Profit Sharing.

[El Gato]

I'll rephrase that: Where I live, that isn't much.

Fly,
Ok, $100,000 isn't so great in the bay area. But where are you living, or expecting to live? I have a friend who lives in Walnut Creek, and he makes about $90,000 doing tech development. Has a wife, but she is not working. They do very well, however. Owns a small bungalow house - kinda small, but still cozy. Sure the car is a rust bucket, but who wants to drive anyway with gas prices being so high right now. And the train to his job is near, so it is even easier. He got his place for about $150k....not too shabby.

I guess what I am trying to say is that $100,000 is a great salary for those out there who can live within their means and excercise some financial prudence and restraint. I would love to have that kind of money, but even if I have less than a third of that, I can do well. I get disgusted anytime I hear someone moaning about how "they can't survive on a $33,000 or whatever a year salary". I can tell you from firsthand experience that I lived in the early nineties on $6.00/hr for about 4 years. It was tough, but I didn't care. I was working towards something better, and I feel I have that in life now. Which is why I would hate to lose it, especially if it is all because someone else just wants to act tough and kill the company out of sheer bravado and irrationality.

Like I said, I don't like the thought of argueing here and running the risk of making enemies, but now more than ever I feel it is time to speak out.

 

[Fly]

El Gato Posted on Mar 26 2004, 03:15 AM

I guess what I am trying to say is that $100,000 is a great salary for those out there who can live within their means and excercise some financial prudence and restraint.

I guess I didn't make myself clear. WE are living within our means, fortunately there isn't much of a ceiling in that department. I just said that $100,000 isn't very much money. (oh, what does he do for a living??? He works for a giant corporation in a top management position... he spends a considerable amount of time trying to figure out how to bust unions. For that they pay him ridiculous amounts of money. Sure they take paycuts...then give each other bonuses to make up for it ) Wow....sounds like the aviation industry, doesn't it? FYI, unless you, El Gato, are in the upper management yourself, they are laughing at you. His mantra: Divide em (you are making his job so easy you know)

 

[Doc]

Most of the jobs that are in the company are replacable. A ticket agent can be trained in a matter of days, the same for a ramper(some airlines like WN have agents as rampers too). A res agent as a career? Please. B6 has folks working res from their homes for a fraction of what US is paying(not to mention the price of renting an office building!).

Well, then why don't you come get trained and work for 8.00 hr.
most of the people comeing for JOBS is the 8.00 hr have green cards and barley speak english if you think you can learn all the international ticking weight balance psgr loads keeping up with all the new tech stuff.
I know I'm not supposed to be name calling buy you are an ^%$# .
Do you have any idea what the turn over rate is at 8.00 hr you can work at mcdonalds for 10.00 and have a better health plan you are so out to lunch it saddends me that you are one of so called AMERICANS that would probably send all our work over seas. you should move to the middle east you can work res from your straw hut for 2.00 a day and if your lucky or should I say if we are lucky you can stay there. I sir call my self a true AMERICAN and will fight to keep good paying JOBS right here in the USA.
YOU SIR ARE NOT AN AMERICAN..............................

 

[wizzz]

Somewhat off the topic, perhaps, but I feel there is a lack of understanding re the REAL VALUE of a trained, seasoned employee in the FA class...
I, for one, DO NOT WANT a 21yrs old BIMBO entrusted with the safety of myself OR my loved ones in the case of an emergency....I want someone with experience, with sensibility and maturity, who knows the REAL reason they're on board...and that is NOT to entertain...

But, I am also one who believes that even though a firefighter spends 90% of his time on the clock cleaning equipment, watching TV, or (as in recent NYC history) recreating on the job, WE CAN'T PAY THEM ENOUGH to be trained, willing and able to do the things they do when they are called into action...

Ditto++ for all pilots...

 

[wizzz]

PLUS...(I am BIG on P.S.'s..)

Do you REALLY WANT Bobbie-Jo Bump-and-Grind in charge and responsible when your little old mother goes into diabetic shock (she THOUGHT there would be food on board...) or heart failure...and your $8.00 and hour attendant now has to figure out the defibulators, which she was trained to use in her one week training class, somewhere between mixing drinks and using the in-flight entertainment unit, which seems to be more important these days....

 

[diogenes]

Look at that list carefully. Every one of those jobs requires extensive training. We're not talking about six weeks here. We're talking about years and in some cases decades of investment. Then after all of that training, these people don't reach the pinnacles of their careers for another couple of decades. That is the hallmark of what defines the difference between a job and a career. And that's why those fields pay the commensurate wages.

Let's look a bit more closely at some of the folks on that list.

Lawyers
You'd think they'd be subject to the economic forces touted on this board, but stangely, that is not the case. I remember in the runup to NAFTA, one of the 'benefits' would be Mexican lawyers practicing in the US, and driving down legal fees. Somehow, that did not come off. Could it be because Congress, the governors, etc. are mostly lawyers, and will not throw their profession under the bus along with the textile workers?

Some years ago, an outfit developed a software program that did legal stuff. The program was a step or two up from what is currently available. The ABA sued the a$$ off them for practicing law without a license. Actually, much legal work lends itself to software and outsourcing, just as accounting does. Is it happening? Not so you could tell it.

Doctors
A once independent businessman who set his fees, and did well. Now overrun by HMO's. The AMA of yesteryear was staunchly conservative, Republican and anti-union. Now some doctors are seeking to ORGANIZE (the Bolsheviks!).

Nurses
Due to the 'shortage' of nurses, the US is importing nurses from the Phillipines and Latin America. Is the shortage due to lazy Americans who are too stupid to pass the boards, or is it due to substandard pay for the responsibilities involved? The same dynamic is at work in the programming field, where Microsoft is lobbying the government for for immigrant programmers, due to a 'shortage' of programmers. I guess that's ok, as Microsoft is going broke.

Teachers
Yeah, they're getting rich.


The point?
I don't believe for a minute the powers-that-be are applying economic theory dispassionately across the board. It is "I come first, and the devil take the hindermost."

The elitists are perfectly happy to throw anybody who will stand still for it under the bus. They get lower air fares, cheaper garments and fatter portfolios. You try to throw their a$$ under the bus (see lawyers) and you'll have a fight on your hands (see doctors).

 

[mweiss]

Those who say a worker is only worth what someone else is willing to do the same job for - that means that everyone who has a job is overpaid because there is always someone who will do your job for less.

That's absurd on several levels.

First of all, your replacement has to be able to do your job. Sure, there are plenty of people who would fly your FLUFs at minimum wage because flying is fun. But if they don't have the type rating, it's rather irrelevant, isn't it?

Second, we're talking about the laws of supply and demand. There is only someone willing to work for less if the demand for workers is outstripped by the supply of workers.

Third, seniority carries some weight in a business. As you continue to work in an organization, your value to the organization increases for many reasons. Your increase of pay should reflect that (though in some instances the increase in pay outstrips the increase in value).

Now, one could make the argument that each employee should be paid exactly the minimum he's willing to work for, based on the current supply/demand curves. Some economists would actually make that argument with a straight face. It doesn't work, though, because employees always get a sense of how their peers are doing financially, so the market segmentation isn't sustainable. It is, in fact, related to why "sensible pricing" is now generating more revenue than the old pricing schemes.

 

[ktflyhome]

Responding to the Monkey Flight Attendants.... :down: A few years ago, U was hiring majorly and many, many youngins' were being seen everywhere. I believe you could even be 19 years of age to get hired. Well stories started flying by the hand fulls. These Young Whippersnappers were pulling all kinds of crazy stunts.

Here is one example: A medical emergency with a woman needing oxygen. The New Hire Young Gal was told to retrieve the POB for this lady. This little bouncing beauty goes and get the PBE and sticks it over the ladies Head!!!!!!!! I believe she got a 3 day suspension.

Another little young whippersnapper was due to meet the crew in PBI at 1:00pm in the Lobby. She is nowhere to be found. The Cpt. called her room...no answer. They finally found her at the Pool in her Bathingsuit having a glass of wine in the sunshine. Her reply was this: "Well, I was told in Training that I got 2 personnal days a year, so I am taking my one personnal day now."!!!!Duh.

The stories go on and on.

Oh, here is one of the first I heard. Right after their training, 2 new hires were on their first flight to PBI. They were so stressed and out of sorts with the flight that when they got to PBI they called up the Company and quit. They wanted the Company to fly them back home.

 

[mweiss]

Do you have any idea what the turn over rate is at 8.00 hr you can work at mcdonalds...

Leaving the name-calling aside (can I suggest that it seriously undermines your credibility when you do that?), there's a simple counterargument to that.

Some jobs can support high turnover, while others cannot. And, of course, that is a continuum, not a binary condition. If the value of a retained employee is much greater than the value of a new employee, then the payscales should reflect that.

I'm not suggesting that the only metric for determining pay is whether or not anyone on the planet is willing to do the same job for less. That is but one determining factor. The others are the need for quality, geographical constraints, and the variation in the value contribution of an employee over time.

Pulling out the American flag and waving it is a specious argument. Ultimately going down that path doesn't result in jobs going overseas due to outsourcing. It results in the jobs going overseas because overseas companies put entire US companies out of business. The results are similar, but the methods are vastly different.

It's actually quite similar to the US Airways vs. LCC battle. Your choices are to reduce costs to the LCC level, or go out of business.

 

[mweiss]

Lawyers
Could it be because Congress, the governors, etc. are mostly lawyers, and will not throw their profession under the bus along with the textile workers?

Or could it be that it takes more than a couple of years to gain enough knowledge to pass the bar in the state in which you wish to practice law?

Doctors
A once independent businessman who set his fees, and did well. Now overrun by HMO's. The AMA of yesteryear was staunchly conservative, Republican and anti-union. Now some doctors are seeking to ORGANIZE (the Bolsheviks!).

And your point is...? They are still paid far, far above minimum wage for their work.

Nurses
Due to the 'shortage' of nurses, the US is importing nurses from the Phillipines and Latin America. Is the shortage due to lazy Americans who are too stupid to pass the boards, or is it due to substandard pay for the responsibilities involved?

No, the shortage comes from most Americans' attitude that if you want to go into the medical profession, you become a doctor. There is a shortage because not enough people are registering for nursing school.

The same dynamic is at work in the programming field, where Microsoft is lobbying the government for for immigrant programmers, due to a 'shortage' of programmers.

Not anymore. They have no trouble finding programmers right now. And when they were lobbying, it was because there was, in fact, a shortage of quality programmers in the US. I'm very intimately acquainted with that industry, and I saw it firsthand.

Teachers
Yeah, they're getting rich.

What's with this "getting rich" stuff? They're paid well above minimum wage, have amazing benefits, and can't be fired.

 

[diogenes]

Uhhh, Michael, I'm talking about Mexicans who have already been to school, passed their bar, and are practicing. I say, bring 'em across the border and let 'em rip. Quality? DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH! The quality argument has been shredded on this board - see the Airbii farmout posts.

You're the one who said these folks, due to the amount of training, are worthy of higher salaries than f/a's.

I'm the one who said that training will not keep you from getting thrown under the bus as we head back to the 1880-1920's.

The bigger point is, in theory, the economics touted should not be a zero sum game. But when the principals treat it as if it were, it mostly is.

I haven't seen lawyers, arbs, and CEO's lining up to outsource their jobs, yet in many cases, it's very doable.

 

[mweiss]

Quality? DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH! The quality argument has been shredded on this board - see the Airbii farmout posts.

With all due respect, that's an apples-to-oranges comparison. I am intimately acquainted with the issues surrounding finding good programmers in the late 1990s, and I can assure you that those hired by Microsoft were compensated well for their contributions.

You're the one who said these folks, due to the amount of training, are worthy of higher salaries than f/a's.

And they are. You're not going to find people who go to the trouble of passing the bar working for the same wage as those who go through a six-week course. Otherwise, the NPV of becoming a lawyer becomes less than that of becoming a FA. It will always be more, because of the value of accepting the upfront risk associated with becoming a doctor or lawyer.

The bigger point is, in theory, the economics touted should not be a zero sum game.

I'm not following you here. Could you elaborate?

 

[BoeingBoy]

mweiss,

QUOTE (BoeingBoy @ Mar 26 2004, 06:24 AM)
"Those who say a worker is only worth what someone else is willing to do the same job for - that means that everyone who has a job is overpaid because there is always someone who will do your job for less."

QUOTE (mweiss)
"That's absurd on several levels."

I agree, I wasn't making that argument but responding to others who effectively said just that.

As far as my particular job, there are lots of pilots out there who would do it for a lot less. To paraphrase Mesa's Ornstein, he is paying too much because he has plenty of people lined up to take the job. There have been carriers who made new-hires pay for their training - they didn't run out of applicants.

There are also people out there getting paid more for doing the same job as I - as I said somewhere in another thread a while back, under JetBlue's contract I would get a raise.

Jim

 

[Kyle]

Back to the original topic, please.

 

[diogenes]

I'm not following you here. Could you elaborate?

Certainly.

The notion of capital and labor chasing the most efficient use is a lovely economic theory. It's a win-win for everybody.

But if one of the players gets grabby, all bets are off.

Back in the 80's, our markets were completely opened to the Japanese. We got better and cheaper electronics and cars. It made the US car makers more efficient, and it shut down American electronics. Hard lines for the American workers, but life is tough, right?

At the same time, our agriculture was much more efficient and cheaper than its Japanese counterpart. Japan refused to import our goods, and even had the gall to say American rice was difficult on the Japanese digestive tract.

So what should have happened, in theory - we buy their cars, they buy our rice - didn't. Because one player decided the theory was a zero-sum game.

Fast forward to now. What surety do we have India and China will play by the rules? Add to that the security concerns - they are not our allies. When you look at the zillions China holds in T bills, and the information India has on US corporations (if they're doing the accounting scut work, they have access to a lot of useful information) it's not hard to imagine the mischief they may decide to cause. It's not good practice, for the individual or the nation, to let someone else hold it's wallet and tell them all of your business.