Dave, How Did You Pass Your Job Interview?

[robbedagain]

if you work in a expressed, outsourced mainline city with one jet a day, getting paid 13.00 crappy dollars an hr and putting up with the mesa and trans states garbage, why should we have to give up more of freaking dough when mgmt just gave themselves a freaking 4% payraise at the same time asking us the employees to slash more of our money--to help themselves out?????

 

[BoeingBoy]

1-800-IFLYSWA,

"I think the answer is voting YES for 44% less results in exactly 56% more than you will have if you vote no."

That assumes that all I have is the paycheck & benefits from the company - which is a bad assumption.

"However, I suspect it will not be 44% out of your paycheck, part is in W2, part is in less people getting the same amount of work done."

That's why I said 44% in pay, productivity, and benefits. Based on what Siegel was quoted as saying a month or more ago, it works out to about 20% pay, 14% productivity, and 9% benefits on average. Presumably, we pilots will take the biggest his since we're paid more. I'm assuming (and that's all) about 35% in pay, 5% in productivity (trips are mostly hard time now), and 15-20% in benefits. That puts me at the level of some of the better "Express" type carriers. If you work in the industry - especially in one of the groups covered by a contract - you know that what is given up with the stroke of a pen takes many years to get back, if ever.

If you'll read a few of my older posts, you discover two things.

First, it will make little difference to me if the doors close tomorrow or I have this job till retirement (and that's at current pay, etc). If you work in the industry - especially in one of the groups covered by a contract - you know that what is given up with the stroke of a pen takes many years to get back, if ever. What we agree to today will be basically what the pilotts remaining at this airline will be working for until they retire. That is my concern.

Second, I don't believe I have ever told anyone else how they should react to the demands for more concessions. I have explained how I feel about this issue, challenged those who feel differently to explain why if they haven't, challenged others "facts" when I know them to be wrong, and challenged those who presume to know what is better for me than I do - nothing more.

At least in the unionized groups, I would hope that everyone gets to vote on any further concessions. If the "Yes" vote wins, so be it. Likewise if the "No" vote wins.

Jim

 

[mweiss]

I would guess that would be for the employees themselves to decide.

Of course. But the problem is that 51% of the employees could put a bunch of willing employees out of work.

If this company goes "tango uniform" there is only one reason why.

It's an oversimplification, but in a large sense you are correct. I don't think concessions will save the company either. But should those that do be punished by those that don't?

That's the way I feel about it. You don't like it, don't read it! <_<

Hey, now. I'm offering a difference of opinion here. I'm not trying to tell you that you have no right to it, nor to post it.

 

[BoeingBoy]

mweiss,

" Of course. But the problem is that 51% of the employees could put a bunch of willing employees out of work."

I'll bite - what would be an acceptable percentage of "No" votes? Should 60% that want to say no instead say yes to save the 40%? How about 70%, or 80%, or 90%. If only 1 person wants to vote "yes" should the rest just go along?

Jim

 

[mweiss]

Jim,

Here's what's bugging me. The "no concession" people acknowledge that the company will go bust, and that the only reason to vote no is so they can collect unemployment insurance. Why not get a different job (since they acknowledge they'll have to anyway) and let those who wish to work for less do so?

This is not your typical situation we're talking about here.

 

[BoeingBoy]

mweiss,

"The "no concession" people acknowledge that the company will go bust, and that the only reason to vote no is so they can collect unemployment insurance."

Yes, I've seen that too. But I've also seen (and believe) the sentiment that this company is more than likely going to shut down irregardless of further concessions due to management incompetance. If that is the case, the choice is to vote "yes" and just delay the inevitable for a short while or vote "no" and get it over with (and have that unemployment).

In early 2003, I told my wife that one of two things would happen. The company would make money hand over fist since the concessions and other savings given then equaled the worst annual loses in our history, or the company was doomed. This management team proved that the first was a hopeless dream.

Jim

 

[mweiss]

Jim,

We're pretty much in violent agreement. I just hate the idea of jamming my opinion into other peoples' lives (contrary to what my prodigious postings of late might suggest ). It's one thing to tell them what you think; it's another thing to essentially force your will upon them.

Here's a sobering thought...what if the "Dave lovers" are right? Seriously. I don't think so, and you don't think so...but if they are, and the nonbelievers take their jobs away, wouldn't that be a horrible outcome?

 

[BoeingBoy]

mweiss,

In a sense, yes. But we generally live in a democracy. If my candidate for President, Senator, or dogcatcher doesn't win, I don't have the right to say "they shouldn't have crammed that down my throat" even though it may have consequences on me be it taxes, regulations, outsourcing jobs, etc.

All the "Yes" folks have to do is convince the 51% to vote their way - using logic and reason. As you've seen here, just saying the other side is wrong will change no minds.

Jim

 

[ktflyhome]

Wouldn't that have been great and wonderful if the majority that have posted on all of the threads today, would have said "Yippee". "Great" "Wonderful" "We are behind you DAVE 100%". Tell us what you really want, we trust you, we are with you. We Believe in You. WE ARE USAIRWAYS>>>>>by God and we will Survive. ??????

That is not what has happened and I for one am saddened by this. I wanted to believe in this Man and have faith.

The Majority that have posted their opinions and concerns and their conjectures and their INTAKE of this WEBCAM overrule the Minority as a whole. If anyone disagrees with me, then go back and reread what has been posted since 4:00 today. It is overwhelmingly a Negative vote against DAVE. Even our Customers, our valued Customers are wishing us well, as they go to bed tonight, they fear the worst for all of us and wishing us the best.

Yea, I guess I am a bit emotional. I want this company to survive and prosper. We all have a stake in this one way or another. We have all sacrificed, given and we have personal say. Whether we all have the resolve and wherewithall to continue down this abyss is up to each and every one of us.

I for one, have No more repect and faith today than I did yesterday.

 

[mweiss]

Jim,

You're right, of course, about the democracy. I just hope we never have a large enough group of people that want to permanently shut down the country in order to stop a tax increase. Because that's a pretty close equivalent to this situation. I'd far prefer that those people, who would clearly end up not being part of the country either way, would simply leave the country.

Does that make sense? This isn't about who we choose for President (though even that doesn't seem to have an impact on who ends up there anymore). It's far graver.

 

[BoeingBoy]

mweiss,

You're right of course. I just couldn't think of a better analogy at the moment.

Don't know if you've ever worked in a unionized group or not - if so then what I'm going to say is what you already know.

Anyone beginning work in a unionized job quickly learns two things. Seniority is everything. What the majority wants is what happens.

So to turn your earlier comments on their head - if a person can't accept the majority determining the outcome, maybe they should seek employment in a non-unionized job.

The non-union employees are in the worst position. They are along for the ride with no say. That realization has resulted in some employee groups being unionized today that weren't 10-15 years ago.

One last thought...

If, as seems almost certain, there are more furloughs coming even with a "yes" vote, roughly 50% of our employees have already given their jobs to "save" this company. It would be interesting to know how many of the adamently "yes" folks are in the position of gladly throwing more "overboard" as long as their job is saved and would be screaming "no" just as loudly if they were facing joblessness to "save" the company.

Jim

 

[ktflyhome]

Jim, you are my Hero. So Smart!!!So Smart!!!!

 

[mweiss]

Anyone beginning work in a unionized job quickly learns two things. Seniority is everything. What the majority wants is what happens...

It would be interesting to know how many of the adamently "yes" folks are in the position of gladly throwing more "overboard" as long as their job is saved and would be screaming "no" just as loudly if they were facing joblessness to "save" the company.

When you juxtapose those two statements, you end up describing the reason I don't like the reality of unions. I've watched it happen before, where people will happily sacrifice other people's jobs in order to maintain their salaries...until, of course, their own jobs are on the line.

This is not how it should be. If unions ended up living up to their intent, we'd have a much better work environment. *sigh*

 

[BoeingBoy]

Having been "associated" with the airline industry for 40 years (my oldest brother was hired by AMR 15 years before I started here) and worked under the worst of non-union conditions in aviation (purely at management's every whim with rampant favoritism), I'll take the relatively small shortcomings of the union job in a heartbeat - as long as the members make the ultimate decisions in major issues. Sorta like that old saying about democracy - it may not be perfect but I'll take it over everything else. But that's just my opinion.

Jim

 

[hopethingswillbeok]

Spin you keep talking about s/b travel, the airlines are the only thing I can think of that you pay the same price as you did ten years ago. You must be very lucky to fly s/b every weekend and have no problems. I would much rather buy a cheap ticket and not worry and sit and wait for a seat.