Crandall Opens Yap Again

[WingAndAPrayer]

By Elizabeth Souder

Dow Jones Newswires
NEW YORK -- Former AMR Corp.(NYSE:AMR) (AMR) chief executive Robert Crandall said he doesn't expect business fares will ever return to their height during the go-go days of the late 1990s.

Even though the economy and the stock market are now recovering, and even though airline experts say improvement in business travel is in the works, Mr. Crandall said he thinks it will be a long time before even the amount of business travel is so high again.

"Business fares are not going to bounce back to the levels of the late 1990s, not now, not ever," Mr. Crandall said during a speech at a meeting of the Association of Travel Marketing Executives. "And business volume won't go back to its peak for a long, long time."

Business travel nose-dived as the economy dropped and more people began booking cheaper leisure fares for business trips.

Mr. Crandall said another problem for business travelers is the long wait at airports due to more thorough security checks since Sept. 11, 2001. He said the best way to cut down the wait is to form a trusted-traveler program.

Under such a program, travelers who agree to allow the federal government access to their personal and financial records would be added to a database and given special identification. Those travelers could breeze through a separate security line at airports by showing their ID, while other travelers wait to go through the usual metal detectors and carry-on checks.

"We need to collectively make clear to the government that these security arrangements are unacceptable," said Mr. Crandall, who is a board member of the Aviation Safety Alliance, a non-profit organization created to inform the public about air travel safety. "A trusted-traveler program is the only thing that makes sense."

Mr. Crandall said some politicians have opposed the trusted-traveler idea because groups of passengers would be treated differently. For instance, people who travel often to the Middle East -- no matter what the reason -- might not be allowed to participate in the program. Other people oppose the idea because of privacy concerns.

Mr. Crandall further said the biggest problem for the network airlines is labor costs, which are preventing the big airlines from defending their turf against the growing low-cost carriers.

"If the legacy carriers can get their costs down, they will prevail," he said. "Labor's what you've got to cut. But it isn't a matter of cutting salaries. It's a matter of productivity."

Mr. Crandall said airline workers should be expected to work more hours with less vacation. He acknowledged that cutting labor costs is extremely difficult because of the power of airline unions. He predicted that some network carriers may eventually managed to whittle those costs down.

 

[KCFlyer]

Yep...he's a bad old meanie. He DID preside over the greatest period of growth in AA's history. But heck...he says that productivity has to increase, so he's the worst thing that could happen to AA. But aside from his productivity comments, what else do you disagree with?

 

[Andre1980]

The man spoke the truth 😉 Thoes who are currently working in the airline business who believe that in the next year or two that business passengers will come back and pay thoes high fares like the ones in the late 90's better wake up to reality. Now getting back to the above comment I don't think that he may try to blame the red ink that is currently in the industry on workers but what he is saying that workers must become more productive in this industry and I have been observing that some of the CEOs in the industry are not very knowlegable or lack the abilities in Leadership and change which is a critical aspect of being a good manager and leader and this is the main reason why the majors lost too much money.

Airline workers especially thoes at UA, AA and U who have given concessions should not look to get all of it back in the future and this would be so because the revenue and profits that we saw flowing through in the 80's is not going to come back and as a result the airlines will not be able to afford thoes type of salaries and work rules in the near future especially while trying to pay thoes huge debts and the LCCs will always keep them on their toes in terms of being conservative cost wise. We would see slimer profits from the network carriers since I believe these airlines can hold their own against the LCCs since they have broad route networks. I agree with Crandall that the network carriers can hold their own once they get their costs in line and adapt to the new revenue enviroment.

 

[extwacaptain]

"Crandall Opens Yap Again".......... 😉


Well, that may be one way to say it, but there are many “old timeâ€￾ employees who have a great deal of respect for that gentleman.

It is my belief that his words always seem to have an ANSWER to the problem and not just criticism.

Not too many of us can make that same claim.

That man should “open his yapâ€￾ more often and some of us should “Be seen and not heardâ€￾ more often.

Just my opinion,



Randy Kramer

 

[RV4]

Yep...he's a bad old meanie. He DID preside over the greatest period of growth in AA's history. But heck...he says that productivity has to increase, so he's the worst thing that could happen to AA. But aside from his productivity comments, what else do you disagree with?

Oh but what if that "productivity increase" causes someone to be laif-off?

Then you would be opposed, correct Mr. everyone needs a job?

 

[Boomer]

The comments attributed to Crandall along with the comments I recorded by Larry Kudlow of Kudlow & Cramer on a rebroadcast Sunday Evening of their Friday show echo the EXACT SAME SENTIMENTS.

The 10-10-03 release of the "marriage counselor" being brought into the relationship between AA and the Unions coupled with those sentiments being distributed by different sources with ties to the internal workings of the Company, the Government and the Unions essentially lays bare the framework for what is to come.

Essentially, everyone should now have been given fair warning that they are most likely coming back for more.

 

[j7915]

Oh but what if that "productivity increase" causes someone to be laif-off?

Then you would be opposed, correct Mr. everyone needs a job?

Gee RV4, now suddenly you are concerned about the loss of jobs for low senior people?

 

[WingAndAPrayer]

Essentially, everyone should now have been given fair warning that they are most likely coming back for more.

Most can't give any more than they already have. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that any employee should have to do without, should have to see their income thrown into chaos, should have to face job loss, just so this airline can turn a better profit on behalf of it's investors (of which I am one). This is especially so when you still have executives hauling in big bucks, better benefits on top of a protected guaranteed pension fund when all they seem to have accomplished is driving their labor force closer to personal bankruptcy while facing the reality that their own families have to do without.

This isn't a good feeling for anyone with a family to support, and it certainly does abosolutely ZIP for labor force morale let alone desire and capability to perform well. It's a hard job to go to when you know management is always stealthily following you trying to stick their hand in your pocket while you are too busy being more productive to watch and, if it doesn't work, then they're looking for a way to dump you on the unemployment line while your family stands in the welfare line.

Crandall has a big mouth, he offers no contributions to the industry anymore, and would do well to just stick to his Amtrak aspirations. The only reason the media keeps letting him yap is because he always paints a doom and gloom picture on behalf of labor and the media just loves to report unemployment figures.

We have to remember, we're not just talking about higher paid pilots here. There is a sizeable chunk of AMR's labor force that makes under ten bucks an hour, and perhaps the largest section of their workforce makes under 20 bucks an hour. Just how deep in poverty must these employees be before American Airlines will be happy? Why must employees be held in a position where they cannot better their lives or the lives of their families, and only allowed to eek out a meager living before many of you on this board will be happy as well.

Those that have always demand that those that have not be kept downtrodden, so those that have may always feel superior to someone else. In the meantime, Crandall's remarks paint the desirous picture of all airline executives, standing before their lined up employees with their hands out and like a character out of Dickens pleading Please sir, may I have some more!

Labor can give no more. If this airline can't pull it's ass out of the rut with what it has, then it needs to downsize immediately, swallow their greedy pride and give up that "world's largest airline" moniker and find a means within which they can live. In the alternative, they need to just go ahead and file BK and get it over with. At least in bankruptcy, the very executives that put this airline in the rotten mess it is now in will no longer control the purse strings, nor will they have the final say on what truly is best for American Airlines because clearly, they don't now nor have they ever known!

 

[KCFlyer]

Oh but what if that "productivity increase" causes someone to be laif-off?

Then you would be opposed, correct Mr. everyone needs a job?

What's your take on this line coming from Crandall's "yap":

"If the legacy carriers can get their costs down, they will prevail," he said. "Labor's what you've got to cut. But it isn't a matter of cutting salaries. It's a matter of productivity."

How that one strike you, Mr "No more concessions"?

 

[WingAndAPrayer]

Ok KC, define "productivity"

I certainly don't think AMR has done it. To them, increased productivity means getting more for less wages using less people, and when the bodies wear out from being overworked or become crippled, furlough them, strip away their health care, and recall some fresh bodies from the laid-off ranks.

 

[JS]

Well, if increasing productivity or cutting wages isn't acceptable, what is AMR to do? They can't cut lease rates more than they already have under threat of Chapter 11, and they can't do anything about the price of fuel. There is nothing left to cut!

Are you people saying that you would prefer that AMR go bankrupt just to see the executives suffer? Labor would suffer, too.

I'll be perfectly honest -- I don't work for AMR (though I do have a relative who does), and I don't own shares of AMR. So, go ahead and do whatever you want. Shoot yourself in the foot, and I'll read about it right here.

 

[KCFlyer]

Ok KC, define "productivity"

I certainly don't think AMR has done it. To them, increased productivity means getting more for less wages using less people, and when the bodies wear out from being overworked or become crippled, furlough them, strip away their health care, and recall some fresh bodies from the laid-off ranks.

WNP....very fine diatribe...but it would appear that Crandall's statement: "But it isn't a matter of cutting salaries. It's a matter of productivity." flies in the face of what you just stated. He didn't say "It isn't a matter of just cutting salaries"...so that would appear that he believes that salaries have been cut about as much as they can be cut. You know, Southwest is always used as the example of "doing more with less". Their employees are cited as being the most productive in the industry. They also are paid on a par with, if not more than, employees of AA. How many of them have worked themselves cripple only to be furloughed and left to rot without health care?

But I am curious...as Captain Randy stated...Crandall offers an answer. You only cite percieved problems with the answer. So...what is your answer to the problems facing AA? And backing an FA sickout over the holidays does qualify as an answer. How 'bout it? Any answers that can turn AA around? Bear this in mind when pondering your answer...the top 10 executives could cut their salaries to zero and it would buy AA another weeks worth of expenses. So that's not an answer. Let's hear some, okay?

 

[FA Mikey]

Well, if increasing productivity or cutting wages isn't acceptable, what is AMR to do? They can't cut lease rates more than they already have under threat of Chapter 11, and they can't do anything about the price of fuel. There is nothing left to cut!

Are you people saying that you would prefer that AMR go bankrupt just to see the executives suffer? Labor would suffer, too.

I'll be perfectly honest -- I don't work for AMR (though I do have a relative who does), and I don't own shares of AMR. So, go ahead and do whatever you want. Shoot yourself in the foot, and I'll read about it right here.

So now low should my salary go? How much more should I be expected top cut to make management salary bonus happen? There are still billions to be saved in proper utilization of airplanes, crews, and other EQ. There are millions wasted daily in out dated and unworkable procedures. Management refuses to acknowledge there uselessness. It more than cutting pay benefits of working class people. Its cutting the fat and the waste in this giant company.

 

[KCFlyer]

Swinging this back on topic a bit...What Crandall said was:

"If the legacy carriers can get their costs down, they will prevail," he said. "Labor's what you've got to cut. But it isn't a matter of cutting salaries. It's a matter of productivity."

Or does everyone view a productivity increase as a wage decrease?

 

[JS]

Well, if increasing productivity or cutting wages isn't acceptable, what is AMR to do? They can't cut lease rates more than they already have under threat of Chapter 11, and they can't do anything about the price of fuel. There is nothing left to cut!

Are you people saying that you would prefer that AMR go bankrupt just to see the executives suffer? Labor would suffer, too.

I'll be perfectly honest -- I don't work for AMR (though I do have a relative who does), and I don't own shares of AMR. So, go ahead and do whatever you want. Shoot yourself in the foot, and I'll read about it right here.

So now low should my salary go? How much more should I be expected top cut to make management salary bonus happen? There are still billions to be saved in proper utilization of airplanes, crews, and other EQ. There are millions wasted daily in out dated and unworkable procedures. Management refuses to acknowledge there uselessness. It more than cutting pay benefits of working class people. Its cutting the fat and the waste in this giant company.

FA Mikey, this isn't about making the executives bonuses bigger, it's about AMR turning a profit. AMR cannot continue to lose money indefinitely, or they will have to declare Chapter 7.

Please provide some examples of wasted aircraft and crew utilization.