Here''s my thoughts, and take them for what they are worth:
I can''t speak for all our newer employees, but I can tell you that the ones hired after 9/11 are some of the most supportive of the company that I''ve seen in a long time. They know what it feels like to lose a job, and they know that while Southwest may not always pay the highest wages, they offer a level of job security known at no other airline. Some of them have voluntarily given up years of seniority at their airline to come be at Southwest. These employees genuinely are happy to be here, and having seen "the other side", I''ve noticed that they''re less likely to fall into that slump of indifference.
Now, one would assume that the 22% lower labor costs come because we pay our employees less, thus screwing them. But take a good look at the last few contracts: Ramp, Mechanics, etc. All gave good raises in compensation and brought the groups well within the industry standard for their contract group. I would think the flight attendants would get nothing less with their next contract. And while our pilots may not be making the highest wages (although they may be before too much longer), believe me when I say that there''s more to a contract than the base wages. I''ve met many an AA pilot who would have loved to work under Southwest''s contract...and that''s PRIOR to any concessions they took.
There are definitely groups at Southwest who do receive lower pay than their counterparts at the other airlines, but these are mostly non-contract employees who know what they''re getting into, and are willing to accept lower wages in return for a pleasant working environment. In other words, they''re cubicle gophers like me who have seen that hell known as corporate America and decided they didn''t want it, no matter what the paycheck looked like.
In addition, I''ve noticed that Southwest has many stop-loss measures in place that the other airlines don''t. In many cases, I think the lower employment costs are simply because we''re more efficient in terms of scheduling, overtime, etc. We''re always taking costs into consideration in almost every action we do. I''ve seen situations at other airlines that just make me shake my head in wonder when I think about how much money is being wasted. And to be honest, I see considerably less of those situations at Southwest. It''s just part of the culture to think more strategically about how we spend money. In other words, I think we pay comparable wages to our contract employees in most cases, but we don''t waste as much money by having the employment "featherbedding" that I see at some other airlines. This is just my personal observation.
I would take the WSJ article with a very large grain of salt. I get the idea that perhaps it was instigated by some of flight attendant unrest that comes with the contract negotiations. Hey, they''re negotations. Rarely do they all go super smooth, even at Southwest. It''s just part of the business. But I think the reporter who wrote this article picked and chose what information he/she wanted to include, and drew conclusions based on that skewed information. If you only go looking for the negatives, you will find them because that''s all you''ll see.
Personally, this Southwest employee is quite happy, thank you very much. Yes, we''re growing larger, and yes, it does get harder to keep the culture as we get bigger. But we''re working hard at it, and there''s no place I''d rather work. And I actually think the morale now is better than it was in 1999 and 2000, when the money was flowing in like crazy and we were admittedly getting a little too complacent with ourselves. I think 9/11 did a good job of shaking us all up and making us realize that we''ve got something very special here, and nobody wants to ruin that.
