2014 Fleet Service Discussion

[WeAAsles]

"Is is true for my personal experience as well. My first concern would be cost – I would be willing to go through an additional flight if the overall ticket price is significantly cheaper. However, if the price ends up differing by only about $50, then I would rather sit on a direct flight to my destination. The question, then, is if the cost savings from centralized operations in a H&S network are significant enough to offset the increase in customer welfare (and what they are willing to pay for it) by providing direct flights. Right now, because flying is still relatively expensive compared to other modes of transportation, cost savings are still significant, and businesses will be more attracted by that prospect than a less easily quantifiable notion of customer welfare. Furthermore, given the high capital costs in starting an airline and the fact that most airlines are on the H&S model, it seems that airlines have little incentive to switch to a P2P network.
However, my view is that as technology improves, the cost of spreading operations over more nodes in the airline network will go down, and eventually H&S will not seem as viable an alternative. My dream, of course, is when everyone has a flying car – then air travel will be truly point-to-point."

http://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2011/09/14/hub-and-spoke-vs-point-to-point-transport-networks/

 

[Tim Nelson]

Sorry about the spaces. Editing the page did not allow me to fix that.

thanks. Ive got the same editing problems.
but according to that loa, every full timer can be downgraded to part time provided it doesnt result in backto back part time. For definition, back to back pt is even acceptable if 4 hrs on ramp and 4.5 backed up but in the bagroom.

What is entirely likely, unless management at ua is a nice fella, is that the ramp could go as high as 80% part time. Twice the dues of course as two part timers pay twice the revenue of one ft.

 

[ograc]

Tim the one area I really think you have a passion for sometimes is the closing or outsourcing of small stations. I think you originally probably came from one that closed and that's what continues to cause you anger and hard feelings to this day?

The airline companies do not want to subsidize those who wish to remain working in small stations if they are not generating revenue from the routes. That's the reality in front of us today. They don't want the revenue generated from hubs to have to subsidize the feed either. They ALL "tore" away the ability for us to continue to staff them with our Brothers and Sisters through the BK process. To allude that this is any Unions fault is being intellectually dishonest as you say.

The majority of the members and those represented now are in hubs. It is those hub members who decide the direction and the ultimate decision through their votes. We have been herded into hubs for over 20 years now. Why?

"Hubs existed before deregulation, but the removal of restrictions on market entry and exit, along with policies permitting airline mergers, freed surviving carriers to consolidate hub-and-spoke networks feeding traffic to and from strategically located hubs. Prior to deregulation movements (end of 1970s-early 1980s), many airline services were taking place on a point-to-point basis. On the above figure, two airline companies are servicing a network of major cities. A fair amount of direct connections exists, but mainly at the expense of the frequency of services and high costs (if not subsidized). Also, many cities are serviced, although differently, by the two airlines and connections are likely to be inconvenient."

http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch3en/conc3en/hubspokederegulation.html
 

To state that outline stations are not producing revenue and are unprofitable is a reach. The company is turning profit in many outline stations with represented employees. When the company gets the union and subsequently the members in the hubs to forfeit scope protection for these stations they increase their profits by being able to hire vendors.More profit for the company. Less represented members for the union. If you're a represented member, even in a hub, allowing this trend to continue is not in anyone's best interest but the company's. You got to give the companies credit though... they're playing us like a deck of cards.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Tim the one area I really think you have a passion for sometimes is the closing or outsourcing of small stations. I think you originally probably came from one that closed and that's what continues to cause you anger and hard feelings to this day?
The airline companies do not want to subsidize those who wish to remain working in small stations if they are not generating revenue from the routes. That's the reality in front of us today. They don't want the revenue generated from hubs to have to subsidize the feed either. They ALL "tore" away the ability for us to continue to staff them with our Brothers and Sisters through the BK process. To allude that this is any Unions fault is being intellectually dishonest as you say.
The majority of the members and those represented now are in hubs. It is those hub members who decide the direction and the ultimate decision through their votes. We have been herded into hubs for over 20 years now. Why?
"Hubs existed before deregulation, but the removal of restrictions on market entry and exit, along with policies permitting airline mergers, freed surviving carriers to consolidate hub-and-spoke networks feeding traffic to and from strategically located hubs. Prior to deregulation movements (end of 1970s-early 1980s), many airline services were taking place on a point-to-point basis. On the above figure, two airline companies are servicing a network of major cities. A fair amount of direct connections exists, but mainly at the expense of the frequency of services and high costs (if not subsidized). Also, many cities are serviced, although differently, by the two airlines and connections are likely to be inconvenient."
http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch3en/conc3en/hubspokederegulation.html

i didnt come from a small station. I disagree with your reality although it is one that the unions and management have participated in. At ua we arent talking about small stations only. We are talking about all stations, even big markets like bos nyc, etc and all focus stations.

Regarding usair, these union jobs were kept even through bankruptcy before even consolidation. Contracting out these stations now is only supported by greed.

Not sure if you understand the history of labor when a union only negotiates for hubs but we know it quite well at usair. The ibt had 4 hubs but got devoured and collapsed and eventually lost the union.

At united, 7 stations on ramp have scope. Next negotiations will have the company propose only 4. Thats how it works.

Plus, unlike your contract that protects flight activity, ua does not.

That is significant because united can downsize a few union stations and make another station a hub or focus station and avoid union.

With the old usair, 4 stations were union, ie buf pit phl bos.
buf became cle, and bos became lga as far as buildup. And as you know, this industry changes. Station sizes can build quickly but at least you have flight activity that protects any exploitation by management to shiftflights to non union stations

 

[WeAAsles]

To state that outline stations are not producing revenue and are unprofitable is a reach. The company is turning profit in many outline stations with represented employees. When the company gets the union and subsequently the members in the hubs to forfeit scope protection for these stations they increase their profits by being able to hire vendors.More profit for the company. Less represented members for the union. If you're a represented member, even in a hub, allowing this trend to continue is not in anyone's best interest but the company's. You got to give the companies credit though... they're playing us like a deck of cards.

Of course this doesn't speak to all outline stations but the reality exists that some are pulling more than others and that the Airlines are resizing the aircraft flown to either draw, maximize or increase revenues. Large cities generate higher wages for those who live in the community and can afford to pay the costs of fares so the airline draws a profit. As our manufacturing sector shrinks in the US so too does the people who are left's ability to cover the cost of continued air service.

The airline industry doesn't exist in a vacuum and is subject to all the same realities facing small to midsize cities all across the US. 

 

[WeAAsles]

i didnt come from a small station. I disagree with your reality although it is one that the unions and management have participated in. At ua we arent talking about small stations only. We are talking about all stations, even big markets like bos nyc, etc and all focus stations.

I'm not the enemy here Tim. The market reality is the enemy. And to some those cities are hubs while to others they are only still feeders. The focus should be on understanding the business to come up with solutions to keep those cities staffed.

Regarding usair, these union jobs were kept even through bankruptcy before even consolidation. Contracting out these stations now is only supported by greed.

Not sure if you understand the history of labor when a union only negotiates for hubs but we know it quite well at usair. The ibt had 4 hubs but got devoured and collapsed and eventually lost the union.

Of course I do. There is a whole laundry list of stations that were closed due to a voted on contract way before there was any BK.

At united, 7 stations on ramp have scope. Next negotiations will have the company propose only 4. Thats how it works.

Plus, unlike your contract that protects flight activity, ua does not.

Still trying to understand how the non-union Continental more than likely affected what happened there?

That is significant because united can downsize a few union stations and make another station a hub or focus station and avoid union.

With the old usair, 4 stations were union, ie buf pit phl bos.
buf became cle, and bos became lga as far as buildup. And as you know, this industry changes. Station sizes can build quickly but at least you have flight activity that protects any exploitation by management to shiftflights to non union stations

Correct and if the market again supports the continued revenue the airline will not pull any flights out thus angering there customer base. Especially the bread and butter business traveler.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Of course this doesn't speak to all outline stations but the reality exists that some are pulling more than others and that the Airlines are resizing the aircraft flown to either draw, maximize or increase revenues. Large cities generate higher wages for those who live in the community and can afford to pay the costs of fares so the airline draws a profit. As our manufacturing sector shrinks in the US so too does the people who are left's ability to cover the cost of continued air service.
The airline industry doesn't exist in a vacuum and is subject to all the same realities facing small to midsize cities all across the US.

the airline sector isnt subject to the same pressures as other industries either, so wages and benefits have always been greater.

Whatever the case, the twu didnt wind things down to only 7 stations, even in bankruptcy. Never mind unlimited part time. I seriously doubt your negotiation team would have given up alot of scope if not for bankruptcy. The iam leaders gave it up freely during record profits.

 

[WeAAsles]

the airline sector isnt subject to the same pressures as other industries either, so wages and benefits have always been greater.

Whatever the case, the twu didnt wind things down to only 7 stations, even in bankruptcy. Never mind unlimited part time. I seriously doubt your negotiation team would have given up alot of scope if not for bankruptcy. The iam leaders gave it up freely during record profits.

Tim I've asked you before to please not use your campaign rhetoric when you are addressing something I wrote. There are plenty of other places that you can interject that.

One of the stations closed during our BK was MEM. There were 13 TWU clerks in that station. Do you really believe that the company was thinking how can we screw those 13 individuals? They were thinking cost and nothing more. Just the same as when Bob Crandall stated that to save money he took some olives out of the salads being served aboard the flights when he was our CEO.

To the company we are parts. That is what our employee number really means. Our emphasis is on convincing the company that they need that particular part to remain in that station. The only way to do that is to understand the business and the way they think. Emotions can only buy us a box of tissues at the end of the day.

 

[737823]

Whatever the case, the twu didnt wind things down to only 7 stations, even in bankruptcy. Never mind unlimited part time. I seriously doubt your negotiation team would have given up alot of scope if not for bankruptcy. The iam leaders gave it up freely during record profits.

+1000

And now the question is what will the company ask for next? Outsourcing "core" work at hubs? Doesn't the current language allow bagrooms and other functions to be outsourced? Tim why hasn't the district in sourced IAD from ZW/142?

Josh

 

[roabilly]

He doesn't lie? He made a claim of having a masters level education. What institution?

80% of what Nelson says is a LIE.. he just makes it the truth in his mind by leaving out information... you never get the full story from Nelson... I've seen this for YEARS!

 

[roabilly]

"Cinderella dates"

Who else do we know who uses this terminology frequently? Along with the word "Polyanna" and "Chaps My Arse"

I just had to go there, lol.

It's so obvious, it's obscene!

 

[saywhat]

the airline sector isnt subject to the same pressures as other industries either, so wages and benefits have always been greater.

Whatever the case, the twu didnt wind things down to only 7 stations, even in bankruptcy. Never mind unlimited part time. I seriously doubt your negotiation team would have given up alot of scope if not for bankruptcy. The iam leaders gave it up freely during record profits.

 


 


 

 

 
UNITED CONTINENTAL HOLDINGS Inc
(NYSE: UAL)
42.96

-0.93-2.12%Today's Close | 43.09+0.13+0.30%After hours



INCOME STATEMENT: 10-YEAR SUMMARY
DATE
SALES
EBIT
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL NET
INCOME
EPS
TAX RATE
(%)
12/13
38.28 Bil
539.00 Mil
1.69 Bil
571.00 Mil    ( profit)
1.46
NA
12/12
37.15 Bil
-724.00 Mil
1.52 Bil
-723.00 Mil    (loss)
-2.18
NA
12/11
37.11 Bil
845.00 Mil
1.55 Bil
840.00 Mil      (profit)
2.19
0.60
12/10
23.23 Bil
250.00 Mil
1.08 Bil
253.00 Mil       (profit)
1.00
NA
12/09
16.34 Bil
-672.00 Mil
902.00 Mil
-651.00 Mil       (loss)
-4.32
NA
12/08
20.19 Bil
-5.38 Bil
932.00 Mil
-5.35 Bil          (loss)
-42.18
NA
12/07
20.14 Bil
695.00 Mil
925.00 Mil
403.00 Mil        (profit)
2.79
42.70
12/06
19.34 Bil
22.89 Bil
888.00 Mil
22.88 Bil           (profit)
131.94
0.10
12/05
17.38 Bil
-21.18 Bil
792.00 Mil
-21.18 Bil          (loss)
-182.29
NA
12/04
16.39 Bil
-1.73 Bil
874.00 Mil
-1.72 Bil            (loss)
-15.25
NA




 
 

Record profits? Not quite.

 
 

 

 

[Tim Nelson]

+1000
And now the question is what will the company ask for next? Outsourcing "core" work at hubs? Doesn't the current language allow bagrooms and other functions to be outsourced? Tim why hasn't the district in sourced IAD from ZW/142?
Josh

im not sure josh what management will outsource next. After the signing and union endorsement of the united concessions, management seems th whack at least 250 more iam members every 3 weeks. The lack of scope is an issue though josh that will have to finally be handled in the next round of negotiations.

But front and center is usairways negotiations. Delaneys team is banking on rolling with the nmb. Management is banking on sigle carrier application and the iams agreement to only negotiate in section 6 until there is a decision. Either way, something will give by june.

 

[Tim Nelson]

Disappointing that you are a nc member and still insist you are negotiating against what happened the last decade.

Maybe that explains why united agreed to another bankrupt contract.

 

[WeAAsles]

Disappointing that you are a nc member and still insist you are negotiating against what happened the last decade.
Maybe that explains why united agreed to another bankrupt contract.

To say that our negotiators are not negotiating against what has happened in the last 10 years and even more so against the continuing changes and challenges since deregulation itself is disingenuous and suspicious in its accusations.

There are too many items to consider to try and limit your continued insistence to that of poor negotiating or ineptness by those who represent you.

You don't take into consideration the whole rather than just a small sliver of the realities.