Doug Parker on US Airways
- Thread starter Alfa1900CSS
- Start date
Harry Callahan
Veteran
Move2CLT
Veteran
Coming from someone who wouldn't know a good CEO when he saw one means very little. You carrying your yellow highlighter?I heard he had "a couple of beers"
Harry Callahan
Veteran
Move2CLT
Veteran
Dont call me Shirley
Veteran
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11231339/1/us-airways-ceo-how-911-changed-our-airline.html?cm_ven=GOOGLEN
Here's a recent (week old) interview with Parker relating to the Topic. It contains some interesting points about the major economic differences between PHL and CLT.
http://articles.philly.com/2011-09-04/business/30112944_1_fuller-planes-southwest-airlines-airline-employees
http://articles.philly.com/2011-09-04/business/30112944_1_fuller-planes-southwest-airlines-airline-employees
LD3
Veteran
As a result, there are midsize cities that are "marginal" airline hubs, and removing them would rightsize the industry and planes in the air.
Hmm, I wonder if Jerry Orr is wondering if he should have built that 4th runway, with another on the way....
Hmm, I wonder if Jerry Orr is wondering if he should have built that 4th runway, with another on the way....
N924PS
Veteran
- May 9, 2004
- 2,037
- 1,529
No problem!
Southwest Airlines will take up any slack in the CLT hub when Airways vacates.
They did it in SAN, LAX, BWI, LAS, ISP, and more. They're not shy about seizing any opportunity that is handed to them on a platter. CLT will be no exception.
Come on ya'll. Bags fly free and they love their customers and most especially, their employees.
And what would look badder than a Purple and Orange NASCAR! Brilliant!
I do not think Doug is even an acceptable CEO. He is a very good financial executive, and would have been better suited to remain CFO, but not CEO.
As I have said elsewhere, I just read Gordon Bethune's book From Worst to First again, and this time I found astounding parallels to today's US. The story of CO in the 1990's shows you that an airline run by spreadsheet cannot succeed. CO had been through BK twice and was turned around by a CEO who was an operations person. You have to think beyond the effects of cost cutting on a spreadsheet. It is a proven fact that happy employees will yield happier customers and happy customers would yield very happy shareholders.
I have to say I think Robert Isom would be a better choice for CEO than Doug at this point.
The key is going to be to listen to the employees in the field and to make it EASIER for them to do their jobs properly and efficiently.
They need to be empowered to resolve customer issues when they occur, to make sure that those customers keep coming back.
I strongly suggest those who haven't read this book give it a shot. Despite all the changes in the world and the industry it is still exceptionally relevant today.
The failed concept of managing by spreadsheet is not unique to the airline industry either....it has a part in the near collapse of many other industries and large companies, such as GM too...
My BEST to you all.
I don't think so. When he first came to the company I had high hopes for him, but lately I have come to think the the heavy handed tactics with the pilots are coming from him, and if not directly, he is allowing his underlings to act that way. The fuel school and the handling of safety questions come to mind and just a few weeks ago he told the rest of the company that they would not be getting their $50 bonus because of "slow taxis and other illegal job actions", although no one has been found guilty of illegal job actions. Divide and conquer.
CallawayGolf
Veteran
- Nov 13, 2009
- 1,920
- 1,961
The heavy handed tactics originate with certain east pilots, not with Isom or Management. Their motivation is rather transparent: they want a new contract and they want Management to accept USAPA's DOH SLI in order to remove the single biggest obstacle to a JCBA. With Management consistently refusing to budge on USAPA's list, which violates the TA, these east pilots turn to sabotage tactics like requesting substantially more fuel than the historical averages and the averages of their peers not involved in such acts. When they didn't get away with that tactic they then moved on to slow taxis, last minute write-ups and the like to negatively effect on-time and completion performance.
Isom sees this data on a regular basis. He is certainly smart enough to discern and distinguish random anomalies from a sustained shift away from historical averages. He knows how to investigate root-cause sources of statistical shifts for these deviations from the historical tolerances. He can even see which specific crews are the greatest contributors to the operational performance deterioration. He can then compare all of this information to the status quo conditions and easily determine that certain east pilots have been engaging in an illegal work action in violation of the RLA.
He doesn't need a judge to validate the data that an illegal action has taken place. He has the data and he knows what it means. It would be the same as if someone ran into my car in the parking lot right in front of me. I saw the event, took down the driver's information, took pictures with my iPhone and also had an eyewitness to the event. If the driver who caused the accident then claims to not be responsible for my wrecked car, do I need a judge to prove my suspicions that he/she drove into my car? I have all of the information and have independent verification by another party so there is zero doubt as to what happened and who did it. Now if I take the driver to court the burden of proof is on me to prove my allegations and get relief from the court, but getting the court to agree with me based on the facts is an entirely different matter than me knowing with absolute certainly what actually took place.
Courts deal in the minutia of provable evidence, legal procedures, past precedence, technical loophole and the biases of the judge; they do not conduct independent investigations and determine fact independent from what the plaintiff and the defendant submit to the court. Thus, they rule on matters of law based on the limited information presented by both sides; they do not declare what the actual facts that may be in dispute actually are.
Thus a dismissal by judge Conrad, unlikely but possible, would not change the facts sitting on Isom's desk. He has the evidence, the data, the independent verification and he knows what those east pilots are doing to damage the company financially. Now if Isom wants those east pilots to stop damaging airline operations, then he must prove to the court what happened and that the company is entitled to injunctive relief based on the law. If the court agrees, then there will be consequences for USAPA and east pilots. If the court does not agree that the company presented irrefutable evidence of the illegal conduct, relief will not be granted. In the latter case, it still doesn't change the facts of what has happened, it just meas that a remedy will not be granted by the courts.
What would you do if you were the COO with irrefutable evidence streaming across your desk since May 1st and millions of dollars were being lost to illegal work slowdowns?
SparrowHawk
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
Dont call me Shirley
Veteran
There is indeed a pilots issues thread, with thousands of comments. Yet the topic somehow comes up in every thread.
CallawayGolf
Veteran
- Nov 13, 2009
- 1,920
- 1,961
Perhaps, but what we have even more of is pilots finding endless ways to try and excuse and deny facts. Doesn't it seem peculiar that there are no traditional USAPA supporters on this board who are willing to admit that they have engaged in a work slowdown or that they know of any of their peers being involved in them either? Instead they look at the company's information regarding a statistical shift in key operational metrics which all began on May 1st and then begin to offer a litany of excuses that could never account for the kind of performance deteriorations that have been reported, analyzed and independently verified. Is there not a single east pilot who would come on here and say that they are in full support of USAPA's DOH objective, but that they neither condone nor support any any illegal actions that constitute a violation of the status quo? Instead we see people turning a blind eye to the facts and then expect us to do the same just because they say so.
Similar threads
