Global Air Travel not expected to recover until 2024

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Right now, it probably doesn't make sense as a US carrier to try and compete at LAX. There's too many Asian carriers serving it.

For the same money, who would choose AA with cheap amenities and crew members that only speak English vs. one of the Asian airlines who actually understand what onboard service is all about and are likely to have an entire crew of tri-lingual crew members?

You know what pisses me off about your post eolesen...... the fact you are so right.

 

[jimntx]

FWIW, I agree wholeheartedly...especially about the "cheap amenities." The last 4 years of my employment I was working First Class pretty much exclusively, and I wondered (to myself) why anyone would pay the F/C fares which offered a somewhat more comfortable seat, all but inedible meals and the "elegant" basket of help-yourself snacks. And this was on domestic flights. When I was in new-hire training, the trainers stressed repeatedly the importance of doing your very best when working in First Class. The mantra went "60% of our revenue comes from 20% of our passengers." (Those numbers may be off some, but you get the gist.) I shudder to think what International F/C is like if the service and amenities have been cut in the same manner and the fares are as high as they are..

Note to DP: Despite what some may tell you, you cannot make a profit in the airline business by offering less.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

The golden era of flight was simply due to the fact they were catering to the wealthy.

These days they serve the the every man so obviously flying is not as luxurious as it used to be. Not even first class.

These days they cram as many people as they can into that sardine can, that pipe with wings, and give them the minimum amount of service they will tolerate.

So really it comes down to do you want flight to be exclusive (high quality) or do you want it to serve the masses (the minimum amount of service the public will tolerate)?

 

[jimntx]

True, La, but I'm thinking that DP has already decided for you. He's convinced that the masses will tolerate a minimum level of service and amenities..."all they want is a cheap ticket. I think he's going to find himself in the "wrong" corner. The Asian airlines skimp neither on food nor comfort--such as, instead of the passenger having to wait 30 minutes to get an answer from the Lower Slobbovian speaker, the flight attendant you asked in the first place speaks fluent Lower Slobbovian. One can make the argument that the Asian airlines have an unfair advantage because the cabin crews are paid at a much lower(from what I hear) pay rate much lower salaries to cabin crew. However, just being nice to passengers goes a long way. I flew on AA from LAX to AKL and back through SYD in January and February. As a retired flight attendant I tried to be as trouble-free as possible. Not one of the working flight attendants seemed to show any interest in communicating with any of the passengers beyond the minimum required to do the job.

 

[JREwing]

I agree with your sentiments with one exception. I fly a lot, but get much better service consistently on a regional jet vs mainline.

 

[V.O. Reason]

True, La, but I'm thinking that DP has already decided for you. He's convinced that the masses will tolerate a minimum level of service and amenities..."all they want is a cheap ticket. I think he's going to find himself in the "wrong" corner. The Asian airlines skimp neither on food nor comfort--such as, instead of the passenger having to wait 30 minutes to get an answer from the Lower Slobbovian speaker, the flight attendant you asked in the first place speaks fluent Lower Slobbovian. One can make the argument that the Asian airlines have an unfair advantage because the cabin crews are paid at a much lower(from what I hear) pay rate much lower salaries to cabin crew. However, just being nice to passengers goes a long way. I flew on AA from LAX to AKL and back through SYD in January and February. As a retired flight attendant I tried to be as trouble-free as possible. Not one of the working flight attendants seemed to show any interest in communicating with any of the passengers beyond the minimum required to do the job.

Many international carriers are also subsidized by their governments so they can afford to add amenities

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

True, La, but I'm thinking that DP has already decided for you. He's convinced that the masses will tolerate a minimum level of service and amenities..."all they want is a cheap ticket. I think he's going to find himself in the "wrong" corner. The Asian airlines skimp neither on food nor comfort--such as, instead of the passenger having to wait 30 minutes to get an answer from the Lower Slobbovian speaker, the flight attendant you asked in the first place speaks fluent Lower Slobbovian. One can make the argument that the Asian airlines have an unfair advantage because the cabin crews are paid at a much lower(from what I hear) pay rate much lower salaries to cabin crew. However, just being nice to passengers goes a long way. I flew on AA from LAX to AKL and back through SYD in January and February. As a retired flight attendant I tried to be as trouble-free as possible. Not one of the working flight attendants seemed to show any interest in communicating with any of the passengers beyond the minimum required to do the job.

Look Jim I know you are not going to want to hear this but it needs to be said. This is mostly a response to negative statements you made about level of service.

Part of the issue with American Airlines flight attendants (at least for the general public) is they are UNIONized and enjoy job protections. This results in burnt out flight attendants that should have retired or otherwise moved on (and those older burnt out attendants tend to be the ones doing international flights because they have seniority). The Asian airlines tend to hire young, eager, attractive women who enjoy exciting but short careers.

Or at least that is my perception. If you disagree with any of that statement I would love to hear your opinion on it.

I am not saying our flight attendants should not enjoy job protections, only that there is a cost associated with those protections (burn out). Sooner or later the polish wears off the job and it becomes samey (as with any job). Then you are just slogging along until retirement, hardly a good situation in a public service capacity. That sort of situation may even result in resentment. Those same customers you used to love to serve become an annoyance later in your career. You said so yourself "Not one of the working flight attendants seemed to show any interest in communicating with any of the passengers beyond the minimum required to do the job."

You retired as a flight attendant. Is any of what I am saying about burn out untrue?

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I find the title of this thread to be a bit ridiculous. How can anyone predict when air travel will recover? Especially 4 years out?

RIDICULOUS!!!!!

 

[eolesen]

I agree with your sentiments with one exception. I fly a lot, but get much better service consistently on a regional jet vs mainline.

It's been my experience that regional flight attendants still find the job fun and aren't as jaded as someone who spent 10 years on reserve...

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Yeah, put me down for this.

 

[jimntx]

I am not saying our flight attendants should not enjoy job protections, only that there is a cost associated with those protections (burn out). Sooner or later the polish wears off the job and it becomes samey (as with any job). Then you are just slogging along until retirement, hardly a good situation in a public service capacity. That sort of situation may even result in resentment. Those same customers you used to love to serve become an annoyance later in your career. You said so yourself "Not one of the working flight attendants seemed to show any interest in communicating with any of the passengers beyond the minimum required to do the job."

You retired as a flight attendant. Is any of what I am saying about burn out untrue?
[/QUOTE]
You may not believe this, but I agree with you 100%. The union status should not protect an employee who does not see purpose in doing the very best that one can in your job. I had 5 separate careers--wildly different. When I got to the point with a career that I was bored or not challenged I would try to change my attitude or work situation to something interesting. Failing that I resigned and went to a totally different job. I used to tell some f/as that life was way too short to work at a job they seemed to hate. To one I even pointed out that the 13th Amendment to the Constitution had not been repealed; so there was nothing forcing her to stay at a job she hated.

I LOVED being a flight attendant, and I was good at it. I often had passengers say to me "You really enjoy your job, don't you?", and I agreed. If it wasn't for the ruptured disc in my neck which affected my balance and walking there's a chance I would still be on the job at the age of 75--unless, of course, the day arrived when I no longer enjoyed it. I would do myself, the passengers, and my co-workers a favor by resigning. BTW, I would disagree with you about the effect of union protection had on some f/a's work habits. People who do the very minimum (or)less in a day do it that way whether or not they are protected by a union. They are called lazy people.[/QUOTE] Not judgin. Just sayin.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

You may not believe this, but I agree with you 100%.

I will say that is surprising.

The union status should not protect an employee who does not see purpose in doing the very best that one can in your job.

I agree.

To one I even pointed out that the 13th Amendment to the Constitution had not been repealed; so there was nothing forcing her to stay at a job she hated.

Most people identify with their job. If you ask someone "What are you" 90 percent will proclaim their job title or occupation. They enslave themselves in prisons of their own making because it becomes part of their identity.

If it wasn't for the ruptured disc in my neck which affected my balance and walking there's a chance I would still be on the job at the age of 75--unless, of course, the day arrived when I no longer enjoyed it.

I don't know that I would want to depend on someone of such advanced years to evacuate an aircraft.

BTW, I would disagree with you about the effect of union protection had on some f/a's work habits. People who do the very minimum (or)less in a day do it that way whether or not they are protected by a union. They are called lazy people.

It has been my experience that TWU (not UNIONS in general but TWU specifically) fosters seniority fueled entitlement which results in nonproductive workers in the later part of their career. That may not be an issue with flight attendants because you are a small crew working an aircraft but I promise you that is absolutely an issue in the Fleet Service and Mechanic world. I make this statement based off 12 years of observation. I have literally seen a FSC come in and do 15 minutes worth of work in an 8 hour shift and state they are done for the day. I have seen a female employee who was assigned to replace carpets with a crew of 3 (including her) sit up in first class and flirt with mechanics and not strip or lay one carpet. I have seen a FSC on a CS assigned with a crew to strip an aircraft and her big contribution was to remove the blankets. That is what she had to show for the 4 hours of her CS shift.

Fleet and Mechanics are ate up with entitlement (they all love to state you are paying your dues but in reality you are enabling their laziness). That existed long before my time and I see no end to it. That is just TWU IGM culture.