How to destroy your airline

[U2FDX]

 

[AlbieF15]

Clownpilot,

Its a free country, and until the moderator steps in you can pretty much say whatever you want on these boards.

However, I have tried since I started reading and posting on these forums to treat it as if I were having a conversation at the airport with fellow pilots. I understand dudes will have differences of opinion here and there, but most folks at least try to keep it professional.

I've made lots of contacts with these boards, even had dinner a few times with some fellow posters. I certainly got TONS of info when I was looking for jobs, and I appreciated the guys (Jeff G, Profile, Ben Dover, Eagleflip, and others) who passed gouge back and forth.

I wish no harm on AA. I have several ANG bros who are currently on furlough, a former OV10 bro who is a 767 FO, and an Auburn roommate who is a captain on the MD88. I jumpseated to SFO last month out of DFW on AA and was impressed with the great service (and thanks for the lift). My point was simply that by forgoing customer service the majors risk losing market share when competition does eventually show up. If you couldn't translate the first post well enough, I was complaining about the poor service history of ASA, and how their ties to Delta might ultimately hurt Delta more than help once competition shows up.

As for the scathing personal attacks--well--post as you best see fit. However, I'd keep in mind a couple of things. First--most guys know who I am, I don't hide behind a screen name and hurl insults. That has allowed me the chance to interact with some pretty cool guys from across the industry (if hanging out or corresponding with non-AA folks interests you). Second, all of us are just a bad physical away from not being airline pilots anymore. I try not to let my identity get too wrapped up in being an "airline pilot" or an "Eagle Driver" or whatever. Being an AA pilot is obviously a very big deal to you, or perhaps you just like to vent. I've met way too many nice P-3 guys (another Auburn buddy is one) to sit here and start "who's the better service/pilot/airframe" BS, but c'mon man...you flew a big piece o' crap across the sky for hours at a time on autopilot, and you always had a "helper". Now you do the same thing at AA for more money. How hard it that? You are one of 10,000 AA pilots and that makes you "elite"? You'll have a lot more fun at airshows, layovers, and in life in general if you can just say "yeah, I'm a pilot too..." and leave it at that.

And I don't play tic tac toe instead of running an airline--I just waterski. You caught me on the beer drinking, however.

 

[smooshfacekitty]

way to go alpie - that summed it up very well. And there was no name calling, bashing of any sort - some people, especially clowns have burrs up their a$$'$ sometimes - i've been following this post and thourougly and enjoying it - all it takes is one bad apple (or clown) to ruin a good post. Great post - keep it up. I'm not an airline pilot nor do I pretend to be, but this thread makes a lot of sense, especially to me, who has to deal with all that you've been talking about. I'd rather fly SWA or JetBlue for the convenience and great customer service, however, sometimes it is not possible, especially when I have to travel abroad and such. I wish the majors would focus more on it - I'd fly UAL (my choice) more often, if they had the low fairs like SWA and the customer service. Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

Regards,

smoosh

 

[JohnDoe]

Ah yes....there he is folks......that delightfully tactfull individual known as Clownpilot. The man, the myth, the legend behind such insightfull tidbits such as "You're an angry little Eagle Troll," and "Please kill yourself." And who can forget these memorable moments: "These darn Eagle Troll Flowthrough Losers," and "....your angry Troll Asses."

Order your copy now before they're all gone............

 

[FastCargo]

Yet other factors...

Albie,

Excellent posts! Your analysis doesn't even include the very real possibility that the Eclipse (small jet, 6 seat, 850k unit cost) will be able to fulfill the promise of an 'air taxi' service.

The book 'Free Flight' explains the current problems of the current airline system, even before 9/11, with analysis that included the fact that trips under 400 miles (I think) actually took longer to fly than drive. I don't want to even know how much that figure has increased post 9/11.

With all the pain that exists now, what passenger who has a choice is willing to put up with bad service? Especially if the 'air taxi' service gets a foothold...

Arrogance, especially now, is not the thing to have. Ask any American car maker, any American consumer electronics maker, IBM...

And like you Albie, I have no wish to see any company fail. I have a LOT of friends in the majors, especially United, and I don't wish a lack of a job for anybody, cause it could have been easily (and could still be easily) me. I hope the companies in trouble can pull out of this funk, because the economy certainly doesn't need help in staying in it...

Fly Safe!

 

[LiveFreeorDie]

Opinions are like....

Opinions are like @$$holes, everyones got one. And arguing on the internet is like being in the Special Olympics, even if you win you still look retarded. I like the opinions on this site, but not so much the @$$holes.

-Eric

 

[Eagleflip]

Yeah Alpie, Opie, or Albie--whatever moniker you are going by this afternoon! (Smoosh, I had a good laugh at that misspelling )

Now on to a very contentious question on this topic.

My question is this: what role did the various pilot's unions have in the current situation? Specifically, did the unions significantly contribute to the economic decline of the majors, or are they simply another factor of equal impact on the current ugly state?

If so, what provides the balance in the equation? By that I mean at what point should a union concede that wage cuts are necessary to ensure the company stays afloat?

I asked this same question in June of 01 on the old board, but had no takers. Things have changed, eh? The current crunch on the industry has been blamed on many things, high labor costs being one. So, I ask again, what's the scoop on unions?

My take on the subject. Should unions exist? Of course. Unions have played an essential role in this industry, just like others, to ensure the rights and needs of workers are respected. I didn't always understand that.

An AA friend of mine explained the need for a union to me several years ago, though. "You live in one of the most perfect socialist systems ever developed," he said, "The US military. They want to ensure you are healthy, safe and more or less happy. They'll do whatever it takes to balance the mission and 'people' issues to make you content, or at the very least, complaining softly. Civilian corporations, especially airlines, are NOT like that. There is no more 'socialist' protection--it is each side on it's own. Management will suck the life out of you if you have no protections. The union provides that protection."

Sounded rather harsh at the time, but it made sense. (Ed. note: Make no mistake--I'm extremely lucky that my current employer is nothing like that illustration, but I acknowledge that other companies are not as employee oriented as JB.)

Nevertheless (and here's where my opinion will likely make me flamed and reviled beyond hope), I think wage pressure is a significant issue to the current situation, and can't be ignored as a causal factor. Pay is not the only topic at blame here, as the above posts indicate. There are LOTS of factors at work, such as fleet mix, hub inefficiencies, and fickle consumer demand. In fact, I believe that our country's economic downturn is the single largest factor in this equation. Here's my main question, though: isn't a pay raise that helps to push a company over the fiscal edge of bankruptcy self-defeating? After all, if you get the raise but help force the company to go under, don't you loose overall? I've seen articles in respected journals (WSJ, NYT) that address United's pay increase as a major factor in their teetering economic situation. Why did both sides let things decline so far?

My sense is that the "pressure relief valve" of wage concessions operates only at the brink of disaster, with US Airways' latest agreement as a prime example. Why so late? Simply put, pilots don't trust management as far as they can throw them (I am fortunate to be excluded from this group) and believe all company-generated pronouncements of fiscal gloom and doom are simply negotiating tools. Some undoubtedly are tricks to dupe unsuspecting workers; other company statements have evidently told the truth. Thus the lack of trust inhibits the free exchange of information, and therefore slows the whole process down. Is that policy the best for all concerned? No, but then again this is the real world, with lots of competing agendas. Much as I may look like PollyAnna, I'm not.

Great "free hand of economics" granddaddy Adam Smith would be aghast at this turn of events, but hey, he's dead and dust in some London cemetary.

In short, union-led wage demands contributed to this problem, but mistrust (on both sides) inhibited prompt negotiations to resolve it. Finally, I don't see a way around this cycle due to longstanding competing and non-congruent objectives, e.g. management wants to make money regardless of worker welfare, and unions want to maximize benefits, no matter the economic impact to the company.

Before you light the torch, please understand the following:
--I believe in the right to unionize and negotiate--if the need exists.
--I believe a pilot should have a superb income.
--I believe that a mindless obsession with money does not contribute to long-term success, no matter the profession--or position.

Most of all--I hope that our bros/sis's currently out of work out there gain their flying jobs back quickly. I take no comfort in the misfortune of others, no matter who they are employed by.

A good pilot's always learning--so educate me with your take on these questions!

And Clownpilot--I don't think anybody out here on the board wants others in the industry to suffer. Sorry you don't understand that.

 

[pilotyip]

Lesson

In one of my management books it stated unions are a sign of bad management.

 

[beytzim]

Great Comments. Here's one topic unmentioned thus far:

When companies are small, they have more motivated individuals. When companies are young, management is more motivated and probably helped start the company. For example, companies like JB, AirTran, and even SW are young and relatively small - their original founders are still alive!

On the other hand, you have companies that have been around for generations. Their employees are in it for the 'buck' (pilots too) and the union is the motivating force to work. Management is simply looking at stock options or golden parachutes. The founding CEOs are dead for decades already.

So....in ten to twenty years from now when JB, Airtran, and SW have all expanded and their founding CEO's and other employees are long gone - you will see the same crap.

I'm not predicting the future. Just a thought.

 

[F18-FDX]

Clown,

What an appropriate screen name, I couldn't have named you better myself. Awfully bitter, aren't we? Must run all the way back to your performance in flight school...

Just to set the record straight, there are plenty of us out here who are exactly where we want to be, not "stuck at a package carrier or crappy regional airline." It may be hard for you to swallow, but not everyone in the world wants to be you. I came to FedEx over AA and DAL for many reasons, not the least of which was historical performance in both up and down economic cycles. I guess I can add one more reason to my list...I don't have to work with a guy like you.


Albie,

Great post, excellent discussion - the reason this forum exists.