Charlotte-Douglas Airport (CLT) Expansion

[ScottCLT]

Maybe it is a mistake, but after phone calls and emails (not by me) as well as this being posted on various other message boards (flyertalk.com and usaviation.com), wouldn't you think they'd fix it? The reason I was fairly certain it was for real is that the station personnel at Gatwick are the ones who told me about it. They were horrified and wanted to share.

Do we know when this change went into effect? I've flown CLT-Gatwick and CLT-Frankfurt in 2007, and both had meals for free on board.

[Miesian Corners]

Do we know when this change went into effect? I've flown CLT-Gatwick and CLT-Frankfurt in 2007, and both had meals for free on board.

PHL-LHR doesn't begin until March.

[monsoon]

USAir has announced that it will not give it's employees a $100 Christmas bonus (for working then) because the airline failed to meet its ontime goals and for lost baggage.

Gee. When did Scrooge start running the airline? Sadly, Charlotte's airline has moved a long way away from the days of Piedmont Airlines.

[Neo]

USAir has announced that it will not give it's employees a $100 Christmas bonus (for working then) because the airline failed to meet its ontime goals and for lost baggage.

Gee. When did Scrooge start running the airline? Sadly, Charlotte's airline has moved a long way away from the days of Piedmont Airlines.

My sister-in-law flew from CLT to New Orleans first class after Christmas on USAir and they still managed to lose her checked luggage. I'm not amazed anymore that this airline continues to give terrible results.

[redjeep77]

^ i completely agree.

What really pisses me off is when the CEO's gladly take the big time bonus/salary, but leave the common man out to dry. Just imagine how many jobs Lewis would save at BOA if he took a cut from his 75 Million dollar salary!

Usually the successful companies take care of their employees. Happy employees = better work product = larger production!

Edited January 3, 2008 by redjeep77

[uptownliving]

USAir has announced that it will not give it's employees a $100 Christmas bonus (for working then) because the airline failed to meet its ontime goals and for lost baggage.

Gee. When did Scrooge start running the airline? Sadly, Charlotte's airline has moved a long way away from the days of Piedmont Airlines.

I think the Observer did a terrible job of putting that bonus in perspective. The airline has an ongoing bonus for employees if the airline meets their targets for on-time flights, mishandled baggage, and customer complaints. It is not just a Christmas time bonus... it runs the whole year. For each month that the airline meets the pre-stated targets then the employees get the bonus. It is a very transparent process. There were a couple months earlier in 2007 where the airline met the targets and the bonuses were paid.

In addition the employees get a profit sharing bonus which the airline paid out in 2006 and will likely pay out again this year assuming they were profitable in the 4th Quarter.

That all said US Airways employees are some of the lowest paid in the industry. Which is a shame considering how good a lot of them are.

[monsoon]

I actually saw that news in the national media, not the local Observer as I have pretty much quit reading it. It sounds as if the Observer pretty much reflected the growing national feeling that corporate greed yet again wins over the common person. Lets all remember that USAir only exists today because it skillfully used the pro-corporate laws to dump its obligations onto the tax payers while the executive run off laughing to the bank.

The loss of a $100 Christmas bonus is really adding insult to injury.

[kickazzz2000]

I actually saw that news in the national media, not the local Observer as I have pretty much quit reading it. It sounds as if the Observer pretty much reflected the growing national feeling that corporate greed yet again wins over the common person. Lets all remember that USAir only exists today because it skillfully used the pro-corporate laws to dump its obligations onto the tax payers while the executive run off laughing to the bank.

The loss of a $100 Christmas bonus is really adding insult to injury.

In which case, the national media did a poor job portraying it as a Christmas bonus.

By the corporate law argument, that is the reason Continental, Delta, Chrysler, and a whole host of other companies exist today as well...

Back on topic: I think US Airways has done a pretty poor job in terms of public relations since the merger/takeover by America West. I don't know whether its just a lack of understanding of how things are different on the east coast, or a complete disregard for service in the name of profits from the folks over in sandcastle, arizona. It just seems like one gaffe after another.

[monsoon]

By the corporate law argument, that is the reason Continental, Delta, Chrysler, and a whole host of other companies exist today as well...

....

I am not aware that all of these companies have used the bankruptcy laws to dump the obligations onto the US taxpayer. However I will point out that a defense of a crook's actions, is not to point out that other crooks are doing it too.

[Commoner]

I am not aware that all of these companies have used the bankruptcy laws to dump the obligations onto the US taxpayer. However I will point out that a defense of a crook's actions, is not to point out that other crooks are doing it too.

I don't know whether he offered bankruptcy laws as a defense of US Airways' decision to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2001 and 2005 (and I'm probably forgetting one...), but he's right. Continental, Chrysler, Delta (and United, KMart, Air America, MCI, etc.) have all filed under Chapter 11 and still exist, in some respect, today. Any company that files for protection under Chapter 11 "dumps its obligations on the US taxpayer", just the same as in US Airways' case.

Another crummy way of looking at it: all of these companies emerged (well, maybe not Air America) with better management, better (for the company) contracts with workers, enhanced efficiencies, and (most importantly) little to no debt, while their competitors who did not file stuck it out without all of the benefits that come from bankruptcy reorgs.

That being said, I'm not sure how filing under Chapter 11 dumps any obligations on the US Taxpayer. If anything, the obligations are repaid to the extent that existing assets allow, the company is allowed to reorganize under the Court's guidance, and the unsecured creditors get pennies on the dollar. How does a corporate bankruptcy affect taxpayers?

[monsoon]

......

That being said, I'm not sure how filing under Chapter 11 dumps any obligations on the US Taxpayer. ......

The taxpayer gets stuck with the retirement plans. It's typical of these companies to raid the retirement plans first, book the proceeds as profits so they can fatten bonuses to executives, which leaves the retirement plan carrying a lot of obligations and no money to handle it. Company then goes bankrupt and that retirement obligation is then the responsibility of the federal government. This is exactly what happened with USAir. Sadly the common people who worked for that airline ended up with about 10% of the retirement they had earned over the years.

[Miesian Corners]

^My world, welcome to it. The PBGC (Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation) is a lovely little government agency that took responsibility of my retirement in the first bankruptcy of US Airways in 2002. I get a whopping 23 cents on the dollar of what I actually paid into it. I am thankful the PBGC exists and that there'll be a few dollars coming my way when I am old (God willing I live that long). Still, it reeks that big corporations can rape their employees while senior management laughs all the way to the bank.

It should be noted that although PBGC is a government agency, it does not pay pensions using tax revenue. It gets its money from insurance premiums, assets of the old pension plans themselves, and investment income. There is of course more to it, but I'm not as well versed in it as I should be.

[Commoner]

The taxpayer gets stuck with the retirement plans. It's typical of these companies to raid the retirement plans first, book the proceeds as profits so they can fatten bonuses to executives, which leaves the retirement plan carrying a lot of obligations and no money to handle it. Company then goes bankrupt and that retirement obligation is then the responsibility of the federal government. This is exactly what happened with USAir. Sadly the common people who worked for that airline ended up with about 10% of the retirement they had earned over the years.

I see what you mean. Did you know, however, that the PBGS (the government-owned corporation that guarantees these and other pension payments) doesn't receive funding from general tax collections (or, "the taxpayers")? They're actually financed by the companies whose employees' pensions are guaranteed by the plan. In other words, US Airways, Delta, KMart (and any other company with an ERISA-subject employee benefit plan) all pay insurance premiums to an underwriter. The earnings on these premiums are the money that goes toward (sadly, not far enough) the employee benefit plans.

Incidentally, the US Airways obligation was one of (if not the) largest pension obligations ever assumed by the PBGS.

^My world, welcome to it. The PBGC (Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation) is a lovely little government agency that took responsibility of my retirement in the first bankruptcy of US Airways in 2002. I get a whopping 23 cents on the dollar of what I actually paid into it. I am thankful the PBGC exists and that there'll be a few dollars coming my way when I am old (God willing I live that long). Still, it reeks that big corporations can rape their employees while senior management laughs all the way to the bank.

It should be noted that although PBGC is a government agency, it does not pay pensions using tax revenue. It gets its money from insurance premiums, assets of the old pension plans themselves, and investment income. There is of course more to it, but I'm not as well versed in it as I should be.

Nice - you beat me to it!

[monsoon]

..... They're actually financed by the companies whose employees' pensions are guaranteed by the plan. In other words, US Airways, Delta, KMart (and any other company with an ERISA-subject employee benefit plan) all pay insurance premiums to an underwriter. The earnings on these premiums are the money that goes toward (sadly, not far enough) the employee benefit plans......

Actually the taxpayers are picking up the tab because these companies get to deduct these payments from their taxes. But even more so, if the premiums don't meet the obligations, then the government, i.e. the taxpayers, have to make up the shortfall. The bottom line is that these corporations are using the laws to dump the obligations of their retirement plans, this is money their employees earned, onto the federal government.

[atlrvr]

Man....US Airways keeps getting bad press.

This was included in an article yesterday covering US Airways baggage woes.

The following note appeared in a passenger's bag that did not show up in the baggage carousel. It was delivered to the passenger later that night.

"We are truly sorry for any inconvenience you may have when you fly with us as we must use the only tools we have at our disposal," it read, according to a copy Schwartz provided to The Arizona Republic

"We know you have a choice when you fly. Your baggage handlers of US Airways suggest you use it!!!"

The note then goes on to describe how US Airways east baggage handlers make more than former America West handlers.

The current spokesman, I think his last name is Gee, is horrendous. His job is to handle the press, instead he seems like he is full time defensive mode. There are usually ways to make public relations work for you, but as kickazzz2000 already stated, they seem to be clueless in this concept.

[Commoner]

Actually the taxpayers are picking up the tab because these companies get to deduct these payments from their taxes. But even more so, if the premiums don't meet the obligations, then the government, i.e. the taxpayers, have to make up the shortfall.

I don't want to beat a pension law topic to death in a KCLT Expansion thread, so I apologize if anyone is getting tired of my posts, but with all due respect, the taxpayers don't make up any shortfall in PBGC-guaranteed pensions. The extreme scenario (as illustrated by a prior member (sorry - I can't remember his name) is that the pensioner loses any shortfall. Allowing the PBGC to declare bankruptcy (or, to be politically realistic, a taxpayer-paid bailout of the PBGC) has been discussed in (actually, feared and mostly in right-leaning) business publications, but (to my knowledge) nothing of the sort has been proposed. The only effect I foresee is increased assessments on ERISA plan-providing companies.

I actually take exeception to the general argument that a tax deduction = an increased burden on those who do not benefit from the deduction. We're getting into an interesting macroeconomic neighborhood now, but a prominent view is that the sovereign will assess the most it can against those it can, but will hold out deductions/credits as carrots to induce certain behaviors (or because they don't truly reflect "income"). The federal budget doesn't begin with each branch, agency, department or office telling the Executive Branch what it needs -- it starts with the Legislative Branch "telling" the Executive Branch what it can get. After that, it's up to the Executive Branch to either leverage the Treasury further (read: ask for deficit spending) or to restrict spending to the figure that the Legislative Branch (with its power to generate tax revenue) provides.

Again - a great discussion, but I apologize if it's a threadjack of some sort. Just a favorite topic of mine...

[monsoon]

Apparently Delta, Northwest and United have entered talks to merge all 3 airlines into one super-Airline. It would become, by far the largest airline in the country and would have a huge monopoly on international service. I wonder what effect his might have on USAir and in particular USAir in Charlotte.

[tombarnes]

Could such a monstrosity possibly receive federal approval? I can't imagine such a reduction of the already limited "choice" we now enjoy. Shouldn't this be setting off alarm bells somewhere?

[atlrvr]

Actually....Delta has engaged talks to purchase EITHER United OR Northwest. It would not be both.

I think a merger betweeen DL/UA would be the best for US Airways and CLT. It would reduce some competition in markets that US serves, and assuming US gets to stay Star Alliance, they should become much more profitable in international flying. American and the new Delta would be much larger airlines, so US might find it hard to compete, but I think that if they can get there product together, and make it a couple more years until they get there A330s and can expand internationally, then they have a good shot at making it alone.....otherwise they are left to merge with NW or CO (which would likely mean shuttering PHL)....either way, Charlotte should be in good shape unless one of two things happens. DL buys US just to shut down the competition, or US goes into bankrupcy again, in which case they wouldn't likely emerge. I'm not sure who would want CLT as a hub if this happened, perhaps CO.

[monsoon]

In this rather ambiguous article and reporting on TV, I got the impression this would be a merger of all three. I guess it makes more sense that it would be just two of these but I suppose anything could happen.

[kickazzz2000]

In this rather ambiguous article and reporting on TV, I got the impression this would be a merger of all three. I guess it makes more sense that it would be just two of these but I suppose anything could happen.

"If successful, a merger of No. 3 Delta, with No. 2 United or No. 5 Northwest, would produce the biggest airline in the USA, eclipsing Fort Worth-based American. It could also set off a chain reaction of consolidation among the USA's biggest air carriers."

Key word being OR.

I dont think a DL/UA hookup would pass governmental approval, especially in a democratic congress. DL/NW, especially if done in AF/KL style, might do better.

[Raintree21]

The CBJ is reporting that JetBlue began nonstop Charlotte to Fort Lauderdale service last Thursday in addition to its flights to NYC and Boston.

[HopHead]

The CBJ is reporting that JetBlue began nonstop Charlotte to Fort Lauderdale service last Thursday in addition to its flights to NYC and Boston.

In addition to that, the service was changed from seasonal to year-round b/c of the high demand. I'd like to see JetBlue further expand here. They are a great alternative to USA.

[atlrvr]

Agreed...I enjoy JetBlue.....within the next 2 years, I predict they will add Orlando (MCO) and Washington-Dulles (IAD)

[moving uptown]

on another message board there is scuttlebutt that usair will add three domestic flights this week. any of the usair insiders heard anything about this?