DOCSLIB.ORG

United Airlines-Us Airways Merger Hearing Committee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

S. HRG. 106–1015 UNITED AIRLINES-US AIRWAYS MERGER HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ANTITRUST, BUSINESS RIGHTS, AND COMPETITION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JUNE 26, 2000 PITTSBURGH, PA Serial No. J–106–92 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 73–290 WASHINGTON : 2001 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:13 Sep 20, 2001 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 E:\HR\OC\A290.XXX pfrm04 PsN: A290 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, Chairman STROM THURMOND, South Carolina PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware JON KYL, Arizona HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin MIKE DEWINE, Ohio DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York BOB SMITH, New Hampshire MANUS COONEY, Chief Counsel and Staff Director BRUCE A. COHEN, Minority Chief Counsel SUBCOMMITTEE ON ANTITRUST, BUSINESS RIGHTS, AND COMPETITION MIKE DEWINE, Ohio, Chairman ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey STROM THURMOND, South Carolina PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont PETE LEVITAS, Chief Counsel and Staff Director JON LEIBOWITZ, Minority Chief Counsel and Staff Director (II) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:13 Sep 20, 2001 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A290.XXX pfrm04 PsN: A290 C O N T E N T S STATEMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBER Page Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania ................. 1 WITNESSES Canale, Randy, President and Directing General Chairman, Machinists Dis- trict 141 ................................................................................................................. 40 Delgadillo, Richard, President, Local 40, Association of Flight Attendants ....... 41 Fisher, Hon. Mike, Attorney General, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ............ 2 Gillespie, Patrick, Business Manager, Philadelphia Building and Construction Trade Council ....................................................................................................... 35 Hudson, Paul, Executive Director, Aviation Consumer Action Project ............... 17 Isdell, Charles, Acting Director of Aviation, Philadelphia International Air- port ........................................................................................................................ 22 Longmuir, Shelley A., Senior Vice President, International Regulatory and Corporate Affairs, United Airlines ...................................................................... 11 Mahoney, Joseph W., Jr., Vice President, Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce ............................................................................................................. 23 Maisano, Vincent J., International Vice President, District 13, Communica- tions Workers of America .................................................................................... 36 Mitchell, Kevin P., President, Business Travel Coalition .................................... 25 Nagin, Larry, Executive Vice President, Corporate Affairs and General Coun- sel, US Airways .................................................................................................... 12 SUBMISSION FOR THE RECORD Flight Attendants’ Statement on United Airlines’ Offer To Acquire US Air- ways, letter and attachments .............................................................................. 45 (III) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:13 Sep 20, 2001 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A290.XXX pfrm04 PsN: A290 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:13 Sep 20, 2001 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A290.XXX pfrm04 PsN: A290 UNITED AIRLINES-US AIRWAYS MERGER MONDAY, JUNE 26, 2000 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ANTITRUST, BUSINESS RIGHTS, AND COMPETITION, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Philadelphia, PA. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9 a.m., in the Cere- monial Courtroom, 1st floor, Federal Courthouse, 601 Market Square, Philadelphia, PA, Hon. Arlen Specter presiding. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ARLEN SPECTER, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Senator SPECTER. Good morning. The hour of 9 o’clock having ar- rived, we shall proceed with this hearing of the Antitrust Sub- committee of the Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate. We have moved the time to 9 o’clock because after this hearing was scheduled, Senator Lott, the Majority Leader, called for floor action on the appropriations bill on the Labor, Health and Human Serv- ices, and Education Subcommittee which I chair so that it is nec- essary for me to be in Washington in the early afternoon, so we wanted to move the hearing up and conclude it a little before 11 o’clock since I had to catch the 11:11 a.m. Metroliner. Now, this is the first in a series of three statewide hearings on the proposed merger of United and US Airways. We will have a hearing in Pittsburgh on July 10 and a hearing in Lehigh Valley on July 24. There has already been one hearing of the Antitrust Subcommittee before, and we are going to focus on the broad array of issues involved in this proposed merger. Senator Biden, who used to be chairman of the full Judiciary Committee, will be joining us shortly. Senator Santorum had want- ed to be here but had other commitments. We are going to focus on the issue of competition which is the central national issue as to whether this merger would lessen com- petition. United is the biggest of the carriers. US Airways is num- ber six, and the essential purpose of the antitrust laws is to protect competition. We will also be taking a close look from a Pennsyl- vania perspective as to what the impact would be on our State since two major US Airways hubs are located here employing some 17,000 individuals. There is a major issue involving Pittsburgh on the maintenance center, which has been a prospective addition by United and by US Airways for some time, and we have yet to get a definitive answer on that subject. It implicates the United maintenance center in In- (1) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 03:13 Sep 20, 2001 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 E:\HR\OC\A290.XXX pfrm04 PsN: A290 2 dianapolis as to whether US Airways is going to proceed to con- struct the maintenance center in Pittsburgh. There have been major commitments made on the undertakings by both Pittsburgh airport and the Philadelphia airport in terms of capital improvements for the hub. Obviously if the merger is con- cluded, United will assume US Airways’ obligations, but there is more than just the contractual obligations. That is a presetting of the stage. I would like to call our first witness the distinguished Attorney General of Pennsylvania, Mike Fisher. The Honorable Michael Fisher comes to the Attorney General’s Office after an extraordinary career in public service in the State Senate, and prosecuting attorney in Pittsburgh, candidate for Lieu- tenant Governor, candidate for Governor, very deeply involved in the law and the public aspects of this proposed merger. Mr. Attorney General, we welcome you here and look forward to your testimony. STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE FISHER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. FISHER. Thank you very much. It is a pleasure for me to be here, Senator. I first of all would like to commend you and Senator Biden and Senator Santorum for the interest that you have shown in this issue. I know that you participated in the hearings of the sub- committee in Washington week before last, and you have these hearings scheduled across Pennsylvania and I commend you for taking the extra effort to do that. We have submitted a written statement, but I would like to just summarize a couple of issues that I think are important for you. Senator SPECTER. Your full statement will be made a part of the record. We have set the time clocks at 5 minutes since we have so many witnesses. That will leave us some time for some dialog and Q&A. Mr. FISHER. Let me just start with a couple things which we mention in our statement. First of all, I think it is important for you and your colleagues to know that the State attorneys general, not only in this State but across the Nation, have a deep interest and concern in this pro- posed merger and that we have in 10 years been working together with the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commis- sion and have firmly established our role in working with them as partners in review of these mergers, and this is no exception. We have already entered into an agreement with the parties in- volved here as well as with Justice as to how our review will pro- ceed together with Justice. I, together with Attorney General El- liott Spitzer—our offices will be heading the State review. I have with me today Jim Donohue who is the chief of my anti- trust section. Mr. Donohue together with his partner from New York will be the ones working with, at this point, 23 other State attorneys general in looking at the State perspective. There is no State in which this new merger will have a bigger impact than Pennsylvania. That is why we have taken the lead and that is why our participation is so important.
Recommended publications
  • Airline Competition Plan Final Report

    Airline Competition Plan Final Report

    Final Report Airline Competition Plan Philadelphia International Airport Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration in compliance with requirements of AIR21 Prepared by City of Philadelphia Division of Aviation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania August 31, 2000 Final Report Airline Competition Plan Philadelphia International Airport Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration in compliance with requirements of AIR21 Prepared by City of Philadelphia Division of Aviation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania August 31, 2000 SUMMARY S-1 Summary AIRLINE COMPETITION PLAN Philadelphia International Airport The City of Philadelphia, owner and operator of Philadelphia International Airport, is required to submit annually to the Federal Aviation Administration an airline competition plan. The City’s plan for 2000, as documented in the accompanying report, provides information regarding the availability of passenger terminal facilities, the use of passenger facility charge (PFC) revenues to fund terminal facilities, airline leasing arrangements, patterns of airline service, and average airfares for passengers originating their journeys at the Airport. The plan also sets forth the City’s current and planned initiatives to encourage competitive airline service at the Airport, construct terminal facilities needed to accommodate additional airline service, and ensure that access is provided to airlines wishing to serve the Airport on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory terms. These initiatives are summarized in the following paragraphs. Encourage New Airline Service Airlines that have recently started scheduled domestic service at Philadelphia International Airport include AirTran Airways, America West Airlines, American Trans Air, Midway Airlines, Midwest Express Airlines, and National Airlines. Airlines that have recently started scheduled international service at the Airport include Air France and Lufthansa. The City intends to continue its programs to encourage airlines to begin or increase service at the Airport.
  • Airport Press

    Airport Press

    Vol. 31 No. 2 Serving New York Airports April 2009 JFK EWR LGA METRO EDITION SWF JFK CHAMBER TO CONTINUE SCHOLARSHIP GRANT PROGRAM The JFK Chamber of Commerce started date about their quest for a higher education last year to give degree. It does not have to be in the pursuit an “unrestricted” of an aviation degree or career. scholarship to two Last year, the Chamber awarded two stu- employees of JFK dents $500 each. This year they are looking Airport or its’ adja- to increase the dollar amount for each schol- cent industry part- arship. This will be based on the success at ners. their monthly luncheons. The method of This month Ed Bastion of Delta/North- earning the schol- west airline will speak at the Chamber Lun- arship remains the cheon on April 28th. Check out the Cham- same; it is to write ber web site www.jfk-airport.org for more an essay, written by the scholarship candi- details. DOLORES HOFMAN OF QUEENS DEVELOPMENT Back row: Wesley Mills, Manager, Boston Culinary Group; Warren Kroeppel, General Manager, OFFICE HONORED LaGuardia Airport, Port Authority of NY & NJ; Manuel Mora, Assistant Manager, Boston Culinary Group; Paul McGinn, President, Marketplace Development; Ousmane Ba, Manager, Au Bon Excuse us at Airport Press if we share in the pride about Pain; Syed Hussain, Manager, Airport Wireless; Front Row: Lillian Tan, VP/General Manager/ the honoring of Dolores Hofman of the Queens Develop- MarketPlace Development; Lacee Klemm, Manager, The Body Shop; Belkys Polanco, Assistant ment Offi ce as Top Woman in Business. She is not only a Manager, Au Bon Pain; Margherite LaMorte, Manager, Marketing & Customer Service, friend but a neighbor in Building 141.
  • Appendix C Informal Complaints to DOT by New Entrant Airlines About Unfair Exclusionary Practices March 1993 to May 1999

    Appendix C Informal Complaints to DOT by New Entrant Airlines About Unfair Exclusionary Practices March 1993 to May 1999

    9310-08 App C 10/12/99 13:40 Page 171 Appendix C Informal Complaints to DOT by New Entrant Airlines About Unfair Exclusionary Practices March 1993 to May 1999 UNFAIR PRICING AND CAPACITY RESPONSES 1. Date Raised: May 1999 Complaining Party: AccessAir Complained Against: Northwest Airlines Description: AccessAir, a new airline headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa, began service in the New York–LaGuardia and Los Angeles to Mo- line/Quad Cities/Peoria, Illinois, markets. Northwest offers connecting service in these markets. AccessAir alleged that Northwest was offering fares in these markets that were substantially below Northwest’s costs. 171 9310-08 App C 10/12/99 13:40 Page 172 172 ENTRY AND COMPETITION IN THE U.S. AIRLINE INDUSTRY 2. Date Raised: March 1999 Complaining Party: AccessAir Complained Against: Delta, Northwest, and TWA Description: AccessAir was a new entrant air carrier, headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa. In February 1999, AccessAir began service to New York–LaGuardia and Los Angeles from Des Moines, Iowa, and Moline/ Quad Cities/Peoria, Illinois. AccessAir offered direct service (nonstop or single-plane) between these points, while competitors generally offered connecting service. In the Des Moines/Moline–Los Angeles market, Ac- cessAir offered an introductory roundtrip fare of $198 during the first month of operation and then planned to raise the fare to $298 after March 5, 1999. AccessAir pointed out that its lowest fare of $298 was substantially below the major airlines’ normal 14- to 21-day advance pur- chase fares of $380 to $480 per roundtrip and was less than half of the major airlines’ normal 7-day advance purchase fare of $680.
  • RESOURCE Air Travel 2001

    RESOURCE Air Travel 2001

    RESOURCE SYSTEMS GROUP INCORPORATED Air Travel 2001 What do they tell us about the future of US air travel? An Industry Report by Resource Systems Group, Inc. December 2001 331 Olcott Drive, White River Junction, Vermont 05001 802.295.4999 www.rsginc.com www.surveycafe.com TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................................2 THE SURVEY SAMPLE ..............................................................................................................................2 TRIP CHARACTERISTICS..........................................................................................................................2 RESERVATIONS AND TICKETING............................................................................................................3 CHOICE OF TICKETING LOCATIONS ....................................................................................................3 SATISFACTION WITH TICKETING OPTIONS ........................................................................................4 TICKETING SEGMENTS .........................................................................................................................7 AIRPORTS ..................................................................................................................................................7 AIRLINE RANKINGS.................................................................................................................................12
  • Customers First Plan, Highlighting Definitions of Terms

    Customers First Plan, Highlighting Definitions of Terms

    RepLayout for final pdf 8/28/2001 9:24 AM Page 1 2001 Annual Report [c u s t o m e r s] AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION RepLayout for final pdf 8/28/2001 9:24 AM Page 2 Officers Carol B. Hallett President and CEO John M. Meenan Senior Vice President, Industry Policy Edward A. Merlis Senior Vice President, Legislative and International Affairs John R. Ryan Acting Senior Vice President, Aviation Safety and Operations Vice President, Air Traffic Management Robert P. Warren mi Thes Air Transports i Associationo n of America, Inc. serves its Senior Vice President, member airlines and their customers by: General Counsel and Secretary 2 • Assisting the airline industry in continuing to prov i d e James L. Casey the world’s safest system of transportation Vice President and • Transmitting technical expertise and operational Deputy General Counsel kn o w l e d g e among member airlines to improve safety, service and efficiency J. Donald Collier Vice President, • Advocating fair airline taxation and regulation world- Engineering, Maintenance and Materiel wide, ensuring a profitable and competitive industry Albert H. Prest Vice President, Operations Nestor N. Pylypec Vice President, Industry Services Michael D. Wascom Vice President, Communications Richard T. Brandenburg Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer David A. Swierenga Chief Economist RepLayout for final pdf 8/28/2001 9:24 AM Page 3 [ c u s t o m e r s ] Table of Contents Officers . .2 The member airlines of the Air Mission . .2 President’s Letter . .5 Transport Association are committed to Goals . .5 providing the highest level of customer Highlights .
  • The Impacts of Liberalization on Competition on an Air Shuttle Market

    The Impacts of Liberalization on Competition on an Air Shuttle Market

    The Impacts of Liberalization on Competition on an Air Shuttle Market Alessandro V. M. Oliveira§ Abstract This paper aims at assessing the impacts of deregulation on the most important airline market in Brazil: the air shuttle Rio de Janeiro – São Paulo. By making use of both a two-stages budgeting representation of the demand system, and a competition model with product heterogeneity among rivals, and based on the framework of the New Empirical Industrial Organization (NEIO), it was possible to infer whether a structural change on airlines' conduct parameters due to liberalization was observed. This exercise ultimately served as a test of the efficacy of the policy employed by the regulators since 1998. The main conclusions were that regulatory reform effectively stimulated firms to significantly increase the degree of competition in the market (via a decrease in market power), and that marginal-cost or even below-marginal-cost pricing was not rejected for some airlines. JEL: L13 – L50 – L93 Key words: deregulation – market power – conduct – airline Note: Paper competing to the Young Economist Award. § Center for Studies of Airline Competition and Regulation (NECTAR) - Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica, Brazil. E-mail address: [email protected] 1. Introduction This paper aims at developing an empirical model for assessing the impacts of economic liberalization on competition in a relevant subset of the Brazilian airline industry: the air shuttle service on the route Rio de Janeiro - São Paulo. In this market the first air shuttle in the world, the ‘Ponte Aérea’, was created in 1959, by an agreement of airline managers, and had a dominant position in the airport-pair linking both city centers for almost forty years.
  • 03-04-13 AMR-US HSR Release

    03-04-13 AMR-US HSR Release

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE AMERICAN AIRLINES AND US AIRWAYS RECEIVE REQUEST FROM DOJ IN CONNECTION WITH PROPOSED MERGER FORT WORTH, TX, and TEMPE, AZ, March 4, 2013 – AMR Corporation (OTCQB: AAMRQ), the parent company of American Airlines, Inc., and US Airways Group, Inc. (NYSE: LCC) today announced that, on March 4, 2013, each company received a request for additional information (“Second Request”) from the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) in connection with the proposed merger of the two airlines. A DOJ Second Request is a standard part of the regulatory process. A Second Request extends the waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended, during which the parties may not close the transaction, until 30 days after American Airlines and US Airways have substantially complied with the Second Request (or the waiting period is otherwise terminated by the DOJ). American Airlines and US Airways expect to respond promptly to the Second Request and to continue working cooperatively with the DOJ as it conducts its review of the proposed combination. American Airlines and US Airways continue to expect the combination to be completed in the third quarter of 2013. The merger is conditioned on the approval by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, regulatory approvals, approval by US Airways shareholders, other customary closing conditions, and confirmation and consummation of the Plan of Reorganization. About American Airlines American Airlines focuses on providing an exceptional travel experience across the globe, serving more than 260 airports in more than 50 countries and territories.
  • A Competition Model for a Brazilian Air Shuttle Market

    A Competition Model for a Brazilian Air Shuttle Market

    A COMPETITION MODEL FOR A BRAZILIAN AIR SHUTTLE MARKET Alessandro Oliveira§ ABSTRACT This paper aims at developing a competition model for a relevant subset of the Brazilian airline industry: the air shuttle market on the route Rio de Janeiro – São Paulo, a pioneer service created in 1959. The competition model presented here contains elements of both vertical product differentiation and representative consumer. I also use the conduct parameter approach to infer about the behaviour of airlines in the market under three situations: a quasi- deregulation process (from 1998 on), two price war events (1998 and 2001), and a shock in costs due to currency devaluation (1999). Results permitted making inference on the impacts of liberalisation on competition and investigating an alleged collusive behaviour of 1999. Key words: air shuttle – competition – deregulation – product differentiation JEL Classification: L93 § Department of Economics, University of Warwick – UK. Email: [email protected] 1. INTRODUCTION This paper aims at developing a competition model for a relevant subset of the Brazilian airline industry: the air shuttle service on the route Rio de Janeiro - São Paulo. This market was where the first air shuttle in the world, the ‘Ponte Aérea’, was created, in 1959, by an agreement of airline managers, and which dominated the airport-pair linking the city centres of the cities for almost forty years. Air shuttles are usually characterised by frequent service, walk-on flights with no reservations and short-haul markets. This concepts is nowadays very common in the airline industry, usually providing service for highly time-sensitive passengers, with notorious examples being the Eastern Airlines’ Boston-New York-Washington and the Iberia’s Madrid-Barcelona.
  • Open Honors Thesis Lap Chi Adriano Chao.Pdf

    Open Honors Thesis Lap Chi Adriano Chao.Pdf

    THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF SUPPLY CHAIN AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS AIRLINE MERGER WAVES IN THE UNITED STATES IS A MERGER BETWEEN AMERICAN AIRLINES AND US AIRWAYS POSSIBLE? LAP CHI ADRIANO CHAO Spring 2011 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for baccalaureate degrees in Management and Economics with honors in Supply Chain and Information Systems Reviewed and approved* by the following: Robert Novack Associate Professor of Supply Chain and Information Systems Thesis Supervisor John Spychalski Professor Emeritus of Supply Chain and Information Systems Honors Adviser * Signatures are on file in the Schreyer Honors College. i ABSTRACT Commercial airlines are an important part of the transportation industry in the United States. A better understanding of the reasons for a series of airline merger waves in the United States can help airline professionals realize the criteria and requirements of a merger. This study examined three recent U.S. airline mergers (i.e., Delta-Northwest, United-Continental and Southwest-AirTran) and deduced eight major dimensions of merger motivations, including network synergies, antitrust immunity, fleet commonality, alliance coordination, market positioning, financial benefits and shareholders’ approval, union support and organizational learning. The feasibility of a hypothetical merger between American Airlines and US Airways was determined using the eight dimensions derived. Results suggested that the merger was unlikely to increase the competitiveness
  • US Airways, Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter) (Commission File No

    US Airways, Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter) (Commission File No

    Table of Contents UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-K (Mark One) ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 or o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to US Airways Group, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) (Commission File No. 1-8444) Delaware 54-1194634 (State or other Jurisdiction of (IRS Employer Incorporation or Organization) Identification No.) 111 West Rio Salado Parkway, Tempe, Arizona 85281 (Address of principal executive offices, including zip code) (480) 693-0800 (Registrants telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of Each Class Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered Common Stock, $0.01 par value New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None US Airways, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) (Commission File No. 1-8442) Delaware 54-0218143 (State or other Jurisdiction of (IRS Employer Incorporation or Organization) Identification No.) 111 West Rio Salado Parkway, Tempe, Arizona 85281 (Address of principal executive offices, including zip code) (480) 693-0800 (Registrants telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Portions of the proxy statement related to US Airways Group, Inc.’s 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which proxy statement will be filed under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 within 120 days of the end of US Airways Group, Inc.’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
  • DRAFT AMR-US Merger Release

    DRAFT AMR-US Merger Release

    FOR RELEASE: Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2013 AMR CORPORATION AND US AIRWAYS ANNOUNCE SETTLEMENT WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL Settlement Allows for Completion of Merger in December FORT WORTH, Texas and TEMPE, Ariz, – AMR Corporation (OTCQB: AAMRQ), the parent company of American Airlines, Inc., and US Airways Group, Inc. (NYSE: LCC) today announced that the airlines have settled the litigation brought by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the States of Arizona, Florida, Michigan and Tennessee, the Commonwealths of Pennsylvania and Virginia, and the District of Columbia challenging the merger of AMR and US Airways. The companies also announced an agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) related to small community service from Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA). Tom Horton, chairman, president and CEO of AMR, and incoming chairman of the board of the combined company, said, “This is an important day for our customers, our people and our financial stakeholders. This agreement allows us to take the final steps in creating the new American Airlines. With a renewed spirit, we are about to create the world’s leading airline that will offer, along with our oneworld® partners, a comprehensive global network and service by the best people in the business. There is much more work ahead of us but we’re energized by the challenge and look forward to competing vigorously in the ever-changing global marketplace.” Doug Parker, chairman and CEO of US Airways, and incoming CEO of the combined airline, said, “This is very good news and we are grateful to all who have made it happen.
  • Newark International Airport Airline Competition Plan

    Newark International Airport Airline Competition Plan

    Newark International Airport Airline Competition Plan Submitted by: The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Submitted to: The Federal Aviation Administration As required to be submitted by: The Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment & Reform Act for the 21st Century, Pub. L. 106-181, Section 155 Ms. Woodie Woodward Acting Associate Administrator for Airports Federal Aviation Administration Room 600E, 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 December 11, 2000 Re: Newark International Airport—Airline Competition Plan Dear Ms. Woodward: The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (The Port Authority) is pleased to provide1 the Airline Competition Plan for Newark International Airport (EWR) as is required to be submitted by The Wendell H. Ford Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-21), Pub L. 106-181. The Port Authority is keenly interested in ensuring that residents and businesses in the region are provided with an airport system that provides the highest levels of customer service, generates substantial economic benefits, and provides a large and level platform for airlines to compete for passengers. We view competition as essential to our thriving airport system and are dedicated to allowing existing carriers the opportunity to expand operations and new airlines the opportunity to serve this great metropolitan area. No other airport operator has done more to optimize the operation and efficiency of its facilities to support airline competition. Although the Port Authority is only required by law to submit a competition plan for Newark Airport, that plan must be considered in the context of the overall system of four airports and a commercial heliport owned or operated by the Port Authority within the Port District, an area roughly 25 miles in diameter centering on the Statue of Liberty.