<That's because terms of its government loan limit its annual labor costs. The company had budgeted a set amount based on the terms of the contract and can't carry that amount into 2004, Parker said.>
Do you understand the TERMS OF THE GOV. LOAN does not allow this to be carried over. Perhaps they should fire 18 million worth of flight attendents or mechanics??? Don't just come up with some lame argument because you want to argue. Unless parker just stood out there and blatently LIED to everyone including the media, I suggest you take him on his work and autopark your mouth for a change.
>>Do you understand the TERMS OF THE GOV. LOAN does not allow this to be carried over.<<
I believe the terms are that the CASM limits are not carry forward. That is any savings from previous years will not increase the set CASM limit for the next year.
So, the 18 million, as described by Mr. Parker is taken as a charge in 2003 for the "Retroactive" portion of the cost of the new contract when ever it may be ratified. But it will at some time be ratified and it will include charges for retro for the year 2003. The charge is for the increased costs (retro) in 2003. That is the reason many are saying that the money does not "go away".
You know...I don't know what you do for a living but by your creative accounting ideas you have a good future as a CFO in ENRON. Or maybe a Senior Auditor at Arthurs. Listen good...autojackass...YOU CAN'T ARBITRARILY ACCRUE EXPENSES THIS YEAR AND USE IT TO YOUR HEART'S CONTENT NEXT YEAR. Understand Freddy Mac??? What a clown you are. This is not even a point of contention by the union. This is reality weather you agree or not. Now go run you mouth again and be rude you angry little mule.