United Air's Family Is Anything But

DCAflyer

Veteran
Aug 27, 2002
821
0
United Air''s Family Is Anything But
By EDWARD WONG - NY Times 10/6/02
SAN FRANCISCO -- Why does Patrick Palazzolo gripe about his job?
Mr. Palazzolo, a pilot for 24 years at United Airlines, seems to lead the kind of life that drives people mad with envy. His work takes him to the far corners of the globe, keeps him in the cockpit less than 60 hours a month, on average, and provides him with an annual salary exceeding that of 95 percent of all household incomes in America. All that has allowed him to settle down with his wife, Hilda, in a tidy suburb near here, and to put two sons through college.
But Mr. Palazzolo is relieved that those sons are not following in his footsteps.
He says that he believes in his heart of hearts that United is still suffering from a worker-management relationship that has turned sour — often downright ugly — in the last two decades.
Management needs to take a clean chalkboard and build a new airline, Mr. Palazzolo said recently while sitting in uniform in a hotel lobby here, awaiting a five-hour shift aboard a Boeing 777.
His attitude is typical not only of the privileged pilots at United, most of whom earn six-figure salaries, but also of the less-pampered machinists and flight attendants. Together, those three labor groups account for more than 80 percent of the 83,000 workers at United. As the company, which is based in Chicago, bleeds billions of dollars each year and tries to avoid issuing itself a ticket to bankruptcy court, its unions have only grudgingly considered management''s cost-cutting demands. They did agree late last month to offer $1 billion in annual concessions over five years, but that falls far short of the $1.5 billion over six years that the company asked of them in August. And the unions have not worked out among themselves just how the concessions would be divvied up.
Last week, Glenn F. Tilton, the new chief executive of UAL, United''s parent, met with labor leaders to discuss the unions'' proposal. His predecessor, John W. Creighton Jr., who served an interim stint of less than a year, had said that if the unions did not agree to deep concessions, United would fail to get a $1.8 billion federal loan guarantee needed to keep its planes in the air. Yet United''s employees, who own 55 percent of the company, refuse to meet management''s terms, despite the fact that its two most powerful labor groups — the pilots and machinists — have the most generous contracts in the industry and one seat each on the 12-member board.
How did United, once regarded as a potential model for employee-owned companies, end up on this tortuous path?
The problems were endemic well before the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, shook the airline industry.
Executives at United have traditionally blamed what they called self-serving attitudes of the unions for pushing the airline''s costs sky high.
But union leaders and some industry experts say the roots of labor intransigence lie in disastrous business decisions made by management that alienated employees. The poorly structured employee stock ownership plan has also failed to immediately benefit — and thus motivate — workers. And now, there is rampant fear among the unions that management and the Bush administration are using the federal loan guarantee program as leverage to crack down on labor.
Even during the current crisis, it has been tough to persuade the unions to agree on solutions, primarily because of labor politics and income disparities among the different employee groups.
The unions pulled together to offer their concession package, but that does not mean they will necessarily forge ahead toward a common goal. They are siblings in a family more akin to the Sopranos than the Cleavers: sometimes squabbling, sometimes supportive, but usually looking out for their own interests.
What they have in common, though, is a deep-seated distrust of management, and they have their list of suggestions for Mr. Tilton, the company''s fourth chief executive in seven years: replace the old-school executives with fresh blood, form task forces that will seek advice from workers and, above all, overhaul the culture of United by impressing on workers that they are the airline''s owners, responsible for its fortunes.
As shareholder-owners, we don''t have the voice we need, said Charlie Lincoln, a lead mechanic and shop steward of the local chapter of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. United''s executives, he said, need to show the people they''re willing to listen to us.
Mr. Tilton, a former ChevronTexaco vice chairman who lives in the exclusive Pacific Heights neighborhood here, declined to be interviewed for this article. As he and other executives negotiate for further concessions, they have been extremely guarded in their public comments on labor tensions.
In a voice mail message to employees last week, Mr. Tilton said, In the long term, our cooperation and our alignment will lead to a lasting advantage for United.
If workers'' perspectives at the United hub here, the airline''s second-largest in number of employees, are a good gauge of overall labor sentiment, any immediate concessions should be regarded as little more than a quick financial Band-Aid. Knocking down deep-rooted cultural barriers, a requisite for true recovery, is never simple at a plodding leviathan like United.
The company''s problems are reflected in the market valuation of its publicly traded shares, which tumbled from a high of $5.2 billion in 1997 to a paltry $124 million today. Though United is generally considered to have the best route structure in the industry, it lost a record $2.1 billion last year on revenue of $16.1 billion and has lost $851 million in the first half of this year on revenue of $7.1 billion. That set of figures is among the worst in airline history.
That was far from what the employees envisioned in 1995, when Gerald Greenwald, a former Chrysler executive, signed on as chief executive to guide the airline as it put in place the employee stock ownership plan. The pilots, machinists and salaried nonunion employees had formulated the plan the previous year with Stephen M. Wolf, Mr. Greenwald''s predecessor. Those employee groups agreed to give up $4.8 billion in pay cuts, raises and pension contributions in exchange for 55 percent of the company stock and one seat each on the board. The pilots would own about half of the employees'' shares.
Though the flight attendants drew other employees'' ire by refusing to join the plan — because of what they saw as a lack of job protection — expectations still ran high. Mr. Palazzolo referred to that time as a new dawn.
There were extremely high hopes that Gerald Greenwald could change the culture, the culture that had been calcified here over the years, the `us versus them'' mentality, Mr. Palazzolo said. He said all the right things. But he made a fatal mistake, which is he didn''t clean house. The middle management structure, and most senior managers around him, never changed.
Mr. Palazzolo and many other United workers blame the old-school managers for not following through on the seamless contracts that Mr. Greenwald promised the employees. The idea was to have negotiators from both sides work together to hammer out new contracts well before the old ones expired.
First up were the pilots.
Management and the Air Line Pilots Association began talks in December 1998, way ahead of the contract expiration on April 12, 2000. Then Mr. Greenwald retired at age 63, and in came James E. Goodwin.
Mr. Goodwin, a congenial West Virginian, quickly turned his attention to buying US Airways, which was being run by Mr. Wolf.
When the pilots found out, the contract negotiations fell apart. They feared that many United jobs would be given to pilots at US Airways with more seniority.
No industry labor group has more at stake in keeping jobs than the pilots, who have a much tougher time than other employees finding comparable jobs. The most senior United pilots make more than $300,000 a year for working an average of 80 hours a month, though often less than two-thirds of that is actually spent in the cockpit. Many pilots have second careers or, in the case of Mr. Palazzolo, spend long stretches of time with their families. Pilots argue that their high pay is warranted because of their layover days away from home and the many job demands, like meeting stringent medical requirements.
With all that at stake, and having just seen pilots at Delta Air Lines negotiate high wages, the United pilots dug in their heels during talks. April 12 came and went. The pilots refused to pick up overtime and, executives say, made coordinated efforts to slow down operations. Flights were delayed for hours, passengers became irate, and United says it lost $700 million during the slowdown. Ryan Murphy, council representative of the local chapter of the Association of Flight Attendants here, said he hid in the cockpit once a flight landed to avoid the glares and invective from passengers.
In August 2000, to appease the pilots, Mr. Goodwin handed them what is still the best contract in the industry: an immediate pay raise of 22 to 28 percent, and a 4.5 percent annual raise through 2004. Executives at rival companies were shocked. Even pilots have shaken their heads, in retrospect.
By the end of the summer, Goodwin backed up a Brink''s truck to the dock and dumped out the cash just to keep the employees happy, Mr. Palazzolo said.
T. Scott Cooper, vice chairman of the local chapter of the pilots'' union and a first officer on Airbus A320''s, said, Had there been a good faith contract proposal, we would have settled for less.
Critics say the pilots were just plain greedy.
But because they received such a generous contract and need to keep their jobs at United, the pilots are now more willing than the other labor groups to make concessions.
Yet much bad blood remains. In July 2001, the Justice Department blocked the US Airways deal on antitrust grounds, a decision that cost United $116 million and that workers say showed them that management was squandering the money they had given up in exchange for stock. That blunder, they say, was compounded by management''s decision that summer to pour millions into a new business-jet division later called Avolar, which United soon wrote off as a $102 million loss. United''s plan to use nonunion flight attendants at Avolar had also infuriated the union workers.
Executives say those business decisions were viewed at the time as moves to increase shareholder value, for outsiders as well as employee stockholders.
In theory, the employee stock ownership plan should have provided enough incentive for the pilots and the machinists to keep the airline running smoothly, even if it meant settling for lower salaries or giving concessions. After all, many pilots saw their piles of stock turn into gold mines during the airline''s boom years. Mr. Palazzolo said his 4,627 shares were worth almost $390,000 in late April 1999.
But those riches were on paper only. Employees cannot cash out on their stock until they leave United, so workers continue to look to their paychecks as their primary compensation. (Mr. Palazzolo''s shares are now worth around $10,000.) There is no annual profit-sharing payment, an incentive that some newer airlines have set up. The ownership plan has also done nothing to ease employees'' fears about job security, or to erase the traditional antagonism between management and the unions.
Corey Rosen, executive director of the National Center for Employee Ownership in Oakland, Calif., said that to get past the culture problem, you can start by trying to get a commitment by management and labor that they''ll do this.
But peace will continue to elude United if its unions do not also iron out their conflicts with one another. The pilots, criticizing other unions for not hopping more enthusiastically on the concession bandwagon, say the machinists'' union agreed only reluctantly to the recent collective concession package. It''s hard for us pilots to understand why the machinists'' union leadership would rather let the company slide into bankruptcy than try to save it, one said.
Such differences have cropped up in the past. When the proposal to buy US Airways was put up for a board vote, for instance, the machinists'' representative voted for it while the pilots'' representative voted against it. One pilot said the machinists supported the merger because their union worried that a rival, the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association, would take over representation of United''s machinists. A merger of United and US Airways would have allowed the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, the current machinists'' union at both airlines, to consolidate its members, shoring up its defenses.
Leaders of the machinists at United acknowledge that the A.M.F.A. still poses a threat, but they say that has had little influence on the current concession talks.

Instead, the machinists say they have been reluctant to give concessions in part because senior managers want to outsource an increasing amount of work to cheaper, nonunion subcontractors, said Rich Bourque, president of the local in San Francisco. Besides, he said, the union already agreed last spring to defer $500 million in retroactive pay that United owed to its members. And machinists are still angry that United went to federal court two years ago to get a restraining order against mechanics whom executives accused of staging a work slowdown during contract negotiations.
Items that may seem minuscule in the bigger picture can contribute to the fire, Mr. Bourque said. You can have all these little fires contributing to one big inferno.
After two years working without a contract, the machinists eventually negotiated industry-leading wages, with entry pay rates jumping as much as 43 percent and top pay rates jumping as much as 38 percent. But they still have much less incentive than the pilots to give concessions.
For one thing, their salaries have always been much lower. Mr. Bourque, for example, said he made about $54,000 a year in 1998, the last full year he was an aircraft and engine inspector. With 34 years in the industry, he lives with his wife, Karen, in a home he bought in the mid-1980''s in the hills south of San Francisco. Soaring housing costs have left many machinists short of cash, he said.
And machinists generally can find comparable jobs in other industries — perhaps for a bit less money but probably with better work hours, Mr. Bourque said.
The flight attendants have been the most vocal about not giving concessions. They never negotiated an industry-leading contract, nor did they take part in the stock ownership plan. Their pay scale ranges from about $23,000 to $50,000, including overtime and other compensation. Moreover, flight attendants often complain that they are treated with the least respect of any of the three. They point out, for instance, that pilots are allowed to walk out of an airplane holding a bottle of water from the pantry, while a flight attendant could be dismissed for doing the same thing.
We feel we do not have to take concessions, said Terry Ann Sousoures, vice president of the local chapter of the flight attendants'' union who has 18 years at United, as she sat in a cramped union office on the airport mezzanine. The majority of flight attendants can go out and get another job and maybe make what we do today.
Mr. Murphy, the council representative of the local, quickly added that, as a recent college graduate from Minnesota, he was making only around $25,000 a year — barely a living wage in the Bay Area.
He said that he and other flight attendants would be forced to confront two tough questions if deep concessions were asked of them: why stay in the profession, and why stay at a dysfunctional company like United? You come to work each day and you hear all these rumors, Mr. Murphy said. My feelings change by the day. Are we saving the company, or are we selling ourselves out?
 
Reading this stuff is not even worth the energy anymore.

Same old story: employees bickering about how big their slice of the pie will be. Pointing fingers.

Don't they notice the ingredients to bake that pie are no longer available?

You can only stretch a recipe so far...
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/7/2002 7:20:45 PM AtlanticBeach wrote:

When United had their major disagreements in the "Summer of He11", flights were delayed for 8+ hours by maintenance, then cancelled when the crews timed out. Passengers worldwide were inconvenienced and lives disrupted (Had a fellow pax on IAD-CDG miss the hearing to adopt a child).


I'm not trying to be difficult, but why did your friend book on UAL during that time? As bad as that summer was, it didn't happen overnight. There was a long escalation, and unfortunately, bargain hunters made the prob worse by continueing to fly UAL despite the problems Had many folks just simply bought a ticket on another airline, you can be sure the disruptions would have ended sooner and been much less severe. Dutta was a numbers man unfortuanately, and I think he was willing to watch our operational performance go into the toilet as long as the yields were still good.

During US Airways' difficulties this year, you set records for quality of service from each and every group of employees.

Quite a difference.

There IS quite a differance. The differance is UAL IS currently experiencing MANY of the same issues as U and if you look at the current operational statistics (go to DOT.GOV), you'll see that UAL is at the top of on-time performance despite these difficult times. Compare apples to apples please

----------------
[/blockquote]
 
US Airways Breaks Records

ARLINGTON (theHub.com) - US Airways’ system wide performance for September 2002 broke a decade of company on-time departure and arrival records, and now stands as the best in US Airways’ history. This news comes just a day after the Department of Transportation listed US Airways as best in the industry in August for on-time performance and baggage handling.

In September, flights departing on schedule were at 83.2 percent, a full nine percentage points above the previous internal record of 74.2 percent set in September 2001. Flights leaving within five minutes of scheduled departure averaged 89.7 percent, well above the 82.8 percent record set in September 1997.

On-time arrivals rose above 90 percent for the first time in company history, with 91.9 percent of all US Airways flights arriving within 14 minutes of schedule – the time frame used by DOT to establish on-time performance. The official DOT on-time performance was 90.9 percent. This figure excludes all international and most Caribbean flights. The previous records of 88.6 percent and 89.1 percent, respectively, had been set in May 1993.

“All of our employees have joined together to run the most flawless operation in US Airways’ history,†said Al Crellin, executive vice president of operations. At a time when our company and the entire industry are facing extraordinary challenges, performance like last month’s is a testament to the cooperation and professionalism of every member of the US Airways team. On-time performance shows dedication to our customers, as well as to our cost-saving efforts.â€

In yesterday’s DOT report of its monthly scorecard for August, US Airways’ arrivals were at 85.9 percent -- the best of the 10 carriers surveyed. In the fewest mishandled bags category, there were just 2.81 reports per 1,000 passengers -- also the best results for the industry.

“Your performance is nothing short of incredible and the August numbers are the culmination of month after month of outstanding work on your part,†President and CEO Dave Siegel said in a Special Bulletin. To acknowledge exceptional performance, US Airways announced yesterday it is providing all employees with two First Class upgrades, to be mailed soon to employees’ homes. The upgrades can be used on any domestic or Caribbean routes and are valid through Dec. 31, 2003.
 
I respectfully disagree with your opinion.

When United had their major disagreements in the Summer of He11, flights were delayed for 8+ hours by maintenance, then cancelled when the crews timed out. Passengers worldwide were inconvenienced and lives disrupted (Had a fellow pax on IAD-CDG miss the hearing to adopt a child).

During US Airways' difficulties this year, you set records for quality of service from each and every group of employees.

Quite a difference. It is worth the energy to read the article as a negative counterpoint to what is happening at US Airways. While the discussions on this board became heated at times, you continued to do your jobs exceedingly well.

Congratulations and thank you.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/7/2002 7:50:10 PM Busdrvr wrote:

I'm not trying to be difficult, but why did your "friend" book on UAL during that time? As bad as that summer was, it didn't happen overnight. There was a long escalation, and unfortunately, "bargain hunters" made the prob worse by continueing to fly UAL despite the "problems" Had many folks just simply bought a ticket on another airline, you can be sure the disruptions would have ended sooner and been much less severe.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Interesting attitude from an 'employee owners' of UAL.
And yet people still wonder why UAL is losing money.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/7/2002 8:23:06 PM chipmunn wrote:

To acknowledge exceptional performance, US Airways announced yesterday it is providing all employees with two First Class upgrades, to be mailed soon to employees’ homes. The upgrades can be used on any domestic or Caribbean routes and are valid through Dec. 31, 2003.

----------------
[/blockquote]

KUDOS!!! Looks like at better than 90% that you will edge us out for the month of Sept too! But I got to say, how generous, two free upgrades?! I'd expect him to give you unlimited space A up front. After all, who is the REAL financers of your recovery?
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/7/2002 9:45:40 PM FrugalFlyer wrote:

Interesting attitude from an 'employee owners' of UAL.
And yet people still wonder why UAL is losing money.

----------------
[/blockquote]

I'm not defending ANYTHING that happened during the summer of 2000, but would YOU have bought as ticket on a flight that was EXTREMELY time critical if you KNEW before you bought it that the company was having big labor problems? That just ain't smart! But then again frugal flyers across the country buy tickets on the cheapest airline they can find (cheapest employees, oldest jets, lowest maint costs) so why should I wonder.
 
Three things to say about the Family story:

1. There's no new news here, just the same rehashed stuff. It's a somewhat accurate but extremely simplified chronicle of what has gone on at United over the past 10 years. You can't sincerely cover the issues with anything less than the volume of a book, certainly not in 2 or 3 pages. Listening to one or two peoples views out of a company this size is like viewing the Grand Canyon through a peephole a foot away from your eye.

2. I think everyone agrees that there were some disaterously costly business decisions made recently but where does this Nine Billion Dollar recovery figure come from? It almost sounds as though it's enough to cover the continuation of disastoroustly costly business decisions in the future. I mean, is it pedicated on the costs of doing business over the past two or three years? Because we don't need to throw that much money down a hole to run this business.

3. As I said in #1: this is old news. No one in the media or the public has a clue of what the current situation is. The fact is that contracts have been settled (finally) and all of these issues and figures from summers long past that are being examined have no relevance anymore. I think it will begin to show soon but - they'd sure like to get their hands on that Nine Billion Dollars first.....
 
Busdrvr...

This is a real nice gesture from the Company considering the past management-labor relationship at US. Sure it isn't much, but we are in Chapter 11 for heaven's sake. Dave says he would like to work out some sort of program when the Company gets back on it's feet. This is actually worth up to $150 or so if used to upgrade to Envoy on Trans-Atlantic runs, $60 for domestic. Not bad for really doing what we are just paid to do, and have always done. Beats what Wolf and Gangwal ever did.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/7/2002 10:36:53 PM Busdrvr wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/7/2002 9:45:40 PM FrugalFlyer wrote:

Interesting attitude from an 'employee owners' of UAL.
And yet people still wonder why UAL is losing money.

----------------
[/blockquote]

I'm not defending ANYTHING that happened during the summer of 2000, but would YOU have bought as ticket on a flight that was EXTREMELY time critical if you KNEW before you bought it that the company was having big labor problems? That just ain't smart! But then again frugal flyers across the country buy tickets on the cheapest airline they can find (cheapest employees, oldest jets, lowest maint "costs") so why should I wonder.
----------------
[/blockquote]


Hmmm, Sherlock... maybe because the airlines are essentially an oligopoly, and United is often the only choice for travelers in the large markets of SFO, LAX, DEN, ORD, IAD, etc. for certain times? Airlines are very price competitive, but when it comes to schedule it's totally different. And business travelers didn't book travel on other carriers' whose connections were significantly more inconvenient, in spite of the job action. What a question.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/8/2002 7:22:23 PM N230UA wrote:

Hmmm, Sherlock... maybe because the airlines are essentially an oligopoly, and United is often the only choice for travelers in the large markets of SFO, LAX, DEN, ORD, IAD, etc. for certain times? Airlines are very price competitive, but when it comes to schedule it's totally different. And business travelers didn't book travel on other carriers' whose connections were significantly more inconvenient, in spite of the job action. What a question.
----------------
[/blockquote]

And you're calling me Sherlock? If we had that much control over a market segment, we'd be ROLLING in cash now instead of burning through it. Community college? Tell me which markets we have over 50% of. Denver? That's probably the only one. And you have to connect from DEN to get anywhere overseas ANYWAY. If you believe that the summer of 2000 was a job action, then you need to understand that a job action is ONLY successful when the cost of that action to the company is greater than the cost of meeting the demands of the union. That's why the Comair strike lasted soooo long. DAL was able to simply reroute the through pax through another hub and still had enough non striking capacity into cincinati to serve the O and D market. Had the consumer not bought tickets on UAL during that period, the company and the union would have come to an agreement MUCH earlier. Again, not condoning the actions of Management OR the union when it went beyond legal and ethical boundaries.
 
[blockquote]
----------------


[/blockquote]


I'm not defending ANYTHING that happened during the summer of 2000, but would YOU have bought as ticket on a flight that was EXTREMELY time critical if you KNEW before you bought it that the company was having big labor problems? That just ain't smart! But then again frugal flyers across the country buy tickets on the cheapest airline they can find (cheapest employees, oldest jets, lowest maint "costs") so why should I wonder.
----------------
[/blockquote]

1) I hold both the employees and management responsible for the events of the summer of 2000.

2) Would I buy a ticket on UAL in the summer of 2000 if I knew they were having labor trouble? Possibly, it would depend on many things, departure/arrival time, non-stop vs. connecting, frequent flyer program (was I a UAL member or OAL ), and ofcourse price. And, if I had a custody hearing/court date in another country I would at least schedule to arrive a few days in advance.
(BTW labor vs. management antics like the summer of 2000 generally tend to drive customers away and do generate any support or sympathy for either).

3) Nice cheap shot (frugal shot) at people who buy discount tickets though.
Did you ever think that perhaps a reason some people buy discount tickets is because they don't have the kind of salary a pilot at UAL has? [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/1.gif']
IMHO, people like me, tend to buy cheap tickets because it is what they can afford. When my income improves I'll be more likely buy business class tickets or even, gulp, heaven forbid, pay walk up fares. For now I try to make my travel plans in advance and be flexible. I refuse to be gouged. For now if I need to get to Chicago I will definitely compare the price of UA/AC from YYZ-ORD AND the price of SW from DTW-MDW then make my decision! (Heck, it may even turn out that your mortal enemy NW, an outfit that has old airplanes, will have the lowest fare as well (DTW-ORD)).

[img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/1.gif']
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/8/2002 8:11:12 PM FrugalFlyer wrote:

(BTW labor vs. management antics like the summer of 2000 generally tend to drive customers away and do generate any support or sympathy for either).

Let's disregard UALs prob a few years ago and just look at the big picture. Any job action is less about who garners the most sympathy and more about who is losing the most (management or workers). If there was a job action during the summer of 2000, it's purpose WAS to drive away customers. The fact that the public was still buying tickets only extended the situation and exacerbated the problem. It's funny though how short the publics memory is though. UAL seems to be the root of all evil while NWA's Pilots had a long strike (97?), AMR's pilots had an illegal sickout (not to mention the prob with the mechs in NYC recently), and DALs Comair division had an extended strike

3) Nice cheap shot (frugal shot) at people who buy discount tickets though.
Did you ever think that perhaps a reason some people buy discount tickets is because they don't have the kind of salary a pilot at UAL has?

LOL, if it makes you feel any better, it appears UALs workgroups won't be able to afford walkup tickets either, after the paycut's we're about to take.

IMHO, people like me, tend to buy cheap tickets because it is what they can afford. When my income improves I'll be more likely buy business class tickets or even, gulp, heaven forbid, pay walk up fares. For now I try to make my travel plans in advance and be flexible. I refuse to be gouged.

Then it seems that the gov dropping the 25% tax on airline tickets would be the best solution to get america flying again. The simple truth is we're selling tickets on average for less than it costs to fly. Did you know that it costs $50 more to fly on Jet Blue from NYC to DEN than to SLC which is nearly an hour further? Did you know Jet fuel costs about 20% more in DEN than in Dallas? The government (to include city and state governments) has unfortunately seen the airlines as a cash cow and is extorting HUGE sums from us. It almost seems that they targeted the most successful airlines for the biggest hits.

For now if I need to get to Chicago I will definitely compare the price of UA/AC from YYZ-ORD AND the price of SW from DTW-MDW then make my decision! (Heck, it may even turn out that your mortal enemy NW, an outfit that has old airplanes, will have the lowest fare as well (DTW-ORD)).

I'd expect you to shop around. I'd also hope you'd be willing to spend a couple extra bucks ($10-20) to get on the airline that has a meal, more legroom, newer, more enviromentally friendly equipment, cool pilots like me, ect. Unfortunately, most folks are starting to see an airline seat as a commodity. They don't differentiate. If the trend continues, expect the flying experience to get MUCH more painful. BTW, I don't hate NWA. I've got lots of buddies who fly there (and a bunch more who were furloughed from there). I do have a prob with employees from other airlines that seem to find joy and happiness with the BK of other airlines and the financial ruin of it's employees. It's ironic some of those comments were made days before NWA announced MORE F/A furloughs there.

----------------
[/blockquote]
 
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/8/2002 9:44:27 PM Busdrvr wrote:[BR]----------------[BR][BR]I'd expect you to shop around. I'd also hope you'd be willing to spend a couple extra bucks ($10-20) to get on the airline that has... cool pilots like me [BR][BR]----------------[BR][BR]
[P]Finally!! Someone who knows a competitive advantage when he sees it! [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/9.gif'] [img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/9.gif'] [/P]
[P]Busdrvr--[/P]
[P]I really enjoyed that! Nice to see someone with a sense of humor in these trying times. Best of luck to you and everyone at United.[/P]
[P]Marky[/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]
 
Back
Top