for United. and generally enjoying doing what I'd worked much of my life to achieve, a moderately rewarding career with a good pension as the hook. Sadly, we had a succession of carpetbaggers and good old boys pass through the corporate offices of the airline, and it became increasingly obvious that their only true motivation was money – the really silly quantities they could make regardless of their true ability to run the airline or comply with the accepted requirements and responsibilities of sound corporate governance. There were apparently no true "airline men" left, just as there were apparently no "statesmen" left; just carpetbaggers and politicians.
I believe that the last real "airline man" to run United Airlines was a gentleman (and I use that word deliberately.) by the name of "Pat" Patterson and it was his name on the side of the 747 I mentioned above. Pat was from the same generation of aviation enthusiasts and airline visionaries as Juan Trippe (Pan Am) and of course, before he lost his mind, Howard Hughes.
Pat was also one of the guys who at best was only paid the lower multiples of the average employee's wage that you referred to as being typical of Harlow H. Curtice's remuneration pay for which he felt obliged to grow and build a business rather than simply plunder and mismanage. These days, the folks who bluff their way into some of the corner offices in the corporate world, and in particular the airline business, know that they are made men the minute they accept the job. Their subsequent performance is irrelevant, because they surround themselves with sycophants, pander only to the Wall Street analysts and bankers rather than the real investors, and by virtue of the employment contracts the company boards offer them, are guaranteed obscene salaries, bonuses, and ultimately huge termination golden parachutes regardless of whether they succeed or fail. If they fall upon hard times, the only tool they know how to employ is that old chestnut from the Harvard Business School grab bag of tricks that says it's alright to cut the pay, benefits, and numbers of your workforce while you cast around looking for a better idea. Of course if you graduated at the bottom of your class at East Podunck Business School like most of these guys apparently did, then there are usually no intelligent and inspired original management ideas forthcoming after you destroy your employees' careers and pensions along with your customers' demand and brand loyalty, so you then go and seek the protection of the court under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. Of course, in the end, the average employee simply wants an OK career with fair remuneration, a reasonable pension at the end, and an employer he can be
proud of and even brag about, but with a bankruptcy code like that in the US, such an outcome for the average worker is less and less likely.
As I noted above, I live in Australia, and am a citizen of that country. The laws here are such that in the event an Australian company declared bankruptcy and then revealed that it had deliberately misappropriated or underfunded contractually guaranteed employee pension schemes, the CEO and board of directors would wake up the next morning in the slammer. Any company that mismanaged, underfunded, or in any way systematically destroyed employee pension funds would feel the full weight of the law descend on those charged with the governance of such a corporation. In such an unlikely event, the employees' pension plan would always have first right to recover the full value of the plan ahead of other secured creditors.
Curiously, a situation like this did emerge in the early 1990s, when a great Australian Airline (funny how it was an airline, and not surprising that there were numerous common denominators, including greed and gross mismanagement at the top levels of the company), founded and grown by agreat Australian "airline man", Reginald Ansett, declared bankruptcy and shortly after, went out of business. It was discovered that the employee pension funds had been plundered by the company, and in order to restore the pension plans to health, the government of the time actually passed legislation adding a small surcharge to airfares in Australia that went directly back to the pension plans until the funds were restored and until the airline was wound up and its assets sold. That single bankruptcy and the plundering of the pension plans alerted the government of the time to the fact that the corporate governance laws required tightening, and hence today, any CEO or corporate officers responsible for such an eventuality would definitely do hard time regardless.
However, in the US it's different. The robber barons who have taken over
the airline business and many other key industries that the US pioneered and
built to greatness now have the bare faced effrontery to promise everything
to employees and shareholders but deliver nothing much at all, breaking
promises and contracts with these workers along the way with impunity, and ultimately using the federal government's own laws to ruin everything. And therein lies the rub. the Congress allows this to happen without penalty to corporations because the Congress simply does more or less the same thing with the county's own pension plan, Social Security. No doubt those who govern the US would have great difficulty throwing the CEO of a company like United Airlines into custody for ruining the employees' retirement plans and/or leaving the plans with IOUs instead of full funding, because that's just what the US government does with Social Security."
continued
