Dave's Friday Message

[BoeingBoy]

I, for one, would like to hear where the inefficies are. Before someone jumps on the headcount per airplane or block hours per pilot or whatever other statistic management comes up with, I'm talking about contract work rules that supposedly make us so ineffieient. I'm not talking about the structural inefficiencies of the hub/spoke, low aircraft utilization, downsized system that management has given us to work with.

I can only speak for the ALPA contract. Most trips are now hard time - very little pay for no work. What's left is vacation, training (FAA required), and sick time. If Bronner & Siegel are to be believed, our pilots fly less block hours per month now then in 2001 - after significant work rule concessions.

PitBull, you can chime in for the F/A's - but I believe they have basically the same work rules as the pilots.

Would anyone like to enlighten me on all the effeciencies that we employees can generate if we'll "just give a little more".

Jim

 

[oldiebutgoody]

If we have in-efficiencies we should agree to fix them only if they agree to grow the airline. Now poo poo that statement - fine. But that's what should be on the table. Just looking for a way out the clouds.

How about some marketing to increase revenue? That would sure be a unique idea!

 

[PITbull]

Jim,

No. I have no "chiming". You covered it all. F/a and Pilots have the same work rule rigs...AND THERE IS NO RIG PAYOUT, except Irregular operation.

One "chime" I can give to the management look-a-likes on these boards, here's a "view from our room":


Flight attendants do not get paid for any ground work. That includeds first class service 30 minutes before any departure, any inventory checks, or deplaning including cleaning of stations. Just for those who are confused, in a 5 -segment day, that equates (=) 2:30 hours of NO PAY at minimum daily for each day of the trip... free work given to the company....just because.

In simple terms: On a 4-day trip, f/as give 8 hours of work and responsibility for FREE to the company. How'se that for efficiency? We are talking FREE. Four 4-days in a month equates to 32 hours. And for five 4-day trips (105 hour option flyers) that is 40 hours of FREE time given to the company in a month. That is an average worker 's (9-5) 1 week's work given for free in any given month.

Walmart Greeters get paid for every hour they work. Punch in; punch out. After 8, BANG..."over-time".

 

[tadjr]

From an agent standpoint, I'm not sure where else there is something to give to make us more efficient, other than adding flights where we have gaps in the schedule to keep us busy.
I guess there are some things I can think of, but I was under the impression that they were company proposed and not from the union to begin with. It has to do with sick time and agent swaps. We are currently limited to 20 swaps a quarter which means once you've hit the 20, you dont swap. We all know what this means. When the 20 swaps are up and you need the day off and cant swap, its sick time call. Now we're paying someone for a sick day plus someone on overtime to cover. Why not do away with the 20 swap limit. I think this would help cut down on $ spent to cover overtime. It would also help those of us who would love to pick up the extra hours, but cant. The ONLY reason I can see why they wanted a limit is so people dont swap off ALL their shifts and still get benefits. If this is the case, make it where you have to work at least x% of your scheduled hours in a quarter or the next quarter THAT PERSONS SWAPS are limited to make up for it. Otherwise, if someone is willing to work for someone, you ought to be able to take the time off. This would also help morale with those employees who are commuting home to be with their families on their days off. Also why is there a 4pm cutoff on swaps the day before? If there is a supervisor there to approve it and someone is willing to work, it should be allowed. I've seen agents try to get someone to work for them (unpaid) instead of calling out, and because it was past the 4pm deadline, it was denied so the person called out instead costing overtime coverage instead of regular pay for the person who was going to work.
There also shouldnt be a limit on only being able to work 1 12hour day next to a 13+ hour day. Its ok when its company requested, but not when working for someone. Either its a safety hazard all the time or its not. Cant have it both ways, but they do. This means sometimes people willing to work to cover people wanting time off cant because of the hours involved. This could result in the other person not being able to find coverage and calling out. This limitation should be eliminated.
Another problem is with sick time occurances. I can guarantee you that at least 80-85% of the employees who call out use at least 2 days at a time. You're going to be charged an occurance and if you're sick on the Thurs of your workweek, but feel well enough to go back to work the next day, most people are going to take it off "to be sure they are better" because if you arent and call out again after being back a day, its another occurance. How much is this costing the company in sick time and overtime coverage?

And before anyone not employed with the airline chimes in how it is in the real world, this is how the airline world works. We arent talking a 9-5 Mo-Fr job here so the comparisons are not valid in my opinion. The work schedule is subject to change any time and there are no guarantees as to what or when you will be working. You could plan accordingly for a month and then have a schedule change where everything you've planned for is turned upside down and require time off because you didnt get the shift this bid you had planned your life around the previous month. Its a whole different ballgame.

 

[N628AU]

Who knows, the Mesa purchase of Midway's assets could prove interesting. Midway operated mainline equipment in the past & I assume that authority to do so is still part of their certificate. Maybe Ornstein wants to run a "real" airline.

Not likely. The certificates do not differentiate from "mainline" and "regional" equipment. As ACA is showing, if Johnny O wants to operate 737s, he only needs to order them, then get FAA approval as if he wanted to add a MetroIII to the fleet.

The only thing preventing him is any scope clauses he may violate, and his stated desire to stay within a revenue guarantee business model.

 

[tadjr]

Seeing how WN is now larger than US, 29 vs 30 is still out of whack IMO.

As far as the IAM (not my union) are they being paid by USAirways these $200,000 salaries? If so, then I agree something needs to be done. If not, then thats an internal IAM matter and should have no bearing on anything being discussed regarding US Airways Management compensation in its current form.

 

[AOG-N-IT]

Actually the comparrison of the number ov VP's in both airlines has been duscussed Ad Nauseum on this board it's 29 for SWA and at last count 30 for Airways.

When you have senior executioves of the I.A.M. Drawing salaries in excess of $200,000 plue expenses and benefits while negotiating concessionary contracts, increasing dues and generally continuing to live high off the hog, you are in no position to be critical of US Managements. Siegel took a 20% pay cut, what did your leadership do? Enlighten me

Piney Bob,

Lets take a look at your add nauseum comment for a moment.

WN is a company that flies 387 Acft compared to US flying 279 Acft....that's a large imbalance first of all.

WN is a company with a history of making money...compared to US being in danger of simply becoming history. There is some nausea for ya !!!

WN is reaching parts of the US that U only wish it could...WN is doing so with a very intelligent choice in Acft....and we are floundering with a continued "Dukes Mix" within the mainline fleet....and now we are venturing into how many different flavors of RJ's between PSA , MAA and the affiliates we contract. That's enough to make the Pope swear , if intelligence in comparisons is being exercised?

WN is also not near as heavy in upper/ middle management either. We have Managing Directors , Directors , Managers upon Managers....and none of them have the faintest clue as to whats going on?

Middle Management is also not just top heavy....they are scared to death to speak the truth...or rock the boat. Information that needs to be brought out to correct problems ,is either never spoken about , acted upon or eagerly swept under the rug....This is in direct contrast to how WN operates....and the nauseum compounds itself

I have seen needs in CLT for instance...and the needs were capable of being solved within the city limits of CLT by a given vendor....yet the purchase orders from CLT were cancelled ,and then re-instated in PIT....then the item was trucked to CLT...all from the same national vendor....what does this say? It says corruption and kick-backs....is this a labor problem ???? , No Sir...this is a compounding Management Problem. Much of our problems boil down to this ...this was just an example

 

[Walmart Greeter]

PitBull - So if you put the US F/A contract side by side with WN, are there any differences? Just curious. Clearly they don't have to serve drinks to the first class passengers.

 

[Justaramper]

tadjr...I wish I could really understand your previous post...Overtime is a voluntary thing , so working 12 hr days that included OT is your choice..work as many as you like, it's up to you..

The swap thing is a BIG deal to some , but I swap maybe 10 times a year and never use my quota. Allowing more swaps won't save money and there are some who will use this job just for the benefits and not work many days.. Additional swaps would also decrease the number of employees who are eligible for overtime and on bad days this would cause a serious shortage.

Some don't really care and use FMLA to take a day off unpaid and then wonder how they can make up the hours.. Get a swap...?

 

[delldude]

tadjr...I wish I could really understand your previous post...Overtime is a voluntary thing , so working 12 hr days that included OT is your choice..work as many as you like, it's up to you..

The swap thing is a BIG deal to some , but I swap maybe 10 times a year and never use my quota. Allowing more swaps won't save money and there are some who will use this job just for the benefits and not work many days.. Additional swaps would also decrease the number of employees who are eligible for overtime and on bad days this would cause a serious shortage.

Some don't really care and use FMLA to take a day off unpaid and then wonder how they can make up the hours.. Get a swap...?

of course as you've indicated before...if it doesn't float your way...you would exercise the "zero tolerance option"....and take down any and all who oppose you.

 

[UseYourHead]

Folks,

If the revenue picture is improving, then if we can't make a profit, I would like to point out this:

The only thing U needs to change in their business model is NEW MANAGEMENT!

And start from there.....

My question for those who would like to send our management team packing is: Who do we have waiting in the wings?

It would be desirable to know the answer; otherwise, as I have said in the past, "Be careful what you wish for-You might get it."

Some of the other posters here have stated that a "new guy" will just come in for a group hug, just before dispencing some more pain to be distributed around the ranks.

So, who will be the new and improved version, Johny O? Carl Icann? Marvin Davis?

Think about it...if labor has a plan like this, it would be nice to know there is a step 2!

 

[PITbull]

PitBull - So if you put the US F/A contract side by side with WN, are there any differences? Just curious. Clearly they don't have to serve drinks to the first class passengers.

Yea, they get paid a hell of a lot more than we do. Their average duty day is 10.5 hours; U's is 13 and then up to 15 hours unscheduled, just to name an example.

Oh, and did i say they get treated with mutual respect too?

 

[700UW]

When you have senior executioves of the I.A.M. Drawing salaries in excess of $200,000 plue expenses and benefits while negotiating concessionary contracts, increasing dues and generally continuing to live high off the hog, you are in no position to be critical of US Managements. Siegel took a 20% pay cut, what did your leadership do? Enlighten me

Bob, your information is not totally accurate, the IAM's stucture has an International President, General Vice President (GVP) of Headquarters, Transportation, Southern, Eastern, Western and Midwest Terrortories.

For the year ending 2002 the IAM had 673,095 active and retired members, US Airways on the other hand has about 29,000 employees with one CEO and 29 Vice Presidents. The International President who is in charge of 673,095 members recieved $166,531 in salary, while Dave Siegel who is in charge of 29,000 employees recieved a salary of $750,000 plus a signing bonus of $750,000.

Total Salaries and Expenses for the International President and all the GVPs were $1,969,607. Dave Siegel's compensation for just himself who manages 644,095 LESS employees who only came to US Airways in March 2002, received $1.4 million for the year of 2002. David Siegel, who became chief executive last March, received a salary of $533,654, a bonus of $750,000 and $163,102 in other compensation, so it looks like Dave makes only a little less then all the International IAM Officers make.

The district leadership of the union took the same pay and benefit concessions as the workers did, Dave did not. I wonder what all the Vice Presidents at US made?

Lets look at the 2002 Executive Compensation from US Airways' 10K filed in March

Steven Wolf: $1,404,647
Dave Siegel: $3,805,756
Michelle Bryan: $592,780
Neal S Cohen: $1,432,545
Al Crellin: $645,634
Jerrod Glass: $629,829


Lets See Six Executives at US Airways made a total off :$8,511,191 for being in charge of 29,000 employees and Seven IAM International Offices who have 673,095 members made $1,969,607. So seven union leaders who are in charge of 644,095 more members made $6,541,584 less, Bob I guess your math does not quite add up.

 

[PITbull]

Folks,

If the revenue picture is improving, then if we can't make a profit, I would like to point out this:

The only thing U needs to change in their business model is NEW MANAGEMENT!

And start from there.....

My question for those who would like to send our management team packing is: Who do we have waiting in the wings?

It would be desirable to know the answer; otherwise, as I have said in the past, "Be careful what you wish for-You might get it."

Some of the other posters here have stated that a "new guy" will just come in for a group hug, just before dispencing some more pain to be distributed around the ranks.

So, who will be the new and improved version, Johny O? Carl Icann? Marvin Davis?

Think about it...if labor has a plan like this, it would be nice to know there is a step 2!

UYH,

There are many educated folks that understand the airline industry. Look at the folks on these boards who share their ideas, PAX and employees alike. You do not have to have a Harvard degree to be CEO. Personally, I never heard of Dave S. before U. Obviously, someone on the U Board thought he was qualified. I am saying, once you have the bottom of the barrel, who we know has the thought processes of this CEO, has a history of disrespecting and disregarding and forsaking his employees, bringing on the property known "union busters", any change would be a "step up". This CEO has had every "advantage" known to the industry to turn U around. Presently, we are one of the only airlines that can't stabalize and we are out of BK with an economy picture that is improving.


AOG,

Your comment about middle management is true. They are given the "bottom line" plans from senior mangagement and it is up to them to create policy and have lower management implement it. There is no way in hell that they will go back to senior management and tell them their policy didn't or doesn't work. They don't work in that kind of atmosphere.

 

[insp89]

Sorry to offend: I don't think we have to cut people - and shouldn't. Isn't it obvious? If we agreed to be more efficient, our costs go down and we should be able to grow and add planes and routes.

I believe the COMPANY has no reason to whine about the work force being inefficent. If anyone is in a position to ask Siegle a question, Ask him about FUEL HEDGING. He seems to enjoy comparing this airline to SW, Ask him how much fuel SW has hedged compared to U ! .... Please reference mrplanes post on this subject. [The post title is COST ITEM.]