Flight Attendants Analysis Of Aa'S Problems!

[Bob Owens]

I am always shocked at the lack of respect for the f/a position. I think the original poster would be surprised at the level of education the f/as have and the ability for continuing education is a wonderful aspect of the job. As my husband once said to someone making cracks about my perceived salary, "Well, she was smart enough to apply and be hired the job" "Back in the day", both PanAm and TWA recruited from colleges. I went to Hollins in Va. and that is where I got my start with PanAm. I was one of the few from the south. Most were from the 7 sister schools. (Smith, Vassar, et al) We all spoke multiple languages and brought a lot to the table.

Good point!

Recently Delta was bragging that they recieved 87000 applications for the Flight attendants jobs, they didnt reveal how many actually met the requirements. My response was with 15million unemployed Delta could only attract 87000 applicants!(in many states you have to file applications in order to continue getting benifits).

 

[Duke787]

Duke787,


The pilot contract addresses employee parking fees. It's part of the contract, we paid for it. I don't know where you get the idea that commuters get an extra parking pass. AA pilots get their parking pass paid for at their base or the commuter city of their choice, only one, not both. AA probably saves money with paid parking at a small outlying city instead of paying for one at MIA/ORD/JFK/LAX.

As for the jumpseats, that is a professional courtesy and custom going back for most of the history of the airlines that was bought and paid for with pilot negotiating capital. I would personally like the option to carry FA's, Mechs and other airline personnel at our discretion when the seat is not used, and with total control regarding approval of the rider. There is also the perception that a very small minority of the FA group will use their cockpit privileges to rat out for the pilots for porcedure violations. There is one in particular who did this and set back any movement on FA cockpit jumpseat privileges back 20 years.



You also mentioned ANA 2 pilot crews flying 16 hours vs 4 needed at AA. That is beyond unsafe and criminally negligent. If true, they shouldn't even fly in US airspace like that.

Disregard all posts on this subject from me as I was dejected after trying to fly out of ORD, I was a D1 and pilots from other airlines and our fa's who were D2's were getting on flights that I couldn't. I wish AA treated it's ground employee's as good as it treats flight crews from other airlines. You can say all you want about professional courtesy, I don't see how that helps AA, but it's a sweet deal for the flight crews of AA.

I can't believe the TWU wasted time on trying to get us jump seat privileges when our flight crews weren't going to share the seats with us, seeing how it's in their contracts.

 

[WorldTraveler]

several items floating around here....

Pass benefits are generally considered no/very low-cost, perceived high value benefits in the airline industry. It is absolutely true that their value is diminishing as carriers figure out how to squeeze more and more passengers onto flights via improved revenue management and dynamic scheduling that allows capacity to be better matched with demand.
As for AA allowing essentially differential pass benefits for different groups of employees, there is a certain amount of that which flows from differing requirements which different carriers have, esp. to jumpseats. Allowing a system that intentionally shows preference to other airline employees at the expense of one's own employees is something that each airline company could manage if it chose to do so. In the absence of a company guideline, the unions will ask and swap what they can get by with - and it is no surprise that one employee group will step on another if given a chance.

As for AA's revenue, it certainlly is true that AA underperformed its network peers on revenue by a significant amount in the most recent quarter. The Atlantic and Pacific are the two largest international regions for the industry and there were good reasons why AA underperformed there. AA does not have the presence in many Asian markets and thus did not participate in the upside... but remember that NW/DL and UA saw significant revenue decreases on the Pacific several years ago - so the fact that they are seeing revenue recovery is not surprising. In Latin America, AA grew the region faster than other carriers which depressed their revenue growth. Domestic was actually the most interesting.... UA and CO led the industry in domestic revenue growth followed by US, AA, and DL.
Note that all of these are results for the mainline operation.... and obviously regional carriers have little inflluence on the international operations.

What is significant is that DL was the only carrier that shrunk it regional operations in the quarter. DL said 2 1/2 years ago when the NW merger was announced that excess capacity would come from the regional carriers. At the same time, DL is adding mainline domestic capacity, opposite of what most carriers are doing. Mainline capacity is cheaper on a CASM basis to operate. While DL's ddmestic RASM came down, it is likelly their cost came down much faster - but that cannot be known.

AA did an outstanding job of managing its mainline costs in the quarter - but it should also be apparent that AA cannot afford to do anything to raise its costs now. Surprisingly, UA and CO both had 7-8% mainline CASM increases so that UA's mainline costs are now approaching AA's, putting AA and UA back into the same cost position they were relative to the rest of the industry. CO was a lower cost producer so even with cost increases, it isn't at UA/AA cost levels. still the merger and most of the costs of it, including the price to please labor is ahead of them. DL also had minimal cost increases in both mainline and regional operations. US does a good job with cost controls too.

As for whether regional operations are profitable, the prevailing mindset is that there is an excess of regional capacity in the US which pushes down the price of contract carriers.... AA can't do that with owned regional capacity and neither could DL. That is part of why DL made the decision to cut so much capacity at Comair. The whole value of regional carriers and their operations diminishes as there are fewer network carriers and fewer hubs which need to be fed; part of DL's reason for growing mainline capacity while shrinking regional capacity is because you simply don't a bunch of RJ flights to a half dozen cities from every hub. You can more efficiently add a few mainline flights and cut a bit more RJ capacity.

As for whether DL is doing things right or not, the proof is really in the results which is where it should be for all companies. The big difference between DL and AA and UA is that DL VERY aggressively went into bankruptcy knowing what was wrong, what needed to be done, and came out swingingi and has largely delivered on the transformations it believed it needed to do. AA is still restructuring seven years after it started, although the pace has definitely picked up. UA was very slow in restructuring but has hit its new stride of late... as long as costs don't get seriously out of line, they will be ok. US has a niche and they are working in it despite their own limitations which they recognize.

No airline has it all figured out but I think there are valid reasons to believe that DL did in its BK what CO did in its 2nd - significantly changing its culture and its business and ruthlessly pressing to maintain the benefits it has obtained. There will be a peak that DL will hit when it no longer is able to achieve those benefits and when others start to take away its ability to maintain its momentum, but that is likely still a ways off - and by staying ahead of the changes that could limit DL.

Whethr DL's aggressive approach to transformation or AA's more gradual, far less dramatic process is better remains to be seen because both are still in the middle of the process. And different stakeholders will measure the gains and losses differently.

 

[eolesen]

That the same fluffy DL culture DL sought post-bankruptcy has also done whatever it can to implement Project Visine. In September, DL lost two ex-NW guys like Jim Cron (Global Sales) and Thom Bach (Revenue Management), and they'd lost a lot of other ex-NW guys in the months prior to that. September was the last month they could pull their change of control parachutes, and there were supposedly at least half a dozen VPs and SVPs who took advantage of that, plus a dozen or so at the director and senior manager level...

 

[Mach85ER]

You can say all you want about professional courtesy, I don't see how that helps AA, but it's a sweet deal for the flight crews of AA.

It helps AA by letting them have the flexibilityto move around flying at a reduced cost based on human behavior. If every pilot did not commute nor had NRSA or jumpseat benefits as now, AA would have to pay retraining on different equipment every time Marketing had one of their Viagra/Cialis moments that cause 50 jobs to cycle north/south/east/west. If they did end up paying for moves on that level, they could count on pressure to compensate those affected like the rest of corporate america does for a 6 figure position. That would be a far higher cost than the $2500 they spent on my move. Every hear the term, " a corporate owned home"?

As it stands now, the B777 Captain living in RDU will react seamlessly and at zero cost to AA when the MIA flying is reduced and JFK/ORD/DFW is increased. He won't miss a trip from one month to the next as he just changes jumpseat commuting from AA to DL, Airtran or UAL. Somewhere at AA there are a few smart guys who have figured this out and grudgingly work with commuting pilots to make the system work. These same smart guys have also probably figured it out that if a major hurricane hits South Florida, 50% of the pilots will be able to commute in to work by air instead of 100% not flying to tend to their damaged homes.


You call it a "sweet deal". Not really. The seats generally suck and the last place one wants to be after a 12 hour day in the cockpit is another 2 in one. On the crowded flights, there might be 3 guys for 1 jumpseat. it's done by seniority. It's a good option for some places where AA doesn't fly. I'd also debate your comment that AA treats other airline employees weel. There are great agents and FA's who get the jumpseating benefit, the are also many more that treat OAL like garbage (my true description would violate board policy in nuclear sense). The joke amongst pilots is how well we've been treated at other airlines for decades, even before AA even would let OAL pilots ride our jumpseats.

 

[eolesen]

I agree with a lot of what you've said as to the benefits for commuting when you play "chase the shrinking airline"... but AA has never paid for moves on ground employees, so don't hold your breath expecting it for pilots or FA's. The $12,500 "location protection" payment that used to exist worked out pretty well for those who were renters, but doesn't go far towards moving a household. I've heard of a couple guys who took the $12,500 and put it towards an RV... there were a dozen or so parked out at the DFW hangar at one point a few years ago until either AA or the airport cracked down on it. No idea if AA still pays out the $12,500 or not.

Where your argument loses steam is the guys & gals commuting from places like Bozeman, MT, Idaho Falls, ID, or London. How do you justify that, especially in light of the language in the new pilot fatigue NPRM?

[quote name=NPRM]
Page 25: For example, if the carrier became aware that flightcrew members were commuting during their WOCL, the carrier could require that all flightcrew members spend the night prior to starting a series of FDPs within the local commuting area.

Page 91: ... time spent commuting, either locally or longdistance, is not considered rest, and a certificate holder will need to consider the
commuting times required by individual flightcrew members to ensure they can reach their home base while still receiving the required opportunity for rest. This approach is consistent with that taken for transportation to and from a sleep facility other than home discussed earlier in this document.

The FAA also believes it is inappropriate to simply rely on the existing requirements in part 91 to report to work fit for duty.
[/quote]

For the most part, commuting is a zero cost item, but it it starts costing the company money because of the monitoring that the new FAA regs could require, you can be they're going to try to use it in their favor during negotiations. Maybe you could turn it around and go for a non-commuter premium.

 

[Mach85ER]

E.,

I'm not debating crew rest, just providing some J.S. past practice. Whether it's Bozeman or LHR, it's the pilots' responsibility to sign in rested. A 3 leg commute arriving 1 hour before a 8 hour lall-nighter won't win any friends including the other pilots that have to cover for the tired slob.
Not holding my breath on AA paid moves. I'm only pointing out what pressures may be exerted in other areas if the no-NRSA crowd got their wish. What the paid move bennies for a $150K/year AA ground employee is something I know nothing about.

 

[WorldTraveler]

That the same fluffy DL culture DL sought post-bankruptcy has also done whatever it can to implement Project Visine. In September, DL lost two ex-NW guys like Jim Cron (Global Sales) and Thom Bach (Revenue Management), and they'd lost a lot of other ex-NW guys in the months prior to that. September was the last month they could pull their change of control parachutes, and there were supposedly at least half a dozen VPs and SVPs who took advantage of that, plus a dozen or so at the director and senior manager level...

that is all a side show related to the merger.... the truth regardless of whether there is a merger or whether a company such as AA remains stand alone comes from the financial numbers the company generates.

And I agree that if the FAA starts pushing airlines to monitor commuter behavior excessively, it could significantly impact the ability of crew members to commute.

I'm still trying to understand how an airline is supposed to know if a crew member jumpseated on another aircraft - or for that matter, spent the night out partying in the very same city. There are far more cases of pilots trying to fly with alcohol in their systems - esp. after long layovers - than there are tired crews. Seems to me that the burden as always rests on crew members to ensure that they are physically able to do their job.

 

[eolesen]

No, there are far more publicized cases of drunk pilots because it's really not newsworthy to say a pilot was tired and called in sick.

 

[Hopeful]

No idea if AA still pays out the $12,500 or not.

AA still has the $12,500 for "protected" workers who are essentially guaranteed a position throughout the system in the event they are furloughed. However not all members have this protection.
I hope no one who is unfamiliar with this provision thinks we get it simply for a transfer!

 

[Skymess]

No, there are far more publicized cases of drunk pilots because it's really not newsworthy to say a pilot was tired and called in sick.

Beat me to it. I agree.

 

[Mach85ER]

I'm still trying to understand how an airline is supposed to know if a crew member jumpseated on another aircraft - or for that matter, spent the night out partying in the very same city.

I'll dispense with the techinical details since it is a public forum, but I can tell you that the electronic trail exists for jumpseaters on all carriers. Big brother knows. That also goes for the guy on the sick list who tries to JS on another carrier. The offender should expect a phone call.

As for partying in the same city, if something happens with a flight, chances are the electronic trail will lead to full video of dancing on the bar if that was the case. Tough to hide this day and age.

 

[frontline]

Ok, the flight attendants need to stick to passing out drinks and reading People Magazine. Can you imagine what the analysts thought of them? How can they really expect to be taken seriously? No Wall Street level analyst is going to trust APFA's numbers. Or for that matter AA's. They will do their own analysis! This just served to make the FA's look silly.

 

[Duke787]

It helps AA by letting them have the flexibilityto move around flying at a reduced cost based on human behavior. If every pilot did not commute nor had NRSA or jumpseat benefits as now, AA would have to pay retraining on different equipment every time Marketing had one of their Viagra/Cialis moments that cause 50 jobs to cycle north/south/east/west. If they did end up paying for moves on that level, they could count on pressure to compensate those affected like the rest of corporate america does for a 6 figure position. That would be a far higher cost than the $2500 they spent on my move. Every hear the term, " a corporate owned home"?

As it stands now, the B777 Captain living in RDU will react seamlessly and at zero cost to AA when the MIA flying is reduced and JFK/ORD/DFW is increased. He won't miss a trip from one month to the next as he just changes jumpseat commuting from AA to DL, Airtran or UAL. Somewhere at AA there are a few smart guys who have figured this out and grudgingly work with commuting pilots to make the system work. These same smart guys have also probably figured it out that if a major hurricane hits South Florida, 50% of the pilots will be able to commute in to work by air instead of 100% not flying to tend to their damaged homes.


You call it a "sweet deal". Not really. The seats generally suck and the last place one wants to be after a 12 hour day in the cockpit is another 2 in one. On the crowded flights, there might be 3 guys for 1 jumpseat. it's done by seniority. It's a good option for some places where AA doesn't fly. I'd also debate your comment that AA treats other airline employees weel. There are great agents and FA's who get the jumpseating benefit, the are also many more that treat OAL like garbage (my true description would violate board


policy in nuclear sense). The joke amongst pilots is how well we've been treated at other airlines for decades, even before AA even

would let OAL pilots ride our

Thanks for the explanation about how the pilots do their commute.