Help Our UAL Friends

Al Checchi took over 1 Billion (with a B) dollars out of NWA when he left -
clearly his hand picked Board of Directors was on the ball with that one -

That sucks, and the owners should fire the board. But that is a private
decision between the board and the owners (actually public in this case
because of the voting), but it has nothing to do with employees.
Employees work for a company so long as they can add value. When a
company goes belly up, the environment in which the employee can add
value goes away and therefore, the employee should go away. This
natural supply/demand and laws of economics ensure the employee is most
productive (in this case, moving to a company where they can be more
productive). If I over pay my top employees that's my decision, it has
nothing to do with guarantying employment for my employees. Owners will
not want to over pay their employees (CEOs or otherwise) but sometimes
unions push them into it.

-Robert

Didn't Checchi get the money from the stock market and not from NWA?
Wasn't the point of the post you snipped that the market value collapsed
after Checchi left? The politicians in the People's Republic of
Minnesota would have been screaming bloody murder if had raided the
corporate coffers.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
Al Checchi took over 1 Billion (with a B) dollars out of NWA when he
left -
clearly his hand picked Board of Directors was on the ball with that
one -

That sucks, and the owners should fire the board. But that is a
private
decision between the board and the owners (actually public in this
case
because of the voting), but it has nothing to do with employees.
Employees work for a company so long as they can add value. When a
company goes belly up, the environment in which the employee can add
value goes away and therefore, the employee should go away. This
natural supply/demand and laws of economics ensure the employee is
most
productive (in this case, moving to a company where they can be more
productive). If I over pay my top employees that's my decision, it has
nothing to do with guarantying employment for my employees. Owners
will
not want to over pay their employees (CEOs or otherwise) but sometimes
unions push them into it.

-Robert

On 20 Sep 2005 11:24:48 -0700, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

The only reason they hire someone is so they can make money for the company. If
your not needed your gone, if they don't get rid of you eventfully you will
get rid of the company.

It's such a beautiful law of nature. However, unions alter it and can
only result in a less than perfect outcome. Companies make money by
retaining (i.e. compensating) the best people and getting rid of the
dead weight. Unions are the equalizers and prevent the best employees
from getting their share so the dead weight can be carried. When they
increase the pay above what the company needs to pay to get the people
they need, they create a shortage of employment (i.e. a surplus of
applicants). So you have people who want to work for the company but
can't because there is a waiting list and the normal supply/demand of
the employment market have been broken.

-Robert

Spewing ignorance such as the above is the same as saying every
republican is a conservative money grubbing scumbag and every democrat
a liberal faggot. Unions are there to protect the working class from
unfair management practices, which unfortunately shows their true
colors. SWA has a union. They're making money! Why? Can't it be
done? How did we ever exist for 100 years with those damn unions?

"Jon A" wrote in message
...

Unions are there to protect the working class from
unfair management practices, which unfortunately shows their true
colors.


What unfair management practices?

In article , Jon A
wrote:

Unions are there to protect the working class

true.

What prevents unions from abusing the workers or the company?

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
Discount airlines ate their shorts because of bad management decisions
not
related to pension costs

I'm not sure what your point is. The airline couldn't compete against
the discouts, the reason makes no difference.

The reason makes all the difference: in short, their level and quality of
service was not all that far removed from the discount carriers.

They could not compete PERIOD. Their management was trained and brought up
in the world a heavy regulation and was thus completely out of the water on
running a competitive enterprise.

Recall, too, that several discount carriers didn't survive either (People
Express, etc).


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Gee, we can take most of the cost out and we
won't even feel it!!

And you haven't even considered maintenance. By the time one of those 8' thick
runways needs resurfacing, we'll probably have anti-gravity systems and won't
need 'em. Hey, some of the old WW II bases are still in good shape after serving
all this time as GA fields.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Matt Barrow wrote:

They could not compete PERIOD. Their management was trained and brought up
in the world a heavy regulation and was thus completely out of the water on
running a competitive enterprise.

I think you've hit the main reason. As they grow, companies develop a "corporate
culture" caused by the fact that existing managers tend to promote people who do
things the same way they do. As time goes on, this "culture" may get out of
touch with reality. About the only thing that will change it is a hostile takeover.

I saw this in action at my former place of employ. The company started out
developing projects on a "cost-plus" basis, with money being fronted in advance.
They were put up for sale about 15 years ago and were supposed to develop
competitive practices, but they're still struggling with that. The old "who's
going to fund this" attitude continued to work with their new owner for long
enough that they never got out of it.

They have another new owner now. The CEO just got handed his walking papers.
There's still a little hope.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...
The only reason they hire someone is so they can make money for the
company. If
your not needed your gone, if they don't get rid of you eventfully you
will
get rid of the company.

It's such a beautiful law of nature. However, unions alter it and can
only result in a less than perfect outcome. Companies make money by
retaining (i.e. compensating) the best people and getting rid of the
dead weight. Unions are the equalizers and prevent the best employees
from getting their share so the dead weight can be carried. When they
increase the pay above what the company needs to pay to get the people
they need, they create a shortage of employment (i.e. a surplus of
applicants). So you have people who want to work for the company but
can't because there is a waiting list and the normal supply/demand of
the employment market have been broken.

-Robert

You are 100% right. This is especially true with highly skilled labor. The
company has to keep the duds because of seniority this lets the cream of the
crop go to other company's. The more skilled one is the less he needs the
union. I have always thought the union protects the lazy and stupid.
Now I am not saying their are a lot of smart hard working union members and
some companies use the union to their advantage. Their are also a lot of bad
run companies with or without the union.

("sfb" wrote)
Didn't Checchi get the money from the stock market and not from NWA?
Wasn't the point of the post you snipped that the market value collapsed
after Checchi left? The politicians in the People's Republic of Minnesota
would have been screaming bloody murder if had raided the corporate
coffers.


Where did Checchi get the stock? NWA.
How did he finance his takeover? NWA operating money.
How did he get paid before he bailed with his stock? Staggering management
fees payed by NWA monies - No, I didn't say profits.

Checchi raided the coffers of the State too. Loans, bailouts, building
projects, etc.

Billion dollars would have bought a few extra planes.


Montblack