How is AA computing flight attendant cost?

[FWAAA]

The really sad part of the above post is the assumption that the employees will ever get back what they lost. Lots of talk about what was given up (confiscated) as a result of the imposition of concessions and an apparent belief that snapbacks can be negotiated now.

The absence of snapbacks in the 2003 concessions should have been a big hint that getting it back would be a very difficult proposition. But instead, the above post makes me think he's still not seeing it.

 

[Hopeful]

The really sad part of the above post is the assumption that the employees will ever get back what they lost. Lots of talk about what was given up (confiscated) as a result of the imposition of concessions and an apparent belief that snapbacks can be negotiated now.

The absence of snapbacks in the 2003 concessions should have been a big hint that getting it back would be a very difficult proposition. But instead, the above post makes me think he's still not seeing it.

A snapback clause with AA means nothing even if it were existent. they would threaten bankruptcy again or some other threats to employees.

By the way, I get it. You have no problem championing the concessions we gave up to help the company but 7 years later, you still champion them wanting more for us in exchange for pennies.

Did Arpey & Co.c salary increase since 2003.

Yes or No would suffice.

And spare me the compensation/pup greed deal.


Straight salary...YES or NO?


I got a yearly raise of 1.5% or .$42 an hour for 5 years?


Did the execs get $.42 and hour?

You and the rest of the company defenders are only concerned with your bonus miles, your stock and the ability to upgrade to business class. that is understandable.

Then you should respect the fact that I am concerned with getting back what they took from me...Just like the execs.

 

[coldplay]

The really sad part of the above post is the assumption that the employees will ever get back what they lost. Lots of talk about what was given up (confiscated) as a result of the imposition of concessions and an apparent belief that snapbacks can be negotiated now.

The absence of snapbacks in the 2003 concessions should have been a big hint that getting it back would be a very difficult proposition. But instead, the above post makes me think he's still not seeing it.

so basically we all should be working for free and everything would be fine in managementland? I'm afraid that won't happen because even if we all worked for Free, AA management would still cry "poor me" and find a way for all employees to give something back, and would expect them to pay just for the "privilege" of working for this fine team of top talented Managers.

seriously though, when will this perversion stop? Just who in this company is the true asset, management or the employees? If one really thinks about, take away the top 4 "brains" (term used loosely here) of this company and the airline will still run smoothly...on the other hand, on any single day, take away 2 pilots, 3 FAs, 2 mechanics, 2 agents, 2 schedulers, 2 baggage handlers, 2 rampers, 2 ticketing agents, plus 2 more lowly peons in every department...and all hell breaks loose and takes days to recover from the mess.

 

[FWAAA]

Did Arpey & Co.c salary increase since 2003.

Yes or No would suffice.

And spare me the compensation/pup greed deal.

Straight salary...YES or NO?

I had no idea so I looked up the proxy statements. The top management (listed in the proxy statement) got increases of 1.5% in their base salary each year. Arpey got one base salary raise because when Horton was rehired, he demanded more than Arpey was making at the time, so the board gave Arpey a raise so that he'd be the highest paid exec.

You and the rest of the company defenders are only concerned with your bonus miles, your stock and the ability to upgrade to business class. that is understandable.

Then you should respect the fact that I am concerned with getting back what they took from me...Just like the execs.

It's funny to read your thoughts about the extent of my concerns.

I actually want higher fares and a profitable airline. I have more than enough money to buy tickets and would still buy them even if they went up 50%. Problem is, AA simply can't convince enough people to pay more. Think I want to fly with underpaid, disgruntled mechanics? I'm all for matching that UPS contract. Profitable airline = even higher gains on that stock I bought last year for under $3/share. Profitable airline would make pay raises much easier to pay (as in - AA would have the cash to pay them).

Sure I want my upgrades and bonus miles and higher stock prices. Doesn't mean I don't support higher pay. You mistakenly equate my neutral, unbiased analysis of AA's piss-poor finances as being against you. Your position seems to be You're either with us or against us. Heard that before? I voted against that nonsense last November despite being a life-long member of the GOP.

BoeingBoy, a retired ALPA USAir pilot, can see it. Me, frequent flyer and compulsive gambler in AMR stock (I can't call it investing) can see it. eolesen, frequent flyer and long-time AA and other airline employee (until his family's finances took precedent) can see it.

I guess I could simplistically say "Full pay to the last day" and "management sucks because they refuse to give you restore and more" but that's not my view. Plenty of others constantly ranting about management and their paychecks here.

 

[eolesen]

Hopeful, nobody here is saying you don't deserve raises. At the same time, nobody has yet been able to explain how they can be funded.

I've been pointing out since 2003 that going back to the 2001 payscale isn't sustainable over the long term if you keep the current size workforce and/or workrules.

I don't make excuses for the PUPs -- it was a poor decision on Arpey's part to accept the awards, and he should have held to the example he set in 2003 thru 2005 by not accepted any increase in pay.

But I'll point out again.... what has been paid to those privileged few is a drop in the bucket. Management at all levels could all work for free and give back every dollar they've received since 2003, and it still wouldn't cover more than a week or two of AA's non-management payroll.

So I'll ask again: where is the money for raises supposed to come from?

 

[coldplay]

So I'll ask again: where is the money for raises supposed to come from?

well first of all, get rid of those "top talent", the same "talent" making all these money-losing decisions of the past years. frankly, i don't see how this company has seen losses quarter after freaking quarter, and yet we still have the same clowns running the circus. Put a team in there that knows that you have to respect your workforce if you want to see gains. A happy workforce makes a profitable company..simple logic. SWA follows that simple plan, treat your employees well and with respect, treat them as an asset instead of a hindrance to management's bonus programs. We all sit here admiring Southwest Airlines, their work philosophy and how well they do yet most of these management rah-rah boys fail to see why it works for them: TREATING EMPLOYEES AS AN ASSET!

yes, giving raises and making your employees earn a livable salary MAY incur a few losses in the short term but will reap greater rewards in the long term.
Giving outrageous salaries and allowances for those people on top who mainly are responsible for the big losses we see does nothing but diminished morale.

so start there, share the wealth, take it off from these bozos salaries. That's a good start.
bring their salaries down to a level that reflects their true "talent" worth...I'd say cut their salaries 3/4ths would be minimum.

I personally wouldn't mind having a CEO and his team having outrageous salaries and golden parachutes but the thing is THEY have to prove to me they DESERVE it.
This present team of "talent" honestly does not deserve it and is severely lacking.

 

[ordcommuter]

[/quote]What will be interesting to see is whether any of the unions at AA are willing to support a strike from another one of the unions. We are all close to that point in negotiations.

When I was growing up in Birmingham, AL in the 50's and the steel mills and coal mines were still going gangbusters, no one, and I mean, NO ONE, crossed a picket line--even if it was just 10 shop janitors on strike.
[/quote]


Times have unfortunately changed. How many flight attendants crossed the NW mechanics picket line to commute to work or home on NW? How many bought cars made in non union factories or shop at non union grocery stores such as Walmart? I hate to say this but this is just no more union support even among unions members.

 

[Hopeful]

deleted

 

[eolesen]

yes, giving raises and making your employees earn a livable salary MAY incur a few losses in the short term but will reap greater rewards in the long term.

Not MAY. Try WILL incur losses. AA's losing money without raises, so what makes you think that increasing wages will reverse that?...

Giving outrageous salaries and allowances for those people on top who mainly are responsible for the big losses we see does nothing but diminished morale.

Don't have the exact number, but executive salaries historically account for less than 2% of payroll. Even if it's now 3% of payroll, that won't go very far towards offsetting more than perhaps a 2% raise (assuming you fire everyone and get replacements to work for 30% of what the current group is earning).

Got any constructive ideas on how to realistically fund a 5-10% raise? Claiming that happy employees means more revenue sounds great, but we all know that there's no such thing as brand loyalty when Brand X is $10 cheaper in price... AA hasn't been able initiate and get a fare increase to stick in many, many years, so what makes you think they can do so now?

 

[AANOTOK]

How does Southwest do it eol?

 

[Hopeful]

I had no idea so I looked up the proxy statements. The top management (listed in the proxy statement) got increases of 1.5% in their base salary each year. Arpey got one base salary raise because when Horton was rehired, he demanded more than Arpey was making at the time, so the board gave Arpey a raise so that he'd be the highest paid exec.



It's funny to read your thoughts about the extent of my concerns.

I actually want higher fares and a profitable airline. I have more than enough money to buy tickets and would still buy them even if they went up 50%. Problem is, AA simply can't convince enough people to pay more. Think I want to fly with underpaid, disgruntled mechanics? I'm all for matching that UPS contract. Profitable airline = even higher gains on that stock I bought last year for under $3/share. Profitable airline would make pay raises much easier to pay (as in - AA would have the cash to pay them).

Sure I want my upgrades and bonus miles and higher stock prices. Doesn't mean I don't support higher pay. You mistakenly equate my neutral, unbiased analysis of AA's piss-poor finances as being against you. Your position seems to be You're either with us or against us. Heard that before? I voted against that nonsense last November despite being a life-long member of the GOP.

BoeingBoy, a retired ALPA USAir pilot, can see it. Me, frequent flyer and compulsive gambler in AMR stock (I can't call it investing) can see it. eolesen, frequent flyer and long-time AA and other airline employee (until his family's finances took precedent) can see it.

I guess I could simplistically say "Full pay to the last day" and "management sucks because they refuse to give you restore and more" but that's not my view. Plenty of others constantly ranting about management and their paychecks here.

[q

Was Horton or is he that valuable? Was he the only exec on the planet that AA could've hired? This is the same nonsense at AA that gets defended.



It's also funny how your opinions consider me and those like me unrealistic for asking for anything..Let alone restoration.




Piss poor performance seems to have nothing to do with stock price these days. Companies are still in the red and stock creeping up regardless.




no active employees in that list. As for your "gambling" problem..Good for you! No way can I or would I invest in any stock when I have kid's college tuition on my plate. I want a raise to keep up with inflation and living expenses. Big shots like yourself can play the market. i could care less.
I don't want stock, profit sharing, nada.....I want a structural increase in my salary. Let the suits take them



I will say this again. Prior to the concessions that were forced upon us (and i don't care if it was voted in, it was under a threat), I never cared what an executive made or anybody else.
But when they preached shared pain, forgive me if i'm disgruntled, because the suits do not feel the pain that the lowly workers feel.

 

[coldplay]

Not MAY. Try WILL incur losses. AA's losing money without raises, so what makes you think that increasing wages will reverse that?...



Don't have the exact number, but executive salaries historically account for less than 2% of payroll. Even if it's now 3% of payroll, that won't go very far towards offsetting more than perhaps a 2% raise (assuming you fire everyone and get replacements to work for 30% of what the current group is earning).

Got any constructive ideas on how to realistically fund a 5-10% raise? Claiming that happy employees means more revenue sounds great, but we all know that there's no such thing as brand loyalty when Brand X is $10 cheaper in price... AA hasn't been able initiate and get a fare increase to stick in many, many years, so what makes you think they can do so now?

spoken like a true rah-rah management boy, unwilling to try something "new". Goodness, "WILL incur losses", as compared to "MAY incur losses", as if WILL incur losses is a bad thing for you management types, you can't see past next week but only what you can reap at the moment.

For one thing, raising employees salaries to a respectable livable rate "WILL" incur losses in the short term WILL not bring this company down, as Management will want you to think. What you get out of Management realizing that the employees deserve to be respected as ASSETS is the one thing missing in this company: PRIDE. pride in your job, pride of whom you work for. Employees Proud enough to claim "Hey i work for American Airlines, the airline that respects its employees, so I will return that respect , i will be proud to make this airline the best it can be"

You build it, they will come. people will realize that anyone proud enough to work hard for this company will get better service out of these happy employees.

But because of the utter disrespect Management has for the employee groups, do you honestly believe that anyone can say they are proud to be part of the American Airlines family?

ergo..shoddy service, low morale, quarterly losses.

 

[Flyboy4u]

At what point do we get rid of an entire BOD who has done nothing but continue to throw this airline into the red, and hire a BOD who cares about customer service, and making an airline survive? Please let us know with all of your aviation knowledge? What does it take?

 

[eolesen]

How does Southwest do it eol?

Simple. Productivity and a severe lack of "it's not my job" syndrome...

Without question, WN doesn't have nearly the same rigidity when it comes to workrules.

Scheduling of FA's and pilots has pointed out repeatedly, as has the ability to outsource overhaul at-will. Sure, different networks, different requirements, but at the end of the day, they still have more flexibility to schedule their people than AA does.

God forbid a flight attendant on AA be asked to pick up trash on a turn flight that Fleet was assigned to work. First of all, we know the FA wouldn't lower herself to put down her Starbucks or Cosmo to help out, and secondly, even if she did, the FSC who could care less about picking up the trash would probably waste no time filing a grievance over it.

You don't see that type of crap at WN. Supervisor throws a couple bags? The crew takes it in stride. Pilot scanning BP's at the jetbridge? No worries. Flight attendant making boarding announcements? Go for it.

It's a different mentality called "serve the customer and keep the planes moving" which really has nothing to do with their management structure. Whether or not they trust "management" seems to be left out of how they do their jobs and interact with customers.

It's not even unique to Southwest. Lots of airlines manage to form and maintain a collaborative & customer-centric culture, and not surprisingly, their employees don't put up with the sense of entitlement and "that's not my job" attitude that has built up at AA over the past 80 years.

 

[FWAAA]

Was Horton or is he that valuable? Was he the only exec on the planet that AA could've hired? This is the same nonsense at AA that gets defended.

Don't know, don't care. He is working for less base salary than most CFOs of major corporations. If he worked for free, his pay divided among all represented workers wouldn't give you a $10/year raise.

It's also funny how your opinions consider me and those like me unrealistic for asking for anything..Let alone restoration.

Nope, you're incorrect. I do think you're being impatient. As some others have posted, waiting until AA actually recovers would probably give you more leverage. Aren't execs are more likely to settle for higher pay if it means preserving a profit stream without a devastating strike? If you strike when the company is losing a billion dollars a year, the execs are likely to thank you for shutting it down.

no active employees in that list. As for your "gambling" problem..Good for you! No way can I or would I invest in any stock when I have kid's college tuition on my plate. I want a raise to keep up with inflation and living expenses. Big shots like yourself can play the market. i could care less.
I don't want stock, profit sharing, nada.....I want a structural increase in my salary. Let the suits take them.

Yes, you want guaranteed raises regardless of whether the venture makes money.

I will say this again. Prior to the concessions that were forced upon us (and i don't care if it was voted in, it was under a threat), I never cared what an executive made or anybody else.
But when they preached shared pain, forgive me if i'm disgruntled, because the suits do not feel the pain that the lowly workers feel.

Executives have never and will never "feel the pain" that "lowly workers" feel. They took base salary cuts in 2003 and took 1.5% raises each year (just like the represented workers). Their LT incentive pay agreements paid off big when AA's stock outperformed all comparable airlines by recovering from $1.25/sh to $41/sh. Yes, I know your stock options didn't make up for your pain. Your union should have demanded more upside in 2003. It didn't, and it failed you. If it were me, I would have spent the last 7 years replacing the worthless union and setting in motion increases to my pay instead of worrying about Arpey's paychecks, but to each his own.