EDIT: Here is a link from the Chicago Tribune stating that CAL is in serious talks with United.
Here is an interesting article by Vaughn Cordle posted on Seeking Alpha. He goes through what he sees as the logic behind a deal with USAirways. The author advises that Labor should go along as it is difficult to attain gains when negotiating with a company that can't make money and the merged entity presumably would. I like to think I take the long view on things, unlike how the author characterizes Labor; however a UA/US merger could leave those of us in DC as well as the employees in the other 14 overlapping city pairs getting ready to move, or lose our jobs. As many of you know in the last proposed deal the DC area was a big problem as far as market saturation was concerned. Knowing that more than 70% of passenger traffic through Dulles is connecting, it is not difficult to assume that with the new facility in Philadelphia, passengers could connect through there just as easily. Add to the mix that Senator Specter from PA would go ballistic if the merged carrier decided to move operations from Philly to Dulles, and you can see how this could be a huge issue for our three hundred members as well as the thousands of others currently employed in DC.
I want to see the airlines return to profitability the same as anyone. As the author of the article correctly assumes, a profitable company is better for all concerned. I disagree with him however that a UA/US merger would greatly benefit the employees. In fact I see this deal as requiring more pain from an already over taxed workforce. The author assumes a five to ten percent increase in wages if a deal goes through. That is no great reward for the pain required to complete this deal.
I think that a UA/CAL deal makes far more sense for the companies as well as Labor, as do most analysts and the author of the above article, and I hope this is the direction these companies ultimately take.
