2011 Annual Leadershipship Conference

[Glucose Intolerant]

You want the industry wages???? then let's start acting like we deserve them. Our employees can't wear the proscribed uniform (as ugly as it might be, however, many people wear it and looked polished and some wearing the exact same uniform look like they rolled out of bed). Stop standing at the check in counter talking on your phone with customers waiting or walking through the terminal with a back pack strapped on and talking on the phone. We look like a joke.........and it's about personal pride, not about anything else.

Everyone blames this company on absolutely everything........a Leadership Conference???? Are you kidding me???? I worked for Xerox for years and every company has yearly meetings.............it's just not us..............get with it and stop blaming everyone else!!!

Xerox - Wow - I bet you wish you never had left.
There seems to be a lot of blame to go around......these days.
You are right about one thing: It is about personal pride - and what you can do (and doing right the first time).

With most successful and profitable companies, accountability and sacrifice usually starts at the top - except US Airways.
Tempe feels it it should start at the bottom where all the little people are, much in the tradition of "trickle down economics".

At this "profitable" airline, management blames labor (while benefiting from their sacrifice to "show" paper profits. Labor then blames management when they realize they have been manipulated and had their pay, work rules, (and pensions on the East) stripped away just to consummate a merger. They no longer trust management, which results in low moral, which then results in no combined contract for the pilots and flight attendants. All the while, the management team still can't seem to do anything right - the first time, but still thinks they are doing a remarkable job and operating a great airline.

Are they? Guess that depends on how low your definition of successful IS.

Is this the same corporate traits that make SWA successful (the one PSA showed them)?

Not Exactly -

Much like everything they do - they did it very simply: Call it the: "1-2-3 Plan"

1. People (hire employees right then take good care of them) +
2. Passengers (employees will take great care of) =
3. Profits (people love your employees and have a good time and that results in)

I am sure our management team laughs at the simplicity - but it works - and it is far side better than our formula - if we even have one.

A lot of people here are still drinking the Cactus Kool Aide, and for reasons unknown to any logical mind, feel that Tempe is doing a great job. They enjoy being a participant in the (ongoing 5 year+) corporate version of the "emperor's new clothes". Why? I guess they just don't know any better. Probably the same people that have been in fear everyday the past 26 years of losing their job. They also think "Cross Utilization" worked and should be brought back.

OK that's harsh - we all know cross utilization was a complete failure.

The economy is bad right now, and probably will be bad again, but sooner or later - it will get better. But in this downturn that doesn't mean we all should watch our pay and work rules be decimated any further. I am personally not willing to concede any more pay, work rules, or self dignity just to say I fly for an airline any longer. But then again - that's me.

Lot of rhetoric about "let the market decide", "what the market will bear", Larry Kudlow, Blah, Blah, Blah

Well this is from Business 101:
If you can't make a profit providing a service, without the employees making up for the difference (monetarily) - your not a successful business.
PROFITABLE MAYBE - BUT NOT SUCCESSFUL.

This management team proved last year you can be profitable yet still be unsuccessful - we live with that result everyday we come to work. And truthfully, if asked again, some would sacrifice (some never had to) again to keep this company afloat, and their job. But it's really time for this airline to start working on their version of the "1-2-3" equation - especially the first step. This entire work group is like a powder keg. Time to put the kid gloves on and start providing your employees something other than the lip service for their hard work, dedication, and sacrifice. Just a thought... and here's one for all "those underpaid MBA's that US Airways is in fear of losing to the competition if their not compensated competitively" (they feel the same way too?) ......

Come up with a plan to charge the passengers what it actually costs to fly somewhere (making at least a profit and not violating the Sherman Act) without all the added BS fees - it really, really ticks people off. Even more so when they are forced to sit in one of our uncomfortable planes with no amenities for 5 hours.

Solve that problem. Then we will talk.

Until then - your just another over paid corporate mediocrity that's getting wealthy on the back's of their employees while waiting for the payday of yet another merger - God Help Us.

 

[Art at ISP]

Glucose Intolerant,

You are so on the money it sounds like it could have been one of my posts.

I have ALWAYS advocated that the 1-2-3 Plan was the way to go--here and with any company with the desire to succeed.

If you have HAPPY employees, they are more motivated to make the customers happy.

If you have HAPPY customers, they come back more often, and stay longer....meaning more revenue, and generally MORE profits.

The issue of pricing the product, while it is key in this argument, is market driven, so unless ALL airlines start pricing their product with consideration of the true cost of providing the service, I doubt just US will do so. I fear it would take some form of re-regulation to accomplish that, although at the end of the day I guess survival of the fittest would be appropriate.

Regardless of what they think, ancillary fees are a band-aid on a hemorrhage - they may work for a short time but they do not address the CORE issues which must be resolved in order to have sustained profitability.

Again if it is not on a spreadsheet, they can't see it......and as long as they keep trying for a 3-2-1 plan, they will continue to have problems.

Thanks for a GREAT post.

 

[LD3]

So I suggest DP to get busy and make sure this company stays profitable, that's what he gets paid for.

How many more fees can he put on the customer?

 

[700UW]

Maybe he will start charging the employees to come to work, make flight crews pay for their own hotel rooms.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Maybe he will start charging the employees to come to work, make flight crews pay for their own hotel rooms.

I'm still waiting for them to require us (the flight crews) to purchase tickets on the flights we operate.

 

[Art at ISP]

I'm still waiting for them to require us (the flight crews) to purchase tickets on the flights we operate.

Shhhhh....don't give them any ideas.......besides-how would they upgrade you?

 

[Jester]

Oddly enough, just spot checking, US is about where the other carriers are in RASM - slightly lower than some and slightly higher than some - so there is no 13% RASM disadvantage. What that means is that US is getting about the same fares and load factor as the other legacies (those two factors determine RASM).

Captain Jim,

I would respectfully disagree with your analysis of RASM in large part because it fails to recognize the average segment length of US flights relative to the average mainline carriers. From what I recall US had the lowest of average stage lengths in the industry for mainline aircreft, thus the RASM tends to be higher (and incidentially so do the costs from landing fees, ground personel, higher fuel usage, etc.)

If you are going to make a comparison, then it would probably be better to use Stage Length Adjusted Passenger Revenue per Equivalent Seat Mile (SLA PRESM) in order to obtain a better comparison. I am not saying that your conclusions are entirely wrong, as they may, in fact, be correct, but I know that the difference between RASM and SLA PRESM can be greatly effected by the average segment lengths.

So Confers Jester.

 

[flyus2]

Pullup,

I could not have said it better myself. LUV does value their employees as assets rather than liabilities--which contributes quite a bit to their success.
This as also CO's philosophy pre merger, and it made them one of the best of the legacy carriers.

When you value your employees AND your customers, you have a much better chance at succeeding in any business...even this one.

If this (mis)management team can't see something on a spreadsheet they just can't understand it...they'd like to think outside the box, but the box they made for themselves is as big if not bigger than the whole company...

With proper management and a clear identity (they are still trying to be a hybrid LCC/Legacy which will not work), this company could be even more successful than it thinks it is today.

My BEST to you all...

I just have to add....we had a supervisor position open at our base recently. Do you know how many Southwest supervisors applied???/ I can tell you it was alot. We always think the grass is always greener.....but it is not!!!! Just ask all of the new hire f/as coming on board what airline they came from..................you'd be suprised. If they think we are a step up....oh dear..............what was it like there??? We are not that different folks!!!

 

[BoeingBoy]

Captain Jim,

I would respectfully disagree with your analysis of RASM in large part because it fails to recognize the average segment length of US flights relative to the average mainline carriers.

You're right to a point - stage length adjusting the RASM puts US about 2/3 of the way down the list of airlines that hub in the very large cities (which would include B6 and FL - low cost carriers). But when adjusted for employee count and stage length, US is about the same position for compensation (and B6 and FL are again below US). In short, while US has a disadvantage in absolute revenue, it has an offsetting advantage in employee compensation. And as US grows TA ops as A332's arrive the advantage in employee costs will increase.

That's all based on 2009 data, the latest annual data available. That also has DL and NW as well as UA and CO reporting separately - I have no idea what their numbers are for DL/NW or will be for UA/CO. CO had the highest employee cost/stage length adjusted ASM so I don't anticipate UA/CO's employee expenses adjusted for number of employees and stage length will decrease.

One thing that Parker has made a big deal of but I didn't mention is fuel - which represents something like 30% of expenses. He didn't give a figure that I remember but a few cents/gallon cost advantage there makes a pretty big difference in total expenses per stage length adjusted ASM - advantage US.

In short, while US is bragging about record setting profits, better profit margins, lower cost of fuel/gallon and RASM growth than it's peers, it sounds a little disingenuous to say how big a revenue or RASM disadvantage it has relative to those same peers.

Jim

 

[767one]

Maybe he will start charging the employees to come to work, make flight crews pay for their own hotel rooms.

Maybe they will start having us buy a ticket to fly the airplane and of course extra fees for the crew bags.....you know how those crew members like to carry heavy bags!

Regards,

Bob

 

[AstroLounge]

Okay, hi Elise!

That has always been My guess. Former TWA in disguise using the old airline tagline "Up and Away TWA". regardless.........consummed waay too much koolaid. Epic proportions. TOXIC Mental Processes.

 

[Art at ISP]

And I thought it was Charlie Sheen.....

 

[SparrowHawk]

And I thought it was Charlie Sheen.....

Even Elise has more common sense!

 

[Crzipilot]

Even Elise has more common sense!

I dunno....she married a pilot....HA

 

[SparrowHawk]

I dunno....she married a pilot....HA

She got married? Damn there goes that fantasy :angry: