SkyWest Vote

[Nightrain_080]

Just some rational thinking, and totally hypothetical, but let's ASSUME....

There are 11,000 employees. If Uncle Jerry gave each one of his employees an AVERAGE of $2,000 extra annually (which really isn't much of a raise, right?), that would cost the company $22,000,000 extra. $22M is 14% of the annual $150M currently coming in. These numbers DO add up.

How many days off a week does a dispatcher have per week? 2 or 3?

say you have 3 days off a week....would you be willing give up an extra day per week for the rest of your career as a dispatcher to 2 days off a week for nothing in return?

I am assuming no.

:nuts:
No bonass check is worth giving up hundreds of days off per year and drowning the pilot morale even lower than it already is. Yes we know Jerry wants a new housboat.

 

[Missed Approach]

Of course Jerry has fiduciary duties to make the shareholders as much money as possible, however he understands he will make more money if he treats his employees equitably.

Operators like Mesa, who are clearly only concerned for their share holders, will continue to treat their employees with disdain, run short staffed, and pay as little as possible to keep classes filled. Because employees have no vested interest in the success of the company, and no reason to be loyal, they will understandably punish the company for treating them this way with by "flying safe", participating in cell phone bans, and using high amounts of fuel. This leads to dissatisfied customers and code-share partners, and in turn poor company financial performance.

Companies like Southwest make their employees' QOL a priority. This ensures that the customer is taken care of, and in turn results increases the value of shareholder wealth.

Skywest certainly not Southwest, but having flown for both Mesa and Skywest, I can say that Skywest is much closer to Southwest's model (1. employees 2. customers 3. shareholders) then the Mesa's (1. shareholders 2. customers 3. employees).

[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']...and yes, the Kool-aide tastes great. [/FONT]

 

[SKYWRJGUY]

In essence a pay cut because cost per ASM went down? Good inference. That cost could go down due to (1) decreasing salary and benefits + steady ASM, (2) steady salary and benefits + rising ASM, or (3) rising salary and beneift but rising slower than ASM. You need to learn how to read that particular financial statement...

 

[JoeMerchant]

In essence a pay cut because cost per ASM went down? Good inference. That cost could go down due to (1) decreasing salary and benefits + steady ASM, (2) steady salary and benefits + rising ASM, or (3) rising salary and beneift but rising slower than ASM. You need to learn how to read that particular financial statement...

Exactly.....CHQ has a lower cost per ASM than CMR......but pays more......Longevity has a lot to do with it......

 

[Nevets]

Of course Jerry has fiduciary duties to make the shareholders as much money as possible, however he understands he will make more money if he treats his employees equitably.

Operators like Mesa, who are clearly only concerned for their share holders, will continue to treat their employees with disdain, run short staffed, and pay as little as possible to keep classes filled. Because employees have no vested interest in the success of the company, and no reason to be loyal, they will understandably punish the company for treating them this way with by "flying safe", participating in cell phone bans, and using high amounts of fuel. This leads to dissatisfied customers and code-share partners, and in turn poor company financial performance.

Companies like Southwest make their employees' QOL a priority. This ensures that the customer is taken care of, and in turn results increases the value of shareholder wealth.

Skywest certainly not Southwest, but having flown for both Mesa and Skywest, I can say that Skywest is much closer to Southwest's model (1. employees 2. customers 3. shareholders) then the Mesa's (1. shareholders 2. customers 3. employees).

[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']...and yes, the Kool-aide tastes great. [/font]

Yet SWA pilots are unionized. Do you think that they would be paid as much if they weren't and if they were not as successful as Skywest?

 

[Nevets]

In essence a pay cut because cost per ASM went down? Good inference. That cost could go down due to (1) decreasing salary and benefits + steady ASM, (2) steady salary and benefits + rising ASM, or (3) rising salary and beneift but rising slower than ASM. You need to learn how to read that particular financial statement...

"Our total ASMs generated during the year ended December 31, 2006 increased 58.9% from the year ended December 31, 2005"
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/793733/000110465907015112/a07-5838_110k.htm

(3)ASM increased 58.9%, salaries, wages and employee benefits increased 55.2%.

 

[joe_pilot]

Thanks to everyone who voted.

I respect that. At least you voted.

I just wish more than 706 of you had voted "No".

(here come the flamers...)

 

[ArcticFlier]

To answer the question posed originally:
Voted no.
Voted for DB.

 

[SSDD]

Voted NO

Voted for DB

 

[Dubya]

Voted for Fruit Punch

Wrote in JA