Southwest's Plans

[geo1004]

Please provide factual data that WN's employees are junior!

I'm fairly certain that none of WN's pilots make as much as the folks who sit in the pointy end of an A-330.

As for fleet decisions, you are right. But you can't blame CURRENT management for that can you? Something tells me that Dave & Co. would just love to see an all Airbus fleet mainline and all ERJ at the Express level.

 

[700UW]

Dave created a VP of Fleet Planning and they redid the airbus narrow and widebody orders and ordered all the RJs.

And compare a 737 pilot at WN and US, you can't compare a plane that is over double the size.

 

[geo1004]

Off to dinner! It's finally nice here in the DC area so I think we will be grilling some steaks!

But don't worry, if I see Wolf tooling around in his vintage Jaguar convertible, I'll be sure to "accidentally" let one of those tomatoes fly out the window!

 

[Fubijaakr]

True. But most of their employees are far less senior than US's - hence US's labor costs are higher.

The ONLY reason SWA has junior employees is due to expansion.

 

[funguy2]

Please provide factual data that WN's employees are junior!

Southwest Airlines newest employee is a new hire with 0 years seniority.

US Airways newest employee has 10 years of seniority, with thousands of people on furlough behind him awaiting a call back.

Logic suggests that Southwest's workforce is more junior than US Airways. If you cannot figure this out, you are not thinking logically.

When you furlough employees on a low-seniority basis, you by default create a high-seniority workforce.

This is not rocket science.

 

[700UW]

Southwest Airlines newest employee is a new hire with 0 years seniority.

US Airways newest employee has 10 years of seniority, with thousands of people on furlough behind him awaiting a call back.

Logic suggests that Southwest's workforce is more junior than US Airways. If you cannot figure this out, you are not thinking logically.

When you furlough employees on a low-seniority basis, you by default create a high-seniority workforce.

This is not rocket science.

Wrong, US just hired 18 part-time rampers last month in CLT, try again.

 

[funguy2]

The ONLY reason SWA has junior employees is due to expansion.

So what? What is wrong with that? Expansion is bad?

 

[funguy2]

Wrong, US just hired 18 part-time rampers last month in CLT, try again.

Are these 18 new rampers employees of US Airways, Inc. or an WO?

This is true for any group with furloughs.

You are saying this company has no furloughed rampers? Is this a contact violation?

Even if US Airways hired 18 new hires, big deal... Southwest Airlines is growing by 10% a year, every year. I would assume a similar percentage growth in employment. US Airways fleet has recently been reduced by 50% from historical highs and is now stagnant. I would not be surprised that the company might be forced to replace some people who are jumping ship.

I find your inability to comprehend this fascinating. While you argue the details, the company continues to falter, and this apparently does not concern you.

 

[700UW]

Nope does not concern me anymore, dave is a liar, a cheat and a thief, I have a plan b if this place goes under, my coworkers and I have given over $1.2 billion a year since 2002 and 20,000 jobs and we are no better off.

And all the rampers in CLT have been called back, and they are MAINLINE.

 

[funguy2]

Ok... From US Airways Annual reports.

2000 YE Employees (FT Equivalent) : 48,100
2002 YE Employees (FT Equivalent) : 37,100
Difference: -11,000

From Southwest's Annual Reports:

2000 YE Employees (FT Equivalent) : 29,274
2002 YE Employees (FT Equivalent) : 33,705
Difference: 4,431

Now, who do you think has more senior employees?

Southwest - formed 33 years ago with 0 employees, and a record of growth, including in the employee ranks

OR

US Airways - which has at least the possibility of a 34 year employee (not even possible at Southwest), and has furloughed 11,000 FTE Employees in two years, which is contractually obligated to furlough lowest seniority employees first?

Again... use logic... not rocket science.

P.S. I would have use 2003 numbers if the US Airways 2003 report we available online.

 

[700UW]

US is down to 27,000 employees, there have been on-going layoffs, and that still does not prove WN is junior.

 

[funguy2]

US is down to 27,000 employees, there have been on-going layoffs, and that still does not prove WN is junior.

You are right. It is not proof. It is called deduction.

I have deduced, using logic and the available facts, that US Airways has a more senior work force. Furthermore, I have outlined exactly how I came to my conclusion. I have presented a strong case as to why US Airways has a more senior work force.

You have asked a question. You have presented nothing in support of your alleged theory that Southwest's workforce is more senior beyond simply questioning it.

If you want proof, why don't you research it? Then you can prove me wrong and actually contribute something as opposed to ranting emotional responses.

 

[700UW]

All your numbers from WN just say they hired 4,000 employees in a year, does not say anything about the previous 29,000 employees years of service with the company.

 

[diverboy]

Southwest Airlines senority in Los Angeles:

CSA: approx 4 years
Provisioning: approx 5 years
Operations: approx 6 years

in Hartford (BDL)
CSA: 2 years !!

 

[funguy2]

All your numbers from WN just say they hired 4,000 employees in a year, does not say anything about the previous 29,000 employees years of service with the company.

I understand what my number say.

Again. I take my numbers and apply logic to it. US Airways is lost 11000 generally low-seniority people, increasing the average seniority level of the remaining employees.

Southwest added low seniority people. I might even think that this lowers Southwest's average seniority, but because I don't have as clear a picture as to their hiring/firing/retirements, I would not make that bet. With US Airways, it is known that they are actively furloughing employees with whom they have contract to furlough the most junior first. While there is probably some retirements occuring, that is not the only thing occuring.

You have still not supported your theory at all. You have simply re-asked the question and attempt to torpedo my argument. However, you have no argument of your own.