JetBlue ALPA drive

[Blue Dude]

but what if it makes the company non-competitive?

Oh, GMAFB. Pilot pay/benefits is a fraction of overall costs, usually about 10% of the total. In major airline terms, it's somewhat less than one cent of CASM. Given that airline CASMs vary a lot more than one cent from airline to airline, it's easy make the case that pilot pay can never be the determining factor in whether or not an airline is cost competitive. You could have double the pilot cost of your competitors and still other factors would swamp the difference. Pilot costs are a factor in competitive cost structures, but they are never make-or-break items. They're just too small for that. Pilots could work for free and only swing costs about 10%.

It is management's job to periodically make the case to the contrary, such as during an economic downturn, force majeure, or other extraordinary circumstance, when every one-hundredth of a penny of CASM might count. Maybe it's true that an all-hands-on-deck attitude might save the company. But it's far more often true that they're just trying to compensate for their own bad decisions and pilot pay is an easy target. They simply over-inflate the pilot's influence on the organization, and make them feel guilty for being paid so much for the job they're doing - the evil twin of "I can't believe they pay me to do this!". But the day-to-day decisions they make - their real job - has a far higher influence on CASM than the cost of pilots. I can't believe you don't realize this already.

 

[Regul8r]

The pay and benefit increases will be achieved very shortly...With ALPA, we're now on the cusp of either a consensual agreement or a release to strike. Either way, we're about to see big improvements in pay, benefits, work rules, and job security. The difference from the in-house union is night and day.

More of that fake-it-till-you-make-it mentality! Hey, I hope it happens...but if it doesn't, ALPA's head will be on a pike. Bottom line...you have little to no control over what the company will agree to.

 

[Flopgut]

Assuming Captain Prater doesn't get reelected, his pension will only be for 20% of earnings. It's 5% for each year served. Not exactly a huge windfall for giving up 4 years of his life to work for his fellow pilots.

Assuming he doesn't get reelected?! I'm praying he doesn't get reelected! As well as speaking to every MEC member I can at CAL and making sure he has ZERO support. Which, I've been told that unless he can pull a rabbitt out of a hat, there won't be any CAL support. Most of us would have been much better off without his "help". And whatever retirement amount he gets is way more than he deserves.

 

[pilotyip]

Oh, GMAFB. Pilot pay/benefits is a fraction of overall costs, usually about 10% of the total. ..............day-to-day decisions they make - their real job - has a far higher influence on CASM than the cost of pilots. I can't believe you don't realize this already.

OK so the union is going to make the company more productive, so the they become more profitable, then those extra earning can be shared with all employees of the company, management, mechanics, dispatchers and pilots. As the airline matures is has an automatic cost increase built into the system, but we want more costs? However what if it makes they non-competitive?

 

[Blue Dude]

Your post makes no sense. Reread my post. Pilot pay, large or small, is a small chunk of the overall cost structure. It is never, cannot be, a make-or-break item in terms of cost competitiveness. Management decisions in all other areas dwarf it by comparison. There are plenty of factors that combine to push pilot pay backwards, but the notion that it alone would make a business non-competitive is not one of them. It is ludicrous on its face.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

OK so the union is going to make the company more productive,

No. The pilots are going to safely fly the jets from point a to b. The company is going to make the company more productive. What is wrong with you?

so the they become more profitable, then those extra earning can be shared with all employees of the company, management, mechanics, dispatchers and pilots. As the airline matures is has an automatic cost increase built into the system, but we want more costs? However what if it makes they non-competitive?

Air Line Pilots do not run Airlines.

 

[pilotyip]

Air Line Pilots do not run Airlines.

but if it isn't run the way they want; they want to change it. Isn't that almost like running the airline?

 

[pilotyip]

Your post makes no sense. Reread my post. Pilot pay, large or small, is a small chunk of the overall cost structure. It is never, cannot be, a make-or-break item in terms of cost competitiveness. Management decisions in all other areas dwarf it by comparison. There are plenty of factors that combine to push pilot pay backwards, but the notion that it alone would make a business non-competitive is not one of them. It is ludicrous on its face.

Still don't understand, you say you have a way to run the company to make it more profitable? Then you can be paid more?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

but if it isn't run the way they want; they want to change it. Isn't that almost like running the airline?

Air Line Pilots do not run Airlines.

 

[pilotyip]

Air Line Pilots do not run Airlines.

they have run them into the ground

 

[Blue Dude]

Still don't understand, you say you have a way to run the company to make it more profitable? Then you can be paid more?

Non sequitur. I didn't say anything about making a company more profitable, just that pilot pay isn't a big enough item to make or break a company's financials. Pilots are paid for services rendered, not for providing added value to the bottom line. Strictly speaking, as long they are providing competent, professional service, there's no way to provide any added value. Other than a safe, comfortable and expeditious flight, what else is there? Their professional operation *is* the value to the bottom line and they ought to be paid for it, just as anyone else providing a service to the company expects to be paid. I'll say it again, really slowly: pilots fly airplanes, management runs the company.

 

[pilotyip]

Non sequitur. I didn't say anything about making a company more profitable, just that pilot pay isn't a big enough item to make or break a company's financials. Pilots are paid for services rendered, not for providing added value to the bottom line. Strictly speaking, as long they are providing competent, professional service, there's no way to provide any added value. Other than a safe, comfortable and expeditious flight, what else is there? Their professional operation *is* the value to the bottom line and they ought to be paid for it, just as anyone else providing a service to the company expects to be paid. I'll say it again, really slowly: pilots fly airplanes, management runs the company.

But I keep seeing pilots don't like the way the airline is run and they want to change it.

 

[Blue Dude]

they have run them into the ground

Not with their pay rates they haven't. Give some examples or hold your peace. Pilot pay just isn't significant enough to bury a company, period.

Pilots *have* deliberately harmed their employers when they perceive that they're not being well treated but it takes a lot to push them that far. We generally want to do the best job we can, knowing that we're married to our company. For some pilots, that's outweighed by other factors and they just stop trying to do anything else but their job. And the operation begins to grind down because the system depends on pilots being proactive and crossing departmental lines to get things done. More fuel is burned, delays are incurred, passengers misconnect, profits are cut. But again, that's the result of perceived mistreatment, not the financial result of contract terms. Pilot pay doesn't break companies, but sometimes pilot apathy does.

 

[Blue Dude]

But I keep seeing pilots don't like the way the airline is run and they want to change it.

Pilots are out in the field with a broader view of the operation than any executive and don't like seeing recurring problems being ignored. That's not the same thing as wanting to run the company.

 

[PCL_128]

but what if it makes the company non-competitive?

It won't. ALPA employs a team of financial analysts that do nothing but examine company books, Form 41 filings, SEC filings, etc. to determine what a company can afford and what the contract proposals cost. Despite the crazy ideas you've cooked up in your head, ALPA is not a group of thugs beating management with baseball bats to get every last penny.

Assuming he doesn't get reelected?! I'm praying he doesn't get reelected! As well as speaking to every MEC member I can at CAL and making sure he has ZERO support. Which, I've been told that unless he can pull a rabbitt out of a hat, there won't be any CAL support. Most of us would have been much better off without his "help". And whatever retirement amount he gets is way more than he deserves.

Glad to hear it. Hopefully your reps will support Captain Rice.

 

[CTflyer]

Why not? It's no worse than the BOB's lying about the facts as they relate to our benefits.

Or the BOB's saying that if we get a union the company will get rid of FLiCA.....Had a BOB say that to me during the JBPA drive last year....

 

[pilotyip]

great insight

Pilots are out in the field with a broader view of the operation than any executive and don't like seeing recurring problems being ignored. That's not the same thing as wanting to run the company.

With that insight you should move into management and make the company a better place, or take charge of the situration and shut JB down until they give you what you want.

 

[Flopgut]

Yip: Ask youself why the best mgts can pay the most for labor? Airline labor's main goal is to be sufficiently inflexible to mgt's whim so as to cause a better class of mgt. Unfortunaltly mgts don't know anything but dollars. So they need to be forced to make a budget. It's a little like FAR 43. If you weren't told to fix your airplanes, you wouldn't, at all! You would never have a wrench lifted. Basic safety is out the window with mgt these days. If they weren't forced to budget for safety nothing would be done.

Labor doesn't need to be cheaper, you need to do your job better.

 

[Regul8r]

If you weren't told to fix your airplanes, you wouldn't, at all! You would never have a wrench lifted. Basic safety is out the window with mgt these days.

Does that make for a sound business plan? Who wants to fly the airline that keeps crashing planes? I do agree to an extent...they willl continue to cut corners where they see fit.

 

[pilotyip]

Yip: Ask youself why the best mgts can pay the most for labor? Airline labor's main goal is to be sufficiently inflexible to mgt's whim so as to cause a better class of mgt. Unfortunaltly mgts don't know anything but dollars. So they need to be forced to make a budget. It's a little like FAR 43. If you weren't told to fix your airplanes, you wouldn't, at all! You would never have a wrench lifted. Basic safety is out the window with mgt these days. If they weren't forced to budget for safety nothing would be done.

Labor doesn't need to be cheaper, you need to do your job better.

This is repeat but if fits here. This is a pilot board so saying anything in defense of management is like peeing into the wind, that it is going to come back to you. CEO's are not intentionally running airlines into the ground. They would very much like to succeed. For lack of other reason it would make their resume look great, they would be doing something no other CEO had ever done. Top management includes many besides the CEO, the CEO sets direction as requested by the board. The CEO has little control over the airline, the airline is run by regulation and union contracts. They are at the mercy of the purchasing public, who with Internet access has made the airline ticket a perfectly elastic commodity. There is little they can do inside their structure. Other high paid top management personnel, in Operations, Maintenance. Marketing, Legal, Finance, etc. have unique skills in dealing with large organizations. This makes them marketable when shopping for a job, unlike pilots whose skills are nearly universal. Now I will agree that CEO leadership in many cases leaves much to be desired. An issue of ATW in 2002 had an article about “Airline Management a dying breed”, the article basically said no one wants to do it. The good track record CEO’s are going to other industries. With tremendous, payrolls, overhead burdens, and extremely low margins, there is no tried and true path to success. Most have tried to increase market share, but this has lead to low price and ridiculous breakeven load factors in 95% range. What is management supposed to do? Eliminating management will bring the end quicker for the airplane industry, and their salaries are insignificant to the airlines operating costs. Without management you could not operate the airline, The FAA would shut it down without approved Part 119 key management. Would the pilots step up and become management for free in their spare time?