InsideFlyer.com [English] United States InsideFlyer.uk [English] United Kingdom InsideFlyer.de [German] Germany InsideFlyer.no [Norwegian] Norway InsideFlyer.se [Swedish] Sweden InsideFlyer.dk [Danish] Denmark InsideFlyer.nl [Dutch] Benelux
Discussion in 'American Airlines | AAdvantage' started by TRYING2BPLAT, Sep 2, 2012.
| Print Topic
per USA TODAY....wonder how true is this？ bopefully not true, dont want toconnect at phoenix.
link? and why would you connect at Phoenix? Does AA require you to only connect in one place for any flight in the country? I thought they had hubs in LAX, DFW, ORD and NYC?
Nothing new, just speaking of the conidentiality agreement.
First two paragraphs from article:
The companies said Friday they signed legal documents allowing them to confidentially exchange information. But a deal is still far from reality.
"It does not mean we are merging — it simply means we have agreed to work together to discuss and analyze a potential merger," US Airways CEO Doug Parker said in a letter to employees Friday.
Same thing as was printed in the Miami Herald; although, in that article, there was a definite slant towards AA.
There is a lot of speculation going on, but it will probably be some time before we know the fate of AA. I personally hope that BA or some other investor helps them avoid a merger.
As do I. I've never thought it would be the end of the world if they merged, but Dougie's constant whining and crowing has really soured me on him.
That and US being a total mess of an airline from labor contracts to operations....
Nothing new in the story. Once AA's unions get a true look at how Dougie treats his employees, I'd like to believe they'll run for the hills. The grass is not necessarily greener on the other side...regardless of what the other side promises. Just ask US pilots on both sides of the dispute...which is approaching 7 years without a contract. I'd think the US pilots (both factions) are fearful of such a merger because by shear numbers USAPA would be obliterated and APA would be the union for all, and with a majority of AA pilots commanding the winning votes, I don't see how US pilots would be happy with any kind of contract.
Then again, a merger might be more tenable with ANYONE but Doug left to run it--he's over his head as it is....
I believe he's looking up to his Idol, Smisek...
Where is Gordon Bethune when we need him?
This is partly why I'm against a merger, and frankly, I don't understand why AA's pilots are being so insistent on merging with US. I know they hate AA's management, but can't they see what a labor mess US has been? And I don't understand why US's pilots aren't being more vocal about this aspect.
While I agree with the overall sentiment of your post, I'm not so sure about this part. It's not like the labor relation issues between US Airways management and its unions is a well-kept secret, requiring one to quest for the key, save the princess, crawl through a wardrobe to Narnia and journey back with this cryptic knowledge. It's out in the open for anyone to see.
They're either that blinded by hate, or they're buying into the story that every person going in to an abusive relationship has to tell themselves: "It'll be different with me!"
The problem at US is how the unions treat each other, not how managements treats them. If the AA pilots are on board then there are enough of them to basically wipe out the US and HP unions and solve that pesky problem without too much trouble.
Actually, Seth it's a combination of both. The unions have been at each other's throats since the merger, but management never did what they could have earlier on to mitigate the issue--they had no problem leaving it as it was because they could continue paying industry lowest wages. Most if not all of their profits over the past few years have come from two sources: ancillary fees and the savings realized by not settling contracts with competitive wages and work rules. It did not come from operating a well run or competitive airline. Therefore it is in their best interest to let the fight go on as long as possible.
Over the past few years, Doug and his sidekick Scott Kirby have been known to make disparaging remarks about both employees and customers. I do not think they should be counted on to keep any promises by AA unions, who want nothing more than to replace their current management. The grass is NOT necessarily greener on the other side...
Because currently, without a contract, they have the most to lose by using their collective voice.
I agree that the grass isn't greener, but I disagree about the pilot union issue at US. Unless the pilots can agree on who management is actually negotiating with there is no point in management actually putting effort into it.
I know you don't like what Doug did to the FF program and I respect that point of view, but there is a big gap between those actions and poorly managing the airline IMO.
Slant in what way? That AA is a better airline, that AA shouldn't merge, ...?
Sent from my iPod Touch using milepoint
It never hurts to have more cash of course, but from the various reports I've read, it doesn't sound like the point of a merger would be to raise extra investment, but rather to have a larger route structure and more dominance of the markets. Admittedly, my understaning of these things is minimal, so I don't see what BA's parent taking a 25% stake would accomplish.
Sent from my iPod Touch using milepoint
I'm with you in the understanding department. Seems to me AA would have a LOT to gain if it and Alaska merged, since AA's inter-west coast routes are almost non-existent (aside from vomit comet routes). But obviously, it takes two to tango.
That west coast thing might be a little better with US and the PHX hub, but I have flown US Air and thought it was a marginal airline at best.
Plus reading about them here and on FT, it's the biggest concern about whether to fully switch to AA in 2013.
If BA gets into it they'll likely be financing part of the merger, not helping them avoid it.
Encouraging the old partner and the current partner to play nice for BA's benefit.
My hope, and I don't know how realistic this is, is that BA will provide enough cash that somehow Dougie and his minions will NOT be in charge at the new version of AA.
I agree with you that it's not really a secret however I do wonder how hard it is as a union employee to integrate what you hear from the union, the press, and other sources. I suspect it's really murky in these circumstances and that leads to a lot of emotional decisions.
If they could get BA to chip in for 25% equity and a couple of their other partners, that would be far better than a merger with U.S. Airways.
BA's chip in would have to be reduced in that scenario in order to avoid the 25% cap on foreign ownership. Either way, this scenario is very unlikely considering the financial health of many of AA's OW partners, among other barriers.