London To Washington

[Ukridge]

I am not one of those chaps who feels it necessary to take to the Internet and tell the excruciating and soporific details of a flight. However, I was called into replace a colleague at a one day meeting in the capitol of the FCs and I must say an overall very pleasant flying experience.

Well, I frankly do not like the 767. I know that one of your staff wrote at length about how much better it was than the other aircraft but the truth is that I do not like buttered parsnips either and no amount of jawing will convince me otherwise. The 747 however, in business class is a very fine aircraft for a passenger – quite the treat as I was in the early morning 767 from LHR and on the next evening's 747 as a return. The staff was quite good both ways. FWIW I have noticed no diminuation of service levels since the financial difficulties began.

As an observer is it just me or do things really change so slowly in the airline industry as they seem. There always seems to be a “new planâ€￾ just around the corner and one of your ground staff mentioned that United has now charted a course to expand international flying. To where and why did it take them so long to formulate this plan? Must test the patience even of old Job to work under such glacial pace change. :blink:

 

[casual rat]

747's are better for those segments methinx, 777 even better.

 

[lpbrian]

I think as far as coach sections go I think the 767 is best. 2-3-2 seating, when combined with extra seat pitch such as on AA or (UAL?) makes for more comfortable coach seating by far, compared with other widebodies. As for First or Business, a case may be made.

 

[rotate]

As an observer is it just me or do things really change so slowly in the airline industry as they seem. There always seems to be a “new planâ€￾ just around the corner and one of your ground staff mentioned that United has now charted a course to expand international flying. To where and why did it take them so long to formulate this plan? Must test the patience even of old Job to work under such glacial pace change. :blink:

[post="190178"][/post]​

As usual, UKridge, you have distilled your observation to the most essential element: the airline industry, management and labor alike, are sloths in a new world of cheetahs. The more magnificent their past success, the more likely they are to pursue incremental change. They are rendered completely ineffective by their view of the world that values reduced risk over enhanced opportunity. No empire, no nation, no industry, no company and no individual has ever improved its lot by preserving the comforts they have accumulated. Wealth and power are acquired by taking risks and are destoyed by avoiding them.


Tom Petty expressed my frustration well with the line, "The waiting is the hardest part."

I want to scream , "DO SOMETHING!!!"

 

[Ukridge]

Sorry to dredge this thread up from the past, but it is both a question and response to Rotate's comments.

I just read that United is inviting a third party to the table to review its new business plan. I well realize that cross-oceanic humour can often be misunderstood so in fairness I must ask - this is a joke is it not? With fleets of assorted hangers-on to the body corporate, they are now inviting yet another party to the table to "consult" and "give advice?" Is United getting windy?
To make this doubly worse, Mrs. Ukridge still is not driving a new automobile. If I had been able to offer my services of "consutling and advisement" United seems to pay quite a few bob for such activity and I would be more than pleased to render opinion (however humble) in return for such riches.
I must say (since United is seeking more and more outside opinion ) that they seem to be falling into the same tired and shopworn trap that many another once-great firm has - namely of allowing cost containment to be someone's self-actualization program and not part of an overall strategy. In other words a department head goes in with a broadsword and cuts out what first looks easy (usually stasff wages and benefits). This of course brings him/her great acclaim for the firm and usually a bit more in the bonus packet come the holidays. Yet, targeted savings to trim the firm of its entrenched fat were not the order of the day because they were not easy. Yet, trimming this fat could yield millions over the long run. As I say over and over, the better mousetrap that the market so amply rewards has not been achieved. Yet, the managers who rendered the sword, move on to other pastures captivated by the illusory thinking that they wrought great accomplishment in their careers.
I must be honest. I had expected better from Mr. Tilton and company. He is trodding a well-worn and unimaginative path it seems. No matter what type of industry, we have seen this film or read this book before and the plot-line is trite, repetitious, and frankly rather boring. One is forced to turn the channel or close the book.
To think, the Mrs. still does not have the new auto and United is handing out the money!
Cheers

 

[ITRADE]

Comparing the 777 to the 747, I'll take the 74 upper deck any time.

 

[jimntx]

To think, the Mrs. still does not have the new auto and United is handing out the money!
Cheers

[post="195795"][/post]​

But, UK, don't you see that you have shot yourself in the foot as we say here in the colonies? By posting clear, concise questions and answers, positing lucid positions and then supporting them with the available facts, you have provided prima facie evidence that you are not qualified to be an airline consultant. (The wonderful wit and sense of humor is suspect, as well.)

It is not consulting if everyone can understand what the hell you are saying. I speak from many years employment as a consultant. Management in almost any company does not wish to be told what they need to hear, only what they want to hear.

So sorry to tell you so very late, old boy, but the TRUTH will not do.

 

[Ukridge]

Itrade: The upper deck of the 747 has my vote as well. Quiet and plenty of room - easily the best ride.

Jimntx: Dissembling, bombast, obfuscation, recondite and arcane verbal references, specious reasoning, good old jaw flapping, and yes (drum roll please) even stock-in-trade sophistry are all talents within the quiver of Ukridge's verbal armament. Presented in an earnest, yet soporific manner, I can take even the most vacuous topic and make it even more so. No vacuity too vacuous for me is the saying. Perhaps it would be worth a try. B)

Cheers

 

[Bear96]

I just read that United is inviting a third party to the table to review its new business plan. I well realize that cross-oceanic humour can often be misunderstood so in fairness I must ask - this is a joke is it not? With fleets of assorted hangers-on to the body corporate, they are now inviting yet another party to the table to "consult" and "give advice?" Is United getting windy?

[post="195795"][/post]​

Ukridge,

From what I understand, the only reason they are doing this is because it is part of a settlement with some unions (AFA and IAM, I think). The unions moved in court to have a trustee take over UA from Tilton et al. because the unions think current senior management is screwing things up. The deal the parties and the court worked out is that a trustee won't come in, but a 3d party will come in to take a "neutral" look at the business plan, I guess to verify to the unions' satisfaction that current management is doing about as well as can be expected givven the circumstances.

In other words, UA management is only going the consultant route because they have to-- absent the settlement, they wouldn't be wasting money on it.

 

[ualdriver]

Ukridge: "I just read that United is inviting a third party to the table to review its new business plan. I well realize that cross-oceanic humour can often be misunderstood so in fairness I must ask - this is a joke is it not? With fleets of assorted hangers-on to the body corporate, they are now inviting yet another party to the table to "consult" and "give advice?" Is United getting windy?"


Ukridge-

There's only ONE reason (in my opinion) an outside consultant is being retained to look at UAL's numbers for the IAM and AFA. Can you say figleaf?

This is why I think the AFA and IAM want a third party, and I think you have to understand the membership of these two groups as I see them and talk to them everyday. Most of the members of these two unions (again from I have seen personally from my opinion-I talk to them everyday at work) for the most part do not fully understand what is really going on at UAL financially. They don't attend union meetings, they aren't looking at the numbers on UAL's quarterly filings, and for the most part they don't try to get a deep understanding of UAL's current predicament. All they know is that they just gave up about 10-15% in pay cuts, their friends are getting laid off, they don't trust management, they know management is going to make another run at them, and they're mad. And damn it, they want their union to stop all this bad stuff from happening. What are they paying dues for if they have to take yet another pay cut?

But they have smart people running their unions I think. So here you are, one of those smart union people who DOES understand what is going on at UAL financially. You DO realize that pay cuts (and other non-labor cuts) are probably needed and are inevitable in the up and coming months in order for UAL to exit bankruptcy and survive. But it's going to be EXTREMELY difficult to get your membership to understand that. If you go to the union without putting up a fight in the press (notice how ALPA isn't fighting their battles in the newspapers for all to see-different group, different mindset), demanding that a trustee be appointed because you don't like our evil pay cutting, union busting management, your membership will think you're not doing anything. You're a management lackee and your credibility as a union leader is gone.

So what do you do? You negotiate for the hiring of a 3rd party outside consultant- what a victory for the IAM and AFA! Didn't you see it in all the newspapers? You already know what the consultant is going to say because you're reading the same numbers that the consultant is about to read. The consultant is going to come back and make a few insignificant suggestions so that they "earn" their fee, and say yup, UAL is in big trouble and labor costs are going to have to come down further. There's your fig leaf. Now the leaders of the IAM and AFA can tell their membership in the up and coming pay cut road shows that they tried to fight for a trustee, they got a consultant, and the consultant agrees that we are in dire straights and that further cuts are going to need to be made. Now as a IAM and AFA member you have BOTH an outside consultant and your leaders telling you that things really are dire, and perhaps instead of civil war, the membership in general will be more willing to listen to what you have to say about further cuts. That "victory" of getting management to agree to a consultant is really just a cover- your proverbial fig leaf to hide behind while you tell your membership that things are about to get more painful.

 

[Bear96]

ualdriver,

That is an absolutely accurate assessment of what is going on.

I was quite disappointed with AFA going down this path. It only serves as an unneeded distraction right now, but the unions have to be able to say, "See, we're doing something!"

 

[rotate]

What all airline personnel in general, and United personnel in particular, must realize is that in order to survive their earnings will now vary according to the company's performance. In short, their lives are going to be much more like those of small business owners, farmers and ranchers who have good years and bad years, and less like trust babies, who get their steady income year in and year out.

What must be done to ensure the employees' support is a commensurate risk by the officers of the company. That means a SIGNIFICANT cut in salary accompanied by a greater increase in performance remuneration. That may mean the departure of management who can get a far better deal in other, more profitable, industries. That's what the market offers. Those officers that have Jet A in their veins will stay for the end game. Let them make the great sacrifices now and reap the great rewards when the airline recovers.

Pay fo performance is good for all of us.

 

[Ukridge]

An exceptionally informative post Ualdriver. Frankly, I was not aware of the calculus involved with the labor groups vis a vis the mangement and the business plan. Seen, in this light, I can now readily understand the need for a disinterested third party to provide the 'cover' to both sides in order to move forward. My puerile attempt at humour in questioing the validity of a firm coming in to inspect the plan did however, have a kernal of truth to it. How much will this consulting firm charge and what, if any, will be its recommendations that will serve to yield a better product and therefore a stronger firm for the shareholders? The answer of course is in the asking, as management must consider any costs to be offset by setting aside the potential for further dispute with the workers even if no useful suggestions are proffered.
Cheers

 

[Ukridge]

Rotate, your remarks concerning 'pay to performance' have a particular resonance to one who witnessed the British transformation from a staid industrial economy to one that remains in many ways still at sea. Meritocracy was in pre-Thatcherian England just a word in the dictionary. Yes, one could have been a scholarship boy and earned a rare place at a public school but the class strictures prevented much movement. When Lady Thatcher arrived, she basically atomized the union leadership in the country. The jury is still out as to whether this unleashed a backflow of social costs in the coal and steel regions. Her method of using 'nuclear weapons' instead of transformative processes was unique to say the least. Some unions - particulary that of the printer's - I was bloody well happy to see get pulled up by the scruff of the neck. Her quest for meritocracy was both revolutionary and founded upon a reasoned sentiment. Her methods however, and results are debatable.
This brings me to the point that there are times when changes need to be wrought. Yet the noblesse, or leaders, need to take a very measured approach and transform the firms from top to bottom. It was not just the lay-abouts on the print shop floor who needed to join the present century but those in the offices and leadership berths as well. They are the ones responsable for harnessing the labour in a meaningful and productive manner lest they simply bring about the situation in the former Soviet Union in which the joke was "You pretend to pay me and I will pretend to work."
Adroitly and nimbly transform it into a pay for performance operation and the rewards can be great for all. The question is can it be done?
Cheers

 

[rotate]

Adroitly and nimbly transform it into a pay for performance operation and the rewards can be great for all. The question is can it be done?

[post="196806"][/post]​

I don't know, UK, I really don't. Nevertheless, the past is dead and buried. We will either succeed, or we will disappear.

I was born in a former colony, granted to eight Lords Proprietors by King Charles I whose motto is "Dum Spiro Spero". This motto seems appropriate for United employees today as it is translated, "While I breathe, I hope".

I still have hope that our leaders will lead and our employees will produce.

Best regards to all...