goingboeing
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2004
- Messages
- 584
- Reaction score
- 1
Looks like more concessions coming in some form. yahoo airline news
Aa Pilots Union To Open Talks
- Thread starter goingboeing
- Start date
TIME FOR CHANGE
Veteran
eolesen
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2003
- Messages
- 15,959
- Reaction score
- 9,375
That leaves productivity and workrules on the table.
Pilot retirements run about 250 per year right now, but are supposed to run between 300 and 400 starting in 2008.
If it's possible to crank up the productivity dial high enough to match the expected attrition rate, it may be possible to avoid layoffs/furloughs and still achieve some productivity improvements which drive our pilot cost per seat mile down below where it is today.
It may mean carrying 100 more heads in 2006 and 2007, but that may also help offset the number of people paid to sit at home awaiting training for upgrades, etc.
Pilot retirements run about 250 per year right now, but are supposed to run between 300 and 400 starting in 2008.
If it's possible to crank up the productivity dial high enough to match the expected attrition rate, it may be possible to avoid layoffs/furloughs and still achieve some productivity improvements which drive our pilot cost per seat mile down below where it is today.
It may mean carrying 100 more heads in 2006 and 2007, but that may also help offset the number of people paid to sit at home awaiting training for upgrades, etc.
C
coldplay
Guest
and once again the Pilots are doing this HOPING the other workgroups help carry most of the burden more than them AGAIN. Such arrogance! Get ready for more tales of woe and dire warnings about the sad state of the company in the coming weeks.
I do hope that the other workgroups can see through all these this time around and realize that the APA only cares about themselves and would do everything to screw everyone else just as long as they get the protection they want.
Think about it, who stands to lose more in the case of Bankruptcy? The FAs? No. The Mechanics/rampers? Heck No.
The pilots and Management? well, if you guessed that...Come on down! You're the next contestant in "The Price Is Right!"
How is that different from every other work group?
Isn't the APA supposed to concentrate primarily on protecting pilots?
Or do F/As, mechanics, CSRs, etc., pay dues to APA as well?
The only way we could have stopped what has happened to this industry is had we stayed together, all of us, as ONE group. Then if one walked, we all walked....regardless of whether it was pilots, ramp, f/a's, etc. Now they are picking us off one at a time. Look at the EU to see how it works.
True, but nothing even close to that happened.
People seem to expect the pilots to have this heightened sense of looking out for other groups, yet feel no obligation to do the same thing in return. The moment another group gets wind of concessions, the first thing they do is scream, "Take it from the pilots! They are the ones who are wayyyy overpaid!" But they somehow expect the pilots to say, "No, don't take from the xxx group. Take more from us instead" ???
People seem to expect the pilots to have this heightened sense of looking out for other groups, yet feel no obligation to do the same thing in return. The moment another group gets wind of concessions, the first thing they do is scream, "Take it from the pilots! They are the ones who are wayyyy overpaid!" But they somehow expect the pilots to say, "No, don't take from the xxx group. Take more from us instead" ???
TWU informer
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2003
- Messages
- 7,550
- Reaction score
- 3,731
The PILOTS want everyone else to save their SACRED COW.
jimntx
Veteran
Fly has it dead on. ALL unions have to support each other, or the labor movement is an exercise in posturing and futility. I grew up in Birmingham, AL in the 50's. At that time, Birmingham was the most unionized city in the South. If a union of 50 floor sweepers at U.S. Steel or one of the other big steel plants went out on a legal strike, not one union OF ANY KIND would cross their picket lines. Furthermore, no union driver from a supplies or food company would deliver food or other supplies to strike breakers in the plant.
Granted, none of those jobs exist today because all the steel companies closed operations during the period that the Reagan administration was allowing foreign steel companies--primarily in Korea--to sell steel in the U.S. at prices way below what domestic steel companies could meet, but that's another "free trade" issue.
It's interesting to me that all airline employees want the employees at ANOTHER airline to fall on the sword, refuse to make concessions, and drive their company in to Chapter 7. The financial difficulties at the industry are not due to world economic conditions tied to overcapacity in the industry in general. No, it's because "Delta pilots are paid too much;" or, "UAL has too many planes." The irony is that once an airline's employees grant concessions--read AA employees 2 years ago--it's THEIR fault that everyone else is having to take pay cuts, work rule changes, etc.
The reality is that the airlines are hemorrhaging money today. One quarter of profits--AA in 2nd quarter, UAL in 3rd quarter--is NOT going to make up for years of losing money. And, as AA so aptly demonstrated (unfortunately) in the 3rd quarter, profits in the previous quarter do not guarantee profits in the next quarter and "happy days are here again."
In classic economic theory, the service industry is labor-intensive, and one plans for the single biggest cost of doing business being labor costs. One looks for EVERY opportunity to increase productivity because there are obvious barriers to reducing staff below a certain level--the FAA still requires that there be 3 flight attendants on every a/c that leaves the ground with 101-150 seats on it regardless of how many passengers are actually on board or how much it cost to fill the fuel tanks. A hotel has to have enough maids (excuse me, room attendants) to clean all the empty rooms between checkout and check-in time. Guests do NOT like to sit on their luggage in the lobby while their room is cleaned.
I know of no other instance where a "supplies" cost has exceeded labor costs in a service industry. The airlines in aggregate today pay more for fuel than for labor. There is no example to follow to deal with this situation. There is no precedent.
It accomplishes exactly nothing to blame the pilots, or the flight attendants, or the mechanics, or the (admittedly) inflated salaries of the executives, or TWU vs. AMFA (can we please have a week of respite from that endless diatribe?), or even the oil companies for the problem. What we have to do--assuming we all want to continue working in this industry--is find solutions to the problem. The money has to come from somewhere. To expect that a Republican administration headed by an oil business guy is going to put price controls on the oil industry is to opt for an unavailable choice.
I was talking to a pilot the other day and we were both just dumbfounded over the fact that AA would have made a $100 million profit in the 3rd quarter (instead of a $95 million loss) if only one thing had been different--if we had paid the same for fuel in the 3rd quarter this year that we paid. And, I don't mean the same total dollar amount, I mean just the same price per gallon.
Now you can all start calling me a company a**-kisser and a Kool-aid drinker (both comments are so very indicative of maturity, intelligence, and originality), but that will not change the situation one iota. Either we find ways to cut costs--work rules, pay rates, general productivity increases--or the airlines are going to have to start parking airplanes on the ground because they will not be able to pay to fuel them. And, in case no one has noticed, fewer airplanes in the air means fewer employees--on the ground AND in the air.
Granted, none of those jobs exist today because all the steel companies closed operations during the period that the Reagan administration was allowing foreign steel companies--primarily in Korea--to sell steel in the U.S. at prices way below what domestic steel companies could meet, but that's another "free trade" issue.
It's interesting to me that all airline employees want the employees at ANOTHER airline to fall on the sword, refuse to make concessions, and drive their company in to Chapter 7. The financial difficulties at the industry are not due to world economic conditions tied to overcapacity in the industry in general. No, it's because "Delta pilots are paid too much;" or, "UAL has too many planes." The irony is that once an airline's employees grant concessions--read AA employees 2 years ago--it's THEIR fault that everyone else is having to take pay cuts, work rule changes, etc.
The reality is that the airlines are hemorrhaging money today. One quarter of profits--AA in 2nd quarter, UAL in 3rd quarter--is NOT going to make up for years of losing money. And, as AA so aptly demonstrated (unfortunately) in the 3rd quarter, profits in the previous quarter do not guarantee profits in the next quarter and "happy days are here again."
In classic economic theory, the service industry is labor-intensive, and one plans for the single biggest cost of doing business being labor costs. One looks for EVERY opportunity to increase productivity because there are obvious barriers to reducing staff below a certain level--the FAA still requires that there be 3 flight attendants on every a/c that leaves the ground with 101-150 seats on it regardless of how many passengers are actually on board or how much it cost to fill the fuel tanks. A hotel has to have enough maids (excuse me, room attendants) to clean all the empty rooms between checkout and check-in time. Guests do NOT like to sit on their luggage in the lobby while their room is cleaned.
I know of no other instance where a "supplies" cost has exceeded labor costs in a service industry. The airlines in aggregate today pay more for fuel than for labor. There is no example to follow to deal with this situation. There is no precedent.
It accomplishes exactly nothing to blame the pilots, or the flight attendants, or the mechanics, or the (admittedly) inflated salaries of the executives, or TWU vs. AMFA (can we please have a week of respite from that endless diatribe?), or even the oil companies for the problem. What we have to do--assuming we all want to continue working in this industry--is find solutions to the problem. The money has to come from somewhere. To expect that a Republican administration headed by an oil business guy is going to put price controls on the oil industry is to opt for an unavailable choice.
I was talking to a pilot the other day and we were both just dumbfounded over the fact that AA would have made a $100 million profit in the 3rd quarter (instead of a $95 million loss) if only one thing had been different--if we had paid the same for fuel in the 3rd quarter this year that we paid. And, I don't mean the same total dollar amount, I mean just the same price per gallon.
Now you can all start calling me a company a**-kisser and a Kool-aid drinker (both comments are so very indicative of maturity, intelligence, and originality), but that will not change the situation one iota. Either we find ways to cut costs--work rules, pay rates, general productivity increases--or the airlines are going to have to start parking airplanes on the ground because they will not be able to pay to fuel them. And, in case no one has noticed, fewer airplanes in the air means fewer employees--on the ground AND in the air.
Or perhaps it is a very relevant issue. Perhaps the impermeable solidarity of the US steel industry unions had the effect of making it impossible for the US steel companies to meet the prices of foreign steel companies. Maybe it is a very relevant point and comparison to what is going on in the US airline industry today, especially now that we are on the verge of seeing expanded foreign ownership and investment in US airlines.
Anyway. You and Fly are right; IF airline unions had all stuck together, US airline workers may not be in the pickle they find themselves in. But so what? US airline workers have made it clear they are NOT willing to do what you wish would happen. Just look at NW and the AMFA situation. And in any case, even if US airline workers were to suddenly "get religion" on the issue today, it is too late. The cat is out of the bag. The new crappy concessionary contracts are already ratified and in place at too many airlines. The pendulum has swung. The boat has been missed. The time for the solidarity you are talking about was around three years ago.
TWU informer
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2003
- Messages
- 7,550
- Reaction score
- 3,731
The difference is the Pilot's Sacred Cow is worth 100 times everyone else's!
The PGBC would come close to covering my Sacred Cow. I cannot even take a lump sum option like the Pilot can. SO there is BIG DIIFFERENCE.
Therefore, the Pilot's should be willing to sacrifice the most!
Hopeful
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2002
- Messages
- 5,998
- Reaction score
- 347
Pilots have traditionally ALWAYS received most of the pie of airlines' labor budget. Their advantage is that they only have to represent pilots. Unlike the TWU who must more fairly slice up the pie among many work groups.
I think pilots have one unique advanatage over the rest of us. They can pretty well predict how many pilots will retire each year due to the mandatory 60 year old rule. So even if they agree to some concessions or layoffs, they can also pretty well predict that a good number of those pilots on layoff will be recalled. As those pilots retire, many will also move up to fill those slots.
And, yes, each union should look out for their own members, but should not ask the company to have their members get a non rev boarding priority for themselves and wives and kids just because they have stripes on their jackets!
I think pilots have one unique advanatage over the rest of us. They can pretty well predict how many pilots will retire each year due to the mandatory 60 year old rule. So even if they agree to some concessions or layoffs, they can also pretty well predict that a good number of those pilots on layoff will be recalled. As those pilots retire, many will also move up to fill those slots.
And, yes, each union should look out for their own members, but should not ask the company to have their members get a non rev boarding priority for themselves and wives and kids just because they have stripes on their jackets!
