Airline, Attendants Ready For Concession Talks

[FlyingHippie]

Fyinghippie,

Plane Jane is not employed at U.

Can I say, Jane stop this crazy thing?

 

[planejane]

Plane Jane,

From my perch on the "inside"....you are dead wrong with your assessment of the conditions of the f/as.


I suspect, if f/as are living the life you cite....they are majorily running themselves into major debt in their attempt to maintain a "lifestyle" that is just not realistic.

When the money was good, it was probably affordable. Times change and so must they. This is the problem and where the attitude stems from. I would not want to change my lifestyle either but your alternative is not the answer. I would downsize and do whatever it takes to keep going (by the way, been there and done that) and move on. I would much rather have the smaller house, the cheaper car, then submit every other week to UE for how every long it takes before I can find other employment. I'm not living in lalalalla land. I'm living in the real world and it's not pretty for the unskilled, under grad from college and especially for those over 40! Unless you have a BA or Masters, good luck. Temp jobs usually start you at $8 an hour, with no benefits until 1000 hours of work. I guess I just see it as a no brainer.....

 

[Do_it_for_Dave]

My friend, Pitbull...You mentioned being prepared for the ultimate, strike or liquidation or both. How does this benefit your group and the other employees? I know several HP employees and they are very happy with their current salaries and benefits. While they are not the best in the industry, their airline is starting to make money and the employees will benefit from this in the end.

You and the other union employees should seriously discuss this with your families and weigh the consequences of being unemployed if you do not participate in the transformation plan. A salary reduction will allow the unhappy employees to seek alternative employment. THis is much better than collecting unemployment benefits.

A recent quote by the Velocity Group (Aviation Consulting firm) on the Next Generations of LCCs.

"In reality, as history has proven, only bankruptcy (and reorganization) truly frees legacy carriers of their comparatively burdensome labor agreements. But as low-cost carriers expand with young work forces and flexible work rules, legacy carriers and their unions will have no choice but to follow suit."

 

[PITbull]

Plane Jane,

Don't give us the "employment education" lecture on here. We may start to think you are the wife of USA320 LOL.... pleading to keep him in his seat.


Don't need the lectures either. WE are all grown up now, and know what the world is about. You are on the "outside" of the issue.

Your opinion is fine, but it is profoundly apparent, you lack insight on our issues, our background, our sills, our potential prospects and our desire to succeed individually no matter what we do.

AFter all, we have proven our personal performance in our task and have provided the best in our craft, in this industry, for eons.

 

[PITbull]

Do_it_for _Dave,

Hello pal.

Where've you been, collecting your retention bonus?

Sorry, won't be able to continue to provide your high salary on my back!

HP and alike, are youthful companies. However, you cite above that they have flexible work rules....you must be talking about management using the workers as slaves. B6 is only 4 years old. They too, eventually will have a mature work force as time goes on. Unless, they eventually institute the same policies as U and attempt to rid themselves in anyway possible of their older population of workers.

America West is based in PHX. The cost of living in the North East is much higher than in the midwest. Don't think you guys thought of that.

I guess, your "handle name" now means "do it for Dave Bronner"...LoL... yea, sure I will. :angry:

 

[sfb]

USA320Pilot comments: With all due respect, I fully understand the bankruptcy process and I have held discussions with union officials, advisors, and money managers on this very point.

Actually, I was speaking to "The Truth"'s lack of understanding of the bankruptcy process, but I'll go ahead and give you a scenario to analyze:

Let's assume that UAIR management lucks out and gets Judge Mitchell should they choose to pursue bankruptcy relief subject to Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Let us further assume that ALPA bends over and gives the company everything it wants while the IAM, AFA, and CWA reiterate their stance that "the concession stand is closed." And we'll go even further and take your prediction that the judge will rule for the company in all labor matters, allowing it to reject its agreements with the latter three unions. You can bet that one or more of these groups (and I'd bet the chances with the IAM are above 99%) would choose to strike rather than accept the contract the company imposes, and they'd be pretty much out of business. The unions still have the right to self-help, and a strike at an airline in Chapter 11 would very likely lead in rapid succession to that filing being converted to Chapter 7.

The (comprehensive) plan makes several changes to our business model, including creating a hybrid operation in Philadelphia, increasing aircraft utilization, flying to passengers’ top destinations from LaGuardia, Boston, and DC, and increasing Caribbean and European flying. The Plan also establishes an aggressive new marketing strategy that lets our customers know that US Airways’ fare structure has been simplified and lowered, giving us a competitive product to challenge anyone, anywhere,â€￾ Pollock noted.
...
SFB, Pollock has seen the plan and confidential information. With all due respect, I find it interesting that your uninformed perspective is in conflict with Pollock's.

Oh, I don't doubt that the "Transformation Plan" could work if management were actually able to execute it and if they managed to get the pilots to cough up $300-400 million/year in wages and got another $100-200 million from the other represented groups. After all, the company's operating loss was a shade over $250 million for the last three quarters taken together (they had an operating profit in 2Q03 but that was skewed by the government compensation and conflict in Iraq), and the reduction in wages for the pilots alone would swing that to a profit.

What boggles my mind is that all of those changes envisioned as part of management's so-called "comprehensive" plan require little or no changes to employee compensation! Increasing aircraft utilization; moving flying to LGA, BOS, and DCA; increasing flying to the Caribbean and Europe; marketing the company more agressively; simplifying and rationalizing the fare structure; and moving to a "hybrid" (whatever that implies) operation at PHL could all have been done a year ago! If these moves would help save the company, why hasn't management moved forward with them yet?? Matching WN fares from PHL and increasing frequency on routes against WN does not count as "transforming" the company! If the plan will truly lead to improved revenue for the company, it ought to have been implemented already.

For his faults, at least Don Carty could point to meaningful changes that were made in AMR's operation before they came after the employee groups for concessions. It's been clear that cuts in wages and benefits will be a last resort (under current management) at CAL. But at UAIR, cuts in wages to below LCC levels are critical, even though US Airways currently has the least exposure to LCC's of any network carrier save perhaps NWA. Why is this?

I actually fail to see how the company can manage to wring savings of $100 million per year from its flight attendants even if they were knocked down to AA Eagle or Mesa wages. And Pollock's endorsement of the "Transformation Plan" doesn't change the fact that a reduction of 2 cents/ASM in labor CASM represents a 45 percent reduction in labor expense, and I cannot see most of US Airways' labor groups (ALPA aside) agreeing to that magnitude of cut. I realize that "productivity improvements" will supposedly help to reach this cost-cutting goal, but again, these productivity improvements do not, for the most part, require the labor contracts to be reopened, and could have been implemented months ago.

Let's just assume, for the sake of argument, that the company manages to improve employee productivity by 20% across the board; i.e. they could have generated 156 million ASM's for the same $577 million in labor expense last quarter. That would have given a labor CASM of 3.70 cents, a reduction of 0.74 cents/mile. To get to the company's targeted reduction of 2 cents, labor would still have to bear cuts of 34% even while being 20% more productive. WN's current labor CASM is 3.20 cents (1.24 cents lower than US); most of the company's non-fuel unit cost differential of 3.45 cents with WN is not in labor.

Please explain to me (since I clearly have an "uninformed perspective") why Wall Street seems to be in agreement with me as to the airline's chance of survival with its current lack of a viable business strategy aside from "hammer on the unions again." UAIR's share price is sitting at $1.50, 47 cents above bankrupt UAL's soon-to-be-cancelled shares -- this is not a resounding endorsement of the company's future prospects. If I were Dr. Bronner and I believed that US Airways had a good chance of escaping a second bankruptcy, I'd be buying up even more of the company at this bargain price. He's a smart guy, he knows a good business opportunity when he sees it, right?

Again, please feel free to enlighten me as to how the company will reach a non-fuel CASM of 6 cents when the non-labor, non-fuel CASM last quarter stood at 5.58 cents.

 

[MrAeroMan]

And just who may I ask makes the rules of the "what is, of the game?

The consumer does by what they're willing to pay for a flight. The LCC's help by keeping the fare bar low.

 

[jbragg476]

I'm with all the "FULL PAY TILL THE LAST DAY" People.

Except in my case it is probably "FULL PAY TILL LABOR DAY"

 

[MrAeroMan]

mweiss/320/hawk and like minded wackos...this airline is going to fail and it will not the be the fault of Teddy or any labor union leader. It will rest with corporate America's greed and corruption, helped along with people like you three as being their cheerleaders acting like co-dependants in need of mental help.

There is plenty of blame to go around if it tanks.

 

[planejane]

Plane Jane,

Don't give us the "employment education" lecture on here. We may start to think you are the wife of USA320 LOL....

I wouldn't have only I don't see anyone else shedding the other side of this story.

The very real consquences that should be brought to light. Not only your beliefs, but the real possibilities that many may face.

Also, am I an outsider? I don't know your history? Think before you speak. All that you might say may not necessarily be factual.

Oh that's it.....That's another thing that's wrong with this board! See, I post one simple statement and I become a page long topic. Good nite.

 

[PITbull]

Plane Jane,

"No one else shedding any light"? Excuse my bluntness, your view point has been shared ad nausem.

I did think before I posted about your thread. I know, and you have implied, you are not an employee of U. But hey....

Good night!, and give USA320 a hug for me...will ya?

 

[BoeingBoy]

sfb,

Your post pretty much sums up my feelings of "the plan", though much more eloquently than I could have. Despite the cheerleading from the ALPA MEC office, I just can't see the numbers adding up to where the plan is supposed to take us.

The only thing I would add to your post is this...

All the plan's attention is on mainline cost or CASM, but we are not a mainline only airline. The express operation is providing an increasingly large percentage of our ASM's, with a growing number of RJ's that have a higher CASM than mainline (the numbers that I've seen say the 70-seaters have a direct operating CASM of about 8 cents). Even if mainline CASM could be reduced to around 8 cents for the hub/spoke portion, our overall CASM would be higher.

Jim

 

[delldude]

HP and alike, are youthful companies. However, you cite above that they have flexible work rules....you must be talking about management using the workers as slaves. B6 is only 4 years old. They too, eventually will have a mature work force as time goes on. Unless, they eventually institute the same policies as U and attempt to rid themselves in anyway possible of their older population of workers.

so could this be the reason behind U wanting a 1:5 seniority giveback ratio?
we need to know....

 

[mweiss]

But what I sense is more a feeling of "Let it die; we've done all we can do."

There's a significant difference from your analogy, though:

There are many "dependent children," if you will, who actually want to continue to receive the income that comes from the patient's continued survival. With the real car crash, continued survival means more costs.

Thus, killing the patient, even with euthanistic intent, robs the choice from those who would otherwise choose to linger under lower wage conditions.

 

[mweiss]

The very premise of the Free Market, Capitalist system is that there is a constant skirmish between supply and demand.

Exactly. And the very premise of the free market, capitalist system is that if someone demands your product (i.e., labor) at a price below that at which you are willing to supply it, then you go find another buyer. You don't kill the guy who asked to buy your product at the lowball price.