Let us talk about discontent in the ranks, and why that is so.
1. The WN factor - When fleet and customer services were negotiating their initial contracts, Gangwhal kept talking about WN's lower labor costs. When we provided him with WN's labor contracts, which showed higher compensation than U's proposals, that talk dried up. Now, Mr. Siegel is focusing on WN's CASM's. Let me stipulate: WN CASM's are lower than U's, and WN is a clear and present danger to U. However, it seems Mr. Siegel only talks about the labor side of CASM. CASM has been brilliantly discussed on this board; I will not go into the depths again. In summary, labor plays only a part of the C (total costs, of which labor is only a part) Available seats (which size and type of aircraft) and Miles (stage length) equation. It's worth repeating; management has sole initiative over most of the CASM equation. To be fair, some progress has been made. On the non-labor costs side, we have reduced fleet types and reduced the costs of aircraft leases, although as AOG N IT cogently points out, there are some steep ownership costs associated with Airbus. I imagine, under BK, facility costs took a similiar haircut. The Caribbean initiative is helpful, but I doubt will be a long-term factor. Cannot WN or JB service the Caribbean Basin? But all in all, employees are left with the impression that, in order to lower CASM, we will be asked or forced to shoulder the burden, while the rest of the CASM equation goes largely unchanged. Or in simpler terms, employees will subsidize a failed business plan.
2. Agents are opposed to further concessions than is contractually agreed to, because further concessions are ALREADY built into the contract, via MDA and Express. While a mainline jet, flown by mainline crews, and maintained by mainline mechanics, will fly into a station, the flight will be groundhandled by express personnel. There is virtually no end in sight to this phenomenon.
3. Look at U's metrics over the past 5 years. Despite the turmoil, employees have delivered a professional product to the customers. Jerry Ornstein has been quoted as saying pilots are overpaid, as he still fills up his training classes. I fear U has the same attitude - obviously, we are treating the employees too well, as they are still able to deliver the goods.
Gentlemen, I do not for a second think you are ignorant, incapable or incompetent. To the contrary, you know exactly what you are doing. I think the focus on CASM, and the focus on the 'silent majority' is a distractionary explanation as you execute the long-term plan. I suspect that plan to be to the detriment of many employees, so do not expect us to go quietly into that good night.
In the meanwhile, I will continue to provide the customer with a professional effort until the end comes, or I am proven wrong.
1. The WN factor - When fleet and customer services were negotiating their initial contracts, Gangwhal kept talking about WN's lower labor costs. When we provided him with WN's labor contracts, which showed higher compensation than U's proposals, that talk dried up. Now, Mr. Siegel is focusing on WN's CASM's. Let me stipulate: WN CASM's are lower than U's, and WN is a clear and present danger to U. However, it seems Mr. Siegel only talks about the labor side of CASM. CASM has been brilliantly discussed on this board; I will not go into the depths again. In summary, labor plays only a part of the C (total costs, of which labor is only a part) Available seats (which size and type of aircraft) and Miles (stage length) equation. It's worth repeating; management has sole initiative over most of the CASM equation. To be fair, some progress has been made. On the non-labor costs side, we have reduced fleet types and reduced the costs of aircraft leases, although as AOG N IT cogently points out, there are some steep ownership costs associated with Airbus. I imagine, under BK, facility costs took a similiar haircut. The Caribbean initiative is helpful, but I doubt will be a long-term factor. Cannot WN or JB service the Caribbean Basin? But all in all, employees are left with the impression that, in order to lower CASM, we will be asked or forced to shoulder the burden, while the rest of the CASM equation goes largely unchanged. Or in simpler terms, employees will subsidize a failed business plan.
2. Agents are opposed to further concessions than is contractually agreed to, because further concessions are ALREADY built into the contract, via MDA and Express. While a mainline jet, flown by mainline crews, and maintained by mainline mechanics, will fly into a station, the flight will be groundhandled by express personnel. There is virtually no end in sight to this phenomenon.
3. Look at U's metrics over the past 5 years. Despite the turmoil, employees have delivered a professional product to the customers. Jerry Ornstein has been quoted as saying pilots are overpaid, as he still fills up his training classes. I fear U has the same attitude - obviously, we are treating the employees too well, as they are still able to deliver the goods.
Gentlemen, I do not for a second think you are ignorant, incapable or incompetent. To the contrary, you know exactly what you are doing. I think the focus on CASM, and the focus on the 'silent majority' is a distractionary explanation as you execute the long-term plan. I suspect that plan to be to the detriment of many employees, so do not expect us to go quietly into that good night.
In the meanwhile, I will continue to provide the customer with a professional effort until the end comes, or I am proven wrong.
