Union''s Fault

[RV4]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/18/2003 138 PM j7915 wrote:

Actually as I recall Holly was getting tired of a certain AMFADave and his (very)small claque.


----------------
[/blockquote]

I simply asked for a comparison between WN and AMR. What's your beef?

Surely a "professional website" would never eliminate a bulletin board because of one person and a (very)small claque.

And you're a known supporter of lower wages in exchange for jobs. Your a really big UNION MAN, huh? Who do we usally see you defending?

 

[RV4]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/18/2003 4:34:35 PM eolesen wrote:

Dave, if you want the ratio of Eagle VP's to employees, I suggest you become a shareholder of record if you're not already, and request the information from Investor Relations.

They'll respond.
----------------
[/blockquote]

I did a little bit of research as you urge.

I find that it appears AA employees are top heavy in management compared to Eagle Operations. It seems AA has to pay for reservation VP's and others that duties must over-lap into Eagle Operations.

In fact, this data shows Eagle with only 3 SVP's. ALL VP's appear to come under the AA umbrella. Doesn't Eagle need Govt. Affairs, Human Resource, and Legal Counsel SVP's ect. to operate also? This sounds fair to me, how about you?

[a href="http://www.amrcorp.com/facts/about.htm"]Click Here for AMR Corporate Management Data[/a]

 

[Oliver Stone''s Apprentice]

You're destroying your own argument, Dave...

If you want to break out the portion of that AA's officers spend dealing with Eagle, or including the additional 4 Eagle officers and the 10,000 Eagle employees in the equation would put AA into the lead position of having fewer officers per employee than any other airline.

 

[Oliver Stone''s Apprentice]

As a private individual who is still associated with Plane Business, there was absolutely no communication between AA and Holly over the bulletin boards.

If Holly had such strong ties to AA, then why did they issued a statement to employees and investors a few weeks back trying to rebut one of her recent columns? Trust me, the APFA and APA have better relationships with AMR management.

There was also no "chastising" of my involvement, aside from a warning over potential conflict of interest in moderating the AMFA/TWU discussions.

If there was a chastising, do you think I'd still be posting with my real name, instead of hiding behind a screen name? I might be in management, but that doesn't mean I'm stupid...

When Holly pulled down the boards at PBB, the bandwidth used was cut to about 20% of what it had been the previous month, mainly due to all of the AA/TW seniority discussions.

Owners of websites like USAviation and PlaneBusiness pay for that bandwidth. USAviation chooses to make up the difference by selling ads. Holly decided she'd had enough.

Dave, if you want the ratio of Eagle VP's to employees, I suggest you become a shareholder of record if you're not already, and request the information from Investor Relations.

They'll respond.

 

[RV4]

Maybe the information provided during the discovery phase and depositions during the AMFA vs. AA Lawsuit over organizing rights was false data and some sort of strategy instead of fact?

If the information I have viewed is incorrect, I apologize...

...We can only go by the information placed before us.

 

[RV4]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/18/2003 505 PM eolesen wrote:

You're destroying your own argument, Dave...

If you want to break out the portion of that AA's officers spend dealing with Eagle, or including the additional 4 Eagle officers and the 10,000 Eagle employees in the equation would put AA into the lead position of having fewer officers per employee than any other airline.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Since when does requesting information constitute an aruguement?

And so what happens to Eagle's operational cost when the cash cow dies? Sounds like Sabre, use the cash cow to create a successful operation and then spin it off. Like I said, this sounds fair to me, how about you? How many successful business adventures do you think we should subsidize with concessions?

It should be illegal to claim one company is a success while the other subsidizes it's operations and management through employee concessions.

 

[Winglet]

It doesn't matter. Even if all the airlines had LCC structures with the available customers split between them, they'd ALL be losing money. THE PROBLEM IS TOO MUCH CAPAPCITY which has driven ridiculously low fares.

If things continue as they are, 2 years from now ticket prices are going to skyrocket and seats will be scarce. The airline industry is WAY too capital intensive to survive wild swings in demand.

 

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 3/17/2003 2:00:20 PM eolesen wrote:

Bob says "Southwest is the most heavily unionized company in the industry." Yes, they are. But WN isn''t as hamstrung by their union contracts as other companies are because the unions at WN recognize featherbedding for what it is...

----------------​

Featherbedding? Show me where the M&E contract promotes featherbedding. Is it the 1/2 hour that is not paid? Is it the cross utilization language? Where is the featherbedding?
Did you ever figure how much you have saved driving 2 miles to save 3 cents a gallon?
Is the problem contract language or the inability of management to maximize productivity within the language that they agreed to. In M&E I would say that they are doing a fairly good job. They have been able to eliminate most of the OT. However on the ramp its a different story. Even though the company uses part timers they still pay out massive amounts of overtime. A little bit of snow and guys were working 24hrs straight. The storms normally only last around 6 to eight hours. Some of these guys stand to make over $100,000 at the rate they have been going. Why is that? Is this a set up for a PR move? Am I going to pick up the paper and see a headline like;
$100,000 Year Baggage Handlers will not help Bankrupt Airline!
Whats going on here?

 

[AAviator]

The real question is,
CAN they weld?

 

[will fix for food]

----------------
On 3/18/2003 5:23:39 PM RV4 wrote:

It should be illegal to claim one company is a success while the other subsidizes it's operations and management through employee concessions.

----------------​

Are you saying that A/A is subsidizing Eagle? If that is what you are implying, can you detail in what ways American Airlines subsidizes American Eagle?

 

[RV4]

I hear AA would like us to take a paycut and then work 50-65 per week and we will not lose much annual income. Benefits are another story!

 

[Connected1]

----------------
On 3/20/2003 400 PM Bob Owens wrote:

Some of these guys stand to make over $100,000 at the rate they have been going. Why is that? Is this a set up for a PR move?
----------------​

Thanks to a dependable operation and system/station protection limits (sounds like a productivity problem, doesn''t it?), FSC OT as a percentage of total hours is down to multi-year lows. Next piece of baseless propaganda, please.

 

[Oliver Stone''s Apprentice]

Bob asked for examples of featherbedding in the mechanic's agreement.

Here's a few to chew on...

1) Inability to cross utilize an inspector to also work in an AMT capacity

2) Inability to cross utilize an AMT to perform stock clerk functions.

3) CC ratios. SAN has 30 mechanics. Excluding the tech CC, there are 4 line CC's. Why?

4) Inability for a CC to cover both AMT's and stock clerks. Using SAN again, there are 6 stock clerks, and 1 CC stock clerk. SFO has 32 stock clerks and 5 stock CC's. Why? The mechanics I've worked with could do the stock job with their eyes closed... Are line CC's overworked or unable to comprehend what a stock clerk does?

I won't say that there isn't justification for some of the language that is in the contract, but these in particular have me wondering if the language is simply there to create as many jobs as possible. It certainly looks that way.

 

[RV4]

----------------
On 3/20/2003 5:49:02 PM AAviator wrote:

The real question is,
CAN they weld?

 

[will fix for food]

----------------
On 3/18/2003 5:23:39 PM RV4 wrote:

And so what happens to Eagle''s operational cost when the cash cow dies?

----------------​

Hmmm...good question. American does provide quite a few services to Eagle. Of course A/A charges Eagle for those services. How much? I don/t know. It probably changes on a quarterly basis depending on whose bottom line they want to make look better at that point in time. To me it seems to make no sense for Eagle to be paying American for services it can do itself cheaper (at least as far as labor costs are concerned). I am sure there are hundreds of examples but the one I see the most is fuelling. If Eagle brought that in house it would save plenty of money.

BTW, Eagle is changing to a "fee per departure" carrier. Does anybody know just how much that fee is going to be?