Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

SWA contract amendable- no pay raise?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
YourPilotFriend said:
FY2005 = 2004 thus FY2007 = 2006. Those numbers are actually from 2003 in that report, so the actual exchange rate was 0.053 euros = 0.049 cents that was when the dollar was stronger.

Once again you are totally wrong when it comes to the Fiscal Year numbers. I am not going to expand on them now becuase trying to converse with you is like talking to a brick wall. It is obvious you have no clue what you are talking about so you just type and type and type until people get tired of your BS.

FY 2005 does not = 2004. FY2007 does not = 2006. It is obvious you dont know where many European countries base their Fiscal Year calendar on.

Enjoy your ignorance.
 
Dangerkitty said:
Once again you are totally wrong when it comes to the Fiscal Year numbers. I am not going to expand on them now becuase trying to converse with you is like talking to a brick wall. It is obvious you have no clue what you are talking about so you just type and type and type until people get tired of your BS.

FY 2005 does not = 2004. FY2007 does not = 2006. It is obvious you dont know where many European countries base their Fiscal Year calendar on.

Enjoy your ignorance.
You mean the fiscal year doesn't run from april first to that time next year? I don't understand, are we not in second quarter FY2007 in europe? I provided results from the previous quarter, and you gave me information from years ago. How is that CASM impossible? They even offer free seats.
 
Last edited:
Saabslime said:
You're W2's may look good but let's face it, you fly regional type schedules........some QOL. I'll put our scheduling and hours of service sections up against yours anyday.

Having flown at a regional for 5 years, a legacy for 1 year (until my furlough), I will assert that SWA schedules look NOTHING like regional schedules.

TexaSWA wrote:

Avg days off last bid in MDW: 17.17
Avg duty period length: 8.5 hrs


Did i miss your reply? Take your time tabulating your data, I go back to work sometime in October.

-fate
 
Hey we have 68 employees per airplane, now thats lean and mean, baby!!!
 
I can't see how the employees/plane ratio is anything other than a rough indication of efficiency. Different carriers have different divisions and services which may be either necessary or profitable, and have nothing to do with getting an airplane launched quickly.

Examples - some carriers use their own maintenance, other may use contract. Baggage handling needs will vary with the operational model and the density of INT traffic vs domestic. Contract vs dedicated WX guessers, schoolhouse, stuff like that. There's no denying the trend towards lean, and I'll be the first to cheer some trimming AT THE VP/CORP level, not the operational.
 
Gorilla said:
I can't see how the employees/plane ratio is anything other than a rough indication of efficiency.


Also, factor in the number of passenger per plane. UAL, DAL and AA have lots of 757, 767, 777s that require more employees per plane.
 
Sounds like one loose screw and you'll have yourself another Midway's Wild Ride.

Sounds like a couple of bad quarters and you'll have yourself another BK filing.
 
Also, factor in the number of passenger per plane. UAL, DAL and AA have lots of 757, 767, 777s that require more employees per plane.

Yes, you are right. But the old UAL (in 2000) had something like 168 employees per airplane. And I thought Houston was the fattest city in the country? Old UAL = fat city, New UAL = who knows?? But back when everone was making tons of cash, who cared? We were even slighly over weight then too.
 
SWA/FO said:
Yes, you are right. But the old UAL (in 2000) had something like 168 employees per airplane. .

I was in Kansas City (MCI), talking to the UAL rampers there. I asked how many UAL employees worked at MCI. I was SHOCKED. .......


100 employees.

50 Full timers plus 50 part timers.

I am not sure of the number of flights per day, but I think they only flew to ORD and DEN.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top