Leave Airtran for United??

[StopNTSing]

I won't get into a long discussion of my dislike for SWA, because it would probably result in one of those 10 page threads that happen when the General posts about LBB and 737s, but I'm most certainly serious. I really have zero desire to work for SWA. Believe it or not, not everyone wants to work there. I like working at AAI, and I don't even have an application out at UAL or any other airline, but an SWA merger would likely change that. Hopefully I'll never have to make that decision.

I'll be the first to admit this place is not for everyone, but if a guy is already content flying narrow-body aircraft in domestic ops, it's a pretty good gig. To each his own, I guess. Best of luck to you.

 

[XShuttle]

PCL,

Delta +1% those are bankruptcy pay rates and that is what you are willing to settle for? 3 years past the amendable date?

I feel sorry for you guys and gals at Air Tran with people like this there is no way you will ever get a good contract. Do you think pilots at UAL are going to settle for Delta +1%?

 

[jke406]

Why not SWA +1%? Try raising the bar industry-wide.

 

[Yuppyguppy]

man...i love this thread keep it up

 

[hoover]

You have a good job with a stable, growing, profitable company. In a couple of years you will upgrade and be earning over 100K a year, with a potential to be pulling in over 150K by the time you reach the top of the pay scale. You have been there less than 2 years, and are already 25% up the seniority list. Imagine where you will be in few years.
When you fly you cross very few time zones, and I guess you do very little "back of the clock" flying, which serves to increase your life expectancy.

I'm hard pressed to see what United can offer you that you don't already have. Unless your life just won't be complete without flying a 747 into Hong Kong, I'd say stay where you are.

I'll state it another way. What do you feel you would be missing if you did not go to UAL?

 

[IAHERJ]

If, Thats a big IF you are senior enough to hold that schedule as a captain then you have it pretty good. 95% don't

By the way what's the time to hold that at CAL?
my guess is 20plus.

Did I say Captain? You can get a schedule like that pretty quick as an FO. We have 2 year guys/gals on the 777 holding 19-21 days off flying to Europe and Asia. Our domestic layovers are a hell of a lot better than AAI's. I know, I worked for Airtran for almost 3 years. Our short layover hotels are the same as AirTran's only layover hotels. Trust me on this. I tried to help a 10 year AAI guy get on at CAL recently but he never got the call. He is starting at Delta next month. Why? Like many, he wants to see the world and enjoy all that flying for a global airine has to offer. Doing a side by side comparison of just money works for some, but not others. BTW, my side by side comparison made before chosing to leave AAI for CAL ended up being very concervative. I have already beat the #'s for year 2 and will easily do so for year 3 after having left the 737 for the 757/767 now based in IAH.
I am not bashing AirTran and never have and never will. Just trying to back up one's decision to leave for United based on what I've seen having flown for AirTran and now Continental. It's not just about the hot meals etc. There is a lot too it.

IAHERJ

 

[Britpilot]

I'll be the first to admit this place is not for everyone, but if a guy is already content flying narrow-body aircraft in domestic ops, it's a pretty good gig. To each his own, I guess. Best of luck to you.

Hey, I won't be upset if SWA buys us.:beer:

 

[IAHERJ]

Did I say Captain? You can get a schedule like that pretty quick as an FO. We have 2 year guys/gals on the 777 holding 19-21 days off flying to Europe and Asia. Our domestic layovers are a hell of a lot better than AAI's. I know, I worked for Airtran for almost 3 years. Our short layover hotels are the same as AirTran's only layover hotels. Trust me on this. I tried to help a 10 year AAI guy get on at CAL recently but he never got the call. He is starting at Delta next month. Why? Like many, he wants to see the world and enjoy all that flying for a global airine has to offer. Doing a side by side comparison of just money works for some, but not others. BTW, my side by side comparison made before chosing to leave AAI for CAL ended up being very concervative. I have already beat the #'s for year 2 and will easily do so for year 3 after having left the 737 for the 757/767 now based in IAH.
I am not bashing AirTran and never have and never will. Just trying to back up one's decision to leave for United based on what I've seen having flown for AirTran and now Continental. It's not just about the hot meals etc. There is a lot too it.

IAHERJ

Why can't I edit my post to correct a spelling mistake? Anyway, concervative should be conservative......

 

[PCL_128]

PCL,

Delta +1% those are bankruptcy pay rates and that is what you are willing to settle for? 3 years past the amendable date?

I feel sorry for you guys and gals at Air Tran with people like this there is no way you will ever get a good contract. Do you think pilots at UAL are going to settle for Delta +1%?

Have you seen our FO rates? Taking our second year rate to DAL +1% is about a 25% raise. If you think you can get much more than that in one contract, then you're dreaming. I think our CA rates will be quite a bit higher than DAL +1% (even our failed TA rates were much higher), but trying to jack the FO rates up to SWA+ will be next to impossible in one contract.

 

[MINIME]

Have you seen our FO rates? Taking our second year rate to DAL +1% is about a 25% raise. If you think you can get much more than that in one contract, then you're dreaming. I think our CA rates will be quite a bit higher than DAL +1% (even our failed TA rates were much higher), but trying to jack the FO rates up to SWA+ will be next to impossible in one contract.

With all due respect, don't be so quick to cut down your own legs. I don't hear that coming from AMR, UAL, DAL or any CAL guys. I wouldn't be so quick as to create lower expectations for your management and your union. This is the kind of stuff that goes on at Regionals. It should not be happening at the Major level, period.

DAL is working under BK wages. All things being equal, I doubt DAL pilots would settle for their current wages. You guys should be shooting for parity with SWA. They're the airline that best mirrors what you can, and what you've accomplished to this point.

Further, you get what you negotiate. I think that the mentality has to be positive (with some militancy) and the bar has to be set high before getting into the ring with management. Otherwise, you may be schooled into accepting something that's less diserving of your pilots.

 

[Pimpin']

With all due respect, don't be so quick to cut down your own legs. I don't hear that coming from AMR, UAL, DAL or any CAL guys. I wouldn't be so quick as to create lower expectations for your management and your union. This is the kind of stuff that goes on at Regionals. It should not be happening at the Major level, period.

Sadly it seems that mgmt. has done a really fine job of conditioning folks to have low expectations around here. It's possible we just disagree, but one man's "just being realistic" is another's "low expectations."

 

[pilotyip]

In the end the flying consumer will determine what airline pilots are paid.

 

[Lear70]

In the end the flying consumer will determine what airline pilots are paid.

That is the most incorrect thing I have ever heard you say on this board.

The consumer doesn't have a THING to say about pilot wages. They never have.

People just don't understand that the price of a ticket doesn't fluctuate by even ONE DOLLAR when pilot wages go up by as much as 25%. That's not just MY opinion; that is FACT from a study that ALPA published for more than one pilot group as a part of their negotiations.

In post-bankruptcy concession agreements, it wasn't the consumer or ticket prices that drove the argument for lower wages, it was the airline's overall cost structure which, amusingly enough, was being whittled down behind the scenes (aircraft leases, fuel purchase agreements, heavy maintenance outsourcing contracts) to where the concessions weren't necessary for the airline's survival (proof is in the company's quarterly reports along with the ALPA study of pilot CASM pre- and post-bankruptcy).

Instead, that extra profit margin went into management bonuses. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. It's the elephant in the room that you can't miss when having this discussion.

In the END, pilots get what they negotiate. Period.

Pilots are paid what management decides they can live with in the face of a work action and what individual Negotiating Committees buy into at the end of the day and send on to their membership with a "we don't believe anything more can be obtained" endorsement, which we've seen time and time again.

When pilots are willing to "shut it down" and walk away for a while (permanently if required) AND we have leadership in Washington who will ALLOW the RLA to work as it was designed without artificial restraints (i.e. restricting LEGAL job actions), then pilot wages will come up.

If those two don't happen, pilot wages will never come up more than COLA, much less recapture lost wages that should never have been cut so hard during restructuring.

The consumer doesn't have a thing to do with it, they'll pay the extra $0.50 per ticket for the increase in wages and won't even blink. The onus is on the pilots. Period.

Again, you get what you negotiate.

 

[SkiFishFly]

Are you for real? (and I'm not trying to yank your chain here, but...) ARE YOU HONESTLY FOR REAL? So SWA buys AirTran tomorrow (not that I believe it will ever happen, but I'm just trying to understand your position) and you would bail to UAL? What would prompt such a move, is it:

1) The pay raise
2) The eight new bases to choose from
3) The better work rules
4) The better schedules (What's a red-eye flight?)
5) The kinder & gentler training dept


Well, maybe it's seniority integration worries (oh that's right, Congress just said put away the stapler, boys), or maybe it's the lack of wide-bodies (oh that's right, AT doesn't have 'em), or the domestic-only flying (oh yeah, that's all AT does currently). Oh! Oh! Oh! I know....you'd be working for one of those scum-sucking non-ALPA carriers! (oh, that's right....never mind)

I know you and ALPA go way back, and that probably means you have an out-sized disdain for SWA, but I really think you're blowing smoke with that statement. Either that or you'd be willing to make a highly-principled choice about your career that would be as ill-advised as your choice for President.

Count me in. I'll gladly take the pay raise, decent medical, better hotels, management that respects employees.....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

In the end the flying consumer will determine what airline pilots are paid.

wrong

In the END, pilots get what they negotiate. Period.

correct

When pilots are willing to "shut it down" and walk away for a while (permanently if required) AND we have leadership in Washington who will ALLOW the RLA to work as it was designed without artificial restraints (i.e. restricting LEGAL job actions), then pilot wages will come up.

If those two don't happen, pilot wages will never come up more than COLA, much less recapture lost wages that should never have been cut so hard during restructuring.

The consumer doesn't have a thing to do with it, they'll pay the extra $0.50 per ticket for the increase in wages and won't even blink. The onus is on the pilots. Period.

Again, you get what you negotiate.

Pilots negotiate by supporting their representation and the legislators/politicians who support pilots.

It curious how many if not most pilots are 'GOP' supporters... You know the free market capitalist that reject labor....

When the 'CorpAmerica' politicians who support free market forces that eliminate pilot jobs or reduce wages/benefits take action.... suddenly the 'GOP' pilots call for classic "socialism and liberal" actions: strikes, special exemptions for small groups, artificial economic barriers (aka CBAs/contracts), etc...

When in actuality, this isn't socialism or liberalism.... it is simply political representation and democracy...


Can you dig it? I knew that you could.....

 

[pilotyip]

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. 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? Why is every time, pilot salaries come up, they are immediately compared to top management. I saw an article in ATW in 2001 that stated at DAL there were 17 members of top management made more than the top DAL Captain. The combined top 17 salaries equaled less than 1/6 of 1% of the combined pilot salaries. If management worked for free all pilots in the company would get a 1/10 of 1% raise. (for a $100K per year pilot that would be $3/wk increase in take home) Boy that raise would really make the pilot group happy. Top management possesses skills that allow them to move from job to job and command high salaries. And every one of these managers wants to see his/her airline prosper. They just can not do it.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

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.

Perhaps if CEO's did something no one else has done besides Herb.... increased production!

There is something else besides management friendly work rules: Individual motivation.

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.

Except exercise leadership... something that many Airline CEO's seem quite incable of doing... this isn't an airline problem but a CorpAmerica problem.

When everyone is on everyones BOD, it turns into a good ol boy network of how much money one can rape from company coffers...

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. 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.

And why would they.... except for those sweet golden parachutes.... yeah!

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.

Sorry. I gotta recognize SWA. Who would not want that type of performance and productivity...???

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?

Have you Stockholm syndrom? How about change from management to leadership. Employees want job satisfaction and purpose... Not a CEO that doesn't care and has term limits with special carveouts.

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.

Gee, I didn't realize management was so special. What about the pilots? Can an airline be run without pilots?

FA?
Mechs?
gate agents?
vendors?


The sooner management switches to a system of egalitarianism, the sooner airlines will start being productive...

If so, the competitive edge would be how well a company treats and serves its employees!

Would the pilots step up and become management for free in their spare time? Why is every time, pilot salaries come up, they are immediately compared to top management. I saw an article in ATW in 2001 that stated at DAL there were 17 members of top management made more than the top DAL Captain. The combined top 17 salaries equaled less than 1/6 of 1% of the combined pilot salaries. If management worked for free all pilots in the company would get a 1/10 of 1% raise. (for a $100K per year pilot that would be $3/wk increase in take home) Boy that raise would really make the pilot group happy. Top management possesses skills that allow them to move from job to job and command high salaries. And every one of these managers wants to see his/her airline prosper. They just can not do it.

It seems to me there are more pilots needed than controllers, (aka management).

See to manage is to control and to lead is to guide, influence and show the way. Do airline employees want to be controlled or lead?


Do you really expect unions to take an altruistic method with thier companies when the flavor of the month CEO is only there till his time is up as he rapes wages, pensions, moral and productivity?


The key to success in the New Airline Industry is productivity. Willfully motivating employees on thier own accord to give 110%. Until CEO's start acting like leaders despite the labor laws in thier favor, I think you will be peeing in the wind...

Rezfully yours...

 

[airline#5]

Please buy us SWA!!! An already strong LCC (SWA)would be an instant true powerhouse. My 1st priority on the recent NPA survey should have been to demand that the company enter into a hostile sale of AAI to SWA, and going public with all the fanfair. We'll threaten to pull out of all there markets if they don't buy us. Perhaps some picketing in ATL. Maybe we can get TPG involved? The possibilities are endless...

 

[bendover]

For a pilot labor group to get to strike is an amazing feat in todays environment. Lets not forget the only major airline to strike in the last 15 years was American Airlines and lets not forget who ordered ( by executive action) them back to work in less than 6 hours on strike. Our Democrat pal BILL CLINTON. So much for the liberals support of the labor unions bull********************.

 

[pilotyip]

Example of successful union strategy

Follow the UAW example they have been extremly successful in getting better pay and benefits for thier employees over the last 50 years. Here is how the UAW does it; they reach a deal with a single company, then go to the next company and say match it or you will be shutdown and all the new cars being sold will be built someplace else, then they go to the next company and repeat. When the auto companies where rolling in money it was a good deal for all. But over the last 30 years it has eliminated 70% of the union jobs, gave great raise to non-union companies, and now it is concession time. Now ALPA could follow the same path as the UAW and it would be great for 30% of those who still had jobs. This is also great for the non-ALPA airlines that would fly all the passengers when the ALPA pilots were on strike.