US Airlines is making all kinds of noises about going bankrupt and having to liquidate. The Pilots union refuses to budge on their 295 million in pension issues because of four shitbags from ALPA (pilots union). And the fecking machinists, who won’t even TALK to the airline. What the FUCK is with you guys, anyway? You’re gonna negotiate yourselves right out of a god damn job, is what you’re gonna do. And them pretty blue planes will be up for auction, and Jet Blue will be flyin em, and in the process, screw me and the missus out of our Caribbean Vacation in december (we’re going to St. Maarten, we hope).
Look, I don’t care what you’ve got to do, or to say, or whatever, just get it done, keep them planes skyward, or I swear, I’m gonna come down there and start knockin heads together until you idiots can reach a resolution that benefits us PAYING CUSTOMERS.
Look, I understand your anger, and Goddess, know, this IS the Pit –
However… are YOU willing to take a pay cut? Would you take several pay cuts in a row? How would you feel if your management asked you to take multiple pay cuts but THEIR salaries were unchanged?
Is that fair?
How about benefits - how would you feel about being asked to pay LOTS more for less health care? How would you feel if that pension you’ve been promised for 10 or 20 years looks like it’s about to evaporate?
How would you feel about having to swallow both? And management still gets all THEIR perks, intact?
Maybe if airline management was willing to cut THEIR compenstation the rank and file might be more willing to play ball.
Fact is - if the airline goes under the mechanics will go work for someone else. There is somewhat of a shortage of qualified airline mechanics. So why should they take a pay cut when, if the company goes under, they can easily go elsewhere for the same or even greater pay and benefits?
The pilots are in a tighter bind - there’s currently an oversupply of those, so if they lose their jobs getting another flying big birds is a bit tough at present. Then again, they could go fly corporate jets for a living. Or retire and live on investments (if they were smart enough to make some good ones). Or go into another line of work because, for the most part, these are fairly smart and resourceful guys.
Another big problem - the airlines (with one or two exceptions) are operating at a LOSS. They’re spending more to fly you to your destination than the cost of the ticket. You can’t do business long term that way. If they can’t make a profit, they go under sooner or later. That’s basic economics.
Next time, book your flight to the Carribean with a financially solvent airline. If you can find one.
And if you’re so selfish as to think others should take paycut after paycut until they are personally bankrupt for YOUR convenience… well then, fuck you, you selfish bastard.
If they go under, I’m sure that United Airlines will be more than happy to absorb USAirways passengers, debt and routes!
.
.
.
.
<snrk>
.
.
.
BWWWAAAAAHHH-HAAAH-HAAAAH-HAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHGHH!
<wipes tears from eyes>
Yeah… like THAT’S gonna happen.
/travel guru hat OFF… oh wait, it fell off when I was laffin’ so hard!/
The American taxpayers, less than three years ago, forked over hundreds of millions of dollars to help the airline industry stay afloat. In the process, they bailed out some companies that were well on the way to bankruptcy before 9/11. Despite the massive bail-out, those airlines still slashed jobs dramatically and cut pay and benefits to the employees who remained, all while the executives continued to draw massive compensation packages as a reward for mismanagement.
Would i be pissed off if a lost my vacation due to this action? I’m sure i would. But i like to think that i’d at least have the intelligence and human decency to understand why the airline employees are doing what they’re doing.
US Air’s CEO makes $425,000 a year, which is the average of the base salaries of AirTran, America West, JetBlue and Southwest (note: those are discount fliers, not the big guys). He is foregoing participation in any bonus programs, including such simple stuff as 401-K matching, unless and untill the airline becomes profitable again. He took a monster, monster paycut from his prior gig. The prior CEO also took a 20% cut in his base and eschewed bonuses and similar. Chairman David Bronner works without compensation, I believe, though the public pension fund he controls has a lot of the reorganized company’s equity.
No there’s not. There’s a glut. Which is why the mechanics don’t leave.
Which is why the airlines have to lower their costs, of which compensation is a very large component, or restrict their supply, which is illegal to do in collusion with other airlines. The market-clearing price of air transportation is below the average cost in the industry.
Congratulations. You’ve just said “fuck you” to every single person who ever booked a flight on a low-cost carrier. For that matter, you just said “fuck you” to everyone who ever searched for lower prices for anything. That’s an awful lot of people in one obscenity.
Can I ask a dumb question? I have a ticket already purchased on US Air for Christmas Day to fly to Vegas. What happens if they go bankrupt before then? Am I shit out of luck? Any ideas on what the likelyhood of this happening is?
When Chrysler was on the ropes Lee Iacoca dropped HIS compensation to one dollar per year until the company was back on its feet - which is why the rank and file there only grimmaced and whined instead of going on strike. If the CEO’s company is on the skids he is NOT “entitled” to “average pay” for someone on his level, particularly not when he’s asking everyone else to sacrifice. What to be CEO? Want to be leader? Then fucking LEAD! He should show his committment by taking the biggest cut because, let’s face it, you can live comfortable on a hell of a lot less than $400K per year but the guys, say, loading bags or loading passenger meals for under a tenth that can’t afford to lose as much of their pay.
No, the airlines have to charge at least cost. What, do you expect their employees to work for free?
If they were fucking stupid enough to start selling below cost then going under is the price of their stupidity. NO industry can sell below cost indefinitely. And this is an industry-wide phenomena.
Sure, cut compensation - then what? Maintenance? There’s a limit to how low the downward spiral can go.
As for “restricting supply” - they recently did just that at O’Hare for safety reasons - and the airlines screamed about it, claimed prices would rise, etc… The guys running the show want all the money for themselves and fuck both employees and passengers.
Any reasonable person knows that there is a basic cost to produce either an item or a service. There’s nothing wrong with shopping for a bargain, but there’s something very wrong about expecting to buy everything below cost of production. Do that, you’re going to run into shit like cancelled trips due to an airline going bankrupt, or shoddy workman ship on a product like a car, or find out when you get the gizmo home it ain’t what’s on the box artwork.
Want to fly a solvent low cost carrier? How about Southwest? They may not be the most rock-bottom carrier but they’re in the black which means they’ll probably still be around for your Christmas trip to the Bahamas (or wherever) AND they have a stellar safety record to boot - both of which are worth a few bucks extra to me - how about you? They’ve proved that you CAN run a “budget” airline without shafting your employees in the bargain. Nor are they the only ones doing it. Why can’t US Air?
You know, I’ve never been able to figure that out. Southwest has been consistently in the black for years. I think that it’s probably due to their standardization on the 737, the lack of any frills, and the use of a more direct-flight system instead of hub-and-spoke. (I was pissed once when it turned out on a flight I booked to BWI that I thought was non-stop was actually direct, needing stops in something like three other cities. I’ve since learned to read more carefully.) Oh, and they were smart to lock into lower fuel prices years ago so they’re not feeling as much of a pinch now. In any case, there are definite reasons that I own stock in Southwest and not in any other airline company (though I’ve thought of picking up some JetBlue.)
You’re right that they are no longer automatically always the cheapest option. My last few flights have all been on American because they’ve actually been cheaper (and, let’s fact it, more comfortable) than tickets for Southwest. However, it’s gotten to the point now that the ONLY thing American has going over for it over Southwest is that the seats have a bit more room both across and in leg-room. (Though I wonder if the difference between a MD-80 and a 737 have something to do with some of that, more than carrier actions.)
Does anyone in the industry know if getting rid of the hub-and-spoke system would help some of the larger, consistently unprofitable airlines?
US airlines are dinosaurs left over from the corporate 1960’s. Government bailouts, government protection, unions, serious benefits. My brother in law used to be a ramp rat. He handled the luggage going onto the luggage carousels. Think he got trained for an entire morning being a high school graduate and all, pulled down around 80k/year, had great benefits and worked a mandated 40 hour week.
Jealous - you bet.
Fact of thematter is that an awful lot of airlines are hideously inefficient in the current US business environment. They still have government mandated monopolies, guarantees and bailouts.
I also think if they are gonna get government bailouts, then management needs to get government pay scales too.
No. Iacoccoa deferred his compensation until the company could pay him. He didn’t take a pay cut.
Also, he was the highest paid CEO in 1986 and 1987, with over $30,000,000 in stock options cashed in on those two years.
The rank and file didn’t go on strike because the union didn’t call one, not because they decided to withhold their anger after the CEO took a pay “cut”. The union didn’t call one because they didn’t want to be blamed for sending Chrysler under… a charge the pilots union is apparently all-too-happy to have laid at their feet in the US Air case.
JohnT, you quoted my post but did you actually read it? I said he dropped his compensation until Chrysler was back on its feet. If Chrysler had gone completely under he wouldn’t have gotten anything – the point being he put his money where his mouth was, which gained him some respect.
As for the union… the UAW and the ALPA exist mainly to further themselves. If Chrysler goes under what does the UAW care? There are other automakers. Diito for the pilot’s union - they’ve shafted airlines, and their pilots, before.
The standarization has a lot to do with their success. After all, they only need to stock one set of parts, their mechanics only need to keep up with just one type of airplane, they need only purchase reference manuals for one type of airplane, their pilots only need to train and maintain currency on just one type of airplane… As soon as you add another make/model you have to keep another set of parts, etc. Under the Southwest business model everything is set to just one standard. Yeah, it saves money. I don’t know, but I wouldn’t be surprised if every single one of their planes uses the exact same engines… next time I see the local Southwest pilot at my airport I’ll ask him. Accrording to him, whenever they buy another 737 they do whatever it takes to make thing like the cockpit absolutely identical to all other 737’s in their fleet. Everytime he sits down in his “office” it’s exactly the same, even if he’s never been in the actual airplane before. Right down to the cupholders and where the pens are kept.
This might also acount, in part, for their safety record. In an emergency their pilots do not fumble about looking for things, nor do they generate emergencies by doing the wrong thing because of habits acqured in different airplanes - things are always in the exact same plane in every airplane their pilots fly. Makes the pilots much more efficient in all types of flying and cockpit activities.
As far as salaries… Southwest pilots have never made as much money as the Big Airlines… on the other hand, Southwest seems to have no problem attracting and retaining employees. At present, Southwest employees may be staying because the airline is solvent… it may not be the highest pay, but it looks like you’ll still have a job and a paycheck next year. But that’s not the whole story, because that was also the case before so many airlines starting tanking and before 9/11/01. That’s an important thing, though - management/employee relations are significantly better at Southwest than most other airlines. Again, why is that? Is it the type of people they attract? Pilots who join Southwest know they won’t be flying 747’s or international routes to places like Asia and Europe, so perhaps that’s a factor in settling for less pay than the guys flying the longest-haul routes?
On the other hand, one of the current Southwest pilots used to be a Space Shuttle commander, and you can’t get more ambitious and “long haul” than that, can you? (American Airlines has one, too - but not United. Hmm…)
I’ll tell you what, though - other airlines no doubt study Southwest intently, and if Southwest could bottle the secret of their success they could make more money by selling that than by running an airline.
Nope, it’s the carriers. Boeing and Airbus will both set the seat pitch to whatever the customer asks for.
Well, back in the days of regulation we didn’t have hub-and-spoke, we had more what you’re talking about. Hub-and-spoke was supposed to be more efficient and was hailed as a wonderous innovation. Um… it doesn’t seem to work so well anymore. Maybe it would work better if there were more hubs?
[/Hijack]ChinaGuy, not to doubt the veracity of your brother-in-law, but if he was pulling down close to 80K a year, he was stealing the luggage and selling it on the side. I was a ramp rat for Delta for many years and the best we pull down after being topped out (after about 10 years or so) is around $45000.
Our benefits used to be pretty good and they still are considering the level of skill needed for the average ramp job, but our salaries certainly haven’t kept up even close to the cost of living.[/Hijack off]
Not necessarily out of luck.
Especially if you paid for your ticket with a credit card.
If the airline ceases to fly, then you may be able to apply a request to your credit card company for a refund based on ‘services not received and not expected to be received’.
Don’t know if anybody else who is currently shopping airline tickets noticed… but after the US Air situation hit the newswire -airfares shot up. I have been shopping to travel at the end of Sept. to see my dear old mother for the first time in 3 years. On Friday, my qouted airfare was $265/rt on all the major airlines. Checking Saturday, the same flights had been jacked up to $385-389.
Industry guy checking in (used to be in marketing on the maintenance side). Yes Southwest flies the same airframe (737-200) and the same powerplant (which I don’t feel like looking up) which does contribute enormously to their bottom line. They’re not the only ones usng this formula either I believe Airtran uses it as well. However that’s not the whole story for Southwest or any other airline. Maintenance costs for all airframes are rising and will continue to rise. The problems are many. Not all required maintenance is done by the airline’s mechanics, in fact Alaska is outsourcing the entire job. The major problem is a shrinking industry which is why there’s a glut of mechanics in the field.
A decade back or so, the major manufacturers of parts on aircraft started making more and more maintenance manuals propietary. This limits the amount of maintenace an airline can perform itself, as well as shrinking the number of outside sources who are also capable of performing the same work, thus forcing items to be sent to the OEM (original equipment manufacturer). This in turn creates it’s own problems. The lobor prices increase accordingly dependant on where it’s done, in-house ($20-$45 pph) being cheapest, a repair station ( $30-$50) a little more and the OEM the most expensive (typical labor charge is $75-$120 per hour). You dont even want to know what replacement cost for things like gaskets and seals are, or the headache it is maintain paperwork that establises a chain of custody between OEM and the guy who does th work is, and how it contributes to cost. So the airline is in kind of a bind, the only way to reduce maintenance cost is to cut mechanic labor cost, or buy a new airframe (which is why Jet Blue is profitable) if you can get someone to loan you the money.
Additionally OEMS have longer turn around times (TAT) for repairs, a real problem as items like valves and sensors are time sensitive items, meaning some items have to be removed after so many flight hours, for overhaul or testing. The longer TAT means the airline has to increase it’s store of spares, further increasing its maintenance costs, or let the aircraft remain on the ground reducing revenue. In some instances as in Southwest this could be a good thing as they fly a single airframe and can get parts readily. It’s a major problem for a company like United as IIRC they’re flying several different versions of the 747, and Ameican who are flying serveral different airframes and versions of those airframes.
So with maintenance and fuel getting further and further from their ability to control, they’re forced to cut where they can and that’s salary.
Post preview addendum: To understand airline maintenance think of the lightbulbs in your house. Lightbulbs have an average life of 800-1000 hours (time sensitive). Now if you ran your house by FAA regulations, you don’t wait until the bulb blows out, instead you replace it (or in the case of aircraft equoipment test or overhaul it) at 600 hours. Now do you go to the store and buy bulbs or do you have extras around the house (turn around time). Thus the need for spares, except spares for aircraft parts are significantly more expensive than a lightbulb.
It’s not the airplane – it’s a decision by the carrier. Southwest packs in more people. If you don’t fit, too bad. Which is why I can’t fly Southwest. I just don’t fit in their airplanes. Seats on airplanes are highly configurable, and Southwest has the worst ‘pitch’, the distance between seats, in the industry.
American, on the other hand, is great. No frills, but a lot more comfortable. Assigned seating is another big plus for me, I hate the ‘cattle call’ seating of Southwest. I want my exit row aisle seat without having to knock over some grandma.
Southwest is doing fine without me, but I (or rather, my clients) spend about $25,000 a year on airfare. Many other business travelers feel the same way, so if all airlines look to Southwest’s example, I, and a significant number of other travelers would be very unhappy.