ATSG Awards Six Scholarships to Business and STEM Students
The scholarship is available to ATSG employees and their children up to 22 years of age who are working toward a technical or undergraduate degree in a STEM, medical, business, or technical/vocational field. ATSG board member and former Executive Chairman Joe Hete and his wife Carrie established the scholarship fund in 2021.
The six recipients of this year's $6,000 awards are:
Kenzie Anderson, seeking a degree in Business and planning for a career in sports management, marketing, or entrepreneurship;
Kathleen Au Clair, pursuing a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting at American Military University;
Alexander Heins, who will attend the New Jersey Institute of Technology to pursue a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering;
Kate Rassbach, who plans to study Business Finance at the University of Wisconsin Eau Claire;
Serena Steele, attending Tulsa Technology Center to become an A&P certified mechanic; and
Emma Waters, a Finance major with a minor in Business Administration at the University of Cincinnati Linder College of Business.
"A good education is the essential foundation that equips individuals with the tools to think critically, act wisely, and contribute meaningfully to the world around them," said ATSG Chief Executive Officer Mike Berger. "An investment in education is an investment in the human spirit—nurturing potential, inspiring purpose, and enriching lives. In lifting others, we help shape a future built on empathy, opportunity, and shared progress."
The deadline to apply for the Hete Family Scholarship is March 31 of each year. For more information and a link to the application site, visit https://www.atsginc.com/hete-family-scholarship.
About Air Transport Services Group
Air Transport Services Group (ATSG) is a premier provider of aircraft leasing and air cargo transportation solutions for both domestic and international air carriers, as well as companies seeking outsourced air cargo services. ATSG is the global leader in freighter leasing with a fleet that includes Boeing 767, Airbus A321, and Airbus A330 aircraft. A diverse portfolio of subsidiaries encompass ATSG's Lease+Plus aircraft leasing strategy including three airlines holding separate and distinct U.S. FAA Part 121 Air Carrier certificates to provide air cargo lift, passenger ACMI and charter services; aircraft maintenance, airport ground services and material handling equipment engineering and service. ATSG subsidiaries include ABX Air, Inc.; Airborne Global Solutions, Inc.; Airborne Maintenance and Engineering Services, Inc.; Air Transport International, Inc.; Cargo Aircraft Management, Inc.; and Omni Air International, LLC. For further details, visit www.atsginc.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
12 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Their window seats lacked windows, So Delta and United passengers sued
Delta declined to comment. United did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Advertisement The suits claim that some of the airlines' Boeing 737, Boeing 757 and Airbus A321 aircraft were built with at least one 'window seat' that is adjacent to a wall, not a window, generally because of the placement of air conditioning ducts or electrical components. Other carriers, such as American Airlines and Alaska Airlines, operate similar aircraft types but disclose during the seat selection process if a seat does not include a window. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'United and Delta could easily implement the same disclosures,' Greenbaum said. A view of the landscape from an airplane window near Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas, on March 8. According to the lawsuits, Delta passengers may be charged more than $70 for a window seat compared with a basic economy fare, while United passengers may pay more than $50 in basic economy on domestic flights, or $100 on international flights. KATHERINE AND MARIEL TYLER/NYT The suits say United and Delta 'affirmatively' describe 'every wall-adjacent seat as a 'window' seat,' even when they know certain seats do not include a window. Delta passengers may be charged more than $70 to select a window seat compared with a basic economy fare, and United passengers may pay more than $50 to select a window seat in basic economy on domestic flights, or $100 on international flights, according to the suits. Advertisement Websites such as SeatGuru can give passengers more information about the seats on their aircraft, including whether the seat is missing a window. Nicholas Meyer, the named plaintiff in the Delta suit, paid for window seats on a series of flights this past weekend from New York, where he lives, to Orange County, California, with a layover in Atlanta, according to the suit. He had a window seat on the first leg of his trip, but when he boarded the aircraft for the connection to Orange County, a Boeing 757-200, he discovered that his seat did not have a window. 'Plaintiff had no option but to spend the ensuing 4 1/2 hour flight next to a blank wall,' the suit says. The plaintiffs in the United suit are Aviva Copaken of Los Angeles and Marc Brenman of San Francisco. Copaken paid between $45.99 and $169.99 to select a window seat on each of three United flights departing from Los Angeles International Airport this spring, none of which were ultimately next to a window. About a month earlier, Brenman used 'points and benefits' to pay for what turned out to be a windowless seat on a United flight from San Francisco to Washington, D.C. After complaining to United, Copaken was refunded for two of her three window seat fees, and Brenman received a partial refund, according to the suit. The suits are seeking a 'refund of the extra fees' for all passengers who paid for window seats but got windowless ones, Greenbaum said, as well as punitive damages. Casey Olbrantz, another attorney involved in the suits, estimated that the total number of affected passengers 'is in the millions.' Advertisement This article originally appeared in .
Business Wire
12 minutes ago
- Business Wire
Regis to Issue Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Results on September 3, 2025
MINNEAPOLIS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Regis Corporation (NasdaqGM:RGS), a leader in the haircare industry, will issue financial results for the fourth fiscal quarter and full year ended June 30, 2025, before the market opens on September 3, 2025. Following the release, the Company will host a presentation via webcast for investors beginning at 7:30 a.m. Central time to discuss its corporate developments and financial performance. To participate in the live webcast, interested parties may register here or register by logging into A replay of the presentation will be available later that day at the same address. Investors with questions they would like addressed during the earnings call may submit them in advance to investorrelations@ About Regis Corporation Regis Corporation (NasdaqGM:RGS) is a leader in the haircare industry. As of March 31, 2025, the Company franchised or owned 4,087 salon locations. Regis' franchised and corporate locations operate under concepts such as Supercuts ®, SmartStyle ®, Cost Cutters ®, Roosters ® and First Choice Haircutters ®. For additional information about the Company, including a reconciliation of certain non-GAAP financial information and certain supplemental financial information, please visit the Investor Relations section of the corporate website at
Business Wire
12 minutes ago
- Business Wire
PUBM CLASS ACTION NOTICE: Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit On Behalf Of PubMatic, Inc. Investors
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ('GPM'), announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, captioned Hsu v. PubMatic, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-07067, on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired PubMatic, Inc. ('PubMatic' or the 'Company') (NASDAQ: PUBM) securities between , inclusive (the 'Class Period'). Plaintiff pursues claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 'Exchange Act'). Investors are hereby notified that they have 60 days from the date of this notice to move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff in this action. IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR PUBMATIC INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS. What Happened? On August 11, 2025, after the market closed, PubMatic released its second quarter 2025 financial report. In its report, PubMatic's Chief Financial Officer, Steven Pantelick, revealed that the Company's outlook reflects 'a reduction in ad spend from one of [its] top DSP partners.' The Company's Chief Executive Officer, Rajeev Goel, further revealed that a 'top DSP buyer' had 'shifted a significant number of clients to a new platform that evaluates inventory differently' causing significant headwinds. Goel stated, in response to the inventory valuation change, the Company would 'need to do a better job . . . to prioritize across all the hundreds of billions of daily ad impressions that we have, which subset of those impressions that we send to this DSP.' On this news, PubMatic's stock price fell $2.23, or 21.1%, to close at $8.34 per share on August 12, 2025, on unusually heavy trading volume. What Is The Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that a top DSP buyer was shifting a significant number of clients to a new platform which evaluated inventory differently; (2) that, as a result, PubMatic was seeing a reduction in ad spend and revenue from this top DSP buyer; and (3) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. If you purchased or otherwise acquired PubMatic securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than 60 days from the date of this notice to ask the Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff. Contact Us To Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq., Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150, Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
