Northwest Flight Attendants Feel The Heat

[dc3fanatic]

That's why all unions, regardless who they are, need to unite as one. Corporate greed is everywhere. That's what I don't understand with this strike. Pilots, FA's and Ramp personel are all going to be affected with this. Their naive if they think their not. These companies will never stop until they brake all unions. The Pilots with their " better then you " attitude needs to stop. They're in the crossheirs too.
Come on people, please see the writing on the wall, all of our careers depend on it!!!

[post="295147"][/post]​

I know it would be great to call this corporate greed, it would justify strikes, etc . . . but this looks more like survival to me. They were loosing money BEFORE the strike. The current business plan doesn't work without massive change. Guess what? Labor is the #1 cost.

Yes, there are other places to cut costs and increase revenue . . . but you can't ignore #1.

If every union got what they really wanted, all they would really get is #7 and start looking for another permanent job.

 

[Kev3188]

Guess what? Labor is the #1 cost.

[post="296048"][/post]​

Not for long.......

 

[High Iron]

I know it would be great to call this corporate greed, it would justify strikes, etc . . . but this looks more like survival to me. They were loosing money BEFORE the strike. The current business plan doesn't work without massive change. Guess what? Labor is the #1 cost.

I don't know you really do know it would be great to call this corporate greed, and you can call it "survival" requiring "massive change", but alas, the devil is in the details. Very important details. Labor is the #1 cost. Guess what? Labor is the #1 source of operations, and by extension, revenue.

Yes, there are other places to cut costs and increase revenue . . . but you can't ignore #1.

Yeah, you can't ignore #1 since it's so irresistable in this present uber-kapitalism climate. I get a kick out of how you glibly state how the other than labor costs are of some "by the way" morsel. We see in the case of US how much a rousing success ( cough cough...er...more like hurl hurl ) of financing a bad business plan via perennial labor cuts was as a stand-alone carrier. The rank and file could have worked gratis and the non-labor costs would have sunk them, let alone the revenue stifling fare structures and operational MO of an arrogant and high-handed management. Did you know that WN's labor, as a percentage of total costs is higher than US'?

If every union got what they really wanted, all they would really get is #7 and start looking for another permanent job.

1) That's what most of them ( NWA mechs ) would get anyway if they went along with these black-hatters

2) What a bunch of utter stereotyping nonesense. OK, I'll humor you: If every corporate robber baron got what they wanted most of us would be living in serfdom. Perhaps they could augment their meagre existance by buying stock in their employers and hoping it goes up when another pay cut or layoff is announced. Sell the seed corn.

What does this mean: I can be just as hyperbolic as you, though I'm aware of it by comparing 2 extremes. I'm not so sure you are aware of it.

 

[dc3fanatic]

US Air's problems do go beyond labor. I doubt anyone will argue that point.

YES, because labor is the #1 expense, it gets attention. It's actually easier to adjust than fuel (unless you can hedge, which is another topic).

If labor had not made concessions, US Airways would have liquidated.

700UW had a good post somewhere here in regards to corporate mistakes. He was right on with a number of missteps. You can blame CCY for a number of missteps that took US Air towards B if you want, but the people you really want to blame are long gone.

That 'massive change' isn't just labor, but everything. Labor feels more painful because it is. It's also the biggest piece of the pie.

 

[Ken MacTiernan]

US Air's problems do go beyond labor. I doubt anyone will argue that point.

YES, because labor is the #1 expense, it gets attention. It's actually easier to adjust than fuel (unless you can hedge, which is another topic).

If labor had not made concessions, US Airways would have liquidated.

700UW had a good post somewhere here in regards to corporate mistakes. He was right on with a number of missteps. You can blame CCY for a number of missteps that took US Air towards B if you want, but the people you really want to blame are long gone.

That 'massive change' isn't just labor, but everything. Labor feels more painful because it is. It's also the biggest piece of the pie.

[post="296155"][/post]​

"I know it would be great to call this corporate greed, it would justify strikes, etc . . . but this looks more like survival to me. They were loosing money BEFORE the strike. The current business plan doesn't work without massive change. Guess what? Labor is the #1 cost.

Yes, there are other places to cut costs and increase revenue . . . but you can't ignore #1.

If every union got what they really wanted, all they would really get is #7 and start looking for another permanent job."


dc3fanatic, had labor stood up at USAir perhaps they would have liquidated. Then again, had EAL employees not struck Lorenzo this and other BBs would be nonexistant. I do not mean to be heartless but I personaly feel that USAir should have liquidated. With the iam's bootlicking there they are to be blamed for the continuing attack on labor in the airlines. The iam said they would strike over a/c being farmed out for heavy maintenance. The company farmed it out and the iam crawled back under their slim covered rock.



And regarding the comment that labor is the #1 cost. This is very true. So?

If a company can not pass along the cost of their labor into their product they have no reason being in bussiness. Has anyone thought that the cost of management's cost is too much? The reason there are low cost carriers is because, in part, labor unions fell asleep at the wheel when concessions were asked for.

AMFA is not asking for more vacation weeks, more holidays or increased medical benefits or pay increases. AMFA is fighting for EVERYONE reading this post regardless of their profession. Once this is understood perhaps labor will have a better chance of survival.

 

[WNJETFIXER]

I know it would be great to call this corporate greed, it would justify strikes, etc . . . but this looks more like survival to me. They were loosing money BEFORE the strike. The current business plan doesn't work without massive change. Guess what? Labor is the #1 cost.

Yes, there are other places to cut costs and increase revenue . . . but you can't ignore #1.

If every union got what they really wanted, all they would really get is #7 and start looking for another permanent job.

[post="296048"][/post]​

Add up all of the salaries and bonuses of all of those CORPORATE MONKIES at NWA and tell me it's not about greed. I call BS :down:

 

[dc3fanatic]

Add up all of the salaries and bonuses of all of those CORPORATE MONKIES at NWA and tell me it's not about greed. I call BS :down:

[post="296228"][/post]​

I would agree it was greed if the companies could at least break even in the current revenue/fuel environment. Fact is, they can't. That's why it's not BS. BTW, mgmt is labor too. By that I mean labor reductions mean all of labor, not just unions.

When layoffs occur at the HQ (corporate) level (and they have), you don't hear the rank and file protests because they lack the representation and contract a union provides. Their employment is 'at will'.

Sorry, It's not BS.

 

[WNJETFIXER]

I would agree it was greed if the companies could at least break even in the current revenue/fuel environment.  Fact is, they can't.  That's why it's not BS.  BTW, mgmt is labor too.  By that I mean labor reductions mean all of labor, not just unions. 

When layoffs occur at the HQ (corporate) level (and they have), you don't hear the rank and file protests because they lack the representation and contract a union provides.  Their employment is 'at will'.

Sorry, It's not BS.

[post="296236"][/post]​

So tell me, how much of a pay cut did Dougie and his Posse take????

 

[Saturdaynite]

So tell me, how much of a pay cut did Dougie and his Posse take????

[post="296239"][/post]​

And the silence is deafening !!!!!

 

[WNJETFIXER]

And the silence is deafening !!!!!

[post="296242"][/post]​

You could almost hear a pin drop!!!!!

 

[dc3fanatic]

So tell me, how much of a pay cut did Dougie and his Posse take????

[post="296239"][/post]​

Douggie and his posse aren't rank and file (right?). They should take pay cuts, but they should also get pay for performance.

So, they should be incentivized to cut costs, regardless of where, to save the airline. I know it sounds cruel to reward an exec for cutting rank and file salaries, but that's an aspect of pay for performance.

They're not doing this to personally piss you off, they're doing it to save the airline and ultimately as many jobs as they can in the airline.

It's a dismal scenario, and it's dismal times in the airline industry.

AND I don't life day in and day out on the message boards, so pin-dropping has more to do with me being away than 'silenced'.

 

[PlayTheOdds]

You guys hammer so hard on management. I myself have had more than my share of management issues, regardless they are the guys that run your company. If you don't like the way they run it why don't you leave? Why haven’t you progressed through the ranks and made the improvements that you feel are necessary?

 

[700UW]

The Membership backed down from striking, they did not want too it was made perfectly clear when Roach, the GLRs and the GCs went around the system to find out what the membership wanted.

The membership was not willing to strike over it and the stage was set for further attacks on the membership.

The IAM won the airbus arbitration but it was a shallow victory as the company filed again and won continued outsourcing of the bus till the final offer was ratified.

 

[WNJETFIXER]

Douggie and his posse aren't rank and file (right?).  They should take pay cuts, but they should also get pay for performance.

So, they should be incentivized to cut costs, regardless of where, to save the airline.  I know it sounds cruel to reward an exec for cutting rank and file salaries, but that's an aspect of pay for performance.

They're not doing this to personally piss you off, they're doing it to save the airline and ultimately as many jobs as they can in the airline.

It's a dismal scenario, and it's dismal times in the airline industry.

AND I don't life day in and day out on the message boards, so pin-dropping has more to do with me being away than 'silenced'.

[post="296248"][/post]​

Ok, I'll agree that they aren't rank and file but that where I have to draw the line.
You say they should get pay for performance, what performance?? The airline in on the verge of falling apart. Rank and file moral is below subpar. Should I go on??

 

[dc3fanatic]

Ok, I'll agree that they aren't rank and file but that where I have to draw the line.
You say they should get pay for performance, what performance?? The airline in on the verge of falling apart. Rank and file moral is below subpar. Should I go on??

[post="296254"][/post]​

You've got to do the best with the hand you're delt. Not every exec has been in their role for 10 years. In the case of US Airways, the unions (probably) forced turnover at the top (Siegel and Cohen). Lakefield wasn't really given a royal flush to play poker with.

Had fuel stayed at $35, you might have a different opinion on performance, because the money available for performance (driven by better pay), better equipment, etc . . . would be different.