🌟 Exclusive Amazon Black Friday Deals 2024 🌟
Don’t miss out on the best deals of the season! Shop now 🎁
A Viable Approach To Concessions...
- Thread starter ELP_WN_Psgr
- Start date
OP
ELP_WN_Psgr
Senior
- Nov 29, 2003
- 419
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #47
Folks, I am flattered. To the union people lining up to nominate me for Prez/CEO...I'd give you fair warning. Be careful what you ask for, you might get it.
Seriously, we all know that could never happen in a million years just like we know that management would never take seriously what some bozo down in Texas thinks.
The real deal is we all know that some concessions are going to be necessary. The real problem is that the folks who work at USAirways cannot trust management to take the savings generated by the concessions and do anything worthwhile with them. If the folks running the showwere willing to make some changes, show some initiative, be a bit creative....I expect the working folks to be lining up to do what is necessary to save the company.
It sounds overly trite and simplistic but trust is the glue that holds everything together. I can't say I blame USAirways employees for not trusting management....they've provided scant evidence that they are to be trusted.
Trust is a two-way street. Management has to trust employees to represent their company well and do their job effectively. Employees need to be able to trust their leaders to make sound decisions and manage the firm for the good of all - stockholders, management, employees, and customers.
Airfares of a buck fifty a mile for a 300 mile trip...well, I personally don't know how a res agent can quote that fare without coming unglued. management can't be trusted to treat customers fairly. How can they be trusted to treat employees fairly?
Management has taken one bankruptcy which has wiped out the value of a lot of shareholders' investments. They are talking of taking another. I think that will be the end. Management has demonstrated they are not overwhelmingly concerned with the shareholders.
The company deserves someone up on top who can be trusted to do the right thing. That doesn't mean caving in to labor demands...heck, it doesn't even mean not asking for concessions or making people work hard. It does mean being open, honest, upfront, and forthcoming with the grandiose schemes for maneuvering the company into better times.
There is far too much management and nowhere near enough leadership at USAirways. Here is one more suggestion for you: There should never be more than two layers between any employee and the President/CEO. For example...a Flight Attendant should answer to the Chief Hostess (sorry for the archaic term) who answers to the VP-Inflight Service who answers to the President. A ticket agent, rez agent, baggage buster should answer to the Station Manager who answers to the VP-Ground Ops who answers to the President.
If your managers feel like their span of control is not adequate for such a daunting task....my suggestion to them is to find a job as a shift manager at McDonald's or Burger King.
Which brings us all back to trust. To delegate that much power and authority to subordinates requires that you put a whole lot of trust and confidence in them. It means you have to be willing to let people make decisions on your behalf and that you have to be willing to back them up. It means delegation, not micromanagement. It means empowering mid-level folks and front-line employees instead of a ery short leash.
In this day and age, in this company, I don't think such a thing is possible.
Seriously, we all know that could never happen in a million years just like we know that management would never take seriously what some bozo down in Texas thinks.
The real deal is we all know that some concessions are going to be necessary. The real problem is that the folks who work at USAirways cannot trust management to take the savings generated by the concessions and do anything worthwhile with them. If the folks running the showwere willing to make some changes, show some initiative, be a bit creative....I expect the working folks to be lining up to do what is necessary to save the company.
It sounds overly trite and simplistic but trust is the glue that holds everything together. I can't say I blame USAirways employees for not trusting management....they've provided scant evidence that they are to be trusted.
Trust is a two-way street. Management has to trust employees to represent their company well and do their job effectively. Employees need to be able to trust their leaders to make sound decisions and manage the firm for the good of all - stockholders, management, employees, and customers.
Airfares of a buck fifty a mile for a 300 mile trip...well, I personally don't know how a res agent can quote that fare without coming unglued. management can't be trusted to treat customers fairly. How can they be trusted to treat employees fairly?
Management has taken one bankruptcy which has wiped out the value of a lot of shareholders' investments. They are talking of taking another. I think that will be the end. Management has demonstrated they are not overwhelmingly concerned with the shareholders.
The company deserves someone up on top who can be trusted to do the right thing. That doesn't mean caving in to labor demands...heck, it doesn't even mean not asking for concessions or making people work hard. It does mean being open, honest, upfront, and forthcoming with the grandiose schemes for maneuvering the company into better times.
There is far too much management and nowhere near enough leadership at USAirways. Here is one more suggestion for you: There should never be more than two layers between any employee and the President/CEO. For example...a Flight Attendant should answer to the Chief Hostess (sorry for the archaic term) who answers to the VP-Inflight Service who answers to the President. A ticket agent, rez agent, baggage buster should answer to the Station Manager who answers to the VP-Ground Ops who answers to the President.
If your managers feel like their span of control is not adequate for such a daunting task....my suggestion to them is to find a job as a shift manager at McDonald's or Burger King.
Which brings us all back to trust. To delegate that much power and authority to subordinates requires that you put a whole lot of trust and confidence in them. It means you have to be willing to let people make decisions on your behalf and that you have to be willing to back them up. It means delegation, not micromanagement. It means empowering mid-level folks and front-line employees instead of a ery short leash.
In this day and age, in this company, I don't think such a thing is possible.
ELP, I think the two-layer rule is a good one to a point, though one cannot keep that degree of svelteness indefinitely. Beyond a certain point, the number of stations becomes too much for a single person to manage, and regional directors need to be added.
Having said that, the one additional layer (making it three) would be the end of it, and then only necessary once you get a large enough number of stations to require it. If each regional manager handled 30 stations, then you could have 30 regions and handle up to 900 stations. No airline comes close to serving 900 destinations, but many handle far more than 30.
Ultimately, though, you're right that one of the biggest problems facing US is trust. CO had that problem before Bethune, and has proven that it's not insurmountable. Nonetheless, the current players aren't doing much to engender trust.
Having said that, the one additional layer (making it three) would be the end of it, and then only necessary once you get a large enough number of stations to require it. If each regional manager handled 30 stations, then you could have 30 regions and handle up to 900 stations. No airline comes close to serving 900 destinations, but many handle far more than 30.
Ultimately, though, you're right that one of the biggest problems facing US is trust. CO had that problem before Bethune, and has proven that it's not insurmountable. Nonetheless, the current players aren't doing much to engender trust.
Scott Adams, creator of Dilbert, has the same idea about a fantasy company he'd create - two layers between the grunts and the CEO.
I can assure you, to date, the Palace trusts NO ONE anywhere near that much.
Adams other idea, which I also subscribe to, is fire EVERY ####, no matter how gifted they are. They are more trouble than they're worth.
I can assure you, to date, the Palace trusts NO ONE anywhere near that much.
Adams other idea, which I also subscribe to, is fire EVERY ####, no matter how gifted they are. They are more trouble than they're worth.
