Management Elitism

[enigma]

As I sit and read posts in the ongoing EAL demise string and others from the recent past, I wonder why I (a pro-business conservative from a right to work state) find myself so at odds with people like the Publisher.

I think that what I find offensive is their elitist mindset.

I mean that I think that some managment types act as if they are superior in knowledge and common sense to working people. Just as people like Hillary Clinton think that the masses really do need sheparding from the intellectuals, some in management really do seem to think that "we really don't know how the game is played".
I beg to differ, I think that a lot of us understand how the game is played. Just because we didn't choose a management track for our career, doesn't mean that we are in any way lacking in intellegence, knowledge, skill, desire, or motivation. We are not intellectuall midgets who must rely on the strenght of numbers to succeed. We are unionized because we inherited a unionized industry. We take the situation that we are given and attempt to make the best of it. We didn't create an environment of distrust and negativity. But that environment does exist.

As an aside, I have worked for a two non-union carriers (Mesa in 1990, and Sunrise in 1999) My distrust of management was learned from those situations. Managers who inist upon treating people poorly just because there is another person standing at the entry door asking to take the abuse, doesn't make the abuse right.

Back to the elitist mindset. Hey Mr. Management, just because you went to Harvard and I went to an obscure aviation school doesn't mean that you'r smarter. Just because I'm not motivated by money and the acquisition of power doesn't mean that I am not motivated.
And most importantly, just because I am motivated to protect my interests, doesn't necessarily make me your enemy. If you management types would realize that we could be partners, your life would be easier.

If I may steal a line from the publisher, Hey managers, "you just don't understand how the game is played". I'll let you in on a secret, people in this country (and hopefully the world) have had a taste of freedom. The human spirit demands that we stand up to oppression, and as long as managers attempt to treat people with disdain, they will be faced with opposition. You might argue that $250K per year pilots are not oppressed, I agree, but the I'm confident that without the protection of numbers they would be. With rare exception, management has earned the opposition that they receive.

As others have noted in other strings, SWA has done OK with a unionized workforce. I would propose that SWA has done OK not because of cheaper workers, although a low cost structure is an obvious advantage, but because of superior leadership from managment. Now that Herb has stepped back, it remains to be seen if his successors can maintain the positive environment.

regards
8N

I've got to finish this in a hurry revisions may follow.

 

[FD109]

Enigma,

Boy , I wish I'd said that!

It's amazing how people (and even pilots) react to the way they are treated. Or said another way, companies have the unions they deserve.

Regards,
FD109

 

[mar]

"Superior Leadership"

Enigma--You used the term superior leadership.

That's it. Some lead with a vision where everyone wins. Others lead with the intent of taking all the pesos.

Takes all kinds I guess. But you seem to be having some trouble reconciling your pro-business sentiment with your Publisher-frustration.

If you ask me (and you didn't) I would suggest that you're merely thinking critically--and independently.

This industry (nation) could use some more critical and independent thinking.

 

[Timebuilder]

You're right, mar. Enigma took the words right out of my mouth.

Many companies treat their employees as a liability, in need of strict control and supervision. In many cases this is because they consistently hire the wrong people since they offer low wages, attracting those people.

Other companies hire good people, pay them well, and give them an interest in the sucess of the company by insipiring excellence. The employee is a team member, and not, as Leona Helmsley once said, one of the "little people".

Two totally different approaches, with two completely different outcomes.

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

Enigma, agree with a lot of what you said except the part of King Hillary - she is the smartest person alive and the peasants are just too ignorant to realize how smart and virtuous she really is .

Probably shouldn't admit this, but I'm in (operational logistics)management myself (duck - incoming!!). I see what you're talking about. There are a few honorable men, but there are more dishonorable and/or elitist. From my experience mis-management types can be all or a combination of the following: 1) power hungry, 2) money hungry, 3) high mindness or elitism, 4) "Frank Burns" from M*A*S*H - how did they ever make it this far?!, 5) interested more in self promotion rather than others and running a good business, and 6) outright thieves, prisons must be full.

I think part of this may stem from them not really enjoying what they are doing. Personally, I do not find my work that enjoyable but I do get satisfaction in trying to run a good operation and helping people.

Regarding the elitism, speculate the "grunts" in the military think the same thing about their chain of command, the ground pounders may think this about flight crews, the law abiding citizens about their government, etc. Guess it all depends where you're coming from.

For what it is worth, I have seen management "eat their own" but pretty much if you're in the inner circle you're part of the untouchable club. I have been subject that elitism myself, got myself an unexpected and unwanted transfer to Orlando as a result! Bottom line what is needed are honorable people in positions of authority and responsibility. Taking a line from the Marines, "we're looking for a few good men (and women)....."

 

[Delta3]

I Agree

I was in a MBA program this summer and many of the people in it, including the professors seemed like snobs.

During the summer we took tours of different companies, and one of the professors, a retired NASA rocket scientist would always ask impossible questions to the employees that only he would know the answer to.

The whole focus of the program seemed to bring in more technology to take the place of the frontline employees. Everybody kept saying how it's the perfect solution to America's corporate problems.

I just kept thinking of how many other CEOs had that bright idea and only fell flat on their face when they realized interpersonal relationships are in fact important in life.

I don't want to give out stereotypes, but many manager type people that I know of are the type of people who have been "the golden child" from day one. They know nothing but success, and they are constantly brought up to believe they are the world's leaders and "more valuable" then the guy working 3rd shift.

It's hard for them to realize that they are not just a coach, but also a player on a team.

As billionaire Ross Perot said:

"You've got to have people working with you, if they're working for you, you're in trouble".

 

[enigma]

Thanks to those of you have replied.

I just thought of another example, and it may prove that the problem is societal. How many of you went to a public school with a "shop" program? I wanted to go into the autoshop program, but the counselors convinced me that the only students who went into the trades were the "unintelligent" ones. I've got an acquantance who is a frame/unibody repair specialist and I WILL NEVER make as much in my avation career as he has already made in an autobody shop. While I spent twenty years pursuing aviation, he was out making money. Enough of the personal stuff, the point is that a lot of people tend to look down upon those who choose to make their living with their hands.

regards
8N

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

Yes, there does seem to be a stigma regarding occupations that involve using your hands. Saw the same thing growing up.
If I had the entrepreneur guts (and capital!) I think owning and running a good car repair place is a great occupation. People are always looking for a good, honest mechanic. Talk about "easy" money. Wouldn't have to advertise, word of mouth would suffice. Not only would you have a succesful business you get to help people in a round about way.
Getting back to your comment regarding others looking down. I may be reading in between the lines, but are you implying people look down at pilots? If so, I see that to a certain degree but if that does happen I wonder if it is more due to jealousy because they are miserable in their jobs and would rather do something more enjoyable like flying? They may be too prideful to admit they'd rather be doing what you're doing. As a result, they build up a "superiority wall". Just a far fetched theory.

 

[bobbysamd]

Shop class

I took two years of metal shop in high school. Among other skills, I learned how to operate machines, acetylene weld and arc weld. I took the course because I liked working with my hands and enjoyed every minute.

My experience with managers has been that you receive a blank look in return for you trying to explain your job to them while explaining why you need help with your work, with a project, or why you cannot cater to their needs immediately. I worked for an attorney who, time and time again, demanded the impossible from us, not that we lacked the intelligence to do what she wanted, but because we, as nonlawyers, lacked the skill and training to do her attorney work. That frustrated me to no end.

I worked for another attorney who wouldn't give me sufficient facts for me to complete his work. I knew how to do the work well, but I needed certain facts to do it properly (and have him avoid potential malpractice). He got surly with me and accused me of not being a self-starter. The problem was that I did not work for him on-site and did not have the file or a way to contact the client. That was frustrating.

Of course, there are some managers who are mentors and not slave drivers. Just the same, the managers we're discussing should try walking a mile in our shoes and not regard us as mere members of the proleteriat. I can relate to Enigma's first comments, having worked for Mesa briefly in 1993.

 

[publisher]

Weigh In

I might as well weigh in on the subject since my name is mentioned here so often.

My reference to how the game was played means only that you have spent your years developing your skills as a pilot. Your hours have been spent learning weather and circumstances and you call on them everytime you are faced with a new situation. You are a professional.

My point was that I am too. It should come as no big surprise to you if I said that something was not what it appeared to be. Let me give you a public example. Oliver North.

Does anyone here think he ws running around ordering aircraft to fly all over with drugs or guns all by his little lonesome.

Eastern-- which we were talking about-- involved a bunch of people doing their own thing and pontificating in public something entirely different

Over the years, I have had a number of people for whom I worked. Some were great mentors who wanted you to succeed and took very good care of me. Others came in all kinds of flavors. Only a few, a very few, were elitist types like Stephen Wolf who would be happy in a world without people. Another current airline Chairman abused employees unless he thought they would fight back. Generally though, most people I have met were fair people who wanted to do the best for all. Sometimes there are managers whose decisions were made for them by circumstance. that cuircumstance resulted in a position that hurt people.

Sometimes the point that business do not exist to employ gets lost and people think they are there to employ people.

Like in my other posts, labels are rarely good when they throw everyone in the same pile. I gave my pilots a course in reading and understanding financials and it changed their appreciation of our customers and company.

As you all know, education does not only come at Harvard.

 

[flywithastick]

I think that what I find offensive is their elitist mindset.

Let me throw in a couple of thoughts on your topic.

Do you agree that someone cannot be taken advantage of without their permission? Then along a similar line, can someone be looked down upon without themselves looking "up" to the manager?

You can't necessarily change what people think, but you do have a much better chance of changing how you feel about yourself.

In other words, short of allowing elitists like Hillary Clinton to take your freedoms, who cares if someone looks down on you if you're happy with yourself. If you enjoy life as a professional pilot, does it matter if "management" looks down on you?

This make any sense?

I mean that I think that some managment types act as if they are superior in knowledge and common sense to working people.

Many believe this, too. Some don't. But as long as you do what it takes to keep your job, and you enjoy what you're doing, does it matter?

...doesn't mean that you'r smarter.

maybe better spellers, though!

just because I'm not motivated by money and the acquisition of power doesn't mean that I am not motivated.

it's all relative. A lot of management types enjoy working 65 hrs/wk, skipping lunch, stabbing their buddy in the back to score a point with the boss, kissing up to the boss, moving their family all over the world chasing corporate success. That's their vision of motivation. No, by their definition of motivation, you're not. What does their def of motivation have to do with your success and happiness as a pilot?

And most importantly, just because I am motivated to protect my interests, doesn't necessarily make me your enemy. If you management types would realize that we could be partners, your life would be easier.

Actually, if they could figure out a way to eliminate flight crews and still make money, you'd be gone tomorrow. They're not your friend, your their tool. Cooperation would be better, but it takes more work than unilateral direction.

With rare exception, management has earned the opposition that they receive.

Why do you say this? They *usually* are just trying to maximize profits for the stockholders. Sometimes they do things spitefully, but usually bad decisions just come from lack of information or intelligence - not trying to *get* anyone.

As others have noted in other strings, SWA has done OK with a unionized workforce. I would propose that SWA has done OK not because of cheaper workers, although a low cost structure is an obvious advantage, but because of superior leadership from managment. Now that Herb has stepped back, it remains to be seen if his successors can maintain the positive environment.

I agree with you. I've never met an unhappy SWA employee, and I've known quite a few. It's their culture. And I really don't know how they've managed to "grow it" so well.

Bottom line, I don't have all the solutions to the problems, but I try to go in the right general direction. You figure out the solution, please let us all know.

 

[enigma]

Re: Weigh In

My reference to how the game was played means only that you have spent your years developing your skills as a pilot. Your hours have been spent learning weather and circumstances and you call on them everytime you are faced with a new situation. You are a professional.

Here is your statement. "Typhoon Look if it makes you feel better, you are absolutely right.

It could have been, should have been, might have been, but, it was not.

If you believe that stuff and those figures, great. What you do not seem to understand is how the game is really played"

If that quote was in any way related to how a pilot develops his skills, I need a lesson on reading comprehension.

regards,
8N

 

[enigma]

To Mr. FLYWITHASTICK

I don't have time to try and do a point, counterpoint. I do have time to say that you are incorrect if you assume that I feel in anyway inferior to an elite manager. If you ever attempt to join the ranks of airline pilots, you will quickly find that managements view of you affects something much more important to you than how you feel about yourself. I can feel just peachy about myself, and have a lousy life because some manager thinks that flying a "red-eye plus one" fits nicely into an otherwise early show schedule.

A quick summation, It doesn't matter how I feel about me, or me about them. How I am treated is what matters; and for some reason, managers seem to treat pilots with little respect.

8N

 

[flywithastick]

Airline pilot, brain surgeon, bag boy, waiter... the scenario really doesn't mater.

I've worked with and for a$$holes. It can get you down. Deal with it or get another job. Those are about your only two legal options. A$$holes *are* everywhere.

 

[publisher]

Enigma

Enigma,

You know I have always respected your position and the fact that you post some of the best postions on here.

The fact I was trying to make is that I spent my time learning how the game was played. I too am a professional but a manager one.

When Typhoon was throwing out stats and saying that everyone was saying that the airline should be saved, I was saying that was not the private position at all.

Bryan was out to prove how tough and in control he was, Lorenzo was headed to the door with the real assets, the other airlines were telling Washington to stay the hell out, and most people that thought they might be iterested thought this was a labor nightmare that could not be dealt with.

The basic premise of management in the first place is understanding the objective. Once understood, you need to organize, direct, motivate, and lead those needed to accomplish the objective.

Why would I as an effective manager want to piss off or otherwise make mad the very group that I depend on for success. Therefore it is not in my nature to do so. As a manager of anything, I want harmony not acrimony.

On the other hand, there is a price for my product. It is what the market will bear. I can set my profit objective and seek a reasonable return on equity, assets, etc. There are controllable cost and uncontrollable costs. All need to be in balance. Regardless of my harmony, regardless of my management skills, or my desire to take care of my people, if that balance gets way off and I can not achieve the objective, decisions are going to be made that effect people in a negative way.

Frankly, I hate that about being a manager.

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

I may be wrong, but I don't think the original issue was management having to make decisions that people may not like. I think most people understand it is a competitive market and realize businesses are not there for the employees benefit only. Rather, it is the condescending attitude that some people have who are in positions of authority. That attitude coupled with greed (power and/or money), the inability to tell the truth (i.e., lie), or incompetence encourages resentment among the people who are under this authority and "leadership".
Granted, there is nothing that binds a manager to treat people with respect or is there anything that binds an employee to respect management. But I would rather "err" in doing good than doing bad. With the economic uncertainty, I can see relationships getting worse and the bad managers/leaders exhibiting even worse behavior. I hope I am wrong.
After re-thinking one of my earlier posts, I probably overstated (at least in my company) the preponderance of bad managers.
In a sad and warped way, however, I think I have learned more from the corrupt managers than the good managers. The corrupt ones are good teachers on how not to lead and manage.

 

[enigma]

Re: Enigma

Enigma,

You know I have always respected your position and the fact that you post some of the best postions on here.

The fact I was trying to make is that I spent my time learning how the game was played. I too am a professional but a manager one.

.........................

The basic premise of management in the first place is understanding the objective. Once understood, you need to organize, direct, motivate, and lead those needed to accomplish the objective.

Why would I as an effective manager want to piss off or otherwise make mad the very group that I depend on for success. Therefore it is not in my nature to do so. As a manager of anything, I want harmony not acrimony.

On the other hand, there is a price for my product. It is what the market will bear. I can set my profit objective and seek a reasonable return on equity, assets, etc. There are controllable cost and uncontrollable costs. All need to be in balance. Regardless of my harmony, regardless of my management skills, or my desire to take care of my people, if that balance gets way off and I can not achieve the objective, decisions are going to be made that effect people in a negative way.

Publisher, I don't debate with argue-ers, nor idiots. The fact that I seem to debate with you is indicitive of two things. First, I want to understand how you can say some of the things that you write, and number two, I don't consider you an argue-er nor certainly not an idiot. Maybe I see you as a worthy adversary. Maybe I want to resolve why I have the same core ideas as yourself, yet we seem to have an opposite attitude toward pilots.

With that said, the reason that I started a new thread was to avoid mixing the debate up on the EAL string. I don't disagree at all with your above quote. I understand why a good manager makes the decisions he makes, but this string is about the attitude I see from managers. I truly believe that there is a level of disdain towards those of us who choose to work for a wage. I don't understand it, especially in this business.

About the specifics were dealing with now, I have tried to not misquote you, nor misrepresent your position. The context of your statement about knowing how the game was played seemed obvious, but since you have explained it, I'll let it go. You notwithstanding, I still think that most managers tend to look down on people who choose to work by the piece.

regards,
8N

 

[publisher]

ok

If there is a reason that I have had some success, I think, is that as a teacher, manager, or friend that I knew the difference between ahving your arm on someone and around someone. Be it a customer or employee, I walked over and looked at it from where they stood.

The same held true for what I required from other people who worked for me. While I think that the nature of aviation presents perhaps more ego factor than others, nevertheless, I have not had many cases where I heard anything from the people who I have worked with that smacked of eliteism. Other than kidding pilots at job fairs that we only allowed 3 captains in a booth due to excess magnetic forces being disturbed in the universe, I really like to believe the best in people.

Keep the Spirit going Enigma. Tell Penny I am still looking for that goody bag.

 

[DoinTime]

Sometimes the point that business do not exist to employ gets lost and people think they are there to employ people.

Whether big business likes it or not they are in the business of employing people. Without employment there is no trade. Without trade there is no buisness.

 

[publisher]

Dointime

It is not a matter of whether you want to or did not want to employ.

The purpose of business is to profit and trade.

The means to do that may be a hard asset, a product, a service, etc.... and employees may be needed to complete or produce the same.

If a labor agreement forces you to employ people that are not necessary---for whatever reason--- that subverts the basic premise and leads to a olack of productivity. In the world of railroads, the term feather bedding was used to describe such an occurance.

This is an example where a business is forced to employ and not it's original purpose.