Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
"chaos" Is A Registered Trademark Of The AFL-CIO  
User currently offlineONT 737 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 591 posts, RR: 2
Posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1792 times:

I found it interesting that the union actually trademarked that acronym. The AFA posted Midwest Express' top 100 markets in terms of revenue as well as listing what airlines compete on thier routes. There were a few suprises in that list for me.


http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/08-30-2002/0001791975&EDATE=

http://www.afanet.org/ME

http://www.afanet.org/ME/me_top100_market_summary.htm


"C.H.A.O.S.™ has begun at Midwest Express.
Don't fly Midwest Express until further notice!" - AFA website


"The world is run by C students"-Harry Truman
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1785 times:

What a bunch of assholes. Send revenue away from the airline you are trying to squeeze money out of. When bookings are down and every dollar counts. Note to Midex FA's...while you're out on the picket line, or replaced (since CHAOS isn't "organized"), your AFA leaders are still pulling a full paycheck.

User currently offlineCre From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 187 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1766 times:

Any group of employees who are intentionally setting out to permanently damage a company - then expect to be welcomed back with raises as if nothing happened is beyond me. I would fire any flight attendants who engage in this.

User currently offlineSeiple From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1764 times:

Wow, I bet most of you wish the airline industry was non-unionized. Then, one could step from behind the wheel of a B747 to a Greyhound bus and not take a pay cut.

User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 4, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1757 times:

No Seiple - but union "leadership" seems to have blinders on when it comes to negotiations. One major airline in bankruptcy, another on it's way, yet another announcing even MORE job cuts. And the AFA thru CHAOS(tm) decides to use the passengers to get their "message" across to managment. FA's have been replaced in the past (look at TWA). And even though they were replaced, the "engineers" of CHAOS(tm) who urged them to "take a stand" were pulling their full paychecks. And to make it even better, they are encouraging passengers to book another airline. Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

User currently offlineSeiple From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1748 times:

I'd like to see your better suggestion of what they do, Goingboeing. Let's see... two and a half years of negociating has gotten nowhere. Now what? Two and a half more years of negociating? Is that what you suggest?

Airlines won't listen to their own employees. They will listen to passengers.


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1743 times:

The unions have gone off the edge into self-destructive behavior. I think UAL is pretty much bankrupt in all but in name now. It is really hard to understand the motivations that underlie union behavior. Is it better to be job less than to be paid less? Personally, I would take the pay cut or leave.

I wish baseball was not unionized. But I guess if it were not for the union, those guys would starve. Same applies to UAL pilots. As far as being greedy, they rank a distant #2 behind Stephen Wolf in the airline industry.


User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1725 times:

My suggestion - if you're not happy with the deal - quit. Sorry to sound so harsh, but airline unions seem to forget that their "inventory" is service. The customer depends on that service. Strike, or use CHAOS(tm) and you screw the customer.

The UAW can strike GM and it doesn't immediately impact the customer because there is still product in inventory. Someone wanting to by a car can still buy a car and the company can still make money on the car while the strike is going on, so that when the stike is settled, money from that inventory is available for the company to cover some of the increased costs associated with the new labor contract. AFA is urging passengers to fly someone else. The money for that "inventory" will NEVER see the bank account of the airline, so they are already behind the 8 ball in covering the increased costs. Screw the customer with CHAOS(tm) and you DO run a real risk of losing their future business, or you cause the company to incur FURTHER costs in efforts to appease the customer and perhaps retain their business.

Sorry you and any other FA chose a service industry to work in. But your customer is your lifeblood...not the union. Screwing with the customer is screwing with yourself.


User currently offlineSeiple From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1721 times:

I'm not a flight attendant.

As I said, Goingboeing, I'd love to see your suggestions for the Midwest flight attendants to do.


User currently offlineMcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1712 times:

The unions really need to start getting public relations advice from professionals.

Grounding flights by surprise will certainly hurt the company financially. It might even bring them some satisfaction if morale is so low that they view management as an enemy. But it won't win much support for their cause.

What is their cause, anyway? Higher salaries? Working conditions? Air rage?

Since they've got a captive audience at 33,000 feet, why doesn't the union just produce a professional-looking video outlining their cause, and ask flight attendants to show it in flight?

If flight attendants are having trouble paying the rent, show it. If working conditions stink, show that. If air rage is a problem, show what a flight attendant looks like after a run-in with a fist-thrower. Then wrap up with a request that passengers call, write or e-mail the company on the FAs' behalf.


User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1707 times:

My suggestion was in my previous post - quit and find a job that is not in a service industry.

User currently offlineCre From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 187 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1703 times:

My suggestion for the FAs is to keep negotiating and act professional. A YX vice president was interviewed on a radio station yesterday and said they have received raises in the last few years.

I say this even though I believe they are somewhat underpaid and probaby do deserve continued raises. But the fact of the matter is the entire airline industry is financially suffering big time.

I think their best course of action is to act profession and help their company emerge financially from this period. Doing chaos and driving people away, undoubtedly some permanently, is not the way to do this.


User currently offlineSeiple From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1702 times:

Goingboeing:

We'll throw you out in concourse D at Milwaukee to tell everybody that all flight attendants took your advice and quit en masse at the deadline instead of striking.

They have a deadline for negociations. The flight attendants stay in hopes that, as with most similar situations, a compromise is reached in the end. At least with CHAOS some flights are operating and they can be back to their normal schedule at any time. Have them all quit... you probably bankrupted the airline. There aren't near 500 flight attendants available who could just step onto MidEx flights today and have it be business as usual.


User currently offlineSquigee From Canada, joined May 2001, 652 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1685 times:

"I'd love to see your suggestions for the Midwest flight attendants to do"

As with any job in capitalist society, if you don't like it, quit. If enough people leave, the company will be forced to raise wages, increase benefits, etc. to get more people to work for them. However, if there is a large group of people who will continue to fly under the conditions the company presents to them, then there is no reason for the company to increase wages. After all, while one or two FA's are grumpy about the pay, there are more who will take their place.

This give and take is the "invisible hand" that keeps the free market stabalized. By allowing unions to force wages and benefits higher, they are throwing the system out of balance, and makes the company pay more than they should. This, in turn, makes the consumer pay more than they should.

People, if you don't like your job, quit. That will show the company that they need to change. Prove the the company that you are worth that raise. If they honestly can't find anyone to work for those wages, then they will be forced to raise them. But if they can find someone to work for a lower wage than you, would the company be smart to keep you employed?

Seems like a bunch of people who want more $$ who are keeping the flying public from getting to where they need to go. And they won't have any sympathy for you when they read in the paper that your airline has gone belly up.



Someday, we'll look back at this, laugh nervously, and then change the subject.
User currently offlineSeiple From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1678 times:

Take a look at airport security.
Arguably, the quality of labor has increased with the wage increases. This holds true in many other fields.

It is more cost-effective for an airline to have flight attendants stay with the carrier rather than train and spend further money recruiting/hiring more. I'm sure there are people out there who would do the job for $6.00 per hour. By your suggestions, you say this is a fair wage as people will work for it. But what kind of people? They aren't likely to stay very long; just long enough until something better comes along. High turnover increases costs in other fashions, as noted above.


User currently offlineUSAirways737 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1026 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1667 times:

Unions are so pathetic. They really should be illegal. Striking is basically blackmailing the company until they get what they want and that just isn't right. My whole stance on unions is: If you dont like what you make, then you should've become a doctor.

Erik in msp


User currently offlineSeiple From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1653 times:

And some of you want to grow up to be pilots in these unions?

Amazing, truly amazing.


User currently offlineONT 737 From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 591 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1630 times:

“Management likes to say it has managers to take over if a flight is struck. But management can’t possibly cover a strike of every flight out of Milwaukee one day, or an unannounced strike of every flight into Kansas City, and it can’t accommodate its passengers on other airlines in those events, either,” said Phillips. “Management cannot predict when, where or to what degree CHAOS will strike, so they cannot defend the airline against it. Passengers who continue to book on the airline risk that their flight will be struck.”


"Midwest Express has been unable to come to a contract agreement with the Association of Flight Attendants by the end of the cooling-off period mandated by the National Mediation Board. Midwest Express will do everything the law allows to ensure customers are not inconvenienced. We have developed a number of contingency plans and are fully prepared to take the action necessary to deliver safe, uninterrupted service for Midwest Express passengers."

Gee... they can't see eye to eye on anything. Not even what the effects of CHAOS will be.  Big thumbs up
I'm sure there are many qualified laid off flight attends out there who would love to get a job with ME at the current wage scales.



"The world is run by C students"-Harry Truman
User currently offlineMcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1624 times:

USAirways737 wrote: "Unions are so pathetic. They really should be illegal."

I'm not a big friend of the union movement myself. I was once in a workplace where there was a union drive, and didn't support it because I wasn't convinced it would make things better.

But I will defend the unions' right to organize and exist, just as I will defend the right of people to engage in organized politics, even though I consider the latter to be a haven for the ruthless and the desperate-to-be-adored, and therefore a far greater danger to humanity.

There is no such thing as a customer-focused workplace, as common as that term has become. It's a myth. Human beings are driven by their own, personal needs above all else: food, clothing, shelter, emotional and physical well-being, love/friendship and appreciation. If their ability to get these things is threatened, people will either fight or flee. The best way to keep the unions at bay is to ensure that people don't feel they're being put into a fight-or-flight situation.



User currently offlineCtbarnes From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3491 posts, RR: 50
Reply 19, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1605 times:

There is no such thing as a customer-focused workplace, as common as that term has become.

I think Nordstrom, Southwest Airlines, and Four Seasons Hotels would disagree.

Charles, SJ



The customer isn't a moron, she is your wife -David Ogilvy
User currently offlineMcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1582 times:

Ctbarnes wrote: "I think Nordstrom, Southwest Airlines, and Four Seasons Hotels would disagree."

Their PR departments would. But what drives people to satisfy other peoples' needs is the hope of satisfying their own needs in the process.

Sometimes those needs are material: a bellman might hope to be rewarded with a generous tip, or a Southwest flight attendant by a profit-sharing bonus.

But often people are motivated by non-material things. An executive might hope to gain recognition as the guy who turned a troubled division around -- even Gordon Bethune admitted that one of the reasons why he stayed at Continental was that he felt Continental's employees needed him more than United did. A flight attendant might do something nice just because it makes her feel that she accomplished something good. Others might go an extra mile because it results in someone telling them that they did a good job today, or resist the lure of a higher-paying job because they like the people they work with.

No matter how you cut it, the only thing that guarantees that the customer's needs will be satisfied is if it's the end result of managers, suppliers, employees and others satisfying their own needs.



User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 21, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1577 times:

McDougald, to satisty the customers nees, if the unions are to be believed, then a pilot should make half a million, the mechanics $300K, the FA's $250K and the rampers $150K. And the airfare between Houston and Dallas should be $3,000 to cover.

User currently offlineMcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1546 times:

The unions often do place far too much emphasis on money and seniority; getting their members an inflated salary is a suitable cover for them to collect higher dues, improving their own financial situations, while the seniority system is such a flawed measurement of merit that it is akin to suggesting that Strom Thurmond had earned the U.S. presidency.

Part of their decline in recent years was their lack of innovation, not just in public relations, but in their failure to realize that money is not the only thing (or even the most important thing) that makes the difference between a good job and a crummy one.



User currently offlineHeavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (12 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1488 times:

Unions are so pathetic. They really should be illegal. Striking is basically blackmailing the company until they get what they want and that just isn't right. My whole stance on unions is: If you dont like what you make, then you should've become a doctor.

So what happens when everyone's a doctor and supply and demand has doctors making five bucks an hour? Or maybe we all can work at a non-union leather company like the one a friend of mine used to work at.....you got 5 working days off a year. But not in a row. One at a time please. And said company managed to buy up all its' competitors in the area, so so much for taking your skills elsewhere.

This opinion doesn't surprise me though. 20 years of brainwashing from the right wing media equating management as being only good, inventive, productive capitalists and workers as being ungrateful, lazy hourly slobs has produced the whole "aw shucks he just got caught" attitude when greedy CEOs pillage our economy.

Unions are nowhere near perfect....in fact some of those same lousy management types pull the same shenanigans at unions. And they stupidly balk at even a whiff of discussion about accountability over tenure.

But as long as there are Frank Lorenzos in this world ...."F**k You Capitalists" .....who would just as soon destroy their company and float away on a golden parachute than deal fairly with their employees....there will rightfully be unions.




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...
Is Anything Out Of The Worldliner's Reach? posted Tue Oct 17 2006 23:44:14 by Charliejag1
RNO Is WN's Station Of The Year posted Fri Jun 23 2006 18:07:47 by RNOcommctr
Is An E-version Of The Jeppesen Text Available? posted Sun Apr 9 2006 21:41:26 by Aak777
Is G-VFAB Out Of The Re-fit Yet? posted Sat Aug 14 2004 17:37:30 by PlaneMad
Why Is Virgin Thinking Of The 777er. posted Sat Feb 7 2004 23:50:58 by 3lions
Man, That 777 Is A Real State-of-the-art! posted Tue Jul 31 2001 15:40:15 by El Al 001
Is American Disposing Of The A300? posted Fri Jun 22 2001 17:46:04 by Jenny's Hot
Is A Lightweight Version Of The A318 Possible? posted Tue May 23 2000 07:47:05 by Samurai 777
Beta Version Of The New "usairways.com" Is Now Out posted Wed May 17 2006 07:23:00 by SonOfACaptain
"A380 Is Flying Into The Headwind Of Reality" posted Wed Jan 19 2005 20:52:28 by Jacobin777