Labor And Management

[mweiss]

The Internet has almost nothing to do with it, with the exception of reducing the number of TAs.

It a strategic, well-thought out plan to bust unions from here to kingdom come.

And if you scratch this premise as just a rediculous "conspiracy theory"...

Well, the antecedent to "it" in my post was the downward price pressure on airline tickets.

So, let me follow the logic from my post through your response:

"The Internet is a strategic, well-thought-out plan to bust unions from here to kingdom come."

So, back in 1969 when DARPA set up the Internet, they weren't really trying to make a network that could survive a nuclear war. They were planning to bust unions!

Ya know what? I'm going to scratch that premise as a ridiculous conspiracy theory.

 

[PITbull]

mweiss,

Go back to page 5 and look at the orginal post. You have so many quotes, I quoted the wrong thread. It in response to this statment of yours:

mweiss states: Really? So, if it's not the market and business, what is it?

View it again. It will make more sense.

 

[mweiss]

PITbull,

OK, now I think I understand what you're trying to say. I think.

Here's where I'm suspicious of the conspiracy theory (no, I won't call it ridiculous). What you're suggesting is that corporations' boards of directors are hiring CEOs with the goal of busting unions, even if it means shutting down the company.

I certainly agree that airline unions have gotten weaker over time. The first step along that path was airline deregulation. Before that, whatever the unions asked for, they got, simply by going to the CAB and getting fare increases to cover it. After deregulation, that sweet deal went away. But let's not mince words here...that sweet deal meant that these unionized employees were stealing from the public through legalized highway robbery, in the exact same fashion that the cable companies are gouging the public today.

Initially after deregulation was enacted, there were so many inefficiencies in the industry that it took a long time to start to reach the point of convergence. Slot control slowed down the convergence process, and enabled the airlines that managed to gain slot-supported monopolies in various markets to support the inefficiencies that had not been eliminated by the late 80s.

With the removal of slots, the protections afforded by the hubs went away. The inefficiencies gradually came under pressure, and the unions themselves came under similar pressure. In order to maintain their revenues (dues), they need to have as many people as possible covered by them. Thus, they're better off selling out the people they supposedly represent than risking having fewer of them to represent. AMFA has done an amazing job building a pyramid scheme for themselves by pretending that they're saving mechanics from their existing unions. In reality, they're taking the mechs out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Fact is, the unions haven't truly represented anyone but themselves since the 1950s in most industries. The airline industry was one of the last to make that conversion, simply due to the protections afforded the industry by government until 1978.

Sure, there have been quite a few moves by various government officials (on both sides of the aisle, mind you) to help along the demise of unions. But competitive forces have had a far greater impact than anything government has done.

 

[openview]

a network to survive nuclear war was just a ruse. the internet was really invented to exchange porn, chain mail and cheaped E.D. cures...

 

[mweiss]

a network to survive nuclear war was just a ruse. the internet was really invented to exchange porn, chain mail and cheaped E.D. cures...

Man, sometimes it sure seems that way, doesn't it???

 

[Just Plane Crazy]

PITbull,

OK, now I think I understand what you're trying to say. I think.

Here's where I'm suspicious of the conspiracy theory (no, I won't call it ridiculous). What you're suggesting is that corporations' boards of directors are hiring CEOs with the goal of busting unions, even if it means shutting down the company.

I certainly agree that airline unions have gotten weaker over time. The first step along that path was airline deregulation. Before that, whatever the unions asked for, they got, simply by going to the CAB and getting fare increases to cover it. After deregulation, that sweet deal went away. But let's not mince words here...that sweet deal meant that these unionized employees were stealing from the public through legalized highway robbery, in the exact same fashion that the cable companies are gouging the public today.

Initially after deregulation was enacted, there were so many inefficiencies in the industry that it took a long time to start to reach the point of convergence. Slot control slowed down the convergence process, and enabled the airlines that managed to gain slot-supported monopolies in various markets to support the inefficiencies that had not been eliminated by the late 80s.

With the removal of slots, the protections afforded by the hubs went away. The inefficiencies gradually came under pressure, and the unions themselves came under similar pressure. In order to maintain their revenues (dues), they need to have as many people as possible covered by them. Thus, they're better off selling out the people they supposedly represent than risking having fewer of them to represent. AMFA has done an amazing job building a pyramid scheme for themselves by pretending that they're saving mechanics from their existing unions. In reality, they're taking the mechs out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Fact is, the unions haven't truly represented anyone but themselves since the 1950s in most industries. The airline industry was one of the last to make that conversion, simply due to the protections afforded the industry by government until 1978.

Sure, there have been quite a few moves by various government officials (on both sides of the aisle, mind you) to help along the demise of unions. But competitive forces have had a far greater impact than anything government has done.

Your thought is very interesting. Let's just look over to UA and imagine, that employer and employee are the same. (Unions own the airline) How can you function and be realistic if you tell your members I will fight for you and the shareholders I will get you the most for your investment. Whome did they take for a ride? At the end the airline, employees and PAX suffer.

I don't think that on the board of directors the Union Reps and the other got into a fight. They all agreed on what they are going to do.

The Union most probably have as a secret slogan the following:

Dividi et impera! Divide and rule!

and behind every ones back they make this face :bleh:

 

[pitguy]

Nothing would prevent the company from mailing the employees a copy of their big plan. If they have one.

 

[mweiss]

Your thought is very interesting. Let's just look over to UA and imagine, that employer and employee are the same. (Unions own the airline) How can you function and be realistic if you tell your members I will fight for you and the shareholders I will get you the most for your investment. Whome did they take for a ride? At the end the airline, employees and PAX suffer.

In fact, that's the theory behind encouraging employees to own stock in the company. It's (theoretically) supposed to align the employee's interests with the shareholders' interests. Doesn't work perfectly in practice, though it works better in some instances than in others.

Much ink has been spilled over the theoretical relationship between Microsoft's success and its ESOP.

 

[mweiss]

Nothing would prevent the company from mailing the employees a copy of their big plan. If they have one.

A very true statement (unless there's something in the plan that would be barred for legal reasons, such as certain proprietary information). And that was in response to...?

 

[usfliboi]

Nothing would prevent the company from mailing the employees a copy of their big plan. If they have one.

Pit why are we entitled to the plan at this point? At the right time you will know so will I !

 

[pitguy]

Pit why are we entitled to the plan at this point? At the right time you will know so will I !

If you want my support then you must tell me. Are you attacking me by saying I am a fool and should give blind support? Please stop.........stop attacking me.

 

[RowUnderDCA]

mweiss-

I think the experts have put too much emphasis on physical barriers to entry in regard to the legacy carriers protecting their monopolistic pricing models.

I think frequency of service, mergers to create bredth of service, ff programs, CRS's, yield management created real and illusory barriers to entry. Some will say gates and slots, but I don't see it. First of all I think that only JFK, LGA, ORD and DCA, among major airports, ever had slots. Some smaller airports have archaic capacity controls due to lawsuits. Sadly, they keep hanging on. Long Beach, Westchester, San Jose?? But these had no effect on anti-competitive actions.

But that's just my opinion. I know of airlines that complain about not being able to get into airports, but they are few and far between. And in the last few years airports have been bending over backwards to favor so-called new entrants and disfavor established carriers.

Oh, with one exception... something called MII's (majority in interest) clauses at some airports did prevent airports for taking on SOME expansion projects that could encourage new entrants. These MII's would rarely prevent a carrier from starting up point to point service, but might have prevented them from establishing mini-hubs. MII's are waning in the airport biz.

 

[usfliboi]

700 i believe i spoke for my self and my opinion , I have and am in your clt hanger more times than you know my friend. I knew the stores there like the back of my hand. I have friends in the clt hanger who come to work day in and out and none and i mean NONE have the attitude that a couple of you on here have. Thats why they arent on here. Thats why they arent picketing everyday. They have a family, and more important things in life ! Certain things in life are out of yours and my control . Sadly you and others wiil see, this one is too !

 

[mweiss]

First of all I think that only JFK, LGA, ORD and DCA, among major airports, ever had slots.

Can someone confirm this? Preferably with a source. My understanding was that slots existed in all of the airline hubs in the mid-80s. If this is not true, then I need to redo some of my work.

I think frequency of service, mergers to create bredth of service, ff programs, CRS's, yield management created real and illusory barriers to entry.

These all contribute to oligopolistic competitive advantage, but not to the monopolistic competitive advantages enjoyed at the hubs until the late 90s.

I know of airlines that complain about not being able to get into airports, but they are few and far between. And in the last few years airports have been bending over backwards to favor so-called new entrants and disfavor established carriers.

Exactly. The market has shifted to oligopolistic competition at the hubs.

 

[usfliboi]

Pit! Your not entitled to a plan nor am I ! Once we need the information about a possible vote on a possible contract you an i will be given the information you and i need to make an "informed " call or what to do. For most of us im sure it will be our last chance . All we can do is do what ya gotta do and move all. We will all survive im sure!