All at the top flying positive space

[PITbull]

And at a company where I used to work, the executives got to use company aircraft for period vacations with their families. So what? It was a perk of being one of the top 5 people in the company. And one day if that's me, then great. Until then, there is a disparity between top executives and the average employee. Being in that position comes with certain perks.

Its a big deal when the CEO states that union leaders can't fly space positive on company frigg'en business BECAUSE of the potential revenue loss.

If the Exec. team wants to be taken seriously by the rank and file, then just say they don't want union reps flying space positive because they're union reps. Period.

He shouldn't be bringing into the fold the issue of "revenue loss", because the Execs, their families and selected FRIENDS are definitely taking up revenue space in FIRST CLASS when it is the Chairmen preferred that deserves and should be occupying those seats! Or upgrade a US2.

Don't give us the mumbo, jumbo double talk of "so what".

Its A BIG DEAL CAUSE THE EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE GIVEN $2.5 BILLION IN COMBINED CONCESSIONS AND PENSIONS... SAY SO!!!

And if your previous company was allowing execs to use company jets to fly their families around on vacation, pal..I'm sure that their employees didn't give up a combined concessionary package of $2.5 billion for the company's survival along with their damn pensions!!!!!!

And if I was a shareholder of your previous company, I'd be pretty damn pissed that they are wasting fuel and personnel to fly their buttttss around on a damn vacation!

 

[john john]

Its a big deal when the CEO states that union leaders can't fly space positive on company frigg'en business BECAUSE of the potential revenue loss.

If the Exec. team wants to be taken seriously by the rank and file, then just say they don't want union reps flying space positive because they're union reps. Period.

He shouldn't be bringing into the fold the issue of "revenue loss", because the Execs, their families and selected FRIENDS are definitely taking up revenue space in FIRST CLASS when it is the Chairmen preferred that deserves and should be occupying those seats! Or upgrade a US2.

Don't give us the mumbo, jumbo double talk of "so what".

Its A BIG DEAL CAUSE THE EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE GIVEN $2.5 BILLION IN COMBINED CONCESSIONS AND PENSIONS... SAY SO!!!

And if your previous company was allowing execs to use company jets to fly their families around on vacation, pal..I'm sure that their employees didn't give up a combined concessionary package of $2.5 billion for the company's survival along with their damn pensions!!!!!!

And if I was a shareholder of your previous company, I'd be pretty damn pissed that they are wasting fuel and personnel to fly their buttttss around on a damn vacation!

Giving away our product...
By Chris Fox, President CWA Local 13302

We have a surprisingly large number of people entitled to free space positive (generally first class), personal and vacation travel on our airline. The current number of people in this exclusive club is 721, including a whole gaggle of current and retired executives, executives of other airlines, members and former members of the Board of Directors, and "director level" US Airways management...and their children and family members! Many of these 721 people work for other corporations or airlines, yet they remain members of the US Airways "Old Boys Club", entitled to free premium seats for their personal travel - seats that could otherwise be sold and generating revenue.

How much does it cost us? – try $86,600 in one 6-day period...

It is not uncommon for paying customers to be denied boarding while these 721 occupy premium seats for personal travel. A recent example occurred when the free-riding president of another airline bumped two first class passengers from an oversold flight to Florida, or a similar situation involving three seats to Rome (Italy - not NY). In one recent 6-day period this group of 721 people grabbed $85,600 worth of free, space positive, personal travel for themselves – an amount equal to the annual salaries of 2 agents. How much longer can we afford to give away our product when others are willing to pay for it?

And are these people grateful for their free travel privileges? Here are some comments I’ve heard from employees who actually deal with these folks:

Mr. ________ is constantly rude and demanding with our agents over seat assignments.

Mr. ________ calls from the ___ tkt counter and asks our agent if they can tell the tkt counter agent how do their job.

Mr. _______ was disputing the fact that he should be paying taxes on a free international ticket.

Retired executive – currently employed by ________ corporation. Most likely uses space positive benefit to fly on business. Spouse is also still working. We must be the laughing stock of this successful family.

Mr. __________ - executive of ___________ airline. This person is, "Not to be removed in an oversale situation." We would much rather give out DBC's than inconvenience this important man.

Mr. _________ - executive of ____________ airline. Recent flight was overbooked – we were forced to seat his party of 2 in first class and deny boarding to revenue passengers because he wouldn't budge.

Here’s our proposal...

We should never give away seats, particularly premium seats, when customers are willing to pay. These 721 select individuals should not be flying free positive space for personal leisure travel, period. If they are entitled to personal travel privileges on US Airways (which is dubious for many of these people), then it should be on space available basis, just like the US Airways employees.

Goldman Sachs got it right...

Employees from all US Airways labor groups have suggested numerous revenue-generating and cost-cutting ideas to management. But, somehow, the only cost-cutting management seems to focus on is employee pay and benefit cost-cutting.

We agree with the Goldman Sachs analysts who say, "US Airways Management insists that every aspect of the company's operations is under review, but the non-labor cost problem is more complex and amorphous, and we have heard no clear strategy for limiting the non-labor gap."

 

[diogenes]

"Let them eat cake!"

 

[flynomore]

If the members of this club had any honor at all, they would look for opportunities to protect revenue or at least enhance the revenue on a flight that the individual absolutely must get on.

Find out who in the back has either the highest number of FF miles, paid the most for a lousy seat (like 23 middle), or had been denied FC due to this travel, then swap seats. Give the upgraded cu$tomer a business card or some other thank you for continued patronage. Maybe some "I make US fly" swag.

Win, win.

Who will be the first of the cast to do just what I suggest?

 

[JAXPax]

Its a big deal when the CEO states that union leaders can't fly space positive on company frigg'en business BECAUSE of the potential revenue loss.

If the Exec. team wants to be taken seriously by the rank and file, then just say they don't want union reps flying space positive because they're union reps. Period.

He shouldn't be bringing into the fold the issue of "revenue loss", because the Execs, their families and selected FRIENDS are definitely taking up revenue space in FIRST CLASS when it is the Chairmen preferred that deserves and should be occupying those seats! Or upgrade a US2.

Don't give us the mumbo, jumbo double talk of "so what".

Its A BIG DEAL CAUSE THE EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE GIVEN $2.5 BILLION IN COMBINED CONCESSIONS AND PENSIONS... SAY SO!!!

And if your previous company was allowing execs to use company jets to fly their families around on vacation, pal..I'm sure that their employees didn't give up a combined concessionary package of $2.5 billion for the company's survival along with their damn pensions!!!!!!

And if I was a shareholder of your previous company, I'd be pretty damn pissed that they are wasting fuel and personnel to fly their buttttss around on a damn vacation!

And as a Preferred on US, I'd rather I be in that seat than them. I will cede that point.

That company's shareholders didn't care because stock was doing well (kind of like it is at US presently).

I'm not going to get into the union argument because at my present company, myself and others in management are not getting raises (and many of us took a pay cut plus there were furloughs) so that the the hourly employees could continue to get raises in an effort to stave off a unionization effort. Meanwhile we are in financial difficulty and the CEO is one of the highest paid in our industry (off relatively low revenue). But, I'm not the CEO and if I want to make that sort of money I'll strive for a similar position some day.

Like it or not, executives have certain perks. Otherwise they do like the CFO of AA and leave for another industry, making two to three times the amount of money they could at the airline. Do you really want executives pushing down the doors to flee? Do you want a situation where the only people you can get are those who have either a.) been around forever and have no incentive to leave or b.) aren't good enough to get hired on elsewhere?

Maybe I just put more thought into it than the average customer, but this weekend while traveling on a $175 round trip US ticket, do I deserve an upgrade? It's nice, but not an absolute requirement. If I miss the odd upgrade because US gave that seat to a top executive to keep them on board, keep the airline in business, and keep my US stock performing, then great.

I don't agree with the former executives retaining some of these privileges, unless it was part of a plan to give them a lower than contracted buy-out.

 

[PITbull]

And as a Preferred on US, I'd rather I be in that seat than them. I will cede that point.

That company's shareholders didn't care because stock was doing well (kind of like it is at US presently).

I'm not going to get into the union argument because at my present company, myself and others in management are not getting raises (and many of us took a pay cut plus there were furloughs) so that the the hourly employees could continue to get raises in an effort to stave off a unionization effort. Meanwhile we are in financial difficulty and the CEO is one of the highest paid in our industry (off relatively low revenue). But, I'm not the CEO and if I want to make that sort of money I'll strive for a similar position some day.

Like it or not, executives have certain perks. Otherwise they do like the CFO of AA and leave for another industry, making two to three times the amount of money they could at the airline. Do you really want executives pushing down the doors to flee? Do you want a situation where the only people you can get are those who have either a.) been around forever and have no incentive to leave or b.) aren't good enough to get hired on elsewhere?

Maybe I just put more thought into it than the average customer, but this weekend while traveling on a $175 round trip US ticket, do I deserve an upgrade? It's nice, but not an absolute requirement. If I miss the odd upgrade because US gave that seat to a top executive to keep them on board, keep the airline in business, and keep my US stock performing, then great.

I don't agree with the former executives retaining some of these privileges, unless it was part of a plan to give them a lower than contracted buy-out.

90% of the execs in the airline industry are WORTHLESS!

The BODs can't get rid of them because their exit contract is so hugely expensive.

If the guys don't like paying for First Class or flying space available...fu**'um. There's the door..quit as they tell us!

Hope your not an attorney in a previous profession; your arguments are lame.

Figures, you have self interest, I understand your "slant".

And when that stock doesn't perform, I guess you'll dump, unless you get caught holding rather than folding.

If you are stupid enough to hold on to an airline stock long-term, you have what's coming.

 

[JAXPax]

90% of the execs in the airline industry are WORTHLESS!

The BODs can't get rid of them because their exit contract is so hugely expensive.

If the guys don't like paying for First Class or flying space available...fu**'um. There's the door..quit as they tell us!

Hope your not an attorney in a previous profession; your arguments are lame.

Figures, you have self interest, I understand your "slant".

And when that stock doesn't perform, I guess you'll dump, unless you get caught holding rather than folding.

If you are stupid enough to hold on to an airline stock long-term, you have what's coming.

Why do I pick up US Airways stock? It's not because of the return I got through the number of Chapter 11's, let me assure it. It is in support of the employees. Why have I been nearly exclusive to US Airways (until a few recent circumstances put me on another airline for awhile), been financial supportive in FFOCUS projects, donated to the US Airways Katrina fund, hand-write thank you notes for many of my US crews, etc? In support of the best airline professionals in the business.

But one can be in support of airline front-line professionals and not be anti-management. Do I want to be in an hourly position the rest of my life? No. Will I get the top job somewhere some day? Who knows. My company ceased paying for tuition, so I took out loans and am most of the way through a MBA as means of self- and career-improvement. That's my choice and if that causes me a different slant, go ahead and hate me.

You may say the majority of airline executives are worthless, but think about what the alternative could be.

At what level do you, PITbull, begin your mistrust and disdain for airline management? Do you share the same attitude for those making $35K a year without a union contract's protection who process airline payroll, set airfares, struggle to meet catering guidelines under dropping budgets? Or does somebody have to have a VP title? I'm really interested.

 

[PITbull]

Why do I pick up US Airways stock? It's not because of the return I got through the number of Chapter 11's, let me assure it. It is in support of the employees. Why have I been nearly exclusive to US Airways (until a few recent circumstances put me on another airline for awhile), been financial supportive in FFOCUS projects, donated to the US Airways Katrina fund, hand-write thank you notes for many of my US crews, etc? In support of the best airline professionals in the business.

But one can be in support of airline front-line professionals and not be anti-management. Do I want to be in an hourly position the rest of my life? No. Will I get the top job somewhere some day? Who knows. My company ceased paying for tuition, so I took out loans and am most of the way through a MBA as means of self- and career-improvement. That's my choice and if that causes me a different slant, go ahead and hate me.

You may say the majority of airline executives are worthless, but think about what the alternative could be.
At what level do you, PITbull, begin your mistrust and disdain for airline management? Do you share the same attitude for those making $35K a year without a union contract's protection who process airline payroll, set airfares, struggle to meet catering guidelines under dropping budgets? Or does somebody have to have a VP title? I'm really interested.

What would be the alternative if you already have worthless managment????? What kind of statment is that?
Here's an altrnative... A more productive management who values their employees as much as they do their product, and possess hindsight, insight and foresight?

I'd take it.

I am speaking to basically airline management; not rank and file non-union personnel. And that's not every single managment person with a title of "managment".

I have met a few (very few; one hand) in my experience at U that was worth any "gold". From what has been expressed by other airline groups at other airlines at meetings I've attended, they feel exactly as I do.

Most, simply worthless. Their "art" is knowing "how to play the game" to climb... devalue your employees by making them feel they're replaceable, treat them like you can't trust them, treat them like children with punitive disciplines, and you have what it takes to climb the Corporate ladder.

BTW, you buying and selling U stock does not help the employees in any form. Flying the carrier does. I happen to think the front liners are the best in the business too. Not because they are union, but because of their immense and continued sacrifice and commitment to their jobs and customer.

Senior managment is committed to their hefty paychecks and loyal to the BOD who provides their stock distributions.

 

[JAXPax]

What would be the alternative if you already have worthless managment????? What kind of statment is that?
Here's an altrnative... A more productive management who values their employees as much as they do their product, and possess hindsight, insight and foresight?

I'd take it.

I am speaking to basically airline management; not rank and file non-union personnel. And that's not every single managment person with a title of "managment".

Senior managment is committed to their hefty paychecks and loyal to the BOD who provides their stock distributions.

Companies are in business to serve the stakeholders. Unless that stock price is driven up, the BOD tosses senior management, or the BOD is tossed by the stockholders. That's just how it works. Not going to discuss the merits of that, but that is business.

How do you plan, PITbull, to bring in worthwhile senior management? When airlines are notoriously underpaid (relative to other industries) in those positions with less job security and fewer benefits, how do you attract top talent that is employee-minded AND knows what they are doing? I agree with you that in the airline industry, there could be better people in many of the top jobs, but how do you plan on attracting and retaining them?

 

[nostradamus]

Companies are in business to serve the stakeholders. Unless that stock price is driven up, the BOD tosses senior management, or the BOD is tossed by the stockholders. That's just how it works. Not going to discuss the merits of that, but that is business.

How do you plan, PITbull, to bring in worthwhile senior management? When airlines are notoriously underpaid (relative to other industries) in those positions with less job security and fewer benefits, how do you attract top talent that is employee-minded AND knows what they are doing? I agree with you that in the airline industry, there could be better people in many of the top jobs, but how do you plan on attracting and retaining them?

The jury is out yet on Mr. Parker, so far he is in the early stages of airline ceo’s in this industry that take from the employee’s and line the pockets of a few upper executives. In the past airlines ceo’s like Icahn and Lorenzo came in to a company and thought it was as elementary as just cutting wages to increase bottom line. And if the stock goes down the ceo cry’s to the bod about his greedy employees and then is given a raise and more incentives. Every earnings report in the past have included nothing but excuses, i.e.: hurricanes, fuel prices, employees, etc. This makes it really easy to mask inferior management. I never once heard one of these gentlemen blame themselves. The bods of airlines rarely "toss" a ceo, they will give him a golden parachute and send him out with is dignity intact, unlike the employees he was in charge of.

How do we retain them? How about treating them like a football coach, you loose you are sent packing to another team as an assistant to learn more. The models of Southwest and American are good models to study.





A Ceo is involved the employees are commited.

"The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
- unknown

 

[US1YFARE]

Please, why is there even this debate? My new signature says it all. ARROGANCE

 

[PITbull]

Companies are in business to serve the stakeholders. Unless that stock price is driven up, the BOD tosses senior management, or the BOD is tossed by the stockholders. That's just how it works. Not going to discuss the merits of that, but that is business.

How do you plan, PITbull, to bring in worthwhile senior management? When airlines are notoriously underpaid (relative to other industries) in those positions with less job security and fewer benefits, how do you attract top talent that is employee-minded AND knows what they are doing? I agree with you that in the airline industry, there could be better people in many of the top jobs, but how do you plan on attracting and retaining them?

I believe there are many well educated folks who have the ability to run a company, and have the talent and skill to maintain a balance between being successful and incentivizing labor to maintain high level of performance. They just need the opportunity.

How do you attract high talented management? Don't accept mediorcrity. Before you even consider an employment package, investigate what potential they can bring to the company. In a labor intense business whose product is customer service, you investigate and scrutinize their background. Do they have a labor relations background, negotiations, what is their claim to fame? What have they done in the past to maintain or bring about success in thier past company and what do they hope to achieve going forward (measured goals) and what is their vision of the future . If there was a slump, what did they do to inspire their workers and what innovative ideas did they implement to attract the customer? How do they maintain or lower costs? What do they look for in a managment team and what is the ideology and expectation? What is the BOD expectation of a CEO?

Execs today look at short-term success VS. maintaining long-term success so that there are not these huge peaks and valleys on the flow chart. Most Investors want a big portion of their portfolio with a more stable, consistant pattern of performance in a company V.S. dealing with the perception of an unstable and unpredictable company from quarter to quarter with the stock being day traded.

As I said, in the airline industry, its hard to find an Exec who basically is the right person sitting in the right seat on the bus and would perform at any company with aggressive passion. I think motivating an exec for only reaching short-term success for a company, is mistake #1.
An exec performance compensation should be tied to company performance setting a longer range goals than 1 year. Compensation for the Exec should increase as the company's balance sheet increases and profits over, for example, 3 years are maintained. That should be the criteria for stock distributions and bonsuses. Company performance target triggers should be put in place that in order to have a more gradual increase in compensation, rather than making them instant millionaires with hundreds of thousands of stock options when they are first get hired. With the example of USAirways, the Execs got to cash in their new distribution by only holding for 8 months. Now, what? What's their incentive? There exists a huge disparity between the instant millionaire Execs in a few short months of operation, and dealing with a company whose employee moral is at the bttom of the wage bar by majority, who by majority struggle to put food on the table, and gas in the car to even show up for work . These actions do not set the stage for a successful, long-term co. and it reveals the impatience of the Execs and investors who really don't trust a company longer than 6 months for any return on investment.

The BOD and the shareholders could get more out of the Senior Team by setting longer range goals to achieve the kind of compensation they receive today.

I wouldn't work for a company whose that unstable and who set a compensation package for the execs to cash out too early. Those execs will continue to look for the next opportunity to leave as there is no long-term vision for the company. Its the employees and all their sacrificing that goes all for not.

Nope. These execs don't impress me one bit. And get the union busters off the property!!!!

 

[Dog Wonder]

We have a surprisingly large number of people entitled to free space positive (generally first class), personal and vacation travel on our airline. The current number of people in this exclusive club is 721, including a whole gaggle of current and retired executives, executives of other airlines, members and former members of the Board of Directors, and "director level" US Airways management...and their children and family members!

721 is a surprisingly large number. Way above my guess.

Conservatively, if you include family members, domestic partners and whoever else the company wants to comp, double the 721 number

 

[PhxMama]

Personally, I cant think of a better way to meet your employees than by waiting to board a flight. Let your family hang out at the airport for a couple of hours and than maybe they would appreciate how space avail trvl works. They might be more appreciative of a gate agents work or appreciate a rez agents advice on a better flight time. I cant think of a better morale booster than waiting with a VP to board when trvling for leisure. Dont worry, with laptops they can work there too! With their salaries they can afford to BUY non business related tkts. THAT would help the bottom line.

 

[Dog Wonder]

Personally, I cant think of a better way to meet your employees than by waiting to board a flight. Let your family hang out at the airport for a couple of hours and than maybe they would appreciate how space avail trvl works. They might be more appreciative of a gate agents work or appreciate a rez agents advice on a better flight time. I cant think of a better morale booster than waiting with a VP to board when trvling for leisure. Dont worry, with laptops they can work there too! With their salaries they can afford to BUY non business related tkts. THAT would help the bottom line.

Just another way for the top brass to say you scratch my ass I'll scratch yours.

The BOD flies First Class for free with their definitely needy family and friends. In return the BOD give the definitely needy brass obscene boners.

Every one makes out at the expense of the workers, except of course the workers.

Don't look for a VP in a boarding area near you soon. They have incest to do.