What concession would you like to see from AA management?

[tech2101]

   [mawr-uhl, mor-] Show IPA

adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes.

2. expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work; moralizing: a moral novel.

3. founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: moral obligations.

4. capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: a moral being.

5. conforming to the rules of right conduct ( opposed to immoral): a moral man.



mo·rale
   [muh-ral] Show IPA

noun
emotional or mental condition with respect to cheerfulness, confidence, zeal, etc., especially in the face of opposition, hardship, etc.: the morale of the troops.

Pointing out a spelling error as a character fault is a weak attempt to make someone look bad. We all make mistakes. I thought you were above that.

 

[Buck]

tech2101: No I believe WT got it right, they both apply.


Moral :distinction between right and wrong; ethical

Morale :emotional or mental condition with respect to cheerfulness, confidence, zeal, etc., especially in the face of opposition, hardship, etc.: the morale of the troops.


As per the topic: Questioning management ethics and/or creating a condition.

 

[Hopeful]

I like that idea. Cisco's John Chambers did that (he wound up getting a lot of stock options though).



Agree there!




I know what you mean, but pay cut and cash infusion are different.





I agree! This could have been a great bargaining tool!




CEO's do get fired. Hewlett Packard's recent firing of its CEO is one example.

There are some excellent ideas here (especially the comparisons to other carriers). Rather than just complaining about "we've taken a pay cut and you management have gotten bonuses, I think this could have been one direction the various unions take. A quid pro quo. Now maybe this was indeed discussed, but from what I've read/heard, this approach wasn't taken.

Sure they do.. The HP CEO left with $13 million dollars......Not too shabby having to leave with one's tail between one's legs in shame.

 

[Hopeful]

The unionized workforce gave about $13.5 billion so far since the concessions were imposed.

Since the concessions were imposed, AMR has spent about $50 billion on fuel, nearly $30 bllion more than it would have at 2002 prices.

That's been the biggest problem: Fuel that has been two and a half times more expensive, on average, than when the concessions were imposed.

Your concessions barely made a dent in the price rise for fuel.

The difference being that labor is a controllable cost while fuel is not...Since they cannot control fuel, then the easiest target has and always will be labor.

 

[Buck]

The difference being that labor is a controllable cost while fuel is not...Since they cannot control fuel, then the easiest target has and always will be labor.

You do have a point, labor is a controllable, at least it is for the mechanic and related....

 

[FWAAA]

The difference being that labor is a controllable cost while fuel is not...Since they cannot control fuel, then the easiest target has and always will be labor.

Sadly for the employees, you're right.

My point about fuel was to dispel the nonsense that the company somehow "squandered" the concessions given up by the employees. It put the $13.5 billion toward the $30 billion increase in fuel prices.

All airlines have had to contend with higher fuel prices but AA's disadvantage was that it did not punish the employees to the same extent as the competition that filed for Ch 11 in 2002-05. Of course, that punishment probably awaits the employees when the inevitable Ch 11 filing happens.

 

[Jacobin777]

Sure they do.. The HP CEO left with $13 million dollars......Not too shabby having to leave with one's tail between one's legs in shame.

At this point in time, I think many would be happy to just to get rid of AArpey+management, no matter how he had to be "paid off"...

While my views of AA's costs/hours/etc compared to its peers are known here, I have also stated a number of times that management has failed on multiple levels as well.

 

[ULM148]

Sadly for the employees, you're right.

My point about fuel was to dispel the nonsense that the company somehow "squandered" the concessions given up by the employees. It put the $13.5 billion toward the $30 billion increase in fuel prices.

All airlines have had to contend with higher fuel prices but AA's disadvantage was that it did not punish the employees to the same extent as the competition that filed for Ch 11 in 2002-05. Of course, that punishment probably awaits the employees when the inevitable Ch 11 filing happens.

Ok, so your saying the company spent the concession money on jet fuel? American's lack of punishment, (organized labor seems to be your implication), is why it has not turned a profit for the past 8 years. The "inevitable chapter 11 filing" will right all of American's wrong's and return it to profitability, just like that. What happened to the massive cash infusion American got post 911 from the federal government, which coincided with the "concession" contracts? Jet fuel has been an issue for every airline, American was in a good spot on hedged fuel post 911. Not sure that was an issue for them like it was for most of the other airlines. American's work group was "punished" plenty with 9-5 Carty, and lack of direction or insight Arpey. The company "squandered" it resources through their lack of leadership. Through their shortsightedness. Through their lack of respect for their customers, product, and employee's. As far as the punishment that awaits... the punishment has always been here. Bankruptcy would not rattle the cages of the hardened.

 

[ULM148]

Ok, so your saying the company spent the concession money on jet fuel? American's lack of punishment, (organized labor seems to be your implication), is why it has not turned a profit for the past 8 years. The "inevitable chapter 11 filing" will right all of American's wrong's and return it to profitability, just like that. What happened to the massive cash infusion American got post 911 from the federal government, which coincided with the "concession" contracts? Jet fuel has been an issue for every airline, American was in a good spot on hedged fuel post 911. Not sure that was an issue for them like it was for most of the other airlines. American's work group was "punished" plenty with 9-5 Carty, and lack of direction or insight Arpey. The company "squandered" it resources through their lack of leadership. Through their shortsightedness. Through their lack of respect for their customers, product, and employee's. As far as the punishment that awaits... the punishment has always been here. Bankruptcy would not rattle the cages of the hardened.

Oh I forgot one more thing...We have to pay to keep our "talent" or they'll leave. That was a large portion of where the money went. None of the "talent" has produced anything, except.........loss loss loss. I'm glad were paying to retain this great talent. No squandering here!

 

[eolesen]

Disclaimer: I'm not advocating AA's position, nor saying that this is a good decision for the company.

WT's sad & veiled attempt at cheerleading simply can't go without rebuttal.

Indicative of this fall in its revenue production is its decline in the Business Travel Network survey:

"Following a second-place finish in 2010, American Airlines' scores this year declined in every category, with the largest decreases related to buyers' perceptions of the value of its network and partnerships, quality of communications and availability of distribution channels. "

The airline that many once thought had the best access to the best business markets in the world now is perceived as not having a network that delivers sufficient value.
An incredible assessment....

Wow. An incredible assessment. BTN's audience voted AA down. That's real truth beyond the press releases, eh?

Not.

That's about as shocking as saying the sun is going to rise in the east.


Oh, and since you're in the nitpicking mood, it's not "Business Travel Network" -- it's "Business Travel News"


Yet another indicator of how uninformed and blinded you can be at times.

BTN is a publication for corporate travel managers (fancy speak for travel agencies). Not business travelers. It's a sister publication to "The Beat" and owned by the same holding company as PhoCusWright. I get both of the publications and have a subscription to PCW's content.

Now, can anyone think of a reason why corporate travel managers might be mad at AA?

Anybody? Anybody? Buhler?

No, it's pretty clear to me why AA got voted down in that survey: AA's championing of direct connect. Northstar hates it. That goes for BTN, "The Beat", and even PCW seems to be biased against it. And so do their largest subscribers.

Why?

Because if AA succeeds, it threatens the current business model some agencies literally live and die by: Airlines paying GDS's, and GDS's passing along a cut of the fees charged to the airline as "incentives" to the agencies. Heck, it's not unthinkable that the GDS's may wind up having to charge the agencies the full cost for using their systems, as opposed to the airlines subsidizing it.

It's the same reason Southwest ranked last in their survey. Southwest's way of dealing with travel agencies cuts out the GDS most of the time, which means no cut of the ticket price for them unless the agency adds a surcharge or service fee. Continental and United fell in popularity because they're "rationalizing" their corporate contracts and don't need to offer as much incentive as they used to.

Pessimists can read the result for themselves: http://www.businesstravelnews.com/Business-Travel-Research/BTN-s-2011-Airline-Survey--Delta-Finally-On-Top

So, sorry, nice try, thanks for playing, but my informed read on the results of that survey in particular have nothing to do with AA's service, the network, revenue generating capability. Unless, of course, you consider the revenue generation for the agencies.

It has everything to do with the money flow. And to borrow from OWS, "follow the money"... BTN's subscriber base doesn't like what it means for their future.

 

[eolesen]

For those following the actual topic of the thread... I'm partway thru my VP comparison, and it ain't pretty for AA so far...

For years, AA and WN were at parity with the number of VP's (approx 42 each).

For 2011, AA had 47 compared to WN's 39. That's a lot of bloat, to paraphrase someone else who was helping me out with the survey.

I have yet to really figure out who is staying with UA/CO, so they're not going to be in the results. DL's also problematic, since they don't list anyone but the top nine or ten senior staff. It looks like they're somewhere around 45, based on Delta PAC donation records and other sources such as press releases.

Not enough hours in the weekend to finish it, so I'll leave it at that until I get some more information.

 

[care2purchasefood?]

File bankruptcy and get over it! Who gives a crAAp anymore about this POS airline? I don't!

 

[WorldTraveler]

Disclaimer: I'm not advocating AA's position, nor saying that this is a good decision for the company.

WT's sad & veiled attempt at cheerleading simply can't go without rebuttal.



Wow. An incredible assessment. BTN's audience voted AA down.

AND MORE JIBBERISH

I can appreciate the fact that AA is trying to revamp its distribution model...
but once again the simple fact is that AA can't transform its business model w/o PI78ing everyone else in the process....

there isn't a single transformative event that AA has been able to do w/o inflicting the ire of its constituents.
Other airlines have adapted to the realities of the marketplace whether it be fuel costs, GDS changes, etc... but have managed to avoid the confrontation and employee blame - and AA's tactis have rarely succeeded at accomplishing at what AA was trying to accomplish in the first place.
At some point, you would think that someone would realize AA's positions could be perfectly valid but the fact that they can't execute them means they fail miserably.
.
and no, it is not solely about AA's attacks on the GDS system - you know the one it created several decades ago and now wants to dismantle.
.
The survey said that business travel managers see LESS and LESS VALUE to AA's network - exactly what some of us have been saying for years.... when other carriers have managed to fly practically everything that AA once flew exclusively AND STILL offer a whole lot more in addition, it isn't hard to see why AA's network has lost its value.
Factor in that AA's product lags behind its competitors - who are also investing in their products - and it becomes even harder for customers to find value in AA's product. When the market no longer values your product - esp. a commodity product which is what air transportation is - then your option is to reduce your prices. We all remember how that strategy worked out for TWA.
.
The rest of your post is simply attempts at deflecting from the undeniable core of what is said - and again not unexpected.

Sadly for the employees, you're right.

My point about fuel was to dispel the nonsense that the company somehow "squandered" the concessions given up by the employees. It put the $13.5 billion toward the $30 billion increase in fuel prices.

All airlines have had to contend with higher fuel prices but AA's disadvantage was that it did not punish the employees to the same extent as the competition that filed for Ch 11 in 2002-05. Of course, that punishment probably awaits the employees when the inevitable Ch 11 filing happens.

The squandering that AA did was that they didn't use the "contributions" they obtained from their employees to turn the company around.
And again, as much as you would like to characterize it otherwise, there is still no proof that AA employees were spared less than other airline employees.
Despite the desire to paint it otherwise, DL for one didn't walk away completely from its pension obligations and gave $2B of the reorganized company to pay for the obligations it did give up to the pilots...
As for base pay levels, DL employees make as much or more in terms of scale now - and they also have received profit sharing which AA employees have not - and they will do so in all likelihood again this year.
AA employee salaries - in terms of total compensation per employee - fell to the same levels as other airline employees.
.
So the notion that AA employees gave less is nothing than a prideful and hypocritical attempt at deflecting from the reality which is that AA mgmt has failed to take advantage of the restructuring which it initiated - UNDER DURESS - and AA's future remains woefully uncertain... and yes you are right the only way for AA to continue operating is for even further concessions to be granted.
.
TIME IS MONEY - and AA's failure to decisively act to turn the company around has cost the employees an enormous amount - and the costs will keep adding up since no turnaround is in sight.
And when a turnaround does come, it will be at the expense of one group to the benefit of another.

 

[Buck]

I get the part that you are very knowledgeable, however could limit your posts in size. I for one have a difficult time staying interested in what you have to say.

 

[Flying low]

I get the part that you are very knowledgeable, however could limit your posts in size. I for one have a difficult time staying interested in what you have to say.

Buck,
Sometimes when one becomes long-winded, they usually have nothing to say