Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Fair Appraisal of SWA's Future

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

chase

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
1,217
There is no denying that Southwest has done well in the past & continues to make money in a market that is anything but friendly. As some have pointed out though the future for Southwest and the industry is one that is full of potholes. I would agree the challenges for Southwest in the future are some of the same ones that some airlines are having to face right now....MUCH higher fuel prices (as the article points out for next year the cost will be around $500m) is certainly the most looming one. While our fuel hedges does provide us some insulation Gary Kelly realizes (as do analysts) an airline company that is only making money off of fuel hedges is not one that can survive in the long term. No one has their head buried in the sand at Southwest on that topic despite what is posted on any website or forum.

However what is very encouraging to many is the optimism and various plans that are being put into place to find more savings and productivity by all departments, flight ops, technology, inflight, etc. The recent decision by the pilots to delay the "offiicial" opening of new contract negotiations (commonly referred to as "section 6 negotiations") while still carrying on "productivity" discussions with management starting nearly immediately shows that both the pilot group & management realize productivity gains can still be achieved within the system and could lead toward savings toward next year's goal of cutting costs & increasing revenue.

No one knows the outcome of these "productivity discussions" but it is a hopeful sign that the pilot group will become even more productive resulting in savings (not via givebacks but by increasing our production with the number of folks we have on board....an approach that has been the standard for Southwest I'm happy to say). This will be a give & take on the part of all parties. The article below doesn't address this issue directly but it adds some context to why Gary Kelly is upbeat about our future in terms of finding solutions to increasing revenues.
____________________

Article on Southwest in Sunday Dallas Morning News
Southwest moves signal strength



[size=-1]07:20 PM CDT on Saturday, April 23, 2005 [/size]

[size=-1]By ERIC TORBENSON / The Dallas Morning News [/size]

Gary Kelly's office-decorating ideas have some Southwest Airlines Co. executives concerned that visitors could get the wrong impression about his intentions for the leading low-cost carrier. "It's a perfect place for a map of the world," said the jovial Mr. Kelly, chief executive of Southwest since July, motioning to a wall covered in historic photos. "They're sort of asking me not to do that."While fliers shouldn't expect Southwest's Canyon Blue tail colors on other continents, they should get used to the Dallas-based carrier calling the shots in an industry that's facing change on a tectonic scale.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/img/04-05/0424southwest.jpg
Simply put, Southwest is on top of the domestic aviation world. It's flush with cash and low on debt. It's shielded from record high jet fuel prices, and where it treads, other airlines quiver.

It's got a glowing reputation as the "LUV" airline because of a feel-good, humor-infused culture that would be the envy of any company in any industry.

And now the 34-year-old airline has stepped out and demonstrated how much it loves to win.

By dropping 25 years of "passionate neutrality" toward the Wright amendment restrictions limiting its flying at Dallas Love Field, Southwest has signaled a new era of activism aimed at strengthening its best markets.

To keep its most promising airport growing, Southwest muscled its way into winning an asset auction against AirTran Airways Inc., yielding six more gates at Chicago's Midway Airport from ATA Airlines Inc.

The move allows Southwest to add 50 daily flights and make Chicago one of its top three cities for service, but it's also earned the carrier a reputation for getting what it wants and keeping others at bay.

"They're very much a vigorous suppressor of competition," said Michael E. Levine, a Yale Law School professor and former airline executive, citing Southwest's track record of smartly expanding into cities and capturing the market. Southwest is the No. 1 airline at all but a dozen of the 58 airports it serves.

"They're always going to be an aggressive player with the lowest costs," Mr. Levine said. "They're a little like a lioness on the hunt, following the pack and looking for stragglers."

Others say Southwest has good instincts. "There is nothing predatory about snapping up strategically important resources that will likely be profitable," said Robert L. Crandall, former chairman and chief executive of American Airlines Inc. and AMR Corp. That's "just good business."

Southwest makes no apologies.

"We're tough competitors, we always have been, and there's nothing new about that," Mr. Kelly said. "We're a strong company with a strong balance sheet."

How strong?

With $1.9 billion in available cash and an untapped credit line of $575 million, the carrier's purchase of ATA assets with cash and loans of more than $100 million didn't make much of a dent in its coffers.

Southwest thinks it will recoup its ATA investment in a year, both in new revenue from Chicago and in bonus revenue from an alliance with ATA where the two sell seats on each other's planes.

A program that has Southwest pre-purchasing fuel for its planes has been so successful that the carrier is sitting on $700 million in collateral from other parties that bet against the airline on where oil prices would go.

Compared with others, Southwest's finances make it look like anything but an airline. Its competitors have bled a combined $33 billion in four years; Southwest made $1.5 billion in the same period.

While traditional carriers have hocked their aircraft fleets to the hilt to finance their losses, Southwest's 424 Boeing 737s aren't mortgaged. Collectively, they're probably worth several billion dollars more if the airline needs cash.



Positively sterling


Southwest's finances look positively sterling compared with those of traditional carriers, which have credit ratings in the junk bond range.

That's why analyst Gary Chase of Lehman Bros. puts Southwest "in the catbird seat" amid all the industry turmoil.

Noting Southwest's "more aggressive posture" in a recent report, he wrote that the airline remains "the best positioned to benefit from potential industry rationalization in the short- and long-term view."

Industry changes seem imminent. Low-cost carriers, including Southwest, AirTran and JetBlue Airways Corp., now fly about a third of domestic traffic and affect pricing on most major routes.

Consolidation of some of the weaker players appears likely.

US Airways Group, which is in bankruptcy, and America West Airlines Inc. are discussing a merger. Reports last week disclosing the talks said the carriers hope to create a low-cost rival to Southwest.

Wall Street didn't look favorably on the possible deal, and Yale's Mr. Levine called it "something that isn't even close to workable."

In any case, Mr. Kelly shrugged off any combination as unlikely to affect his carrier's strategy because neither airline can undercut Southwest on pricing.

America West trails Southwest in market share at its top two cities, Phoenix and Las Vegas.

Analysts expect Southwest to be a force as the US Airways situation plays out, figuring that the bankruptcy court would solicit bids for US Airways assets regardless of how merger talks proceed.



Tread carefully


Both US Airways and America West – which would shed some planes in a merger – have 737s that may intrigue Southwest.

But even rock-solid Southwest will tread carefully in increasingly perilous territory.

"Any additional risk we want to consider, we have to do that very wisely," Mr. Kelly said. "We've certainly seen signs of contraction, and that can provide some opportunities for us to expand and do it profitably."

Traditionally, Southwest has picked its expansion opportunities diligently. Now, as it's gotten bigger, the carrier is being forced to react more to what rivals are doing – or might do.

"They're going to have to be very reactive to what's happening," said consultant Michael Boyd of the Boyd Group.

"They wouldn't have opened Pittsburgh if they hadn't have opened up Philadelphia, and they wouldn't have done Philly if those gates hadn't opened up and JetBlue wasn't lurking."

Indeed, Mr. Kelly admitted that the Southwest management team was caught off guard when bankrupt ATA initially struck a deal with AirTran for the Midway gates.

"Why would we sit by after investing 20 years in Chicago and let somebody brand new come in and steal our growth potential?" Mr. Kelly asked. In short order, Southwest set up the winning bid.

The ATA deal shows that Southwest is willing to break its own rules for the right reward, Mr. Kelly said.

Southwest has operated independently for decades. But to win the Midway gates, it agreed to form an alliance with the Indianapolis-based airline, a choice Mr. Kelly refers to as a "means to an end."

Southwest's technology staff had to build systems from scratch to handle computer reservations from ATA, but the alliance has worked better than expected "and it's become a real morale boost for us," he said.

(continued)
 
(continued)

Ready for anything


Mr. Kelly isn't interested in buying other airlines or jumping the carrier's annual growth rate to 20 percent. But it's ready for anything. "We've definitely got to be on our toes."

Not all are ready to call Southwest the new sheriff of the skies.

"I do not think Southwest is the 'king' of the majors," said Mr. Crandall, who ran what's now the world's largest airline for 13 years.

However, Southwest's strength gives it "the resources to take the chance it will be wrong, a luxury many others do not have," he said.

By some measures, Southwest falls in the middle of the pack, ranking No. 6 in total revenue among airlines. It has no international operations and no ambitions to start them.

At its home airport, Love Field, Southwest may seem like an upstart regional carrier because of limits that restrict it to serving nearby states. But it's now the nation's top domestic carrier in terms of passengers carried.

Even if passengers get a kick out of the corny jokes from Southwest flight crews, rivals aren't laughing.

"They're really a bully, and nobody seems to hear about it," said one executive at another low-cost carrier who asked not to be named.

Unlike executives in other industries who regularly lob public insults at one another, criticisms are offered more privately in the clubby airline business.

"I've always thought they were the most predatory of carriers out there," the executive said.



What bullies?


Mr. Kelly brushed off the 'bully' label. But, he said, anyone who would call Southwest chairman and co-founder Herb Kelleher "a meek, mild competitor is just lying or ignorant."

"We give our word; we honor it," Mr. Kelly said. "There's nothing anywhere close to improper behavior on our part that I know of or that I've heard."

Some see Southwest – along with JetBlue, AirTran and a few others – as the legacy of airline deregulation, coming into focus after nearly three decades.

"They continue to be my major vindication," said Alfred Kahn, who guided the nation's Civil Aeronautics Board to unleash the power of low-cost carriers through deregulation in 1978.

"I feared that there would be five or so carriers that dominated the industry," he said, especially when most start-up airlines in the 1980s failed to stay aloft.

Southwest's "continued profitability is reassuring that this was worth it," Mr. Kahn said.

Despite the commanding view from up high, Mr. Kelly can see dark clouds in the form of Southwest's stagnant share price and higher fuel costs.

"We have all the things you'd want to have in a company," he said. "The one thing that's missing is prosperity."

By paying Southwest employees with profit sharing and giving them ample opportunities at stock options, the shares are "clearly our common bond." The stock has mostly treaded water in the mid-teens since 2002.

The carrier's fuel hedges will begin to taper off next year, leaving a greater percentage of its jet fuel needs exposed to market prices. The impact could mean $500 million – about an 8 percent increase in total costs – just for 2006.

To combat the cost creep and keep its high perch, Southwest has aggressive efficiency efforts under way and will entertain a host of new moves that could be as bold as the ATA purchase.

"We are not the same company we were in 1971 or even the same company that we were in 2000," Mr. Kelly said. "We don't want to sit back here and feel like victims – we want to control our destiny as much as possible."

E-mail [email protected]
 
Southwest has aggressive efficiency efforts under way and will entertain a host of new moves that could be as bold as the ATA purchase.

Except, it wasn't a purchase. It's a "small-risk" codeshare.

The "bailout/loan" was a smart move on SWA's part. They did move quickly to stave off the competition, and ATA might be the impetus to move outside the 48 contiguous. That's up to GK.
 
Spoiler????

Sure, why not?? UAIR has priority until 4/30/05 to bring their business plan to the judge. Kelly will look at what's on the table that could hurt SWA and act accordingly. His decision to do something will be based on the cost and ROI for SWA vs letting any merger deal go through with AWA or anyone else. A bidding war for assets could turn ugly as SWA might have to take on a conglomerate of saviors that may include GECAS, RSA, and the various Regionals with turf to protect. He will not just bid on the 737s as he needs a place to put them, so any bid would have to include a large portion of all of UAIRs assets. It's funny how Gary Kelly says that AWA is a struggling route system. Their route system is just as profitable as SWA, the difference between the two is debt and cash.

Southwest plays down merger


[size=+1]US Air-America West deal wouldn't create strong rival, Kelly says
[/size]

[size=-1]11:29 PM CDT on Wednesday, April 20, 2005[/size]

[size=-1]By ERIC TORBENSON / The Dallas Morning News [/size]

Southwest Airlines Co. chief executive Gary Kelly said Wednesday he's not particularly concerned about a possible merger between bankrupt US Airways Group and low-cost carrier America West Airlines Inc.

"The notion that they will be a very large low-cost competitor to Southwest Airlines is just not true, at least, with what we can see on the surface," Mr. Kelly said in an interview.

"The facts are as they stand today that their costs are substantially higher than ours."

Talks between US Airways, based in Arlington, Va., and America West, based in Tempe, Ariz., have reportedly intensified in recent weeks, as the two carriers have hunted for investors to finance a merger.

US Airways chairman David Bronner confirmed the talks in an interview with The Associated Press late Tuesday.

In a conference call with analysts Wednesday, America West CEO Douglas Parker said he believed the deal would be done without having to dip into the carrier's dwindling cash reserves of $350 million.

But Mr. Kelly said the deal would need a lot more than outside cash to be a success.

"It's taking one struggling route system and combining it with another struggling route system. It doesn't really change the competitive landscape as we see it."

Analysts also raised concerns that any deal would face considerable opposition from shareholders and unions.



Culture clash?


US Airways' very senior union employees would potentially clash with America West's comparatively young ones, analysts said.

"We believe airline mergers work best when buyer is big and powerful (as America West is not) and target is small and puny (US Airways is weak but over twice the size of America West)," wrote Robert Ashcroft of UBS Securities.

He expects Southwest to be a vigorous competitor that could mix up the process by bidding on assets in the same way it outbid AirTran Airways Inc. for assets of bankrupt ATA Airlines Inc. earlier this year.

"That precedent showed it's unwise to count on (Southwest) to sit on the sidelines," he added.

Mr. Kelly said he's aware that both the carriers have Boeing 737s that might interest Southwest, but he declined to speculate on what might occur.



Tough competitor


Dallas-based Southwest gives both carriers plenty of trouble.

Southwest has superior market share in America West's top two markets, Phoenix and Las Vegas, and the discounter expanded last year into Philadelphia, which is US Airways' most profitable city.

In May, Southwest will add flights to US Airways' former hub at Pittsburgh.

"We don't control the destiny of other airlines," Mr. Kelly said. "We're starting up service in Pittsburgh next month. We'll have 10 flights to US Airways' 250, and I seriously doubt that our 10 flights are going to have serious impact on US Airways' finances."

Executives at Fort Worth-based American Airlines Inc. said they wouldn't comment on whether the world's largest carrier would be active in any industry consolidation.

American parent AMR Corp. concluded the last big airline deal when it bought assets of bankrupt TWA Inc. in 2001.

"If it takes capacity out of the industry, I think that would improve the revenue environment and improve industry conditions," said American chief executive Gerard Arpey of the potential merger, in a conference call.

"If on the other hand it preserves capacity that might otherwise go away, that would be a bad development."

Shares of Southwest fell 41 cents to $14.44. Shares of America West fell 31 cents to $4.50, having traded as much as 16 percent lower during the day.

Staff writer Suzanne Marta contributed to this report.

E-mail [email protected]
 
lowecur said:
A bidding war for assets could turn ugly as SWA might have to take on a conglomerate of saviors that may include GECAS, RSA, and the various Regionals with turf to protect. He will not just bid on the 737s as he needs a place to put them, so any bid would have to include a large portion of all of UAIRs assets. It's funny how Gary Kelly says that AWA is a struggling route system. Their route system is just as profitable as SWA, the difference between the two is debt and cash.

Bidding war turn ugly? I think not. Cash is king right now. Who has enough cash to make a good deal besides SWA?

If America West merges with USAir you have two debt laden companies joining forces. Doesn't sound very scary to me. The combined entity might get more bargaining power with GECAS and other creditors. The push to create efficiencies will cause much pain for employees and probably investors.

Keep in mind USAir is trying to avoid liquidation. This possible merger can't perform a miracle overnight.
 
FlyBoeingJets said:
Bidding war turn ugly? I think not. Cash is king right now. Who has enough cash to make a good deal besides SWA? You lost me there BJ. People on Wall St expect the BK judge to accept bids on UAIR assets. My point is Kelly is not going to buy 737s from UAIR unless he sees significant contraction of their capacity either through liquidation or consolidation with AWA. His other option is he may decide to make an offer for slots, gates, and 737s just to muck up any deal. Yes, there may be a bidding war if that happens. GECAS is not going to sit back and let SWA screw with their leased a/c.

If America West merges with USAir you have two debt laden companies joining forces. Doesn't sound very scary to me. Only if they have enough backing to be viable. The combined entity might get more bargaining power with GECAS and other creditors. The push to create efficiencies will cause much pain for employees and probably investors.

Keep in mind USAir is trying to avoid liquidation. This possible merger can't perform a miracle overnight.
Let's see what happens in the next week. All this may be premature, and UAIR may just be forced to liquidate if the merger looks like it's going to cost more than it's worth.
 
Chase, I originally posted this on Dec 16. I think it still holds true regarding SWA's moniker as the newest in the line of airline industry leaders:

"I also doubt that you will repeat the same specific mistakes that have doomed the legacy carriers. However, I think SWA could fall prey to some of the same types of cultural and emotional problems that infested the former big boys during their period of dominance.

The changes to SWA's culture and attitude, as you transition from perennial underdog to 800 pound gorilla, could be very threatening. As SWA takes a more aggressive stance within the industry, the subtle emotional effects that will have on employees and customers could be damaging. It's easy to rally the troops to put up with low pay and more work when their survival is threatened. However, the opposite is true now at SWA, and I think the psychological motivation to keep costs low and operate efficiently will be reduced with SWA's new industry position. Additionally, humility has always been a cornerstone of SWA's culture. Customers have always picked up on that and liked it. Customers have also always known up to this point, through SWA's marketing and by the genuine case of reality, that SWA was in an underdog sort of situation. They were willing to cut SWA just a little bit of slack. That's the way people are. Now, however, times have certainly changed. It is hard to be humble when you're the dominant industry leader. Both employees and customers will eventually realize this. It'll be extremely difficult to keep your culture the same. Customers will also have a different expectation from a SWA that is king of the hill.

SWA will be able to ride on it's coattails and the goodwill it has engendered for a while, but eventually that could change unless the growth is very, very carefully managed. Employees from the old guard will still be humble and try to maintain the old SWA spirit. However, there is a real danger (I think) that they will be overwhelmed as the newer, cockier employees work their way into the SWA organization. Believe me, there are pilots being hired at SWA today who five years disparaged and ridiculed anyone who would pay for a type rating to go work at a low ball operation.

Another point to consider: SWA has incredible fuel hedges (in the mid $20's) right now that last for the next couple of years. This is VERY good for SWA and will virtually guarantee SWA's position for the next several years. However, those same fuel hedges could turn out to be a bad thing in the long run. The airlines without good fuel hedges right now are being forced by the competitive situation to become ultra-efficient. If they don't become ultra-efficient, they will die (USAir, Independence, ATA). Therefore, the airlines that do manage to make it through to a point where all of the airlines are on somewhat equal footing in terms of fuel prices will be profit-making machines. SWA may feel some pressure right now to keep costs rock-bottom low but at the end of the day that pressure cannot rival the do-or-die pressure on other airlines. I've long held the belief that people do only what they know and believe they really have to do to get by. That's the argument I'm making here. Airlines like AirTran, JetBlue, and America West know and believe they have to be efficient. SWA knows in it's heart it doesn't have to be as efficient right now. If the playing field is ever leveled, SWA could be at a disadvantage."
 
Delville said:
Chase, I originally posted this on Dec 16. I think it still holds true regarding SWA's moniker as the newest in the line of airline industry leaders:

"I also doubt that you will repeat the same specific mistakes that have doomed the legacy carriers. However, I think SWA could fall prey to some of the same types of cultural and emotional problems that infested the former big boys during their period of dominance.


These potential pitfalls have dogged SWA for years. When a company is as dependent on productivity and efficiency as Southwest is, employee morale, specifically, positive morale is paramount. The initiation of service to PHL and the ATA deal have recently turned the industry's attention to Southwest. However, it could be said that Southwest entered a critical phase from the "Culture" standpoint back in the mid to late 90s when the airline acquired Morris Air and saw massive expansion on the east coast and Florida. By yearend 1990, SWA had 106 aircraft and just under 9,000 employees. At the end of the decade those numbers had tripled to 312 aircraft and nearly 28,000 employees. Herb has been quoted as saying that "Southwest's adolesence would be a critical time in the airline's history". SWA could have succumbed to severe growing pains in the 1990s but instead, she thrived. The difference between Southwest and the Legacy carriers is that "Culture" as it were is woven deeply into the company's DNA. There are entire departments focused on and devoted to the preservation of said Culture. The people in the big offices know that if the culture suffers, Southwest suffers. Period. The recent Flight Attendant contract talks can give us a bit of insight. After nearly 2 years at the table, the union played the "culture card" and then CEO Jim Parker took a hardline stance. The Flight Attendant group dug in their heels. SWA's relationship with one of it's largest labor groups was at a crossroads. Herb stepped in, a deal was struck. A little over a year later then CEO Jim Parker and Vice President of Inflight Services Tammy Walker-Jones have left the company. Coincidence?

The changes to SWA's culture and attitude, as you transition from perennial underdog to 800 pound gorilla, could be very threatening.

I stand by the belief that this transition began years ago.

As SWA takes a more aggressive stance within the industry, the subtle emotional effects that will have on employees and customers could be damaging. It's easy to rally the troops to put up with low pay and more work when their survival is threatened.
However, the opposite is true now at SWA, and I think the psychological motivation to keep costs low and operate efficiently will be reduced with SWA's new industry position.


What people who are not SWA employees often fail to realize is that senior management never stops railing against the evils of complacency. For instance, the cover story of this month's employee newsletter is 'Fill 'er up!: From hedging to Tankering, Southwest is battling rising fuel costs'. The article goes on to give a detailed account of the current state of fuel costs and exactly what SWA is doing about it. Note the following quote from the article:

" We're doing all we can to control fuel costs and should be proud of our efforts. However, these intiatives alone won't solve the problem of increasing fuel costs. That's one of the big reasons for our sense of urgency about reducing costs in other areas."

Not exactly light reading. The 'underdog' mentality is still alive and well around here. 30 years ago, the 'enemy' was Braniff, 15 years ago it may have been the United Shuttle, now it's OPEC.



Additionally, humility has always been a cornerstone of SWA's culture.
Customers have always picked up on that and liked it. Customers have also always known up to this point, through SWA's marketing and by the genuine case of reality, that SWA was in an underdog sort of situation. They were willing to cut SWA just a little bit of slack. That's the way people are. Now, however, times have certainly changed. It is hard to be humble when you're the dominant industry leader.


I'm not sure I agree with that assesment. The Triple Crown is an honor that SWA invented and then proceeded to award itself with 5 years in a row. Hardly the mark of humility. It's not so much humility it's 'self-possesion' and a refusal to apologize for who/what Southwest is that is a hallmark of this company. In life, people who know who they are and are 'okay' with that don't feel need to constantly trumpet their accomplishments but, they don't hide them either. Southwest knows who they are as a company and their place in the industry. My experience as an employee over the years has been more 'quiet confidence' than humility. No matter how large we become, we will always be an outsider among the major carriers. It's like the difference between "new money" and "old money". It doesn't matter how many years Southwest has been in business, how large their share of the domestic market becomes, or how much money the company makes...in the hearts and minds of many Southwest will always be "beneath" the other legacy carriers dignity. We might have the money for the Country Club membership but that doesn't mean we can get in.

Both employees and customers will eventually realize this. It'll be extremely difficult to keep your culture the same. Customers will also have a different expectation from a SWA that is king of the hill.

Nearly 34 years and counting and the Culture is still alive and well. Southwest has always excelled and managing Customer's expectations. It is often said that the company underpromises and overdelivers. That being said, the product has evolved and continues to do so. A decade ago, a SWA Customer got a plastic boarding card and could expect to make no less than 3 stops if they wanted to travel cross-country. Today Southwest has embraced technology with a vengeance to enhance the Customer's experience. Customers can now check-in and print a boarding pass online or at a kiosk and fly non-stop from coast to coast in a newly stitched leather seat no less. It's tough to find that sweet spot between what your Customers want and what will ultimately push them to your competition. But, that doesn't mean the company has opted to refuse to update the product and risk alienating the Customer.

SWA will be able to ride on it's coattails and the goodwill it has engendered for a while, but eventually that could change unless the growth is very, very carefully managed.

I think the fact that Southwest still delievers a good, consistent product at a fair price also counts for something. Goodwill will only get you so far.


 
Last edited:
Employees from the old guard will still be humble and try to maintain the old SWA spirit. However, there is a real danger (I think) that they will be overwhelmed as the newer, cockier employees work their way into the SWA organization.
Believe me, there are pilots being hired at SWA today who five years disparaged and ridiculed anyone who would pay for a type rating to go work at a low ball operation.


Which is why the work of the People Department, acting as the company's "gatekeepers" has never been more important. I recruit for SWA on the Inflight side so I have seen this first hand. I take personal responsiblity for every Flight Attendant I hire. The PD has a tough job but, they take it very seriously and they are very good at what they do. No matter what qualifications you bring to the table "Southwest Fit" or lack thereof is still very much a factor in the hiring process.
There are plenty of "old guard" employees who are cocky as all get out and the vast majority of new-hires truly seem to "get it". There will always been those who will beat the system and slip through the cracks. However, as long as every effort is being made to hire people who are "Southwest Material" what more can be done?




Another point to consider: SWA has incredible fuel hedges (in the mid $20's) right now that last for the next couple of years. This is VERY good for SWA and will virtually guarantee SWA's position for the next several years. However, those same fuel hedges could turn out to be a bad thing in the long run. The airlines without good fuel hedges right now are being forced by the competitive situation to become ultra-efficient. If they don't become ultra-efficient, they will die (USAir, Independence, ATA). Therefore, the airlines that do manage to make it through to a point where all of the airlines are on somewhat equal footing in terms of fuel prices will be profit-making machines.

As long as the legacy carriers operate multiple mainline fleet types through massive hub and spoke operations, "ultra-efficiency' is likely to elude them. That is not to say though that they will not emerge from the recent unpleasantness leaner and meaner. There are numerous, aggressive cost-cutting measures being implemented at Southwest in an attempt to make sure the airline remains competitive when the playing field is once again more level. From the outside, it may appear that SWA is riding the wave fat, dumb, and happy...oblivious to the fact that industry is changing all around them. From an insider's perspective, nothing could be further from the truth. I don't think any of us that work here are deluding ourselves into thinking that Southwest is bulletproof. However, we also know that we have an engergetic, proactive, intelligent front office that is doing everything they can to keep the company in the black. What more could we ask for?

SWA may feel some pressure right now to keep costs rock-bottom low but at the end of the day that pressure cannot rival the do-or-die pressure on other airlines.

Southwest always feels and more importantly exerts on it's employees pressure to keep costs "rock-bottom"...always. The fact that SWA has the advantage of fuel hedges right now is a direct result of dogged focus on cost even back in the good ol days when profit margins where much higher than they are now. "Prepare in the good times to weather the bad times" is a phrase we hear often around here.

I've long held the belief that people do only what they know and believe they really have to do to get by. That's the argument I'm making here.

Some people? Yes. Most people? No. Does Southwest have it's fair share of slackers on the payroll? Yes. Is the entire company and most importantly management on cruise control? No.

Airlines like AirTran, JetBlue, and America West know and believe they have to be efficient. SWA knows in it's heart it doesn't have to be as efficient right now If the playing field is ever leveled, SWA could be at a disadvantage."

I'm not sure which SWA you're referring to...the one I work for knows that nothing could be further from the truth.
 
Excellent post SWAInflt.

When I was hired in 94 these issues were brought up.

I have yet to see any significant changes in our culture.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top