FlyDeltasJets
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 664
You name all these high cost items, yet our costs are lower than yours on everything except wages. You talk about higher flight times and ramper productivity, yet neglect to address the fact that our employees are more productive on a revenue per employee scale. You mention "dumping," yet I think that this has ocurred far less than you think. Until I have the numbers, we will have to agree to disagree about the effects. Even if we did dump, what would you suggest we do. Even if we only put one plane on a route, we still would not be able to compete with your costs. The result would be huge expansion for you and retreat for us (see U and LUV in BWI). We will not let that happen to us, I can assure you.
You seem to want to point a finger at many incidental items, yet you want to disregard the effect of an airline's largest cost: Employee wages and benefits. You mention a $150/hr cost differential (you disregarded the other 80% of the airline's employees) as if that was negligable. Multiply that by the millions of block hours we fly, and the difference no longer appears so minimal.
I guess we will have to leave it at this. You beleive that wages and benefits are not as important to cost savings as some other items. I disagree. I beleive that the wages and benefits of low cost carriers are the primary reason that they are profitable and the majors are not. I believe that I have supported this assertion with numbers from SEC filings. Wages and benefits make up about 40% of an airline's costs (or in your case, a bit under 30%). To ignore such a large percentage of expenses in, in my opinion, a bit naive. The simple fact is, if you study the CASM makeup of both airlines, you will notice that in 2002, if the wage and benefit percentage of CASM equaled yours, our total CASM would in fact be lower than yours. I also believe that the net effect of the practice of cost competition based on employee wages will be harmful to the profession. I think that we are witnessing that right now.
Is there anything that we can do about it? I don't know. Lately it seems as if we are along for the ride, and the proposed attack on the RLA certainly won't help if successful. However, I certainly think that we should try, and I don't think that we should shy away from discussing factors influencing our struggles. Thank you for doing so with me. Discourse and honesty can only help all of us.
P.S.
I listed my beliefs, but I left one out: I also believe that Delta will rise to the current challenges, just as they have always done in the past. We have faced adversity before, and we will do so again, and every time it happens, the same people say that the "paradigm" has shifted and the majors will go the way of the dinosaurs. More often than not, the "dinosaurs" outlast the shiny new media darlings! I think that we will weather this storm as well, and come out on top as we have done so many times before (yes, mgt and labor together!). I am so glad that I am at Delta, and even though I am furloughed, I wouldn't trade airlines with anyone.
I am sure that you feel the same about your airline, and that's good. Hopefully we can both prosper. I wish you well.
Fly safe.
You seem to want to point a finger at many incidental items, yet you want to disregard the effect of an airline's largest cost: Employee wages and benefits. You mention a $150/hr cost differential (you disregarded the other 80% of the airline's employees) as if that was negligable. Multiply that by the millions of block hours we fly, and the difference no longer appears so minimal.
I guess we will have to leave it at this. You beleive that wages and benefits are not as important to cost savings as some other items. I disagree. I beleive that the wages and benefits of low cost carriers are the primary reason that they are profitable and the majors are not. I believe that I have supported this assertion with numbers from SEC filings. Wages and benefits make up about 40% of an airline's costs (or in your case, a bit under 30%). To ignore such a large percentage of expenses in, in my opinion, a bit naive. The simple fact is, if you study the CASM makeup of both airlines, you will notice that in 2002, if the wage and benefit percentage of CASM equaled yours, our total CASM would in fact be lower than yours. I also believe that the net effect of the practice of cost competition based on employee wages will be harmful to the profession. I think that we are witnessing that right now.
Is there anything that we can do about it? I don't know. Lately it seems as if we are along for the ride, and the proposed attack on the RLA certainly won't help if successful. However, I certainly think that we should try, and I don't think that we should shy away from discussing factors influencing our struggles. Thank you for doing so with me. Discourse and honesty can only help all of us.
P.S.
I listed my beliefs, but I left one out: I also believe that Delta will rise to the current challenges, just as they have always done in the past. We have faced adversity before, and we will do so again, and every time it happens, the same people say that the "paradigm" has shifted and the majors will go the way of the dinosaurs. More often than not, the "dinosaurs" outlast the shiny new media darlings! I think that we will weather this storm as well, and come out on top as we have done so many times before (yes, mgt and labor together!). I am so glad that I am at Delta, and even though I am furloughed, I wouldn't trade airlines with anyone.
I am sure that you feel the same about your airline, and that's good. Hopefully we can both prosper. I wish you well.
Fly safe.
