SWA will not cut pay to increase profits

[wnbubbleboy]

"The higher pay raises have been funded largely by improvements in productivity," Kelly told reporters in a conference call last week. "I've been very proud of our people and how hard they've worked and the kind of results they've put out.â€￾


Worker productivity has improved 24 percent in the past five years by one measure, he says. In 2001, Southwest had the equivalent of 89 employees for each aircraft; by 2006, that number was 68. Even with bigger workloads, Southwest workers are "the friendliest, most helpful employees in the business," Kelly said, citing customer surveys.




http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/157919.html

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

"The higher pay raises have been funded largely by improvements in productivity," Kelly told reporters in a conference call last week. "I've been very proud of our people and how hard they've worked and the kind of results they've put out.â€￾
Worker productivity has improved 24 percent in the past five years by one measure, he says. In 2001, Southwest had the equivalent of 89 employees for each aircraft; by 2006, that number was 68. Even with bigger workloads, Southwest workers are "the friendliest, most helpful employees in the business," Kelly said, citing customer surveys.
http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/157919.html

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I for one, am GLAD that some of WN's work groups are at...top of scale..in the Industry, BUT, it does'nt take rocket sceince to say, that IF WN's profits start to shrink(think jet-fuel), that the days of large raises, or perhaps zero raises, are upon WN.

NH/BB's

 

[KCFlyer]

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I for one, am GLAD that some of WN's work groups are at...top of scale..in the Industry, BUT, it does'nt take rocket sceince to say, that IF WN's profits start to shrink(think jet-fuel), that the days of large raises, or perhaps zero raises, are upon WN.

NH/BB's

NHBB - There IS a difference between small or no raises, and cuts in pay and benefits.

 

[BoeingBoy]

You're right, KCFlyer, but I'd even go as far as saying that with the enviable position that WN's pilots find themselves in - the highest paid by a pretty wide margin for comparable equipment - there probably won't be anything but small raises at best for years (or at least till the other carrier's pilots catch up). But with the pay scales the WN pilots enjoy, no to small raises is probably a briar patch that most other carrier's pilots would be happy to get thrown in.....

Jim

 

[ramper_in_las]

2008 will be an interesting year with TWU 555 and 556 contracts are expired. We will see if Gary is a man of his word.

 

[KCFlyer]

2008 will be an interesting year with TWU 555 and 556 contracts are expired. We will see if Gary is a man of his word.

Is 556 the FA's union? If so, I was not at all impressed with the way that their spokesman (Thom McDaniel) conducted their negotiations. If there are problems facing WN, my guess is that it will come from the ego of one person. But imagine how good it would look on his resume "Choked and killed the golden goose". I thought this was interesting:

The Union needs your help.

Management is blatantly violating our Contract by having Inflight Leaders signed up as the "D" position on flights. Inflight Leaders are not Flight Attendants as defined in our Contract. Also, remember Inflight Leaders flying in this position block the jumpseat for any Flight Attendant trying to commute.

Inflight Leaders are being encouraged to step up and perform the duties of a Flight Attendant while in the "D" position.

Some examples include announcements, beverage service, securing the cabin. The Union strongly recommends that all Flight Attendants respectfully decline an Inflight Leaders offer to perform any of your Flight Attendant duties.

The Union has filed a grievance on behalf of the entire Membership for this violation of our Contract. If you have an "Inflight Leader" signed up as the "D" position on any flights, please call the Union immediately with the "Leader's" name or Employee number and the flight number so that we can document it.

I'm perhaps the biggest "LUV fan" on this board. But that looks like 5 paragraphs that say "It's not my job". That's the attitude that put a lot of the "legacy" carriers in the shape they found themselves. Time will tell I guess.

 

[ramper_in_las]

Is 556 the FA's union? If so, I was not at all impressed with the way that their spokesman (Thom McDaniel) conducted their negotiations. If there are problems facing WN, my guess is that it will come from the ego of one person. But imagine how good it would look on his resume "Choked and killed the golden goose". I thought this was interesting: I'm perhaps the biggest "LUV fan" on this board. But that looks like 5 paragraphs that say "It's not my job". That's the attitude that put a lot of the "legacy" carriers in the shape they found themselves. Time will tell I guess.

I would have to agree with the 556 leaders. If your riding fourth (D) we all are encouraged to assist with some duties but not to do their job. Its not a matter of "its not my job" but the union doing what it is supposed to and protecting the already existing jobs.

 

[ELP_WN_Psgr]

I would have to agree with the 556 leaders. If your riding fourth (D) we all are encouraged to assist with some duties but not to do their job. Its not a matter of "its not my job" but the union doing what it is supposed to and protecting the already existing jobs.

I'm gonna have to call B.S. on that.

Asking whoever is flying in the 4th hostess seat to do something to enhance or make more pleasant the customer experience is not going to reduce the number of FAs required per flight.

There's either 122 or 137 seaqts on each aircraft. regardless of how you slice it, that is going to take 3 FAs. You can't drop down to 2 and there's never a need for 4.

Thus, an employee....whether an "Inflight Leader" or whatever nonsensical title the Onion wants to call this person is sitting in the 4th hostess seat is asked to do something which benefits the customer....he or she can do so secure in the knowledge that it is not going to result in the reduction of any workforce.

If he or she refuses, the he or she is driving a nail in the coffin, one at a time, of what wasperhaps the best airline the United States has ever seen.

The main problem as I see it is that (a) Parker should have remained President/CEO (B) they should have let the FAs strike and gone ahead and fixed the FA contract several years back and © Colleen and Herb needed to quit being buddy-buddy with all the employee groups. Yes, the employee groups are very productive. They were even more productive when Lamar was President and FAs were making $550 a month.

 

[swflyer]

The main problem as I see it is that (a) Parker should have remained President/CEO (B) they should have let the FAs strike and gone ahead and fixed the FA contract several years back and © Colleen and Herb needed to quit being buddy-buddy with all the employee groups. Yes, the employee groups are very productive. They were even more productive when Lamar was President and FAs were making $550 a month.

We're going to have to disagree on this one ELP :blink:

Point of fact: SWA leadership, by creating the "D" position, has violated the contract they signed. Period. This does NOT shut the door on cool programs that Inflight Leadership can, should and has develop (-ed) with our workgroup.

SWA has enjoyed and will continue to enjoy good relations with labor. Labor can and will continue to uphold contract language. It's just Business, LUV style.

 

[Tanker]

I would have to agree with the 556 leaders. If your riding fourth (D) we all are encouraged to assist with some duties but not to do their job. Its not a matter of "its not my job" but the union doing what it is supposed to and protecting the already existing jobs.

SWA created the "D" position for certain individuals, not for everyone who rides 4th. What 556 is calling "Inflight Leaders" are what SWA officialy call "Inflight Supervisors". These are the people who are tasked by SWA to manage F/As, sorta like Asst Chief Pilots are tasked to manage pilots. At SWA many Inflight Supervisors have no recent experience as F/As. Creating the "D" position is a way for SWA to give managers some idea of the work, and the work environment, that the people that they supervise do.

 

[ramper_in_las]

SWA created the "D" position for certain individuals, not for everyone who rides 4th. What 556 is calling "Inflight Leaders" are what SWA officialy call "Inflight Supervisors". These are the people who are tasked by SWA to manage F/As, sorta like Asst Chief Pilots are tasked to manage pilots. At SWA many Inflight Supervisors have no recent experience as F/As. Creating the "D" position is a way for SWA to give managers some idea of the work, and the work environment, that the people that they supervise do.

TWU 556 is still protecting its members jobs. What will happen is on vacated positions the company will fill them with the supervisors in order to get the plane out on time. The company need to follow the letter of the law of the current 556 contract. Hence the grievance.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

NHBB - There IS a difference between small or no raises, and cuts in pay and benefits.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

KCF,
YES, your right.

Actually, I don't think ANY of us, will be able to truly judge raises, profits(pro/con) until WN reports a full year AFTER the fuel Hedges expire !

NH/BB's

 

[ramper_in_las]

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

KCF,
YES, your right.

Actually, I don't think ANY of us, will be able to truly judge raises, profits(pro/con) until WN reports a full year AFTER the fuel Hedges expire !

NH/BB's

hedges are around for at least another 3 years...

 

[Flying Photog]

It absolutely kills me how unionized Employees are being told to decline help to do their jobs. :down: The silent elephant in the room is going to start trumpeting its horn soon...

 

[Tanker]

TWU 556 is still protecting its members jobs. What will happen is on vacated positions the company will fill them with the supervisors in order to get the plane out on time. The company need to follow the letter of the law of the current 556 contract. Hence the grievance.

If a supervisor flies any position but "D" then I agree grieve it. The only way I can see a flight supervisor working a position other than "D" is if the F/A who was scheduled to work that position gets pulled with full pay, not to fill a vacancy. I still don't see the problem with them flying "D" with a full F/A crew.