In Phl, Southwest

[javaboy]

take a good look at when the banks operate out of PHL. then take a look at schedules of SWA they will simply operate at off UAIR peak times. instead of 60 UAIR planes linning up, there will only be a few. this is there modis operondi.

now how about this UAIR has been servicing PHL for what 30 or 40 YEARS? and SWA who hasn't even pushed one plane yet is the HOMETOWN airline for 3 of the 4 major sports teams nice. huh?

One last thing, PANTHERS are in the SUPERBOWL CLT, UAIR you would think there would be some kind of quick commercial on at least local outlets (maybe there is an i am unable to see them) of Thankyou for supporting your home town team and home town airline? or anything of that nature? how easy would that be?

h34r:

 

[Bear96]

... however, the greater question is...is job elimination good for America? ...

Of course not, but PITbull, platitudes like "layoffs are bad for America" doesn't do anything to solve problems at a company facing the simple mathematical problem that costs (including employee wages and benefits) are exceeding revenues.

And I have yet to hear of any workable solutions to the issues facing U that would solve this problem.

Chanting "make PHL a rolling hub" just won't be enough.

 

[TomBascom]

This is not the bottom of the 4th or the top of the ninth, AND it is NOT a game.

I didn't say that it is. But IMHO the outlook is none the less very, very bleak.

Like it or not it should be obvious that things do have to change.

I heartily agree that management needs to take advantage of the tools that they already have available to them. They gain no credibility whatsoever when it appears that they haven't lifted a single finger towards anything that could pass as an attempt to improve productivity. (They may have made such attempts, they may even have successes -- but communications are so pathetic nobody would know it...)

They blather on about gaining $2B in concessions from labor but neglect to state how much revenue they've thrown away by shrinking the airline -- eyeballing the 10-k would seem to show that they've slashed revenue about 50% more than they've obtained from labor over the same period. (I haven't really sat down and crunched those numbers. But they're ugly.)

There are only two ways out of this -- reduce costs or bring in more revenue for the same (or at least similar) costs. Reducing revenue faster than you reduce costs won't work.

... most important in my opinion, is while one group does more, it will have to be at the expense of costing others their jobs in other groups.

Perhaps some groups will suffer unevenly. I don't know. It does seem likely. And, yes, individually that's very painful. But it becomes even more painful as time goes by without addressing it. Ultimately (on average over the whole population, not for each and every person) these displacements do result in people being better off. As a population we're more prosperous than our parents and grandparents were and our children and grandchildren will almost certainly do better yet (yes, I'm sure that lots of people can provide anecdotes that say otherwise -- but that doesn't change the fact that over the whole population things do, on average, get better over time). You're in an industry that is undergoing disruptive change -- clinging to the old ways has a very predictable outcome.

Is that more efficient? Why, yes in the corporate business arena, however, the greater question is...is job elimination good for America? Unemploying more will make for a more efficeint leaner company and yield profits...

Unemploying more people won't make the company more efficient and profitable unless it can be done in such a way as to reduce costs faster than it reduces revenue. So far they haven't managed to do that. Hacking and slashing at labor is not, by itself, a garanteed method for obtaining a bonus.

Bronner needs to come out of his isolated "shell". He has invested in a very precarious, and volatile industry..."stupid him". But, he now needs to have the foresight and realize that ALL the labor groups by concensus, DO NOT TRUST OR WANT TO GIVE THIS MANGEMNT ANYTHING. Unfortunately for him, that IS the reality. If he truly cares about his investment, he needs to do some serious thinking. Otherwise, we will ALL lose.

You'll also all lose if you persist in this rhetoric. That's reality too.

Framing the problem as a "volatile industry" is a mistake -- you aren't looking at problems that are a result of normal business cycles. You're passing through a state change -- it's a much bigger problem than volatility. You can't just ride it out with the same old work groups, the same processes and the same contracts. (Yup, management has to see this too...)

Your stated principles are often laudable. But a lot of the details just aren't going to survive -- one of three things is going to happen 1) Dave & Dave crush the unions and the company will somehow survive (fat chance but lots more likely than the other way around ) 2) The company goes bust or 3) You start working as a team and figure out what the new world needs to look like.

It's not a one way street... to paraphrase one of the founding fathers -- either find a way to work together or you'll surely all hang together (although Dave will probably hang from a silk rope...)

 

[MarkMyWords]

Of course not, but PITbull, platitudes like "layoffs are bad for America" doesn't do anything to solve problems at a company facing the simple mathematical problem that costs (including employee wages and benefits) are exceeding revenues.

And I have yet to hear of any workable solutions to the issues facing U that would solve this problem.

Chanting "make PHL a rolling hub" just won't be enough.

Bear,

While I agree that just rolling the PHL hub won't solve all the problems, I would sure be a step in the right direction and will show employees that this isn't going to continue to be business as usual with additional sacrifices from employees being the only solution offered. Dave constantly talks about changing the business plan, but provides no information on what the original business plan was, none the less what will be changing. When we were in bankruptcy I waited patiently to hear anything about this supposed "new business plan". There was no real big change in the way we do busines, all we really did was move airplanes around. We "expressed" some cities while growing in a region that allows us to contract out all of the ground functions. Was there any real change in how we do business today?

Rolling the PHL hub would be a great start iin showing employees that the same old broken down system and way of doing things are changing. We are fighting cost and productivity issues not only with employees, but how we operate as an airline. We would be reducing inefficiencies in our best O & D hub to try and take advantage of local traffic while supplimenting it with some connecting traffic. We would reduce fuel costs, increase crew and airplane productivity, increase agent productivity and gate utilization. It is a start. When you couple this with employee productivity enhancements, right pricing and increased flying with 60 additional jets, we will be a serious entity to deal with and can defeat WN at their own game.

We have to start somewhere and employee threats are not the place to start anymore. Show us all positive changes that are being made. Rally the employees to stop fighting one another and start fighting the real enemy, WN. Motivate, inspire, lead and challenge the employees instead of beating them down.

 

[PITbull]

Tom,

Labor has made the changes. We just happen to have been "infected" by a visionless mangement team that has been unable to take those changes and turn the airline around.

And it is somewhat unsettling that you post as if Labor hasn't participated in trying to keep our airline from sinking with all their sacrifices, while this managment continues to bust contract language, implement new policies that accerlerate the discipline process and terminate our folks, instead of focusing on the operational aspect of the airline.

When you speak of the "new world", other carriers have been able to adapt without a BK scene. We've had AA f/as in particular come on here and tell U employees they feel sorry for us. Conversely, SW is doing well in this "new world" and the "old world". SW is not a LCC carrier. They are a Big airline that has a unique business model that provides customers with simple, consistant fare pricing. And yes, this is a very volatile industry, (outside of U) airlines have their robusts years and their down years. Their are many variables that have a profound effect on the industry, e.g., Fuel price, airline accidents, terrorism events and threat of, interest rates, general status of the economy. These elements impact the sector in a cyclic manner. Keep in mind, that BK in our industry is not unique.

 

[expressedndepressed]

Is it not possible that WN already knows what problems they will face in PHL? Also, the plan involves short term losses with PHL, (which they can afford) knowing it will inflict even more losses for US. End result, finishing what CO Lite started and push US off the East Coast into the Atlantic. Key point, WN CAN afford a loss in PHL, US CANNOT......

PS. Maybe ALPA should be talking to Herb, he is available, isn't he???

 

[TomBascom]

Labor has made the changes. We just happen to have been "infected" by a visionless mangement team...

Yes, you've made changes. But don't believe that it is over. Yes, management has failed to take advantage of the tools that you've made available. But that doesn't mean that they don't need and won't ask for more. Labor has certainly made huge sacrifices. But it isn't over until you come out of the woods and see the sun shine. Absolutely keep hammering on management to use the tools that are available to them -- but don't hamstring their efforts or kid yourself into thinking that you've done enough until you can look back and see that the company is profitable and look forward and see that the future is bright.

The industry is not going through a cycle. Nor is it "just" visionless management. The model is changing. This hurts US Airways more than anyone else because US Airways was more reliant on the old model than anyone else, was already in serious financial trouble when the excrement hit the fan, was asymmetrically impacted by 9/11 and had the tremendously bad fortune of having management that had no plan B. Other airlines may get through this without BK, they all have different stories and some, but they're all going to be very different businesses 5 years from now.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Tom,

You said "that doesn't mean that they don't need and won't ask for more".

The problem with that statement is that until management takes advantage of the tools already given them, there is no way to know if more is needed or not.

Based on 3rd quarter numbers, if every employee worked for ZERO wages and benefits, we would be CASM competitive with Southwest but still have 20% higher costs than JetBlue. Trying to survive on employee concessions alone is a futile exercise.

Jim

 

[TomBascom]

Tom,

You said "that doesn't mean that they don't need and won't ask for more".

The problem with that statement is that until management takes advantage of the tools already given them, there is no way to know if more is needed or not.

Based on 3rd quarter numbers, if every employee worked for ZERO wages and benefits, we would be CASM competitive with Southwest but still have 20% higher costs than JetBlue. Trying to survive on employee concessions alone is a futile exercise.

Jim

I agree.

But that doesn't make pretending that it won't happen a useful position to take.

 

[PITbull]

Tom,

Easy to say those words above from your "outside perch". Try sitting on the inside as a rank and file employee. Pretty unrealistic, huh? Without even hearing the business plan, we already know what the expectation is. <_<

 

[BoeingBoy]

Tom,

Whether "it" be liquidation, concessions, or even (can't believe I'm saying this) merger, you're right. All each of us can do individually is continue doing our job to the best of our ability and, if given the chance, cast our one vote.

Jim

 

[Mike]

You can try any runway you want at PHL. If there is in trail spaacing over the departure fix, your going to be sitting for 45 minutes with everybody else. PHL has great ATC guys and if they could move traffic faster they would have figured it out a long long time ago.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Hi Bob,

Missed you there for a few days.

It's not about brakes & tires, it about FAA approved performance numbers - which come from Boeing. Runway 17/35 is marginal for shorter flights at best, and unusable for longer flights. Of course, I'm talking about Boeings & Airbuses here. Don't have any idea about the RJ's. Also don't know about SW's 737-700's, especially those fitted with winglets, which are supposed to increase takeoff performance, along with other benefits.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Oh, good interview by the way.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Since this thread discussed the use of runway 17/35 at PHL I thought I'd post this ...


Subject: PHL RUNWAY 17/35

DUE TO AIRPORT CAPACITY ISSUES IN PHL WE RECENTLY STARTED A PROGRAM TO
ENCOURAGE MORE OF OUR EXPRESS AIRCRAFT TO USE RUNWAY 17 OR 35. WE HAVE FOUND
THAT BECAUSE OF PERFORMANCE ISSUES, THE EXPRESS RJ'S CAN UTILIZE THESE RUNWAYS
MORE OFTEN FOR LANDING THAN FOR TAKEOFF. OUR MAINLINE AIRCRAFT ACTUALLY HAVE
MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO UTILIZE THESE RUNWAYS FROM A PERFORMANCE STANDPOINT THAN
OUR EXPRESS AIRCRAFT.

SHORTLY, WE WILL MOVE CERTAIN SHORT STAGE LENGTH FLIGHTS TO THE C CONCOURSE IN
ORDER TO BE CLOSER TO RUNWAY 35. IF PERFORMANCE PERMITS, IT WOULD IMPROVE OUR
PHL OPERATION FOR THESE RELATIVELY SHORT FLIGHTS TO REQUEST THESE RUNWAYS.
THIS WILL NOT ONLY IMPROVE THE AIRPORT ARRIVAL AND DEPARTURE RATES BUT ALSO
HELP TO REDUCE TAXIWAY CONGESTION.

IN THE NEAR FUTURE WE EXPECT THE PHL AIRPORT TO ADD EVEN MORE FLIGHTS MAKING
OUR NEED TO UTILIZE THESE SECONDARY RUNWAYS, WHEN ABLE, IMPORTANT TO THE
FUTURE SUCCESS OF OUR COMPANY.