Negative, WT. I wasn't arguing that DL employes are poorly compensated. I was merely observing that FA pay at AA has exceeded FA pay at most of the legacy peers for most of the past several years.
I don't understand this paragraph. Yes, DL's FAs are more productive than AA's FAs, leading to a huge cost advantage for DL. Doesn't change the fact that AA's FAs have much higher average W-2 wages than DL FAs. My observation was not about DL's costs; it was that AA's FAs have enjoyed higher average pay than most of the legacy peer FAs. And yes, the lack of productivity at AA increases AA's costs dramatically.
No, DL's average mainline per-employee benefit costs are substantially less than AA's average mainline per-employee benefit costs. Bob Herbst does not report the average benefit costs per flight attendant (unless I missed it somewhere). Perhaps you have it? Bottom line: For the past several years, DL's FAs have had substantially lower annual wages and DL employees have lower per-employee benefit costs, meaning that DL's FAs have had substantially lower total compensation than AA's FAs.
Without data for the average CO FA's benefit expenses, there's no way to tell. CO's W-2 wages are comparable to AA's FA's W-2 wages.
Nope, but it's irrelevant to my observation that AA's FAs make more money, on average, than DL FAs.
My observation about FA pay was over the last few years. Excluding the ones you're hiring this year, how many FAs did DL hire off the street from 2003-2010?
Yes, AA has a relatively senior, mostly topped-out workforce and has not hired off the street for almost a decade. That will cause average compensation to climb.
