BillLumbergh
Veteran
You wouldn't happen to know somebody who goes by the name Cavalier, would you???
Management Presents "plan" To Afa
- Thread starter PITbull
- Start date
pitbull: he got suspended. Duh. Some of us are not so luckyand prudent as to give our opionions and advise wiithout suffering the consquenses You should know this by now. I am sorry to say this, but after being on these boards or a while, it seems as though "just a few are entitled to say what they want". All others are called to account for. You and Piney Bob seem to rule. I's like no one else has any thing to contribute here but you two. So where i Cavalier. Only you should Know. :blink:
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #155
PineyBob,
You said "Based on my limited knowledge it's not wages, it's cost per unit that is the problem." Lord, I'm proud of you. (See PitBull, I told you ole Bob was trainable)
Aside from some niggling terminology issues, you've got the idea. What matters in this business is unit cost (CASM) and it's relationship to unit revenue (RASM). It is pure mathematics (not business 101) that says changing the units 10% makes a lot bigger difference than changing employee costs (only a part of cost) that same 10%.
Now that you've the units part of the picture figured out, let's talk about efficiency in other areas. Let's create a theoretical hub, say with 25 mainline gates and maybe something like 120 mainline departures per day (about 5 departures per gate). Now let's make up a name for this make-believe hub - something like PIT.
Your costs are mainly fixed (the lease cost) with some variable (employee costs). Let's say a team of rampers and an agent can work only two gates since the gates are all in use at about the same times. Of course, you need two shifts, since the first departures are in the morning and the last are in the late evening. That's 2 ramper crews and 2 agents per day to work 10 flights. If it takes an hour to turn the flights, that's about 10 hours of actual work per day or 5 hours per crew/agent combo per shift. Not very efficient when they're paid for 8.
Now using your "fly the planes more" model, say we can increase the number of departures to 175 per day or 7 per gate. In addition, we tweak the arrival & departure times so that a ramp crew and agent can work 3 gates (recognize the rolling hub?). We still need two shifts, but now those two shifts are working 21 flights per day instead of 10. Since the rolling hub reduces ground time, let's say it takes 45 minutes to turn each flight, or 15 hours work per day. Each ramp crew/agent is now working 7:30 per shift. Sure is more efficient, isn't it.
Of course, the costs of the hub are included in the cost part of CASM. Our hub cost hasn't changed one iota - the leases are the same, the wages are the same. We're just dividing those costs by a bigger number of units.
In your "fly more" model, you generate more units with low incremental cost (4-5 cents CASM). Throw the hub efficiencies in at ZERO cost. We've just given the ole unit cost a one-two punch at very little extra expense.
As the saying goes, "It ain't rocket science".
Jim
You said "Based on my limited knowledge it's not wages, it's cost per unit that is the problem." Lord, I'm proud of you. (See PitBull, I told you ole Bob was trainable)
Aside from some niggling terminology issues, you've got the idea. What matters in this business is unit cost (CASM) and it's relationship to unit revenue (RASM). It is pure mathematics (not business 101) that says changing the units 10% makes a lot bigger difference than changing employee costs (only a part of cost) that same 10%.
Now that you've the units part of the picture figured out, let's talk about efficiency in other areas. Let's create a theoretical hub, say with 25 mainline gates and maybe something like 120 mainline departures per day (about 5 departures per gate). Now let's make up a name for this make-believe hub - something like PIT.
Your costs are mainly fixed (the lease cost) with some variable (employee costs). Let's say a team of rampers and an agent can work only two gates since the gates are all in use at about the same times. Of course, you need two shifts, since the first departures are in the morning and the last are in the late evening. That's 2 ramper crews and 2 agents per day to work 10 flights. If it takes an hour to turn the flights, that's about 10 hours of actual work per day or 5 hours per crew/agent combo per shift. Not very efficient when they're paid for 8.
Now using your "fly the planes more" model, say we can increase the number of departures to 175 per day or 7 per gate. In addition, we tweak the arrival & departure times so that a ramp crew and agent can work 3 gates (recognize the rolling hub?). We still need two shifts, but now those two shifts are working 21 flights per day instead of 10. Since the rolling hub reduces ground time, let's say it takes 45 minutes to turn each flight, or 15 hours work per day. Each ramp crew/agent is now working 7:30 per shift. Sure is more efficient, isn't it.
Of course, the costs of the hub are included in the cost part of CASM. Our hub cost hasn't changed one iota - the leases are the same, the wages are the same. We're just dividing those costs by a bigger number of units.
In your "fly more" model, you generate more units with low incremental cost (4-5 cents CASM). Throw the hub efficiencies in at ZERO cost. We've just given the ole unit cost a one-two punch at very little extra expense.
As the saying goes, "It ain't rocket science".
Jim
One thing that would help I think all F/a's in the new plan is for the F/a's to agree to be split from the pilots on trips. I just got off a 4 day, first day was one leg from PHL to PVD. Then we all went to the hotel. No reason why the F/a's could not have flown another 3 or 4 hrs. No reason the pilots couldn't fly more as well, but that's another story. The trips that make up the blocks are made up by the Flight Dept. after getting the raw data from Marketing. F/a's are not part of Flight. Just along for the ride with the trips.
My trip was worth 20 and change. Now if for the same 4 days if was worth 24:30 for the F/a's, you tell me.
It would be less days per month, but flying more per day. And maybe more reserve F/a's would break 72. I would miss the old way, been doing it now for 25 years. But times change, and I think we are one of the few, if not the only airline where the crew stays toghether.
My trip was worth 20 and change. Now if for the same 4 days if was worth 24:30 for the F/a's, you tell me.
It would be less days per month, but flying more per day. And maybe more reserve F/a's would break 72. I would miss the old way, been doing it now for 25 years. But times change, and I think we are one of the few, if not the only airline where the crew stays toghether.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #159
Atlantic,
The trips are produced by Resource Planning, not the Flight Department. Well, actually by a computer in Resource Planning.
That said, the trips are built around the duty rigs, max duty time, and crew rest requirements. The computer basically has one over-riding instruction - minimize penalty time. As long as the limiting factors stay the same for the pilots and flight attendents, the trips will stay the same for both.
Jim
The trips are produced by Resource Planning, not the Flight Department. Well, actually by a computer in Resource Planning.
That said, the trips are built around the duty rigs, max duty time, and crew rest requirements. The computer basically has one over-riding instruction - minimize penalty time. As long as the limiting factors stay the same for the pilots and flight attendents, the trips will stay the same for both.
Jim
UseYourHead
Veteran
- Apr 1, 2003
- 720
- 0
756pro,756pro said:
Instead of pointing fingers and playing the blame game, what do you propose any management team do to turn things around here; pretend for a minute you are the new CEO.
The only thing you post is rage, blame, and negativity...get ahold of yourself.
UseYourHead
Veteran
- Apr 1, 2003
- 720
- 0
756pro,756pro said:
Don't flatter yourself, no one really cares what you think; you have most likely complained your entire career here. It is people like you that provide the entertainment around here....
No one is trying to hade any facts around here, they haven't even been disseminated yet; you on the other hand have already decided how you will view whatever plan is presented.
Prove me wrong and engage in some intelligent debate?
Boing,
You are right. Resource has it's hand in it too. They need the a/c and crews to please Marketing. The limit in the program you bring up is what the pilots can do. Forget about our respective contracts for a min. By the FAR's the F/a's are less restricted than the pilots.
The point I wanted to make was that by breaking with the pilots on trips, and maybe kicking out the "me too" as well, it could turn into a better deal for the F/a's.
Me, I would be all over two days less for the same hours. It's all about hard time now.
Dave
You are right. Resource has it's hand in it too. They need the a/c and crews to please Marketing. The limit in the program you bring up is what the pilots can do. Forget about our respective contracts for a min. By the FAR's the F/a's are less restricted than the pilots.
The point I wanted to make was that by breaking with the pilots on trips, and maybe kicking out the "me too" as well, it could turn into a better deal for the F/a's.
Me, I would be all over two days less for the same hours. It's all about hard time now.
Dave
Pointing fingers you call it.UseYourHead said:
What has been done to the employees of U is totally and absolutely inexcusable and you are worried about me pointing fingers to where the blame squarely lies. Why does that bother you, why would you care?
Let me answer that: Because you are trying to shift the focus to getting people to believe a sound and rational mind is what is needed, that there is no problem at the top, that this team is the one and only answer, that everyone should embrace them and get behind them 1000 %. If you don't shift the focus then the reality that this team has lost all and any creditability is plain to see with my post.
I say you and this management team are the ones that need to get a grip.
Get a grip on the fact the employee are completely fed up with all the lies and heavy handed tactics handed out by this team who believes that the only way to run a successful company is thru ruthless tyranny, and that employees dare not mutter one word of disapproval of these tactics that are shoved down their throats.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #164
Atlantic,
You are right on two points. After marketing works out what they want, flt ops determines if it is possible from crew standpoint and maintenance does the same for aircraft. The tweaking goes back and forth until everybody is reasonable happy.
The "me too" is what pretty much ties us together at present, since you are correct that the FAR's are limiting on pilots. That affects min rest, since the rest other contract limits are more restrictive than FAR's (at least on a trip basis). I guess it would be possible to build separate trips, but as long as the rigs are the same what is most efficient (from the companies standpoint, not ours) for one group is the most efficient for the other.
By the way, the best way to improve trips under current contracts is to fly the airplanes more hours per day. That's what allows WN to have morning and afternoon "shifts" (as MetroJet did I believe).
Jim
You are right on two points. After marketing works out what they want, flt ops determines if it is possible from crew standpoint and maintenance does the same for aircraft. The tweaking goes back and forth until everybody is reasonable happy.
The "me too" is what pretty much ties us together at present, since you are correct that the FAR's are limiting on pilots. That affects min rest, since the rest other contract limits are more restrictive than FAR's (at least on a trip basis). I guess it would be possible to build separate trips, but as long as the rigs are the same what is most efficient (from the companies standpoint, not ours) for one group is the most efficient for the other.
By the way, the best way to improve trips under current contracts is to fly the airplanes more hours per day. That's what allows WN to have morning and afternoon "shifts" (as MetroJet did I believe).
Jim
calibrator
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2004
- 558
- 0
