Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DL To Lay Off 200 Administrative Employees  
User currently offlineStabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 695 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6736 times:

Just as the title says. I believe this is different than those who took buyouts. Hopefully they'll find new jobs!

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Delta-...yonthewall-625958781.html?x=0&.v=1


So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7036 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6680 times:

I wonder what that really means. Administrators is rather vague. I suspect it means "management".

User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10345 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6608 times:

Perhaps they're laying off those unnecessary layers of managment........more analysts than you could shake a stick at, etc.  


This, from the AJC:


http://www.ajc.com/business/delta-la...pe=rss_business_87628

size=-4>[Edited 2011-09-08 08:17:37]


[Edited 2011-09-08 08:18:14]


"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinerojo From Spain, joined Sep 2000, 2443 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6458 times:

They should lay off more managers and less analysts... analyst are the ones doing he job (excel, pp, sql, etc) while managers are mostly networking trying to get a VP position. At last thas what I've seen in US legacy airlines.

User currently offlineStabilator From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 695 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6286 times:

It seems like the 2000 employees who were bought out didn't save enough money, so they laid off 200 more. I'd link the site, but I'm on my iPhone and it's a mobile link.


So we beat on against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
User currently offlineJosh32121 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 369 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6116 times:

"Administrators" is inaccurate and misleading. The article said "administrative staff." These are low- to mid-level corporate HQ type office jobs.

User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6441 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6111 times:

Quoting Stabilator (Reply 4):
It seems like the 2000 employees who were bought out didn't save enough money, so they laid off 200 more. I'd link the site, but I'm on my iPhone and it's a mobile link.

The 200 being laid off were not eligabe for the buyout, since they are "at will employees". They can be terminated at any time without cause and no recourse.


User currently offlinesimairlinenet From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 911 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6017 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 6):
The 200 being laid off were not eligabe for the buyout, since they are "at will employees".

Pretty much all management employees were eligible for the buyout--anyone hired prior to 2011 was eligible.


User currently offlineooer From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1464 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5982 times:

Quoting simairlinenet (Reply 7):
Pretty much all management employees were eligible for the buyout--anyone hired prior to 2011 was eligible.

That is incorrect, you needed to have at least 5 years of service to be eligible for the buyout.


User currently offlinerivervisual From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 51 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5874 times:

Quoting ooer (Reply 8):
That is incorrect, you needed to have at least 5 years of service to be eligible for the buyout.

THAT is actually incorrect. All Merit Employees hired before January 1 2011 were eligible regardless of number of years in service.


User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7438 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 5482 times:

What is a "Merit" employee.

User currently offlineDelta2ual From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 614 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 5172 times:

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 10):
What is a "Merit" employee.

People whose yearly raises are based on "merit" vs. an automatic step increase like those on published payscales. Usually, they are considered "management".



From the world's largest airline-to the world's largest airline. Delta2ual
User currently offlinecatiii From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3029 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 5171 times:

Quoting rojo (Reply 3):
They should lay off more managers and less analysts... analyst are the ones doing he job (excel, pp, sql, etc) while managers are mostly networking trying to get a VP position. At last thas what I've seen in US legacy airlines.

Based on what experience? That's a blanket statement by you.


User currently offlineusdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 949 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4955 times:

Quoting rojo (Reply 3):
They should lay off more managers and less analysts... analyst are the ones doing he job (excel, pp, sql, etc) while managers are mostly networking trying to get a VP position.

This is a gross generalization, but it's basically correct. At a number of airlines, the analysts are bending over backwards running many of the administrative functions while managers discuss issues and produce little in the way of productive change. Except, of course, new ways to cut costs by reducing headcount.

Speaking of which, this is the second round of administrative layoffs Delta has had in the past couple of years. If I remember correctly, there was another one in early 2010. Why so many cuts? Did they retain too many people from the merger? Why is Delta shrinking so much more rapidly than other carriers?


User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4866 times:

You see it all the time. Continental was in the spotlight not too long ago. Company x may need 10 people to operate and company y may need 10 as well. Combinationed doesn't automatically mean they need 20.


What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6441 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4782 times:

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 13):
Why is Delta shrinking so much more rapidly than other carriers?

I don't believe Delta is shrinking more rapidly than AA or UA/CO or US for that matter. All airlines have drawn back because of the recession and fuel costs. In that regard DL is the same as the others.


User currently offlineVC10DC10 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 1035 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4757 times:

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 13):
Why is Delta shrinking so much more rapidly than other carriers?

I don't know this for a fact, but is it possible that Delta hired a lot of behind-the-scenes people in the meantime? (Layoffs always make headlines, but companies don't usually put out press releases saying "we're gonna hire 3,000 new middle managers to fill the office.")


User currently offlineBCEaglesCO757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 242 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4743 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 6):
The 200 being laid off were not eligabe for the buyout, since they are "at will employees". They can be terminated at any time without cause and no recourse.

This is the very reason I'm glad I left my "office" job at CO. As well as not considered for a few jobs at HQS I had applied for.

I'd certainly be out of an job right now without a doubt with the current merger.

I think a former user on here MSPCO I believe had been CO ramp in MSP and went to HQS. I'm not sure if he is with UA/CO any longer.

The problem with those type of jobs is that when they let you go that is it. You're non-rehireable and it's not like you can go to another station in the system if there is a spot available.


User currently offlinen7371f From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1688 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4505 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

They ought to lay off the clowns at SkyMiles who keep devaluing the program. Thought of the guy who runs that program with his tag line "you're the reasong we fly" when waiting in a jet bridge with the "Loyalty Programs Should Be Loyal" poster.  

User currently offlinebrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3007 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4458 times:

Quoting BCEaglesCO757 (Reply 17):
The problem with those type of jobs is that when they let you go that is it. You're non-rehireable

Why? If you haven't violated any policies or anything like that, why would they not consider you for a re-hire? The way you put it sounds more like there was a job performance issue, not a layoff due to economics.



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently onlineDalmd88 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2533 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4232 times:

Quoting brons2 (Reply 19):
Why? If you haven't violated any policies or anything like that, why would they not consider you for a re-hire? The way you put it sounds more like there was a job performance issue, not a layoff due to economics.

The way these layoffs are handled they are performance based. Say engineering needs to cut two spots. The two lowest performing employees get cut. They might not be bad employees, just the lowest in that group. The next group over might be filled with slackers. The second group's manager might just be better at showing a need for an inflated headcount.

In the end both decent and less than stellar people get let go. At least that is how I've seen it. We heard a few of the names in Tech Ops. For some it was their time. For others we were shocked.


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3114 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4176 times:

Quoting n7371f (Reply 18):

Funny, they may be running out of all the millions of sky miles Amex gave them as a financial boost back when Amex and Delta inked the deal for the skymiles card.



AA-AC-AQ-AS-BN-BD-CO-CS-DL-EA-EZ-HA-HP-KL-KN-MP-MW-NK-NW-OO-OZ-PA-PS-QX-RC-RH-RW-SA-TG-TW-UA-US-VS-WA-WC-WN
User currently offlinebhmdiversion From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 457 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4096 times:

From what I heard, there was also a BIG shakeup from the ACS Station Management side as well... There were some very Senior Manager that were asked to Retire -OR- they were walked out.

User currently offlineBCEaglesCO757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 242 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3472 times:

Quoting brons2 (Reply 19):
Why? If you haven't violated any policies or anything like that, why would they not consider you for a re-hire? The way you put it sounds more like there was a job performance issue, not a layoff due to economics.

Thats a good question. Generally if you were let go from a position downtown with CO in an office, you could not apply for a job in operations or anywhere at the airport. Or to come back downtown to my knowledge. Somebody on here at CO must be able to confirm this.

When people did usually they knew somebody or knew somebody who knew somebody at the airport,inflight,maintenanace,etc.


I always thought it odd myself. Still don't know why CO did that.


User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 24, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3170 times:

Quoting bhmdiversion (Reply 22):

Yep. Quite a few station manager positions have become available in the past week. I also know of at least one PL in Atlanta that is now showing as a regular ramp agent in the directory as of yesterday...



What gets measured gets done.
25 swa4life : Are you sure it's the lowest performing employees being let go and not the highest earning? Oh the joys of a non-union shop..
26 sgtusmc96 : What do you mean by that statement swa4life? A union would have no affect on these cuts. These are management jobs, wether we had a union or not would
27 Dalmd88 : Some of these positions I heard of were non scale stores positions and one was a pretty high up Tech Ops management position. I think he was one step
28 usdcaguy : Likely not the cuts themselves, but a union may be able to negotiate better severance terms, or at least get upper management to make the employees e
29 nwaesc : Definitely lots of station openings and/or movement lately... I know at least 2 took the early out; I'm sure there were others. There's also been a r
30 DL747400 : Personally knowing several individuals who were affected, I can tell you that yes, this means management.
31 DL747400 : One word: EFFICIENCY. My perception is that they are getting rid of the last of the overlapping positions and redundant personnel created as a result
32 DL747400 : Well, not exactly....... AMEX didn't "give" DL any SkyMiles and never has. The reality is the other way around. AMEX purchases SkyMiles from DL. And
33 SkyPriorityDTW : An above-wing GM and operations/hub control center Corporate Director at DTW were let go in the past few weeks. This is the first *big* cut I've seen
34 FlyASAGuy2005 : Wrong. These are all non-scale positions to which the unions would have ZERO control over. Let's keep them out of things for once, please.
35 Flighty : Imagine that. Not that DL is a poster child for corporate excellence (not with Ch 11 in its trailing 5 year record... sorry... it's not eligible for
36 mayor : DL's history of employee relations didn't just start in the last 5 years.......you might want to check back further than you have to see how it has b
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...
USAirways To Lay Off 200 Gate Agents posted Mon May 17 2004 15:41:46 by NIKV69
United Airlines To Lay Off 50 O'Hare Workers posted Thu Jan 7 2010 12:55:04 by KarlB737
Jazz Air To Lay Off 270; Cut Service posted Thu Jul 3 2008 10:27:47 by PlaneInsomniac
Rumor: US To Lay Off Pilots posted Sun Jun 8 2008 16:38:23 by Live4peanuts
Air Canada To Lay Off 300 posted Thu Sep 14 2006 12:46:26 by EmiratesA345
Northwest To Lay Off 1,400 Flight Attendants posted Wed Sep 21 2005 21:12:14 by KarlB737
Air Transat To Lay-off 30% Of Its Workforce posted Mon May 5 2003 17:01:37 by FLYYUL
SQ To Lay-off Staff....? posted Thu Apr 10 2003 03:21:31 by BusinessFlyer
BBC: Airbus To Lay Off 20% Of Workforce posted Wed Jan 16 2002 17:18:33 by Cfalk
Boeing To Lay Off 30,000 posted Wed Sep 19 2001 13:38:42 by Galaxy5