Us Air Needs To Cut Costs By Yearend

BoeingBoy

Veteran
Nov 9, 2003
16,512
5,865
[Notice that in the 4th paragraph the bar has been raised - Jim]

Aviation Daily

US Air Needs To Cut Costs By Yearend To Survive LCCs Battle
By Steve Lott
02/26/2004 10:00:55 AM

US Airways CEO David Siegel yesterday warned the airline must cut its costs by at least 25% by yearend -- and preferably by this summer -- or face ultimate defeat by Southwest and other low-cost carriers invading its network.

Following a speech to the Potomac Officers Club in Washington, Siegel told The DAILY, "We need to have a competitive cost structure in place" when Southwest starts service to Philadelphia in May, "or shortly thereafter." One thing is clear, it must lower its unit costs in 2004, he said. "The sooner, the better because Southwest is coming, and we need to be able to compete vigorously."

Siegel told local business leaders that US Air's 10-cent unit costs won't lead to profitability in the rapidly changing environment, and he aims to cut four cents from CASM on routes where the airline competes with low-cost carriers.

Roughly 2.5 cents of that will come from labor, he noted. While Siegel is "making good progress" with the carrier's labor groups, if he does not win concessions, the airline will "have to look at other alternatives that are not as attractive to our employees and our stakeholders."

There is no way to stop the economic forces, he said, adding, "We know what will happen to us in Philadelphia if we don't fix our problems." He believes management is entering a "constructive phase" in its labor talks after both sides "vented" frustrations. The next round is often the most difficult, he said, and will be "painful for everyone, but we have no choice but to rally together."

Siegel also said that domestic consolidation is "inevitable" during the next few years. He predicts a U.S. market with two or three strong hub-and-spoke carriers providing international service with broad networks, and then a "swarm" of low-cost carriers battling it out in high-density markets.

After his speech, Siegel said the US Airways assets "will participate in the consolidation process," but not much else unless the airline is able to lower its costs to competitive levels. If it can't cut costs, "we will be the awkward teenager at the school dance, hoping someone will come talk to us, but going home disappointed and lonely."
 
Could that mean that somebody making $20/hour could be reduced to $12/hour? OUCH! Even a 20% cost reduction would take $20/hr down to $16/hr. If you take a pilot at $100 per flight hour where does he go to, $60 or $80? He/she is already down something like 20% already.
 
Steve Lott of Aviation Daily wrote: (US Airways CEO Dave) Siegel also said that domestic consolidation is "inevitable" during the next few years. He predicts a U.S. market with two or three strong hub-and-spoke carriers providing international service with broad networks, and then a "swarm" of low-cost carriers battling it out in high-density markets.

USA320Pilot comments: With a competitive cost structure US Airways could be the surviving business entity in the pending corporate transaction, according to US Airways chairman David Bronner, who would presumably fund the transaction with RSA funds.

According to a recent Charlotte Observer article, the Retirement Systems of Alabama won't put more money into US Airways now. "You never want to throw good money after bad ... to save something that's bleeding," he said. But if the airline turns profitable, it could invest in acquiring more assets.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot
 
coolflyingfool said:
Could that mean that somebody making $20/hour could be reduced to $12/hour? OUCH! Even a 20% cost reduction would take $20/hr down to $16/hr. If you take a pilot at $100 per flight hour where does he go to, $60 or $80? He/she is already down something like 20% already.
That wage differential has already been negotiated in the agent's contracts when a station is 'expressed'.
 
USA320Pilot said:
Steve Lott of Aviation Daily wrote: (US Airways CEO Dave) Siegel also said that domestic consolidation is "inevitable" during the next few years. He predicts a U.S. market with two or three strong hub-and-spoke carriers providing international service with broad networks, and then a "swarm" of low-cost carriers battling it out in high-density markets.

USA320Pilot comments: With a competitive cost structure US Airways could be the surviving business entity in the pending corporate transaction, according to US Airways chairman David Bronner, who would presumably fund the transaction with RSA funds.

According to a recent Charlotte Observer article, the Retirement Systems of Alabama won't put more money into US Airways now. "You never want to throw good money after bad ... to save something that's bleeding," he said. But if the airline turns profitable, it could invest in acquiring more assets.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot
This is a no-brainer, we must do what we must do.
 
If/when US becomes profitable, the cost of acquiring anything else will go way up, especially given that the prime target of some people's dreams (UA) will be out of Chapter 11, and presumably on the road to, or reaching profitability sooner (as their raw numbers are currently on par with, or better than US).

Siegel 's thoughts on the matter are irrelevent--it's been proven, based on the abject failure of the US business plan less than a year out of bankruptcy that his strategic vision is clouded, at best.
 
Piney,

I will hit on only one pojnt in your post. The "average" hourly rate of a Jet Blue RSV agent is $9/hr. In contrast, a US RSV agent's average hourly rate is $21/hr. What Dave fails to mention is that $21 is pretty much top pay scale. So what does that tell you about the "average" seniority at U vs. Jet Blue? Most of the people left at this airline are senior employees struggling to hold on for a few more years so they can retire. My question is this - what ever happened to retirement incentives? Why not give these people an option to retire without penalty? Doing this may be one solution to cutting labor costs. I personally work with quite a few people who would jump at the chance to retire.

Just to take my point home - a senior agent makes approx. $21/hr a new hire would start at approx. $10/hr. Once again, Dave, in one of his more recent quotes is trying to lay the blame on labor and misrepresenting his employees. He consistently fails to provide all the facts. You see - it's not that the company employs alot of lazy bums making too much for what they do. The truth is that once the tree was pruned all that was left were the employees that had dedicated their lives to U. Obviously, quite a few of those employees are topped out.

Just one more point. Jet Blue, IMO, has a creative and innovative management team. One example is cutting overhead by having "at home" RSV agents. This is just one small example. I'm sure there is a multitude of others we could dig up.
 
PineyBob said:
Shill? I don't think so. Each of us "must do what we must do"
Bob, you forget the rules around here. If you don't chant "full pay 'til the last day" you're a shill. If you don't remind everyone that "the concession stand is closed" you're a shill. If you suggest that there's something wrong with how the unions play the game, you're a shill. If you point out that the company needs to do more than simply stop paying the CEO, you're a shill. :rolleyes:
 
mweiss said:
Bob, you forget the rules around here. If you don't chant "full pay 'til the last day" you're a shill. If you don't remind everyone that "the concession stand is closed" you're a shill. If you suggest that there's something wrong with how the unions play the game, you're a shill. If you point out that the company needs to do more than simply stop paying the CEO, you're a shill. :rolleyes:
Well at least you KNOW the rules :lol:
 
PineyBob said:
"
Management has IMO the dirtiest detail of all. Cleaning up 20 years of screwups and bonehead decisions, allowing US Airways to become a bloated dinosaur. Now faced with unheard of challenges in the industry all of those chickens have come home to roost. They have a task to complete and great portions of it are painful to be polite and all of the rhetoric from labor will not change the basic facts. COSTS are to high PERIOD and if 40% of your total costs come from one area, that's where you go FIRST to cut. Thus round 3 in proposed wage and benefit cuts. It's simple economics. If I can "Buy" res agents for $9/hr on the street right now, why am I paying $21/hr? Would you go to Target and buy the 10 pairs of Lee Jeans @ $21.00 each or go to K-Mart and get the same Lee Jeans for $15.00. Why expect Dave to do what you won't do in your personal life, when it comes to labor? That's the dilema management faces.

.
Bob,

Surely you've learned by now what dave doesn't say is just as important as what he does say.

1. How many 20+ years agents does JB have? None

2. How many 3 year agents does U have? Very, very few.

3. Did dave mention the entry level pay for a U rez agent is $8 and change?

4. When JB does have 20 year agents, do you think they'll still be working for $9?

dave is very apt at setting up, and then knocking down strawmen.

Real life story.

in 2002, I had a congressman tell me the reason legacy carriers were in such a bind was high labor costs. Whereupon I whipped out a copy of the WN contract, and compared it to the contract of an unnamed legacy carrier. He was totally shocked to discover WN agents actually made more (and this was prior to the concession rounds), and said, "I never would have believed that!" I told him that he, of all people, should know better than to believe what he reads in the newspaper.

Bob, remember those links you liked so well? Well, who controls the media? Have you seen labor get a fair shake yet?
 

Latest posts