Arpey Could Give American A Fresh Start ?

[Winglet]

Well, let''s see, the current business plan is losing us $5 million a day, give or take. How long before there is no more money?

Or, maybe, RV4, some employees are disgruntled because they have not been given a reason by management to HAVE confidence in the future.

This ain''t rocket science. This is basic leadership 101.

 

[Winglet]

Still no business plan, huh, Buzzkill.

If Arpey doesn''t start leading this company soon, there isn''t going to be any company to lead. We have no viable business plan. Even with the putting thousands of employees out of work, and drastic cuts in compensation, Mr. Arpey''s CASM is still way too high and he''s not going to get his 30% premium in these days of Walmart Air. There is no light at the end of his tunnel.

All I''ve heard is boilerplate platitudes out of Mr. Arpey, but certainly nothing that inspires confidence in his leadership or management prowess.

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 5/9/2003 802 PM KCFlyer wrote:

----------------
On 5/9/2003 6:28:18 PM Bob Owens wrote:

Oh yea, and raise ticket prices by $25 across the board.​

----------------​

So...you mean they should raise the unrestricted coach fare from DFW to STL from $1254 to $1279?

----------------​

Sure. If your desperate enough to pay $1254 then you will pay $1279.

 

[buzzkill]

----------------
On 5/10/2003 3:59:55 PM Winglet wrote:

Still no business plan, huh, Buzzkill.

If Arpey doesn''t start leading this company soon, there isn''t going to be any company to lead. We have no viable business plan. Even with the putting thousands of employees out of work, and drastic cuts in compensation, Mr. Arpey''s CASM is still way too high and he''s not going to get his 30% premium in these days of Walmart Air. There is no light at the end of his tunnel.

All I''ve heard is boilerplate platitudes out of Mr. Arpey, but certainly nothing that inspires confidence in his leadership or management prowess.

----------------​

That''s right, you still have not given any suggestions for a new business plan. You have complained about the current business plan, but you don''t have any solutions.

At least Bob Owens and Eoleson articulated what they would do differently. I get the feeling you would like AA to be more like WN. If so, how do you suggest AA change from a big, hub and spoke airline with multiple fleet types, first class seating, Eagle connections, and union contracts that are still a great deal away from being as productive as WN''s?

 

[Winglet]

Probably some of the things mentioned already might be helpful. As far as my own personal suggestions, I think Carty and Arpey have already missed the boat and it's now too late. The industry changed 2 years ago.

The primary functions of senior leadership is to forcast the market, change the strategic direction of the company to lead-turn the customer, and to motivate and inspire the employees.

My job is to tactically execute the strategic plan of the company by flying airplanes.

It's Mr. Arpey's job to strategically plan. It is apparent that our strategic plan will not ensure the long term survival of the company.

Going back to the original title of this thread . . . What is "fresh" about Mr. Arpey's approach to leading American Airlines?

 

[AC AA LA FA]

From where I stand the biggest problem at AA is that our product is stale-we are offering less and less in to the passanger in the way of inovation and comfort. Our service, as reflected in the latest Survey America results, has consistently declined-meal quality, quantity/cabin apperence-comfort-all impacted by our stagnent marketing department and closed minded suits who remain so out of touch in this area it is un real. When a LLC can run up against a "full service carrier" in these areas-whats to keep anyone from saving money for a better flight? When the LLCs improve ther FFP-and tie ins are further introduced..that will be the end...
JMO...
Arpey-my fingers are crossed...but a am not holding our breath..
looks as if AAdvantage program was our first-and last-real marketing weapon..

I feel Song-at DL is headed the right direction-I hope AA keeps an eye on whats up over there and impliment a similar concept...time will tell..

 

[Winglet]

The problem is that the customer has become accustomed to unsustainable low fares from the major airlines. When they get on SWA, they expect to be in a cattle car, but when they get on AA or UAL, they expect a meal, personal service, etc. . . . . . . oh, AND the same price as SWA. When they don''t get it, they denegrate the airline.

Like it or not, it''s WALMART Air from now on. This is bus travel now, ladies and gentlemen. Oh, and your wages will reflect the same.

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 5/12/2003 805 AM Winglet wrote:

The problem is that the customer has become accustomed to unsustainable low fares from the major airlines.

You''re right...the leisure customer has become accustomed to unsustainable low fares. And the companies offer them what they want, and still try to "make it up" by screwing with the business passenger. And even the attempts to "value price" the business ticketss are still laden with change fees and use it or lose it penalties. That;s managment''s fault...if they even think of trying to offer value pricing in it''s truest form, some other airline will launch a loss leading fare sale to lure the leisure traveller. And managment, wanting to win the "market share" war at any costs, matches those sales, when what they should do is stick to their guns and be willing to give up an 80% load factor, of which 50% of that is losing them money, and let the other carriers take all the loss leaders that they want. Let them screw themselves - in short order, you''ll find consumer advocates crying "bait and switch" when the super duper money losing low fares aren''t available. But as long as the attitude exists that "if you''re desparate enough to pay $1200 to fly from Dallas to St Louis, you''ll pay $1,225", and not admit that that''s pretty steep for an hour and a half flight, you''ll end up playing the "revenue managment" game with a model that has been broken for a few years. My sister lives in Dallas and works in Telecom. For those of you who think airline workers have it rough, read up on telecoms, or better yet, take a tour of "telecom row" up in Richardson/Plano. Used to be those folks were the ones who would pay the $1,200 and think nothing of it...times were gravy for their employer. Now, the ones who are left and have watched 60% of their coworkers hit the streets are urging their employer to find more cost effective ways to conduct business, rather than pay the rape and pillage fares that they used to pay in the past.

When they get on SWA, they expect to be in a cattle car, but when they get on AA or UAL, they expect a meal, personal service, etc. . . . . . . oh, AND the same price as SWA. When they don''t get it, they denegrate the airline.

Sorry, when I get on SWA, AA, UAL, Delta or anyone else, I "expect" to get from point A to point B on time. I don''t book a flight when I am hungry, I don''t expect much more from an FA on anyone else than I do on SWA, and I either read a book or bring my own music, so inflight entertainment isn''t expected. My expectations are the same accross the board. What surprises many is that they feel that they are actually getting more from SWA and other LCC''s than they are from the "full service" airlines.

I won''t denigrate another airline because they only offered one drink service on an hour and a half flight. I do tend to denigrate an airline that imposes such harsh rules on advance purchase tickets... Let me show you an example:

I buy the family tickets to MCO in June. Due to a work issue, I cannot take vacation that week, and I''m not sure when I will be able to go at this time until sometime in early July. What happens to my tickets?

On SWA - I tell them I can''t make it, and when I find in mid July that I can go in late August, I call them, look at the fares that are available, and apply 100% of the money I have paid towards that new itenerary. There''s a good chance that the net "out of pocket" for me amounts to $0.00

On anybody else, I had better pick a date before my original travel date, book another flight, lose $100 per ticket, and pay any additional amounts needed to purchase the tickets, then hope like hell I can fly when I said I can. The alternative is to give the airline 100% of the money I had already paid, since I failed to use it.

Southwest offered value, which outweighs reheated hungry man dinners and a movie every time.

Like it or not, it''s WALMART Air from now on. This is bus travel now, ladies and gentlemen. Oh, and your wages will reflect the same.

Why is it that so many are now pointing to SWA and saying "we''ll work for what they are paid"?

----------------​

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 5/11/2003 1:02:44 PM buzzkill wrote:

If so, how do you suggest AA change from a big, hub and spoke airline with multiple fleet types, first class seating, Eagle connections, and union contracts that are still a great deal away from being as productive as WN''s?

----------------

Oh really? Tell me how AA mechanics contractually are less productive than SWA?​

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 5/12/2003 840 AM KCFlyer wrote:




Wah, wah, wah. OK so fly SWA to LAX or JFK or LHR or Mexico, Hawaii. Or drive, or stay home. The fact is that flying on average is still much cheaper than it ever was, even the "rip off" business fares are cheaper than the average fares were years ago. You want to be transported at over 500 mph in a very expensive machine for less than it costs to drive. You want highly trained people who are drug free, alcohol free with no criminal background who make enourmous personal sacrifices to safely get you where you want to go and you want them to work for meager wages so you can save a few bucks. You want us to do without so you can fly on our backs. You expect to save time flying and money by telling us we should work for less. Give it up.

​

 

[KCFlyer]

----------------
On 5/12/2003 4:22:12 PM Bob Owens wrote:

----------------
On 5/12/2003 840 AM KCFlyer wrote:




Wah, wah, wah. OK so fly SWA to LAX or JFK or LHR or Mexico, Hawaii. Or drive, or stay home. The fact is that flying on average is still much cheaper than it ever was, even the "rip off" business fares are cheaper than the average fares were years ago. You want to be transported at over 500 mph in a very expensive machine for less than it costs to drive. You want highly trained people who are drug free, alcohol free with no criminal background who make enourmous personal sacrifices to safely get you where you want to go and you want them to work for meager wages so you can save a few bucks. You want us to do without so you can fly on our backs. You expect to save time flying and money by telling us we should work for less. Give it up.

​

----------------​

You must''ve been talking to busdriver. Please cite for me where I have EVER said you guys should work for less...just one example would be fine. I HAVE said that pay cuts beat no job, as in the "full pay til the last day", but I have NEVER, EVER said you guys are overpaid. Ever.

I''ve spent almost $8,000 this year on air travel. Your assumptions of what I demand are way way off base.

Oh, FWIW, I have taken and passed all the drug tests and criminal background checks.

 

[AC AA LA FA]

On the side of revenue management-yes its quite obviuos where AA and other majors need change-
My question is if AA were to go through a renasaince-if you will in the marketing department-so there is a difference in the flying experience at AA-would you be more likeley to see the benefits of flying us and paying a SLIGHT premium over other LLCs? I am talking about new on board products/services-tie ins with major brands in food-contests-products-rewards. New cabin features-which could be produced quite easily with quality name brand items/materials if our marketing dep. and in flight product dep. would wake up...kinda like JB has do with its modern/hip image-you can associate yourself or company with pleasure...

As a flight attendant-I have seen so much in this area go neglected, and have seen first hand how it impacts passangers and crews morale...we do like to take some pride in our work-and with the tools and guidelines in place now its hard to "get on board"..and make it all shine-
am I alone here?

 

[AC AA LA FA]

Flight attendants at Southwest work as many as 150 hours a month, compared with 80 hours at many other airlines....

WN..f/a''s do not put in an advg. 150 hrs per month-no way-besides they are compensated differently on paid hrs-its apples and oranges on this point-

 

[buzzkill]

----------------
On 5/12/2003 4:12:05 PM Bob Owens wrote:

----------------
On 5/11/2003 1:02:44 PM buzzkill wrote:

 If so, how do you suggest AA change from a big, hub and spoke airline with multiple fleet types, first class seating, Eagle connections, and union contracts that are still a great deal away from being as productive as WN''s?

----------------

Oh really? Tell me how AA mechanics contractually are less productive than SWA?​

----------------​

I never singled out AA mechanics. I doubt anybody is as obsessed with mechanics as 3 or 4 on this board are. I said that AA''s unions contracts are still a great deal away from being as productive as WN''s. I found some interesting articles that discuss how WN''s productivity is amazingly better than other carriers like AA. These articles were written before AA''s recent labor agreements, but I think you will be able to safely conclude that AA did not make up the gap with WN.

For starters, try "One Airline''s Magic" by Sally B. Donnelly in the 10/28/2002 Time Magazine. Here is an excerpt:

"But Southwest''s core advantage isn''t that its employees get paid less for their work; rather, it''s that they work more for their pay. They work more productively, more flexibly and more creatively — like Johnny Bomaster. Southwest pilots routinely fly nearly 80 hours a month; United pilots fly just over 50 hours, even in a busy month. Southwest pilots are paid for each trip, not each hour, so they have a strong interest in keeping flights on schedule. And because a big chunk of their compensation comes in the form of stock options, they tend to watch costs like bean counters. Air-traffic controllers say Southwest pilots are constantly pushing to get quicker routings to their destinations. On occasion pilots have even pitched in to help ground crews move luggage — a step virtually unheard of at Southwest''s bigger rivals.

Flight attendants at Southwest work as many as 150 hours a month, compared with 80 hours at many other airlines, says union president Thom McDaniel. Southwest attendants are required by contract to "make a reasonable effort to tidy the airplane" between flights, a chore that other major airlines pay contractors to do. According to an airline labor expert, senior flight attendants at United get as many as 52 vacation days (compared with 35 days for veterans at Southwest). And they never have to clean up after the passengers.

Operating like a nascar pit crew, Southwest''s mechanics pride themselves on changing airplane tires faster than their counterparts at other airlines. And mechanics at Southwest don''t use the standard $500 tool to remove the magnetic device that detects metal chips in engine oil, as other mechanics do; they simply and quickly use their hand to pop it out. "Those tools are a waste," says a mechanic."

If you want to see some real analysis on the subject, try the following study that Unisys did in 11/2002, called the "Unisys R2A Scorecard, Airline Industry Cost Measurement" (http://www.unisys.com/eprise/main/admin/micro/doc/1102_scorecard.pdf). This is a powerful study that basically says that major carriers like AA, UA, US, DL, etc. have gotten so far from WN''s unit costs, that it is out of control.

Here is an excerpt: "The employee-owners of United, in
common with many of their colleagues at
other carriers, are looking for someone else
to blame for their airline’s financial distress
and for a solution that will make the
company profitable without labor’s
incurring any pain. But these airline labor spokesmen don’t
understand the mathematics. Labor
accounted for 41% of total airline costs in
the year ended June 30, 2001 and
44% of the cost differential between
Southwest and the other Majors.
Put another way, the other Majors would
save $8.2 billion annually, in their domestic
operations alone, if they could operate with
Southwest’s unit labor costs. That’s more
than enough to turn things around."

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 5/12/2003 6:25:21 PM buzzkill wrote:


I never singled out AA mechanics. I doubt anybody is as obsessed with mechanics as 3 or 4 on this board are. I said that AA''s unions contracts are still a great deal away from being as productive as WN''s. I found some interesting articles that discuss how WN''s productivity is amazingly better than other carriers like AA. These articles were written before AA''s recent labor agreements, but I think you will be able to safely conclude that AA did not make up the gap with WN.

For starters, try "One Airline''s Magic" by Sally B. Donnelly in the 10/28/2002 Time Magazine. Here is an excerpt:

"But Southwest''s core advantage isn''t that its employees get paid less for their work; rather, it''s that they work more for their pay. They work more productively, more flexibly and more creatively — like Johnny Bomaster. Southwest pilots routinely fly nearly 80 hours a month; United pilots fly just over 50 hours, even in a busy month. Southwest pilots are paid for each trip, not each hour, so they have a strong interest in keeping flights on schedule. And because a big chunk of their compensation comes in the form of stock options, they tend to watch costs like bean counters. Air-traffic controllers say Southwest pilots are constantly pushing to get quicker routings to their destinations. On occasion pilots have even pitched in to help ground crews move luggage — a step virtually unheard of at Southwest''s bigger rivals.

Flight attendants at Southwest work as many as 150 hours a month, compared with 80 hours at many other airlines, says union president Thom McDaniel. Southwest attendants are required by contract to "make a reasonable effort to tidy the airplane" between flights, a chore that other major airlines pay contractors to do. According to an airline labor expert, senior flight attendants at United get as many as 52 vacation days (compared with 35 days for veterans at Southwest). And they never have to clean up after the passengers.

Operating like a nascar pit crew, Southwest''s mechanics pride themselves on changing airplane tires faster than their counterparts at other airlines. And mechanics at Southwest don''t use the standard $500 tool to remove the magnetic device that detects metal chips in engine oil, as other mechanics do; they simply and quickly use their hand to pop it out. "Those tools are a waste," says a mechanic."

If you want to see some real analysis on the subject, try the following study that Unisys did in 11/2002, called the "Unisys R2A Scorecard, Airline Industry Cost Measurement" (http://www.unisys.com/eprise/main/admin/micro/doc/1102_scorecard.pdf). This is a powerful study that basically says that major carriers like AA, UA, US, DL, etc. have gotten so far from WN''s unit costs, that it is out of control.

Here is an excerpt: "The employee-owners of United, in
common with many of their colleagues at
other carriers, are looking for someone else
to blame for their airline’s financial distress
and for a solution that will make the
company profitable without labor’s
incurring any pain. But these airline labor spokesmen don’t
understand the mathematics. Labor
accounted for 41% of total airline costs in
the year ended June 30, 2001 and
44% of the cost differential between
Southwest and the other Majors.
Put another way, the other Majors would
save $8.2 billion annually, in their domestic
operations alone, if they could operate with
Southwest’s unit labor costs. That’s more
than enough to turn things around."


----------------​

Your statement was about contracts.

A quote from a magazine article is not exactly evidence to support your statement.

Unit costs for labor can be impacted more by management than contractual provisions. The mechanics contract is a perfect example. SWA costs are lower because of the way the company is managed not because of contractual differences. The same is probably true for other workgroups.