kirkpatrick
Veteran
Attrition among the FA ranks continues to be disappointingly low. 40 is the number for March. In addition, 29 more TWA people retired from furlough status.
MK
MK
March FA Attrition
- Thread starter kirkpatrick
- Start date
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 10,154
- 681
==========================================================
IORFA (or anyone),
Just curious, Not counting the language speakers, how much seniority does the most senior F/A have, on the Shanghai(SP?) trip.
Thanx,
NH/BB's
Kev3188
Veteran
What does that translate to, seniority date wise?
OP
kirkpatrick
Veteran
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #7
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,940
- 9,369
100 and below have occ dates of 1965 or earlier... That's 41+ years of flying for the math challenged...
1000 and below were hired no later than 1970.
5000 and below were hired no later than 1985, meaning at least a third of the workgroup has at least 20 years union seniority.
10000 and below were hired no later than 1990, meaning that only about a third of the workgroup has 15 years or less of union seniority.
1000 and below were hired no later than 1970.
5000 and below were hired no later than 1985, meaning at least a third of the workgroup has at least 20 years union seniority.
10000 and below were hired no later than 1990, meaning that only about a third of the workgroup has 15 years or less of union seniority.
jimntx
Veteran
Just some "fun" facts...
1. The website lists 16 retirees, but there are 17 names on the retiree list; so, I'm assuming that one of those was a late February that got included in the March list.
2. None of the retirees on the list had less than 31 years of service.
3. The average seniority for the retirees was 36.12 years!
4. So, for the average seniority for all attrition to be pulled down to 21 years, there have to be some very junior people leaving as well.
Well, I knew you were going to ask sooner or later.
just a quick question:
does amr fear a recall because to do so would lead to a rush of retirements that would include retiree medical expenses? what I mean is this - if I am retirement age and furloughed I would want to be recalled so I could retire and have medical benefits. is this why the company is dragging their feet or are they planning to downsize further ie through summer 2008?
does amr fear a recall because to do so would lead to a rush of retirements that would include retiree medical expenses? what I mean is this - if I am retirement age and furloughed I would want to be recalled so I could retire and have medical benefits. is this why the company is dragging their feet or are they planning to downsize further ie through summer 2008?
jimntx
Veteran
I doubt seriously that is a concern for the company. The company knows that after the next 96 people on the list there are 3,000 former TW flight attendants that will have to be offered recall per the contract. What those f/as plan to do once recalled is not an issue because it would be totally outside the company's control.
As it stands, there is no possible way to go to July, 2008 without a recall unless the company becomes substantially smaller than it is now. There may be some slight shrinkage--eliminating non-profitable routes, delay of expansions, etc--but AMR management is well aware of the fact that no airline has ever shrunk to profitability.
The law of unintended consequences kicks in when you start eliminating routes. Say, for instance, you eliminate DFW-CLT. You not only lose the people who might be traveling between DFW and CLT, but also all the people from the CLT area who might want to connect at DFW to other destinations.
you are correct here. before 9/11 it was observed that approx 80% of united's network lost money (as memory serves). however, the severing of any of those spokes caused the remaining network to lose. in other words, i do not see how amr could shrink to profitablity either (as you mentioned) but like the previously extintict carriers - will they not try it anyway???
Somebody's gotta shrink or domestic fares will continue to go down.
WN and B6 continue with their plans to add dozens of new airplanes - helping to drive fares lower and lower.
Shrinking to profitability? Not gonna work. But if a major or two shrinks to, say, nonexistence? That would sure help.
WN and B6 continue with their plans to add dozens of new airplanes - helping to drive fares lower and lower.
Shrinking to profitability? Not gonna work. But if a major or two shrinks to, say, nonexistence? That would sure help.
OP
kirkpatrick
Veteran
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #14
Fares have been climbing for a few months now. Even Jet Blue and Southwest are raising fares, and the good news is, the fare increases are sticking.
MK
MK
True, they have, recently, but jet fuel currently costs just about FOUR times what it cost AMR in both 1998 and 1999, yet when AA announces its first quarter results tomorrow, the first quarter yield will be a smaller number than in either of those two years.
THAT is the problem. Fares are far too low for today's costs.
