boycott united forever

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
Boycott United and drive them out of business. That will show all those
shareholders, many of whom are retirees what we mean! That will teach
CEOs not to take risks and let their companies die a normal and slow
death rather than try to reform the compay and have a chance to
succeed.

Riiiiiiiiight. "Teach CEOs not to take risks" like ensuring their own $1.5
million pensions while screwing everyone who worked for the company."

It'd teach the shareholders and future businesses to pay more attention to
their employees, though, huh?

-c

The share holders own the company. If they think the CEO is making too
much the board doesn't have to pay them. If you think your pool boy is
making too much you don't have to pay him as much either.
Is the purpose of the company to provide employement, Mr. Marx?

-Robert

I"m not sure what employees have to do with it. The purpose of the
company is to return value to the shareholders. The shareholders are
singularly responsible for ensuring that they get the most bang for
buck with their CEO (just like you do with your pool boy). The
shareholders write the CEOs pay check, not the employees. I have never
read a company's mission statement that said, "The purpose of this
company is to provide employement". How would invest their hard earned
money in that?
Anytime you have a pension you must always understand that it is only
good until the company declares bankruptcy. That is why God invented
401ks.

-Robert

Pretty hard for individual investors to have any say in these matters
these days. In theory yes, but the real power is with the intitutional
investors who have their own agenda.

-Jim

The intitutional investors are the best cops. They are rated on one and
only one thing, value returned. No one reads a fund portfolio and looks
at what a nice guy the fund manager is.The fund manager is graded on
one and only one thing, how well he returns money to his investors. The
fund managers will not allow the board to pay any more for a CEO than
they need to because it directly impacts the fund manager's own bottom
line. CEOs are like point guards. There are few of them out there that
can do a good job and when you find a good one you have to compete
against other companies to recruit them.

-Robert

gatt wrote:

The best way to solve this problem would be to take the CEO, shoot
him through the head and hang his corpse from a Wall Street lamp
post so that every other executive out there remembers, for
example, why the french still celebrate Bastille Day. But we
can't do that.

Which CEO would you do that to? The one who oversaw things at the
airline many years ago and set the stage for the current problems, the
later one who saw the problems coming, and tried to change the way the
company was run, but was forced out by the union representation on the
board, who said he was too pessimistic, or the current one who inherited
the whole mess and has been trying to turn things around, but had no
alternative but to declare bankruptcy?

So boycott United forever and make sure that the rest of the executives in
the aviation industry don't try to pull the same stunt on America's pilots
and airline industry workers.

And just who do you think that would penalize? The original owners, the
shareholders, have already lost everything with the bankruptcy
declaration. People owed money, like the fuel vendors, the caterers,
and other contractors might only get a few cents on the dollar, if that,
if the company is liquidated. Finally, the employees would be forced out
of work, and any existing suppliers would lose a large part of their
businesses. It seems that boycotting the airline would only hurt the
people who were least involved with the whole situation. Is that really
what you want to do?

Years later, some new jackass comes along, wrecks the company and walks off
with a $1.5 million guaranteed pension after a trivial amount of time.
Meanwhile, the pilots, flight attendants and everybody else who MADE UNITED
WHAT IT WAS are screwed out of their contracted pension.

This is typical union a**hole envy mentality. $1.5M is a bunch of
money, but I'll bet United's run rate is about that much every 5 min.

Try looking at the real killers of the company; those egotistical
union pilots that get $250K + a year for 20 hours of work a month,
Flight Attendants that "play the game" with their sick time and
schedule and ground employees that take an hour and a half to turn
around a plane.

You want to see how a airline can be killed by the employees, take a
close look at Pan Am. United's going down the same path. Blame all
the executives you want, but you need to point fingers at the unions
to assign the real blame. They are the ones running the show.

In article , Don Hammer
wrote:

Try looking at the real killers of the company; those egotistical
union pilots that get $250K + a year for 20 hours of work a month....

Surely a group of pilots should know better than to believe that. VERY
few pilots approach anything close to what you describe, and if they
do, it's for about a year before they turn 60.

The rest of us are away from home 400 hours a month (compared to your
typical nine-to-five gone less than half of that), and dreaming of the
day we hit the six-figure mark.

Ah, yes, the "greedy union pilots."

Try being a seventh-year employee at a regional airline, flying as a
Part 121 captain, for less than 40K a year. Try and balance that
against your mythical 20-hour, $250K captain.

--
Garner R. Miller
ATP/CFII/MEI
Clifton Park, NY =USA=

Garner Miller wrote:

Don Hammer wrote:

Try looking at the real killers of the company; those egotistical
union pilots that get $250K + a year for 20 hours of work a month....

Surely a group of pilots should know better than to believe that. VERY
few pilots approach anything close to what you describe, and if they
do, it's for about a year before they turn 60.

The rest of us are away from home 400 hours a month (compared to your
typical nine-to-five gone less than half of that), and dreaming of the
day we hit the six-figure mark.

Ah, yes, the "greedy union pilots."

Try being a seventh-year employee at a regional airline, flying as a
Part 121 captain, for less than 40K a year. Try and balance that
against your mythical 20-hour, $250K captain.

Lower regional airline pay and longer hours are two of the reasons the
majors have problems. Here are some quotes from an article written in
2001 about pilot pay at the major airlines:

"A 10-year captain of Boeing 737-200s makes $157,152 at Delta, and
$178,152
at United. The most senior captain, with 30 years of experience, flying
a
Boeing 777 wide-body, makes $248,040 at Delta, and $254,748 at United."

"Delta pilots are expected to top United pilots, who now stand with the
highest pay among passenger carriers."

"In September, McCain compared the 1998 per capital U.S. income of
$20,120
with the $342,000 a year that the most senior United pilots will make by
2004."

Full article he

http://archives.californiaaviation.o.../msg00010.html

In article , James Robinson
wrote:

"A 10-year captain of Boeing 737-200s makes $157,152 at Delta, and
$178,152
at United. The most senior captain, with 30 years of experience, flying
a
Boeing 777 wide-body, makes $248,040 at Delta, and $254,748 at United."

You proved my point. Of all the captains at Delta, for example, how
many have been there 30 years? And how many are on the 777? Far, far
fewer than the entire pilot pool, I assure you.

--
Garner R. Miller
ATP/CFII/MEI
Clifton Park, NY =USA=