Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AMR CFO: Labor Costs Must Be Reduced Further  
User currently offlineDeltaSFO From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2488 posts, RR: 22
Posted (8 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 4079 times:

http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/060405/airlines_amr_cfo.html?.v=1

Fair use excerpt:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - American Airlines' new chief financial officer said on Wednesday the carrier needs to cut labor costs further to stay competitive, even while hewing to the union-friendly strategy it has adopted in recent years.

AMR Corp.'s (NYSE:AMR - News) American won major concessions in 2003 after flirting with Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing but has since insisted that further pay cuts were off the table as it sought suggestions from unions on non-wage related cost reductions and revenue increases.


[Edited 2006-04-06 04:32:44]


It's a new day. Every moment matters. Now, more than ever.
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11754 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 4079 times:

Let's see what AA's unions have to say now that they are again among the highest-paid in the industry. Should be interesting ...

User currently offlineSwissy From Switzerland, joined Jan 2005, 1734 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 4061 times:

Delta thanks for the link.

Ouch, well let's see how they are going to deal with these news.


User currently offlineIsitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 8 hours ago) and read 4030 times:

The plot now thickens for AMR.

Stay tuned for the best fight between labor and management yet because fuel
prices are only going to rise this summer. The higher it goes, the more management will squeeze the labor lemon for givebacks.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineJetdeltamsy From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2987 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 8 hours ago) and read 3982 times:

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 3):
The plot now thickens for AMR.

It SURE does. Arpy,the labor-friendly guy brings in this guy who starts spouting off about cutting labor costs before his butt warms up the chair.

American mainline has been shifting a lot of flying to Eagle. A lot of AA mainline employees are "flowing back" to Eagle because they're losing their mainline jobs (and payrates).



Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13302 posts, RR: 100
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 7 hours ago) and read 3910 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

When I read this earlier it shocked me. I thought AA was on a healthier recover path. Just shows you what damage $65+ oil does to the bottom line.  Sad

Quoting Commavia (Reply 1):
Let's see what AA's unions have to say now that they are again among the highest-paid in the industry. Should be interesting ...

It will be very interesting.

And the economy might start to cool.  Sad

I just wanted one year of good airline health!  hissyfit  One!

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5279 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 6 hours ago) and read 3874 times:

Horton should have held off on his comments until DL either reaches an agreement with the pilots or the strike closed down the carrier. If DL shuts down for good, that will put a lot of upward pressure on ticket prices.

Further, Horton should remember that a lot of his pilots are paid less per hour than Southwest.

From Airline Pilot Central:

AA 757 Captain w/12 years $166
AA 737 Captain w/12 years $158
AA MD-80 Captain w/12 years $154
WN 737 Captain w/12 years $190

AA 757 F/O w/12 years $113
AA 737 F/O w/12 years $108
AA MD-80 F/O w/12 years $105
WN 737 F/O w/12 years $126

Granted, AA pilots are paid for actual block time, while WN pilots are paid only for scheduled block time. But that is still a significant difference in pay rates.

As for consolidation, a friend who flies for AA keeps hearing rumors that CO and UA will merge and AA and NW will merge. He sees no reason for CO, an airline with reasonably good management, merging with UA, whose management got them into bankruptcy and had some difficulty getting it out. Add to the mix that there are a lot of fleet merger issues.

For AA, the fleet merger is even worse. Labor relations at NW are far worse than AA ever had. And a merger would put 3 hubs in the upper Midwest DTW, MSP, and ORD) and two in the lower Mississippi Valley (MEM and STL).


User currently offlineSwissy From Switzerland, joined Jan 2005, 1734 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3766 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
And the economy might start to cool.

That is my fear too...... I just do not understand why oil producers are pushing the issue, no need for it, I know they will say bla bla bla bla so they can sleep at night.......

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
I just wanted one year of good airline health! One!

agree 1000%

Cheers,


User currently offlineSeeTheWorld From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1325 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3746 times:

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 6):
Further, Horton should remember that a lot of his pilots are paid less per hour than Southwest.

Once again, you are only telling part of the story. The work rules and productivity rates and benefits are different for AA and WN, so your above comments are misleading and incomplete.


User currently offlineAA777JFKLHR From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 22 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3693 times:

As for consolidation, a friend who flies for AA keeps hearing rumors that CO and UA will merge and AA and NW will merge. He sees no reason for CO, an airline with reasonably good management, merging with UA, whose management got them into bankruptcy and had some difficulty getting it out. Add to the mix that there are a lot of fleet merger issues.

For AA, the fleet merger is even worse. Labor relations at NW are far worse than AA ever had. And a merger would put 3 hubs in the upper Midwest DTW, MSP, and ORD) and two in the lower Mississippi Valley (MEM and STL).


You will not see AA merging with NW or any airline for that matter. The cost associated with a merger is not worth it. AA learned from its mistake in the past when it took over TWA....look how great that turned out. We obtained a hub in STL which we didnt need...fleet types that didnt coinside with AA's..international routes which arent used...and best of all employees for AA who are still disgruntal of the merger because of the seniority issues. the AA-TWA deal is still a strong issue among the work groups for that matter you will not see AA merge with another carrier for a very very long time.



people know me...Im a kinda a big deal!
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13302 posts, RR: 100
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3643 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 6):
Horton should have held off on his comments until DL either reaches an agreement with the pilots or the strike closed down the carrier. If DL shuts down for good, that will put a lot of upward pressure on ticket prices.

Oh... risky!  scared  I no way can AA bet the company on DL failing. Did UA? US? While I do not see a healthy DL, I wouldn't bet my job on them failing. (Then again, I wouldn't bet my job on them being around in a year either.) But AA management has a fiduciary duty to make the company financially viable under reasonable projections of the buisiness environment. I would consider it unreasonable to plan for DL's demise.

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 6):
As for consolidation, a friend who flies for AA keeps hearing rumors that CO and UA will merge and AA and NW will merge. He sees no reason for CO, an airline with reasonably good management, merging with UA, whose management got them into bankruptcy and had some difficulty getting it out. Add to the mix that there are a lot of fleet merger issues.

Airline mergers are scary. Since there isn't a standard airline practice but rather customized FA/pilot training at each airline, it makes mergers very difficult. Also, the unions have to decide how to handle pay and seniority differences. IMHO, that is a business decision and should be decided pre-merger. But no one made me god so the current disfunctional system will stay in place. And the current system has led to the doom of one or both airlines in most mergers. I think DL with the Western and Northeastern mergers were the most successful. Or were those purchases?  scratchchin 

Quoting Swissy (Reply 7):
That is my fear too...... I just do not understand why oil producers are pushing the issue, no need for it, I know they will say bla bla bla bla so they can sleep at night.......

I don't know what its like there, but we're starting to see people pinched between high mortgages and high gasoline prices. Note: I have little sympathy for those who drive gas hogs. But, that is there call. I've been trying to get the more sensible engineers and techs to buy small cars for years. Finally I got through... to one! Grrr... I also wish more mass transit would be built.

off topic:
Just do LAX plan A with the *huge* bus terminal.  spin  Whilshire line, exposition line, and green line to the airport. Then I would be very happy.  hyper  Alas, the Whilshire line would need to be built like NY's Lexington line (express trains) and make it out to ONT to truely do any good.  Sad I guess I can dream.

But something needs to be done to further reduce our economic dependence on oil. Yes, I know the US economy is far less dependent on oil than 20 years ago, but we haven't done enough. We need to consume less oil where its used the most (cars/heating) so that we have more for Jet-A.  Wink

I hope the AA workers do ok.

How much of a pay cut is it to slide over to Eagle? Any rumors of Eagle ordering the 70 seaters they're allowed?

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6280 posts, RR: 34
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3530 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 10):
Any rumors of Eagle ordering the 70 seaters they're allowed?

They already have the 25 CRJ700s allowed under scope.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineHighliner2 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 696 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3382 times:

IIRC, the limitation on the number of 70 seaters AE could fly was removed when AA renegotiated it's labor contracts in 2003. I could be mistaken, but I believe AE can fly as many 70 seaters as AMR see's fit.


Go Cubs!
User currently offlineJc2354 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 586 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3373 times:

Quoting DeltaSFO (Thread starter):
American Airlines' new chief financial officer said on Wednesday the carrier needs to cut labor costs further to stay competitive,,,,,,.


Let me understand this. AA started service out of DAL, yet stated it would not make any profit. Gone are pillows, blankets and free meals. And, oldies from the past, lets offer MRTC, lets take avay MRTC, lets open a hub in BNA, lets open a hub in RDU, lets buy AirCal, lets buy Reno Air, lets buy TWA. Lets blame 9/11, lets blame security, lets blame fuel, lets blame high labor costs.

The only way this company can stay competitive is to start revamping it's own management. Raise the fare just $1.00. Start managing and stop blaming others for your incompetence. The opportunities you have to succeed shouldn't be used as excuses to fail!

OK, back to my prozac!



If not now, then when?
User currently offlineCkfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5279 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3334 times:

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 8):
Quoting Ckfred (Reply 6):
Further, Horton should remember that a lot of his pilots are paid less per hour than Southwest.

Once again, you are only telling part of the story. The work rules and productivity rates and benefits are different for AA and WN, so your above comments are misleading and incomplete.

Remember, though, that the pilots will start negotiating their contract this year, and they want increases that are commensurate with WN's increases in profits. Whatever increases they get will just raise WN's costs.

Yes, AA pilots have better benefits and work rules, but they also used to have payscales that were higher than WN's pilots. And AA's pilots never got the big raises that UA's and DL's pilots received prior to 9/11.

Quoting AA777JFKLHR (Reply 9):
You will not see AA merging with NW or any airline for that matter. The cost associated with a merger is not worth it. AA learned from its mistake in the past when it took over TWA....look how great that turned out. We obtained a hub in STL which we didnt need...fleet types that didnt coinside with AA's..international routes which arent used...and best of all employees for AA who are still disgruntal of the merger because of the seniority issues. the AA-TWA deal is still a strong issue among the work groups for that matter you will not see AA merge with another carrier for a very very long time

I compelety agree with you on the possibility of an AA-NW merger. Apparently, it's Wall Street analysts that are driving merger rumors, because of the creditos of NW want to get their money.

I do disagree about the need for an STL hub. The summer of 2000 was absolutely miserable at ORD. Between UA's pilots refusing to work overtime and one of the stormiest summers that I can remember in Chicago, ORD was always behind schedule.

Having another Midwest hub 300 miles away made a lot of sense. If ORD went into gridlock, just reschedule passengers through STL. As an AMR shareholder, I thought it was a terrific idea.

Even for O&D traffic for ORD, STL made sense. If flights into or out of ORD were full, flying to STL saves a lot of time over flying to DFW.


User currently offlineVegasplanes From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 778 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3315 times:

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 14):
I compelety agree with you on the possibility of an AA-NW merger. Apparently, it's Wall Street analysts that are driving merger rumors, because of the creditos of NW want to get their money.

It would not make sense to do a complete merger from AA's point of view. All they, or anybody wants from NW is the Asian routes and the freight boys probably would like the ANC hub. The rest of their system is expendible, MEM, MSP, and DTW are not huge O/D markets, people can connect anywhere, the general public probably does not care too much if you tell them they are changing planes in CLE, CVG, MKE, STL, or ORD instead of MSP or DTW.

Besides, AA, nor any other airline, could afford to swallow NW whole. Too much debt/liabilities. Now, if NW dumped their under-funded pension, health care, DC-9/DC-10/742/A320/A319 fleet, 90 % of their gate/counter leases in MEM, MSP, and DTW, and the rest of their employees, than AA might be interested in swalling NW "whole."


User currently offlineBHMNONREV From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1376 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3290 times:

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 14):
I do disagree about the need for an STL hub. The summer of 2000 was absolutely miserable at ORD. Between UA's pilots refusing to work overtime and one of the stormiest summers that I can remember in Chicago, ORD was always behind schedule.

Having another Midwest hub 300 miles away made a lot of sense. If ORD went into gridlock, just reschedule passengers through STL. As an AMR shareholder, I thought it was a terrific idea.

Even for O&D traffic for ORD, STL made sense. If flights into or out of ORD were full, flying to STL saves a lot of time over flying to DFW.

This was the plan when AA bought/acquired/stole (pick your own) TW. STL would allow AA to concentrate on the higher-yielding O&D passenger at ORD, and to a lesser extent DFW, while funneling all of the lower-yield folks thru STL. STL had the facilities and a new runway which was in the works, further reducing system-wide delays. While not an AMR shareholder, I also thought it was a brilliant idea. But for AA, like most other US airlines 9/11 screwed up any plans they had for STL.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
When I read this earlier it shocked me. I thought AA was on a healthier recover path. Just shows you what damage $65+ oil does to the bottom line.

I was shocked as well, it will be interesting to see how the unions react to this..


User currently offlineNWA744TPA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 67 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3145 times:

Quoting AA777JFKLHR (Reply 9):

You will not see AA merging with NW or any airline for that matter. The cost associated with a merger is not worth it. AA learned from its mistake in the past when it took over TWA....look how great that turned out. We obtained a hub in STL which we didnt need...fleet types that didnt coinside with AA's..international routes which arent used...and best of all employees for AA who are still disgruntal of the merger because of the seniority issues. the AA-TWA deal is still a strong issue among the work groups for that matter you will not see AA merge with another carrier for a very very long time.

Seniority issues? Being tacked on the bottom then out of a job first wouldn't sit well with anyone. Let's be real-it was only to eliminate TWA,get their routes/equipment/gates-then dump everything else. It was presented as a salvation for them, which of course it wasn't.


User currently offlineAA767400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2389 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3111 times:

Here we go again.

Let's see how much more they can squeeze out of labor. How much more is it worth to keep a job at an airline these days.



"The low fares airline."
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3806 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3005 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 1):
Let's see what AA's unions have to say now that they are again among the highest-paid in the industry. Should be interesting ...

Yet another round in the "race to the bottom" (to have the lowest-paid employees). Based on the mentality of the U.S. legacy airlines' management -- as demonstrated by their words and actions and track records -- there can be no end to the downward movement of employee pay as each time one airline coerces labor to accept further paycuts, another airline moves up on the labor costs ladder, solely by virtue of one or more competitor(s) moving down.

Which begs the question, what happens when U.S. airline labor has been fleeced down to the federally mandated minimum wage after management has yet again promptly squandered all the savings and then decrees that "further sacrifice" from employees is needed? (While management doesn't "miss a beat" in lining their pockets with million$ in bonuses and "incentives.")


User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11754 posts, RR: 62
Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2999 times:

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 19):
Based on the mentality of the U.S. legacy airlines' management

I think this has a lot more to do with the mentality of the U.S. airline passenger than "the mentality of U.S. legacy airlines' management." If you have a problem with what you see as a "race to the bottom" in airline wages, take it up with the millions of air travel consumers annually who are logging on to Orbitz, etc., and continuing to buy their air travel based on price and price alone. Ultimately, they are the ones who are making these decisions -- management is just the ones who are carrying out thee consequences of these consumers' decisions.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 19):
there can be no end to the downward movement of employee pay as each time one airline coerces labor to accept further pay cuts, another airline moves up on the labor costs ladder, solely by virtue of one or more competitor(s) moving down.

If the freely competitive market says that there is "no end to the downward movement of employee pay," than so be it. Right now, consumers are calling the shots as never before. If consumers decide (as they often do), that they would rather fly JetBlue (which pays its employees less) than American, and thus pay a lower fare, than so be it. That's their choice.

If people don't like the going wage in the airline industry, than don't work there. Now, I certainly recognize that this is a hard reality to accept for those people who already work in the airline industry, and entered the industry either before deregulation, or at least before a hypercompetitive market meant that higher wages and benefits were still acceptable for reasonable profits.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 19):
While management doesn't "miss a beat" in lining their pockets with million$ in bonuses and "incentives."

AA -- for example -- has not lined its management's pockets with millions in bonuses and incentives. This year, following a compensation plan put into place years ago, AA was to give performance compensation to its management for AMR stock outperforming competitors. I would say that this is pretty fair, considering that AA is one of only two legacy carriers not currently in bankruptcy or having just exited it, and is now the only legacy never to have filed for bankruptcy.

Furthermore, I'd say it's also fair considering that, on balance, AA has one of the lowest-paid executive teams of any airline in the U.S., and definitely one of the lowest-paid executive teams of any company of its size in America.

While some in labor absolutely hate it, the reality is that (most of) the people at the top don't just sit around in leather-bound offices all day shooting pool and smoking cigars. They have hard jobs, that require talent, knowledge, and education, and people at that level are not easy to find, train and retain. AA is generally very good about this -- AA almost religiously promotes from within, and virtually every single senior manager at the company worked their way up, but AA has to keep those people at AA.

Just look at what has happened in the last three months: James Beer, AA's CFO, and someone who was widely respected within and outside the company for his knowledge, skill and charisma, got charmed away to Symantec, who probably doubled his pay, and -- almost certainly -- cut his stress level in half. And can you blame him? Who wouldn't want that deal? AA has been incredibly frugal -- when compared with other airlines -- when it comes to providing incentive pay to executives, AA has lost several very good people because they have been fairly willing to cave when the unions balk, as they have -- at least to some extent -- in this latest episode.

I am not in any way saying that what ordinary, rank-and-fill airline employees do is less valuable, less important, or less significant. In fact, I would argue it is more important, because unlike executives, front-line employees, through direct contact with customers, actually have more of any ability to shape customer satisfaction. I am simply saying that, given what has happened in the airline industry of late, I don't think it is unreasonable for an airline to try and provide incentives to retain valuable top-level executive talent.


User currently offlineDesertAir From Mexico, joined Jan 2006, 1466 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2894 times:

It would be interesting to examine the corporate culture that exists in the airline industry. I wonder if the perks, the expense accounts, the expensive office furniture, the tiers of managers who manage managers contribues significantly to many of aviation's woes. When PG&E was bankrupt in California, top executives were given big bonuses to remain. They were what caused the dismal state of affairs.

User currently offlineOkie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3116 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2816 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
When I read this earlier it shocked me. I thought AA was on a healthier recover path. Just shows you what damage $65+ oil does to the bottom line.



Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
And the economy might start to cool.

 checkmark 

Maybe it is just my opinion but I see the oil companies/marketers/future markets are just chipping away towards higher prices until they start to chill the economy. While the market may driven by supply and demand the other factors of speculation and charging what the market will bear are factoring into play as well.
Once the higher oil prices rattle through the economy and start causing the economy to slow down the oil prices will stop increasing. Right now oil prices are responding to speculation on the futures markets not supply and demand.

Now back to the topic, AA needs to get back in the business of selling seats and start running an airline, get off the WA, get out of the business of trying to run an airport (DFW), get out of the business of telling WN how to run their airline, get off the blame game with employee wages and get to the business at hand which is suppose to be running an airline. Obviously, they are wasting resources that need to be directed towards making AA profitable for all involved.

Okie


User currently offlineLuisca From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2784 times:

What I don't get is why don't domestic fares just go UP? it is ridiculous to pay 280 dollars for a MIA-LAX flight (over 2000 miles) when for a MIA-PTY I have to pay 780. there are many other examples like this, WN is artificially driving fares down with their hedges, B6 wont make a dime in 2006, even the LCC's are feeling the pinch, if Oil goes up, then fares should go up, not salaries down, start charging 600 dollars for a ticket to LAX, that is the only way that the airlines can be healthy again. We need realistic ticket pricing.

User currently offlineAA767400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2389 posts, RR: 26
Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2773 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 20):
If people don't like the going wage in the airline industry, than don't work there. Now, I certainly recognize that this is a hard reality to accept for those people who already work in the airline industry, and entered the industry either before deregulation, or at least before a hypercompetitive market meant that higher wages and benefits were still acceptable for reasonable profits.

Easier said than done to just walk away from a job. I love how people on here say that so loosely like it was that easy. I find it hard to believe that so many have left their job at a drop of a dime for a better one. It takes time, and consideration to make such a move.

It is hard to accept that in America you have to work hard for less. This is the new look here, and it ain't getting any better. Airlines want to offer great service, and great employee morale, but want to pay nothing for the effort.

All this and you hear people bitch about airline service, and terrible employees. Well guess what? You pay them nothing, you will get nothing out of them. Get rid of all the current employees and bring in a bunch of foreign labor who don't speak enough English, and with time will be just as bitter as the last employee.

You want to have cheap labor? Pay the price! And don't expect much out of the employee.



"The low fares airline."
25 Commavia : No question about it, and please don't misunderstand me. I am not devaluing the hard and dedicated work that thousands of airline employees across Am
26 Ckfred : But remember, the arbitration decision is due April 15th, and Delta's pilots could be striking within a few days. I agree that you can't make busines
27 ScottB : I think directing the blame for the state of the airlines at the passengers isn't appropriate; after all, the passengers don't set the fares charged
28 Aa757first : I think if I were in charge of flight attendant recruitment, I would put a policy that says absouletly no more education than an Associate's Degree.
29 Post contains images Commavia : First of all, I'm not "blaming" anyone, as I don't think anyone is to "blame" per se. This is not a matter of cause or guilt, but a matter of a hyper
30 ScottB : Well, Southwest likely would have priced somewhat higher absent its hedges -- but you still wouldn't see the sort of pricing which American and the o
31 Commavia : AA and every airline (including Southwest) charge the fare they think the market can sustain. AA's fares are, at least in my experience in the recent
32 AA767400 : The reason that these other Flight Attendants are falling all over to serve the passenger is because in their country THEY make good money, and their
33 Commavia : I think the second part of what you said is so key. Americans simply don't value airline employees and their work as much as they should, and I think
34 AA777223ER : I wonder again why I and my coworkers should subsidize the people fly on cheap fares. Fedex just annouced a rate increase because fuel cost is up, an
35 Vegasplanes : Nobody is asking the employees to pay the fuel bill. But, in todays economy seems like the passengers are interested in paying it either. Problem lie
36 UAORD2000 : Absolutely right on. Perfect answer.
37 ScottB : In markets where they are forced to compete, perhaps. But compare the walk-up round-trip DFW-ICT fare of $664 in economy to the DAL-MCI walk-up round
38 Isitsafenow : In your post 34, you are about 269 percent correct. That's where the rev should come from. The problem is that the el-cheapo's, (LLC) have lower cost
39 Commavia : That pension liability is a paper number, not a real number. Arpey has talked about this before. AA's pension is actually pretty close to fully funde
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Could The A330 Be Extended Further In Length? posted Sun Sep 24 2006 13:13:42 by Gilesdavies
Boeing Wichita Spinoff Slashes Labor Costs posted Thu Aug 31 2006 10:52:59 by Leelaw
Will RR Be Reduced To Subcontracting? posted Thu Jul 13 2006 23:39:55 by BOE773
I Must Be Going Crazy (Insane Trip Just Booked) posted Tue Apr 11 2006 05:56:25 by MSYtristar
Northwest To Regionals: Cut Costs Or Be Cut! posted Mon Dec 19 2005 18:03:44 by KarlB737
NWA Says High Labor Costs Could Force Liquidation. posted Fri Oct 14 2005 04:14:45 by Jetjack74
EU Says Airbus Subsidies Must Be "curbed" posted Sun Sep 25 2005 15:47:05 by Kellmark
Who Has The Highest Labor Costs (US)? posted Fri Jun 10 2005 17:53:34 by Wobbles
Colleen Barrett: US CEO Lakefield Must Be On Drugs posted Fri May 13 2005 04:02:26 by N670UW
Pilot Jobs Must Be Hard To Get posted Mon May 9 2005 23:05:49 by Brons2