Re-regulation

[AAflyer]

I think that you guys are wasting too much energy on what used to be. No one has said they way things used to be was correct. Was the profession looked on differently, yes and that is not coming back. For many of those years, flying was considered some kind of adventure into the unknown. Regulation and unionism allowed the wages to grow and fuel the desire for the job. In the end of regulation, some thought that things were really out of hand.

With deregulation, the ability of a carrier to withstand a strike went to zero and many of them caved in to demands that really were not in line with what was happening in the business. This is still a business you know. In regulation, there was not all this comptetition waiting in the wings to take your marketshare.

This society will not stand for re-regulation nor will the job ever be looked at like some exotic dangerous profession. Flying has become safer, the world better educated, in some ways the job easier, and we will not be going back in our lifetimes. for the most part, it will be paid in line with a decent mid level management job.

Society may not stand for it, but if there comes a day when the pilots of SWA, JB, AirTran along with the pilots of the "legacies" take more and more paycuts to "subsidize" the flying publics' demand for cheap tickets the airlines employees may demand it.

With the ability to park every jet in this country they will have the power to get it. As we continue to spiral downwards there seems to be realization that we are "all" in this together, and when that comes together the "pilots of this country" will have a very strong voice.

AA

 

[SWA GUY]

See guys the problem with this industry is all SWA/JB/Aitran's fault.

AAflyer you slay me!

Sorry we are messing up the industry. <<<Yawn>>>

 

[Publishers]

The thing that keeps the airlines going under BK is cash flow, hidden reserves, and revenue. These are the things that have to be there for a BK filing to work. If they do not exist, then you switch to chapter 7 and adios.

If you have a revenue stream, and, you have items in hidden reserve (good value at low book value), then cash is produced and you can pay your current operatiing expenses hence staying in business.

This description applies to most airlines. Many bankruptcies do not have these things going for them. Think about it. If you can be absolved of your long term debt and only have to worry about current expenses, can you produce positive cash flow. If you lose your job, that may not be possible.

The law is in place so that companies and individuals can have a second chance if things get out of control. Still, the basics have to be there. If you have 0 assets to pledge as collateral, 0 assets with value in them, and revenue is sinking faster than the Titantic, you cannot go on.

 

[Lear70]

Reregulation will cause the loss of many pilot jobs. We will go back to a time when in history where it was very hard to get a flying job. And yes, the few pilots who still have jobs will be paid very well.


You willing to lose your job to improve someone else's?

Yup. Read the last line of my last post.

Family business building houses and commercial real estate pays better and I'm home at night. I can do that until I can find another flying job - life goes on.

 

[Speed Turd]

I posted this earlier in general, but since it really applies to you guys. What do you think about Re-Regulating the airlines? Partial re-regualtion?. I don't think this industry can stay in this current cycle much longer. Legacies aren't allowed to fail, lives being ruined, pesions gone, jobs gone. I'm not convinced that unregulated competition will ever work in this indusrty. It sure isn't now.

Pinko commie!

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Society may not stand for it, but if there comes a day when the pilots of SWA, JB, AirTran along with the pilots of the "legacies" take more and more paycuts to "subsidize" the flying publics' demand for cheap tickets the airlines employees may demand it.

With the ability to park every jet in this country they will have the power to get it. As we continue to spiral downwards there seems to be realization that we are "all" in this together, and when that comes together the "pilots of this country" will have a very strong voice.

AA

The scene in Apollo 13 where the NASA engineers were debating what needed to be done. Finally, the one engineer said 'guys it is all about power' (electrical).

For us, it is all about politics. From the discussion on this thread, what is left after all is fixed is pilots still have to negotiate thier wages, work rules etc. from thier companies..

We don't negotiate Age 60. It is Fed law. Same with flight and duty times. and so on...

Our effectiveness to change and protect the Air Line Pilot Profession is not [entirely] with the amount of revenue we can get out of our companies.

It also rests with the lobbying of our Fed Representatives. Passing legislation that provides stops to the race to the bottom. Placing protections that allow us to focus on safety.

 

[AAflyer]

See guys the problem with this industry is all SWA/JB/Aitran's fault.

AAflyer you slay me!

Sorry we are messing up the industry. <<<Yawn>>>

Where did I say that? May I suggest you re-read the post as you are miles from the target.

AA

If you are still not bright enough to figure it, I am not blaming the pilots of the LCCs at all.

 

[Publishers]

I do think that re regulation would lead ultimately to fewer jobs but not necessarily well paid jobs,,, at least at the level you think existed before.

Regulation is and becomes all about the politic. Flexibility becomes less so you are locked into your route structure. There is no panacea here for your woes. Lousy companies run without skill still crash and burn

 

[GogglesPisano]

I posted this earlier in general, but since it really applies to you guys. What do you think about Re-Regulating the airlines? Partial re-regualtion?. I don't think this industry can stay in this current cycle much longer. Legacies aren't allowed to fail, lives being ruined, pesions gone, jobs gone. I'm not convinced that unregulated competition will ever work in this indusrty. It sure isn't now.

Some would argue the industry is still being regulated in the form of federal bankruptcy courts.

In any event, the free market system is working. It is devastating for the piloting profession and for airline labor in general. And a lot of the great names have already disappeared -- but some of you fail to realize that the public has benefited from increased competition. Fares have never been lower and the skies have never been safer.

To think that the public will stand for re-regulation and the higher fares it entails simply to help a rather small segment of society (airline labor) is mental masturbation. It may make you feel better, but that's about it.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

To think that the public will stand for re-regulation and the higher fares it entails simply to help a rather small segment of society (airline labor) is mental masturbation. It may make you feel better, but that's about it.

That is the point. While one could argue this on a general level...

Does the United States want the Air Line Pilot Profession to be...bottomed out?

1. Do the pilots themsleves want it?

2. Can US National Security afford to have it?

3. While pax want the cheapest tickets, do they really want bottom feeders flying the airplanes.


What can be done about it?

How about an artilce to read in 15 years that says "How the Air Line Pilots saved the airline industry"

We need to quit thinking about just next year. Plan ahead.....

 

[atrdriver]

Regulation is and becomes all about the politic. Flexibility becomes less so you are locked into your route structure. There is no panacea here for your woes. Lousy companies run without skill still crash and burn

The regulation that needs to happen has nothing to do with route structure. There needs to be a set minimum price that can be charged between city pairs. A price that covers the cost of the trip, with a little profit built in. For example, JFK-LAX maybe $250 one way, while JFK-ATL might be $150. That's the minimum price that can be charged. If you have a product that people want to fly on, and you can charge more, more power to you. If not, you charge the minimum price if you want to fly that route. And whatever that price is, you better put a plane on it that will make you money. All that type of re-regulation would accomplish would be to make it so a carrier can't cut their and everyone elses throats by lowballing a fare. Also makes the bankrupt carriers play on a level field with whose that aren't.

 

[Lear70]

To think that the public will stand for re-regulation and the higher fares it entails simply to help a rather small segment of society (airline labor) is mental masturbation. It may make you feel better, but that's about it.

You're thinking too small. The public is NOT benefitting from deregulation.

Oh maybe they are on the ticket price side of it, but then they're getting slammed on the backside (their taxes) in the form of government bailouts, PBGC bailouts, and secondary bankruptcy problems (vendor bankruptcies, etc).

There's more to it than just ticket prices.

ATRDRIVER, that's exactly what I'm talking about. A fairly simple law that says, "An airline may not price their product below what it costs to produce it." and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

ATRDRIVER, that's exactly what I'm talking about. A fairly simple law that says, "An airline may not price their product below what it costs to produce it." and let the chips fall where they may.

Could airline pilots lobby for such a law?

 

[Flopgut]

Could airline pilots lobby for such a law?

I think some sort of law is a real possibility. We need to reign in ALPA and other unions and get them to stop trying to bandage a cleaved limb! We can no longer be regarded as lesser Americans because we are members of unions and transportation workers.

Here is where I'm coming from: It was severe weather (a blizzard) in Detroit many years ago that gave the US Congress enough reason to amend the constitution. Lets say that again: they amended the US Constitution! The Airline Passengers Bill of Rights. Bill of Rights! So pissed were they at air transportation that the result of their efforts patterned the most sacred element of our democracy. (Nevermind that at the time various forms of the judicial branch of our government mandated that is was legal for a passenger to maim a gate agent, hit an airline Captain in the face with a golf club, carry on a weedeater, or get piss drunk and cause any manner of mayhem!)

If what happened to NWA in Detroit dictated such a drastic move by Congress then what are they waiting for now? More than 16 cents on the dollar needs to be dispersed from the ATSB for starters. But that is long overdue; Anything they do is going to be long ovedue! How about an energy users bill of rights? This windfall tax that is getting some momentum is a good start but is just going to help a very specific need.

One part of our problem (and it is not a small one) is the whipsaw of pilots against each other. Not the contractual sort but the LCC vs. legacy play. Government, Wall Street, managments, etc. all have LCCs convinced they live in a different world totally ignoring fundamentals. SWA folks are particuliarly bad offenders in this. Case in point is the dialog from SWA Guy above. AAflyer did not say anything to draw such a comment from SWA Guy. SWA Guy just wants to blurt out the response to the non-existent accusation and own it just as though it was real. Because they believe it, and they want it. I can not imagine how any LCC employee can look at the history of this business and what is going on now and think they are entitled to anything different. Unless, of course, you are subjected to the "culture, spirit, circle of happiness" speach you get from a typical SWA systemite. One of them told me that a document existed that would direct me how to properly write about SWA. I'm still waiting for my copy.

 

[pilotyip]

Airlines sell below cost on short routes, because to charge someone $350 to from Lansing to Chicago would kill the Lansing Chicago market, they would drive their car. The regional in that market feeds into the bigger airplanes. Every one prices below cost. Ford sells low-end cars where they do not make any money to meet fuel economy requirements. Would they pass a law that Wal-Mart can not sell 2-liter Pepsi below cost? They all do this to get you to buy something more profitable. To change the law would be a move toward a gov’t planned business environment. That has killed every country that tried it. What is wrong with making $100K per year doing something you like?

 

[AAflyer]

Airlines sell below cost on short routes, because to charge someone $350 to from Lansing to Chicago would kill the Lansing Chicago market, they would drive their car. The regional in that market feeds into the bigger airplanes. Every one prices below cost. Ford sells low-end cars where they do not make any money to meet fuel economy requirements. Would they pass a law that Wal-Mart can not sell 2-liter Pepsi below cost? They all do this to get you to buy something more profitable. To change the law would be a move toward a gov’t planned business environment. That has killed every country that tried it. What is wrong with making $100K per year doing something you like?

Not with gas prices today!

To answer your question about what is wrong with making a 100K a year. Would that amount be ok 10 years from now? what about 20 years from now. With the continued cost of inflation and housing 100K is not what it was even 5 years ago. As other professions, and even jobs raise their level of compensation to adjust for the cost of living we continue to go backwards.

Out of curiosity where did this 100K you talk about come from? You have mentioned that amount often. Why not 150K? Many make that amount and then some at AirTran, SWA, AA etc. Do you make 100K? Is that why it is a good number? Do you really feel someone should be compensated the same to fly a 777 as you do in the DA-20?

Just curious as to your thought process.

regards,

AA

 

[pilotyip]

I have never had a job where I made a $100K/yr therefore it is a good number.

 

[atrdriver]

Airlines sell below cost on short routes, because to charge someone $350 to from Lansing to Chicago would kill the Lansing Chicago market, they would drive their car. The regional in that market feeds into the bigger airplanes. Every one prices below cost. Ford sells low-end cars where they do not make any money to meet fuel economy requirements. Would they pass a law that Wal-Mart can not sell 2-liter Pepsi below cost? They all do this to get you to buy something more profitable. To change the law would be a move toward a gov’t planned business environment. That has killed every country that tried it. What is wrong with making $100K per year doing something you like?

Maybe it would kill the short markets, maybe it wouldn't. But what good is it to make a little money on the long haul markets and then give it all back on the short haul ones? Personally, I would rather kill off the short market if money can't be made on it. It constantly amazes me that people pay more at the pump with little complaint, that UPS and Fedex charge more for shipping when gas proces go up, groceries cost more, yet the airlines are afraid to raise their prices to cover costs for fear of losing the passengers. If you consistantly lose money on a certain market, then it should be shut down. That's how every business except ours works, maybe airline execs should try it.

 

[AutoBus]

I posted this earlier in general, but since it really applies to you guys. What do you think about Re-Regulating the airlines? Partial re-regualtion?. I don't think this industry can stay in this current cycle much longer. Legacies aren't allowed to fail, lives being ruined, pesions gone, jobs gone. I'm not convinced that unregulated competition will ever work in this indusrty. It sure isn't now.

were you even born during regulation?

 

[AIR2MUD]

last I checked, i have not heard of pilots, or anyone on here for that mattter, paying more than they need to for things.

Reminds me of the old joke:

How was copper wire invented?

Two pilots fighting over a penny.