Oil At $55 Per Barrel
- Thread starter LaBradford22
- Start date
goingboeing
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2004
- 584
- 1
I hope oil goes to $60-65 per barrel and that will provide the "fuel" necessary for AA management to get off their a_ _ _s and REALLY fix the airline.
FWAAA said:
a) Because SWA mechanics were already at the top of the list in pay and benifits.
b) The SWA FA were at the bottom and Thom McDaniel proved that there are good leaders within bad organizations.
The TWU International was trying to pressure the SWA Flight attendants but under McDaniels leadership they held out for more.
I would hope that the experience of those negotiations would convince McDaniel to work together with Local 100 and 234 to rid the TWU of management lackies like Little and gang at the TWUs next Convention.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
NewHampshire Black Bears said:
Uh, don't any of you realize that there's also an impact that oil prices has outside the airlines?....
Are you ready to start paying $3.00 or more per gallon of gas/diesel in your car? The price of filling my tank went up $4 just in the last week...
If diesel continues to goes up, that affects everyone, not just airline employees or travelers.
Are you ready to start paying an extra 5-10% for groceries?
Are you also ready to start paying higher local taxes for police/fire/rescue, school buses, or trash collection? Or worse, start seeing reduced service because of budget shortfalls?
Airlines are just the first line of business to feel the pinch. If fuel continues to stay at these prices, I'd expect to see the Big Three automakers to start shutting down truck and SUV assembly lines over the next few months.
Unabated, we're not just heading into a recession -- we're heading into a depression.
Bob Owens said:
Why are we still providing blankets, free soda, free pretzels? I dont get these things when I go to a 2 hour movie, shop at Target, Lowes etc. I dont get them when I buy a car, ride a train or subway. We dont need an inflight magazine issued twice a month or at all if it doesnt pay for itself or make some money with advertising.
desertfox said:
I dont get the in flight magazines either. Figure the cost of printing, handling, disposal, extra fuel and the fact that most of them seem to go straight into the dumpster how can they make money with them? A few weeks ago in our hangar I saw what must have been twenty full palletts of expired magazines that were never even unbundled waiting to be carted off.
Maybe they have to show circulation numbers to the advertizers? I dont know but it seems like an aweful waste. A better Idea would be to set up a rack right in the Jetbridge and a couple in the lobby to allow those who want it to take it. More people would probably use it because then they feel like they are getting something extra for free. This would save a lot of time for the cleaners who instead of inseting a magazine in every seat pocket for every flight they work could simply restock a few racks once a day.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,959
- 9,374
The inflight mag does actually make money -- when I was an analyst in cabin service, we used to run the cost/benefit analysis each budget year to figure the labor cost of provisioning in the cabin. They also ran the numbers as far as how much added fuel burn was required to carry the weight (250 magazines does add some weight to a 777....).
And it still pays for itself and then some, unlike carrying the other magazines (Time, PC World) which were removed a few years back. We got those for free, but it still cost us money to provide them because of the labor and fuel.
And it still pays for itself and then some, unlike carrying the other magazines (Time, PC World) which were removed a few years back. We got those for free, but it still cost us money to provide them because of the labor and fuel.
Here's some interesting info.
Over production may have damaged Saudi oil fields.
Hubbert Peak of Oil Production
Over production may have damaged Saudi oil fields.
Hubbert Peak of Oil Production
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 10,154
- 681
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Former ModerAAtor said:
Eric,
Your right. I agree completely.
But, If all the things you point out DO come to fruition, at least the airline industry will be fixed(in my view), and for most of us employees+(ex) employees, that's a good place to start.
On a different note,
I'm fed up with a lot of the (make believe) Wharton School 'honor" grads, on this board, who are constantly "tub thumping" their favorite chant, "what ever the MARKET will allow"........., when it comes to union talk.
I think It's a FRIGGIN" RIOT, that their words are coming true, with regard to the "OIL MARKET" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It not "too far a stretch" to envision the OIL MARKET driving out the deadwood airlines, while the survivors reap the spoils.
Suppose AA is one of those survivors, with load factors in the 90's, and the unions up for contracts.
Anyone who thinks for even a second(with a scenario like that), that AA would risk a shut down, needs to see a psyciatrist.
So in (hypothetical) summary, the "MARKET" ultimately allows the unions to prosper.
Talk about "strange Bedfellows"
NH/BB's
(Not if,) But when oil hit's $75-85 a barrel, and the country IS in the (soon to be ) Depression, that just opens the door even wider for the exterminators to fumigate congress in 06' and the White House in 08' !!!
Hillary in 08, ya gotta' love it
Your view here is myopic. The second-order effects would more than undo any "fixing" that would happen in the airline industry.NewHampshire Black Bears said:
What's so funny about that? Are you suggesting that we should be moving to a communist (little "c") society?
Of course it does. If it didn't, we wouldn't have them at all. Some of the protective legislation that has been in place for the better part of a century also helps.
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2003
- 5,311
- 584
- Banned
- #44
<_< Hello Bob!---- No I didn't want to go there, but since you have put your own spin on this, I guess I'll have to !!!! First a few stats on Ozark. Ozark first flew in 1950. It flew for 36years, and was bought by (TWA) Carl Icahn on Oct.26th, 1986, for $224Mill. adding 50 aircraft to TWA's fleet. This also eliminated competition out of STL, which was TWA's only hub, and Ozarks main base.------ Now, your statement that "Ozark was dovetailed because of the AMFA langage if they weren't no deal!" Well, I guess you could put it that way, but actually, most all Union contrcts in the industry at that time, as now, had language in there scope protecting their seniority! TWA included! The point I'm making here with the statement "The Ozark people were dovetailed" is in fact true! Unlike the Paranord AMT's at American Airlines, the people at TWA were not out to screw over the people from Ozark! No attempt was even considered to try and stapel them to the bottom of our seniority list! Back then, Seniority was, and should be today, considered one of the main bases of Unionisum! Any Union, including the AMFA! And I do take exception to the statement that "Ozark people did not have that many years there!" I've worked with too many of them thoughout the years, that are now retired, to tell you quite a few of them had "many' years with Ozark! Remember they were flying for 36 years before TWA came into the picture! Was the transition painless? Of course not! We had our issues also! As to what transpired with the language in our scope, a gun was put to our heads by Carty/ TWU, to have us pull that language from our scope, the same language in the Ozark scope, and later on by our own TWU,or Carty/TWU would "requist" the bankrupcy judge to void our total contract under section 1135a!!!!!Rather then lose it all, we reluctantly complied!Knowing that if we did, American Airlines would treat us "fairly", as Carty had promised!!!! :down: As to the presitent set by the AMT's of a.a., and the other Unions of a.a., as to how the TWA people were treated, It is a dangerous one! One that could came back and bit us all in the tail feathers because it strikes right to the core of Unionisum!! Let me point out one other thing here! The percentage of Ozark AMT's to TWA, was roughly the same as that of TWA, to a.a.!!!! Signed: "Just anotherone of a.a.'s redheaded stepchildren!!"Bob Owens said:
MCI transplant,Mar 11 2005, 07:02 PM]
<_< Hello Bob!---- No I didn't want to go there, but since you have put your own spin on this, I guess I'll have to !!!! First a few stats on Ozark. Ozark first flew in 1950. It flew for 36years, and was bought by (TWA) Carl Icahn on Oct.26th, 1986, for $224Mill. adding 50 aircraft to TWA's fleet. This also eliminated competition out of STL, which was TWA's only hub, and Ozarks main base.------ Now, your statement that "Ozark was dovetailed because of the AMFA langage if they weren't no deal!" Well, I guess you could put it that way, but actually, most all Union contrcts in the industry at that time, as now, had language in there scope protecting their seniority! TWA included!
Yes, and the IAM, facing default from the company to the tune of several hundred million dollars waived your contracts successorship clause.
The point I'm making here with the statement "The Ozark people were dovetailed" is in fact true! Unlike the Paranord AMT's at American Airlines, the people at TWA were not out to screw over the people from Ozark! No attempt was even considered to try and stapel them to the bottom of our seniority list! Back then, Seniority was, and should be today, considered one of the main bases of Unionisum! Any Union, including the AMFA! And I do take exception to the statement that "Ozark people did not have that many years there!" I've worked with too many of them thoughout the years, that are now retired, to tell you quite a few of them had "many' years with Ozark!
Well we have a few ex-ozark guys here and the word is that things were not quite as cozy as you make it seem. Mind you those guys are from STL where the impact of the merger would have been much greater than at MCI.
Remember they were flying for 36 years before TWA came into the picture! Was the transition painless? Of course not! We had our issues also! As to what transpired with the language in our scope, a gun was put to our heads by Carty/ TWU, to have us pull that language from our scope, the same language in the Ozark scope, and later on by our own TWU,or Carty/TWU would "requist" the bankrupcy judge to void our total contract under section 1135a!!!!!
Rather then lose it all, we reluctantly complied!
So in the end what part of your contract did you end up keeping ?
Knowing that if we did, American Airlines would treat us "fairly", as Carty had promised!!!!
Fair is a relative word. Carty had no right to promise you something that was not his to give. Would it have been "fair" for the EAL guys to be displaced to make room for guys who submit every time the company "holds a gun to their heads"? When management did that to the EAL guys they held a gun to the companies head. Your merger with Ozark predated EAL and the guys from Ozark took pay and benifit cuts when they went to TWA, you MCI guys got the biggest increase you ever saw when you went to AA, only to vote it,and a whole lot more away just like you did at TWA, once again because of that "gun to your heads". So Ichan had a gun, Carty had a gun, they all got guns, and all they have to do is make a threat and we know how you will go.
:down: As to the presitent set by the AMT's of a.a., and the other Unions of a.a., as to how the TWA people were treated, It is a dangerous one! One that could came back and bit us all in the tail feathers because it strikes right to the core of Unionisum!! Let me point out one other thing here! The percentage of Ozark AMT's to TWA, was roughly the same as that of TWA, to a.a.!!!! Signed: "Just anotherone of a.a.'s redheaded stepchildren!!"
Well if you havent figured it out yet the unionism that you believed in has long since been replaced by business unionism. When Management people like Jim Litltle rise to the top ranks of the union by ushering massive concessions you know that the union is shot.
You want portable seniority there is only one way to get it, get us all in one union-fill out an AMFA card then make the motion, I will support you 100%.
<_< Hello Bob!---- No I didn't want to go there, but since you have put your own spin on this, I guess I'll have to !!!! First a few stats on Ozark. Ozark first flew in 1950. It flew for 36years, and was bought by (TWA) Carl Icahn on Oct.26th, 1986, for $224Mill. adding 50 aircraft to TWA's fleet. This also eliminated competition out of STL, which was TWA's only hub, and Ozarks main base.------ Now, your statement that "Ozark was dovetailed because of the AMFA langage if they weren't no deal!" Well, I guess you could put it that way, but actually, most all Union contrcts in the industry at that time, as now, had language in there scope protecting their seniority! TWA included!
Yes, and the IAM, facing default from the company to the tune of several hundred million dollars waived your contracts successorship clause.
The point I'm making here with the statement "The Ozark people were dovetailed" is in fact true! Unlike the Paranord AMT's at American Airlines, the people at TWA were not out to screw over the people from Ozark! No attempt was even considered to try and stapel them to the bottom of our seniority list! Back then, Seniority was, and should be today, considered one of the main bases of Unionisum! Any Union, including the AMFA! And I do take exception to the statement that "Ozark people did not have that many years there!" I've worked with too many of them thoughout the years, that are now retired, to tell you quite a few of them had "many' years with Ozark!
Well we have a few ex-ozark guys here and the word is that things were not quite as cozy as you make it seem. Mind you those guys are from STL where the impact of the merger would have been much greater than at MCI.
Remember they were flying for 36 years before TWA came into the picture! Was the transition painless? Of course not! We had our issues also! As to what transpired with the language in our scope, a gun was put to our heads by Carty/ TWU, to have us pull that language from our scope, the same language in the Ozark scope, and later on by our own TWU,or Carty/TWU would "requist" the bankrupcy judge to void our total contract under section 1135a!!!!!
Rather then lose it all, we reluctantly complied!
So in the end what part of your contract did you end up keeping ?
Knowing that if we did, American Airlines would treat us "fairly", as Carty had promised!!!!
Fair is a relative word. Carty had no right to promise you something that was not his to give. Would it have been "fair" for the EAL guys to be displaced to make room for guys who submit every time the company "holds a gun to their heads"? When management did that to the EAL guys they held a gun to the companies head. Your merger with Ozark predated EAL and the guys from Ozark took pay and benifit cuts when they went to TWA, you MCI guys got the biggest increase you ever saw when you went to AA, only to vote it,and a whole lot more away just like you did at TWA, once again because of that "gun to your heads". So Ichan had a gun, Carty had a gun, they all got guns, and all they have to do is make a threat and we know how you will go.
:down: As to the presitent set by the AMT's of a.a., and the other Unions of a.a., as to how the TWA people were treated, It is a dangerous one! One that could came back and bit us all in the tail feathers because it strikes right to the core of Unionisum!! Let me point out one other thing here! The percentage of Ozark AMT's to TWA, was roughly the same as that of TWA, to a.a.!!!! Signed: "Just anotherone of a.a.'s redheaded stepchildren!!"
Well if you havent figured it out yet the unionism that you believed in has long since been replaced by business unionism. When Management people like Jim Litltle rise to the top ranks of the union by ushering massive concessions you know that the union is shot.
You want portable seniority there is only one way to get it, get us all in one union-fill out an AMFA card then make the motion, I will support you 100%.
