MCDU Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20030523/RAIRC/TPBusiness/TopStories Well, Inchman, I agree that we shouldn't be whipping ourselves into a frenzy over rumours and speculation. But, should we start becoming concerned yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inchman Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 There was never any question that we should be VERY concerned about the future of the airline. But we shouldn't be whipping ourselves into a frenzy over the rumours that are out there. If you read the last line of the article, it says that we have to arrange $900 million in exit financing. That number goes up about $5 million a day right now. Notice how the numbers in the article aren't the same as the frenzy numbers... It says a 10% pension reduction. There is talk of profit sharing that wasn't mentioned in the rumours... so how many other things in the rumour list are wrong or missing. We should be very concerned. But if anyone thinks that the employees are the only ones being asked to give anything up to save our airline and our jobs, all they need to do is have a look at the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cargo Agent Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Some people just thrive on rumours, and some people don't have the sense to question those rumours. There is very little factual information out there right now. The judge imposed a news blackout. Some people just don't seem to understand this. I know coworkers that have recently made the decision to retire based solely on some of these rumours. Any reports you see in the media are usually attributed to "unnamed sources", if they can't put their to it, it just fear-mongering to sell advertising space. I believe that once we are given all the facts, we'll all make the right decision and get AC back on the road to profitability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airmail Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 "But, should we start becoming concerned yet?" Where have you been? We should all be concerned already! Perhaps it would have helped if we were all concerned on Feb 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Airmail, No slight to you ok, really, I do enjoy your perspective most often. Do you ever think you will accept that Robert Milton, whether correctly or incorrectly, plays a significant role in the way the CEO and employee relationship has evolved here and that relationships' direct repercussion on the current situation? [Not to mention some of the other blunders along the way] Your a pretty smart guy most of the time [you need a pilot advisor ] but a little more honesty would add value to your stock.. whattya think?.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCDU Posted May 23, 2003 Author Share Posted May 23, 2003 You haven't read my question in the context that was intended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCDU Posted May 23, 2003 Author Share Posted May 23, 2003 I wasn't alluding to concern for the airline. That goes without saying, but it is largely out of our control. According to one analysis I read, only about 15% of the cost difference between AC and WJ is attributed to labour, and only 4% of that 15% is due to pilot wages. We are not the ones who will make or break this airline. Attempting to fix the model with my paycheque is not going to be fair or cost effective. All I can do is continue to perform my job to the best of my ability, attempting to minimize or eliminate waste where I see it. I give an honest day's work and I would like very much to continue earning an honest day's pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Airmail Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Dragon: I have never denied that Robert Milton plays a significant role in the CEO-employee relationship. For sure he plays a significant role as do our union leaders and the employees themselves. What I don't buy is the personalization of much of the criticism against Milton and the onesidedness of the blame. Any word by Milton is seized upon by the media and the unions in an unforgiving manner yet the words of our union leaders -- and there are many -- tend to be forgiven, overlooked etc. It seems to me that throughout this period, the one person who has been consistent about the company's need to dramatically, radically, or significantly reduce costs is Milton. He said from the start the life outside CCAA would be better than life inside CCAA -- that part we can all agree on, can't we? He said from the start that the best way to protect our pensions is by making the sacrifices (much smaller ones) outside CCAA and that the best way to preserve pension benefits for the future is by ensuring AC continues as a going concern. Is he responsible for CEO-employee relations? Yes. But is he the only one responsible? No. I think that is being honest, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 I am happy to read your view re, CEO and employees and yes, I too think we all missed an opportunity earlier. It is unfortunate that we have someone willing to lead and not enough willing to follow that lead. Of course the responsibility is shared, I just wish the CEO sentiment were stacked in the reverse order. Sorry for the short retort, I have to run. cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nova Zemlya Posted May 23, 2003 Share Posted May 23, 2003 Hi MCDU! Just want to say that yes, a company in bankruptcy will devalue its current shares in order to issue new ones to unsecured creditors, like bonds holders and private equity investors. That means that the ownership of the airline changes radically. Anybody contributing to the employee shares program may have their shares devalued completely or find their status changed. I think that any unsecured creditor who accepts the exit plan will want to see major concessions on the employees' side before they accept the plan and vote yes. Thats what all of this is about. That is why the conditions put forth by the company are so onerous, because they are under greater obligation to financiers rather than their own employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.