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

Interesting analysis of the "Big Six"

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

furlodpilot

Member
Joined
May 31, 2002
Posts
22
E-Mail Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free Travel e-newsletter and get the best travel news, deals & features in your inbox.

E-mail:
Select one: HTML Text






Advertiser's Travel Specials:

New York hotel deals

These hotels have everything you need for a perfect Manhattan visit.
Las Vegas - Air & Hotel deals

Cruise the Strip at night and feel the combined heat of the desert and pulsing neon bulbs.
Caribbean vacation packages

Featuring awesome sunsets and tranquil blue water.


To see other great deals click here



Mission impossible: Here's the real reason the Big Six are dying
I greatly respect Joe Brancatelli, my fellow USATODAY.com Travel columnist. He's a brilliant writer, and right about most things. But we consistently disagree on one point: the real reason the Big Six airlines are failing.
Joe claims that the major carriers are dying because their fares are too high, fare structures are too complex, customer service is poor, management is inept and top executives have been fiscally irresponsible by taking too much compensation.

I'm a former airline executive, and I agree with Joe that the Big Six are dying — at least as they exist today. And I agree that many of the factors he cites are contributing to their demise. But I believe that even if all those issues could be solved, it would not save the big airlines.

The Big Six – American, Continental, Delta, Northwest, United, US Airways — were doomed by deregulation a quarter-century ago. Their cost structures are based on long histories, and deregulation opened the door to a new crop of airlines such as Southwest and JetBlue that were not saddled with the same burdens. The upstarts could charge lower fares and still make money. Deregulation created an uneven playing field that has forced the Big Six to deteriorate over time.

In fact, the Big Six used to be the Big 12, but names like Pan American, TWA, Eastern, Braniff, Republic and Western have vanished in bankruptcies or mergers since deregulation.

The survivors have cut wages, eliminated unprofitable routes, squeezed more seats into airplanes, laid off employees, cut back in-flight services and amenities, and devised complicated fare structures to extract every last penny out of the traveling public. And then when all that didn't work, they begged the U.S. government for handouts to help them survive.

But it hasn't been enough — and it never will be. For one, the Big Six have labor contracts that keep their costs higher than airlines that entered the market after deregulation. These newcomers can pay rock-bottom wages and set up work rules that favor the airline.

These airlines are called the Big Six because they provide comprehensive service across global networks. That means flying a wide variety of routes, some of them unprofitable, and employing several different types of aircraft to do it. Low-cost airlines, for their part, typically fly only on carefully selected, profitable routes. They operate a single type of aircraft to minimize training and maintenance costs.

The Big Six have started launching low-fare subsidiaries: Delta's Song, United's Ted. But for the Big Six to emulate the models of their low-cost competitors, they would have to change so much they would be unrecognizable. They would no longer be the Big Six.

I agree with Joe that there have been some egregious travesties in executive compensation, and other wasteful acts by managers of Big Six airlines at one time or another. This certainly has not helped their images or financial situations.

But even if Big Six management had been completely saintly over the years, the outcome would still be the same. The big airlines cannot survive in a two-tiered cost structure.

When a company is profitable, it's easy to spread the cheer, the way Southwest does. But when a company suffers continual losses, problems flow. As the Big Six began to cut service, customers became angry. As low-cost carriers began to offer $200 airfares, the public became enraged that prices had been so high for so long. And as the Big Six tried to make up for lost revenue, they alienated business travelers and fliers on noncompetitive routes by sticking them with high fares.

But unlike Joe, I can't really blame the Big Six for cutting service and manipulating airfares to charge whatever the market would bear. They had no alternative, if they wanted to try to stay in business. I'm not condoning their practices; I'm just saying that what they did was totally rational.

Only it hasn't worked. As the economy slowed and the crisis deepened, Big Six airlines alienated not only travelers but also their own employees, laying off thousands who had faithfully devoted their lives to those airlines for countless years. Many who still had jobs became bitter, and sometimes took it out on customers, making matters worse. Only one Big Six airline – Continental – made Fortune magazine's list of the 100 Best Companies to Work For this year, and it shed more than 1,000 jobs.

Please don't get me wrong. I am not defending the tactics of the Big Six, nor am I bemoaning deregulation. Deregulation of the airline industry has been a great boon to consumers, who have reaped the benefits of low airfares. The expansion of low-cost carriers throughout the world has increased the demand for air travel and made it accessible to many people who could not otherwise afford to fly.

Nor am I bashing the unions or employees of the Big Six carriers. These people want the same things as every other American – a decent job with decent wages and some job security. But we must recognize that deregulation created a situation where the old carriers and the new carriers could not peacefully coexist. And the result was an industrial earthquake that has shaken airfares, service and thousands of jobs.

Joe Brancatelli is correct that the Big Six are a dying breed. Some of the companies may survive, but not with their existing business models. And when they are gone, fares will be lower and probably less complex, amenities offered in the air will be commensurate with the price paid for travel, and many new jobs will exist at the low-cost carriers for airline employees who are willing to work for less. As a result, the public will arguably be better off – with the painful exception of the airline employees whose jobs were eliminated.

But change won't necessarily bring stability. We've already seen newer airlines, such as JetBlue, coming into the market with cost structures that are even lower than the original low-cost carriers, such as Southwest. More are undoubtedly waiting in the wings. We'll have to wait as well – to see if history repeats itself.
 
This begs the questions:

What happens when the employees of the LCC have been there for a while and start wanting more money (seniority creap), a retirement plan (for after the company stock has become stagnant), and the aircraft in the fleet start to age, MX costs start to increase.

This is a capital intensive business and nobody is immune to the laws of economics. Not Southwest, JetBlue, United or anyone else. It seems like a viscous cycle that will repeat itself.

It will be interesting when JetBlue and Southwest (maybe)introduce the new, smaller airframe onto the property. My guess is the seat costs will start to go up and there they go, repeating the same "errors" of the legacy carriers.

Just some thoughts from a guy that works for a 72 year old dinasaur airline.
 
mach none,

You see the furure clear oh wise one.
 
But even if Big Six management had been completely saintly over the years, the outcome would still be the same. The big airlines cannot survive in a two-tiered cost structure.

That's funny, they seemed to be able to operate with a two-tiered pay scale! (A and B)
 
Very interesting article. Good points, although none of us know exactly what will happen. Things were going well for all of us unitl the combination of 9-11 and the tech bubble burst smacked everyone (except SW) who had more than 300 airplanes sitting around with most people afraid to fly for a few months. That right there put a huge dent into cash flow, and then things , mainly associated with the economy, started to snowball. Did anyone on this board know 9-11 was coming? Do we know what will happen in the future? It looks like right now the Majors need to get their costs under control to compete with the LCCs domestically---and that is occuring. The economy needs to get better (it is), and fuel prices need to fall---they should I hope. Those two things will help in a huge way and could stop the bleeding. Now, to compete with the LCCs--there needs to be costs cuts, and hopefully (at my airline anyway) that will occur. But, there also needs to be trust in management and their "view of the future", and that is not happening at some airlines. Will there be more Chap 11 filings and maybe some Chap 7s? Maybe, and I hope that doesn't happen--but it might. Will there never be an "up" cycle again just like the author says? I doubt that. Sure, the internet has provided lower fares on the spot for businessmen, but as the economy grows (and some analysts say the DOW could hit 15,000 by the end of the DECADE) there will be more priority travel for them that will cost big bucks. Can we rely on that for our business models? No way. That is why there should be some cost cutting etc, but with assurances that management won't run away with huge bonuses at the same time.


Bye Bye--General Lee:rolleyes: ;)
 
But it hasn't been enough — and it never will be. For one, the Big Six have labor contracts that keep their costs higher than airlines that entered the market after deregulation. These newcomers can pay rock-bottom wages and set up work rules that favor the airline.

Perhaps the author would like to list the number of "newcomers" that are no longer in operation.


Braniff, EAL and Pan Am did not go under because of labor costs, they suucumbed to poor management decisions and/or corporate raiders like Lorenzo. But hey, don't let history get in the way of a superficial analysis of an entire industry.
 
I wonder if the writer knows the next loto numbers? (I may need it, right?) Who knows? Nobody really knows for sure, and it would be nice to negotiate and get some costs down---no doubt. But, it has to be NEGOTIATIONS---not "You will give this amount or else....."

Bye Bye--General Lee;)
 
A couple of observations about the article... in general what he says is okay, but there are some details he just fumbles, and I don't think it's an especially insightful piece.

He sees deregulation as the sea change, and airlines that came along after deregulation as having all sorts of advantages over the old ones. If that were so, would National have folded? Legend? Midway? There's a lot more to the story than "pre-deregulation" vs "post-deregulation."

The author mentions the dynamic of "Big 6" serving lots of routes, some of them unprofitable, while the LCCs pick only profitable routes. Two problems with that: for a small LCC, one would certainly HOPE to use jets on the best (i.e. most profitable) opportunities available, but for the BIG LCC, it isn't about "cherry picking" routes. If it were, do you think SWA would serve Boise, Spokane, Midland, Lubbuck, Amarillo, and Jackson MS with jets that could be flying between the northeast & Florida? Which ties to the second problem with that piece of analysis: a LCC can turn a profit on a route that a "Big 6" carrier perhaps can't... having low costs MAKES the thinner routes profitable.

Finally, Jet Blue does NOT have a lower cost structure than Southwest. Their seat mile costs are lower because their average stage lengths are longer, but comparing CASM on equal stage lengths, SWA's costs are lower. The numbers aren't way far apart, but the writer got the detail wrong.

Who wrote the piece in the post that started the thread?
 
mach none said:
This begs the questions:

What happens when the employees of the LCC have been there for a while and start wanting more money (seniority creap), a retirement plan (for after the company stock has become stagnant), and the aircraft in the fleet start to age, MX costs start to increase.

Just some thoughts from a guy that works for a 72 year old dinasaur airline.

Employees of the LCC's wanting more money? A retirement plan for when the stock becomes stagnant? NAAAAA!! Those guys don't think a pilot is worth what Pre 9-11 US Airways, United, AA, Delta (cuts to come), NWA (cuts to come), paid their pilots it seems. Its ashame, because lowering wages is not going to return an airline to profitability. US Airways pilot costs are comparable to SWA but still they fade away.

Heres to the 70 year old dinosaur airlines becoming 140 year old dinosaur airlines!! Long live the Legacy Carriers!! But alas, all good things seem to always end:( I just wish I was born about 30 years earlier and had the priveledge of living out my dream of being a pilot for one of them. Whats out there now aint what it used to be.
 
I agree! The author speaks about deregulation starting the downard spiral of the aviation industry and he is right about that. But the low fare/wage airlines and those who work for them are the main reason we will never see the Professional Pilot make the same kind of money and enjoy the same style of life he did 10-20 years ago.

It will be interesting to watch the industry in the next few years. As SWA, JetB, and the other low cost cariers begin to get bigger their costs will go up. At some point they will start demanding industry leading pay and contracts (as opposed to getting paid peanuts and stock options like they have for the past 20 years).
 
What is industry Leading wages?

Why does everyone blame the LCC employees.

But the low fare/wage airlines and those who work for them are the main reason we will never see the Professional Pilot make the same kind of money and enjoy the same style of life he did 10-20 years ago.

Welcome to generation X dude. Studies show that Generation X and on will not make more than thier parents did. This will be the first Generation that didn't have the oppertunity as a whole to out do thier parents.

I spent 20+ years in the military and never made more than 8K a month. When I enlisted into the Army, my take home pay was $400 a month. I sent $200 home to support my mother and I had a $100 car payment. I had more money to spend then than I did making $8K. Why does every pilot have to make a bajilion Dollars a year to be happy. Money doesn't buy me happiness. If I really wanted to be rich I would have gone to Med school or tried to become a Professional B-Ball player.

When teachers, cops, and Combat soldiers who put up with a bunch of crap and put thier lives on the line whine about low pay when men who can barely read are paid millions to intertain us, I can accept their whining and see thier point.

But when fellow pilots bash LCC pilots because they are willing to work for $160 an hour as a Capt instead of Demanding $210, you have crossed the line in my book. If I stay health at SWA, In my third year I'll be making more than I did after 20 years Flying for the military.

Don't tell SWA but I would be willing to work for way less than what they are willing to pay me. I think I will feel like I am stealing from them. But that is just me, a future LCC Pilot who feels very lucky to have a promise of a rewarding job in a couple of months.
 
Last edited:
Don't tell SWA but I would be willing to work for way less than what they are willing to pay me.

Would you still feel that way if you did not happen to have your otherwise well deserved military pension?
 
I didn't say my Wife would be happy

You got me there, I know my wife would have something to say about it. That is why I have waited 2 years for SWA. But how many years would I have to wait for Delta, United, American. And Oh by the way, 5 years to Captain at SWA vs. 12 years at American. Would I have been happy at any company flying, You are talking to a Guy who enjoyed working as a Ground FAC with the Army units for 2.5 year (Non-Flying). My wife hated it because I was gone so much, but I thrived in it.

I turned down oppertunities for interviews with JetBlue and AirTran. Plus have turned down jobs with a couple of corporate outfits. Not because I didn't like them or because SWA promised more money, but because I didn't feel it was right to have a good job lined up with SWA and take the chance of taking away a job from someone else that needed one at the other companies. Plus I thought I would have started with SWA sooner.

But to answer your question, would I work at SWA for less if I didn't have $30k in retirment a year. I would be happy with the pay I was getting when I taught Middle School Math from last Jan to May which was $40K a year. I will admit that my wife would have to get a full time job if that happened. But I was home every night, and my kids would get to stay in one school for more that 2 years. My 16 year old son went to 8 different schools because of military moves. He is only in the 10th grade now and loves the thought of staying to finish HS at one place and have Reletives nearby to watch him play soccer every week.

I am not saying that Everyone should get paid less, and I am not saying that Some Pilots aren't worth a Trillion dollars.

I guess I am saying that I have a scewed sense of reality. I barely graduated from High School, grew up on a dirt farm, never had more than $200 to my name before I enlisted in the Army, and feel very fortunate for the oppertunities that the military gave me and to this day can't believe they paid me as well as they did and let me fly Multi-million Dollar fighters along side with dudes with Big Brains and Big Brain Degrees. Did I love everything about the military. NO, especially the Commanders that were managers and not Leaders. But as a whole the Military was and is a great organization trying to do good.

My real point is that it is not the fault of the LCC pilots. Blame the Consumer, Blame the Taliban, Blame Saddam. If the consumer who can barely afford to ride the bus or train from Florida to DC can jump on a LCC for the same amount and save hours on the road is willing only to pay that amount. Guess what you will find someone out there that will give them the product.

I totally hate to go to Walmart, some reasons only my close friends know about. But I dislike the fact that they came in to every small town and put out of buisness all the High Cost Mom and Pop stores, totally destroying Small Downtown America. But do you see me bitching at the workers at Walmart for this. No I don't, Walmart is providing a service and cost that some consumers want. They provide low paying jobs for people who are willing to work for the wages, most of them feel fortunant enough to have the job and the Medical benefits that go with it.

We are a market based economy, Only the Gas Stations can charge what the market can bare and Banks pay as little interest on savings as possible and get away with it.

The LCCs attract people that normally could only afford to ride the Bus. And there are people out there like me who aren't in it for the money. As long as I have a job that pays me enough to live off of I'll be happy. Is my standard of living LOW, I guess it is.
Am I happy, YES I AM. Do I need $200K a year to be happy, NO I DON'T. Will Making $200K a year make me happier, I dought it. I will probably bitch about all the Taxes would have to pay.

I don't think I answered you question, but I feel good about what I said and that I was actually able to type this much without getting to confused. It is amazing that when you get Alshaimers you can't ever complete a thou......

Now where was I. Oh Yes Maam, strained Carrots are my favorite veggie.
 
Last edited:
Don't tell SWA but I would be willing to work for way less than what they are willing to pay me.

You won't be saying that for long.

Its ok to like where you work and have a good paying job.

SWAdude:cool:
 
I was wondering where my son was.

SWA Dude,

That Kid on your Picture looks just like my youngest son.

I know my patience will pay off in a great job and great pay. I can't wait to work for a Company that on 9/11/01 all the pilots rallied together and said they would do what ever it took not to furlough anyone.
 
Deregulation

The article had a great many points that were right on target.

There is little qustion that it started with deregulation. Airlines had a philospophy and the fact that their routes were protected, meant they were not efficient, not driven, and spent most of their time securing the correct routes.

Deregulation changed the way the game was played, the basic rules of the game, and who had the advantage.

There were other factors as well. Leasing tended to erode the value of the business. Companies like ILFC changed the way aircraft deals were done.

Masked -- there were real market changes going on as well. In fact fewer and fewer tickets were sold at price. Problems were masked by yield management practices and the way tickets were sold.

Will the big six prosper again, depends on their ability to adapt to the new rules.
 
Well this thread has some excellent points and debates but in reality "deregulation" didn't kill the Legacy's. What it is going to do is one of the two over the next 10-20 years.

-The Legacy's will have to drop Int'l flying to be more domestic in structure and go face to face with the SWAs of the industry. Why? Becaue we can't afford to constantly put the most expensive equipment i.e. widebodys, along with the associated support equipment and staff in economies that are more cyclical than our own countrys economy.

The LCC are profitable, not because of lower labor costs but because of lower initial startup costs and the ability to fly only in domestic markets that truly make sense with a fleet that is very common.

-All Legacy domestic flying will go to regionals and the old Legacys will simply fly widebody aircraft Int'l only.

I've believed for some time that for CAL to honestly servive they need to slowly downsize the Int'l fleet and keep expanding the 737 with the idea of getting completely out of Int'l flying.

I would love to see the investment community and DC polititians when there are no US carriers willing to accept Int'l routes and all that money is being lost to Int'l carriers.

Until Washington realizes this problem only the LCC will continue to thrive in this country and the Big 6 will dwindle to the Big one and even it won't be very profitable, if at all.

No Big 6 can compete with the LCC when they have to maintain a domestic route structure just to fill Int'l flights. I say to heck with the Int'l flying and we should all go domestic only over hte next 10 years-then let's see how the playing field is then.

The proof is in how most all regionals make money yet their major counterparts struggle.
 
Re: What is industry Leading wages?

OPIE01 said:
Why does everyone blame the LCC employees.


But when fellow pilots bash LCC pilots because they are willing to work for $160 an hour as a Capt instead of Demanding $210, you have crossed the line in my book. If I stay health at SWA, In my third year I'll be making more than I did after 20 years Flying for the military.



So are you going to write a check to Southwest each month for anything over 160/hour? That is over the "line" in your book.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top