Alaska cutting back on California routes from Virgin

[derg]

I rode DCA-BNA-PHX on Christmas on SWA. I heard that 15 minute (seemingly) Christmas song at a milllion decibels twice.

That was hell. Heck, I wish my own airline would keep PA's to an absolute minimum as well.

 

[Roger Roger]

How bad is it? Maybe resident Virgin-lover @Cherokee_Cruiser would like to comment?

Edit: somewhat watchable on mute whilst killing time on the crapper.

Obnoxious bordering on ridiculous as a substitute for a proper safety briefing.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

How bad is it? Maybe resident Virgin-lover @Cherokee_Cruiser would like to comment?

Just slightly worse than the "founded by CE Woolman and get to sit at his desk everyday" video.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

I don't know why everyone hates flying on United. I like them.

It's funny seeing a thread of airline pilots pretending domestic US flying is different among carriers. Domestically at least, they're all the same. Point A to point B (occasionally point C), seats that are more or less the same, service that is more or less the same, and each carrier has had its share disasters on social media.

 

[Murdoughnut]

..Don't forget hot flight attendants that are allowed to show cleavage and practically their ass cheeks if they so choose(the silent victim of the merger), and employees from check in to arrival that actually like their jobs, have fun at work, and treat you well and have a sense of humor.

They were also very passenger friendly, the cancellation protections were ridiculous, they would often provide hotels for ATC and Weather cancellations. Other airlines only do that for international flights cancelled beyond the airlines control, if even. Of course this didn't help profits, but it did help them build a very loyal flyer base(remember almost all their flights started or ended in SFO/LAX/NYC, so that was the target market).

A coach product is a coach product. You sit there for a few hours and get off. But personally, I liked the interior with bright white and sharp black and the food they have to offer on longer flights is real food, not some random vending machine crap like we've become accustomed to with buy on board, the service is more consistently friendly than most other airlines, and they had a fantastic in-seat entertainment selection which I appreciate because I don't own a tablet and I don't like airlines to assume I have one at all times when I travel.

Virgin didn't upgrade employees or crew members so I'm guessing most of you haven't tried it from what I read here, but man, their first class was AWESOME! Blew anything but premium transcon services out of the water when it came to domestic flights. Big ass(you can totally say ass in here) white leather almost-flat recliners that bend and shape in several ways and can help massage you to an under-blanket happy ending, great original specialty entrees that were real meals(not generic omelettes and chicken breast), and great fun service. Time really flew by, I think only Sun Country had better first class service in my experience, but Virgin had a better interior and better food/IFE. With Sun Country eliminating first class and legroom in favor of becoming the next Frontier, it is sad we will lose both those premium cabins.

I'll agree with the safety video, that actually pisses me off. So does United's and some of the older Delta ones. Safety is no joke, not everyone speaks English or can clearly hear the video/read the subtitles. The video should be conservative and make sense, it isn't entertainment, it's what to do in the minutes or seconds you have to prepare for or egress from a crash. The FAA should step in and regulate safety briefings a little more strictly, IMO. People think flying is so safe that those briefings are white noise, until they're choking on smoke crawling up the dark aisle and don't know how many rows to the exit, anyway.

I've spent time with Gary Kelly and his wife, and of all of the corporate CEOs and big wigs I've spent time with over my career, they are hands down the most genuine, down to earth ones I've met. I'm on the Tony Jannus Society Board and we honored him the year before last. Of course it was during talks with the pilots, who all of a sudden were calling for his head - taking advantage of unrelated problems (website issues) to make a case for his ouster - all because they were in a hissy fit because someone else was being paid a bit more at the time. Magically, once the talks were over, the LUV returned. Now it's the mechanics turn.

 

[Inverted]

How bad is it? That depends on you...

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

I've spent time with Gary Kelly and his wife, and of all of the corporate CEOs and big wigs I've spent time with over my career, they are hands down the most genuine, down to earth ones I've met. I'm on the Tony Jannus Society Board and we honored him the year before last. Of course it was during talks with the pilots, who all of a sudden were calling for his head - taking advantage of unrelated problems (website issues) to make a case for his ouster - all because they were in a hissy fit because someone else was being paid a bit more at the time. Magically, once the talks were over, the LUV returned. Now it's the mechanics turn.

It's all sides. No one is innocent during negotiations. Management wants to low ball whatever employee group wants gains. And the employee group wants to raid the company bank. Nasty things are said and done on both sides. It's petty, juvenile. It's a game. It's politics. It's a process. Then magically once the deal is done and signed. Everyone is happy and friends again. Until next time.

 

[Murdoughnut]

It's all sides. No one is innocent during negotiations. Management wants to low ball whatever employee group wants gains. And the employee group wants to raid the company bank. Nasty things are said and done on both sides. It's petty, juvenile. It's a game. It's politics. It's a process. Then magically once the deal is done and signed. Everyone is happy and friends again. Until next time.

Hard for those of us in other sectors to understand. I was offered a salary and pay band when I joined the Airport. I was happy with it, so I accepted it. It never occurred to me, five years later, that I should suddenly demand a new contract because someone else at another airport is making more. It would also never occur to me to ask for more money for doing the same job simply because the company is making more money.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Hard for those of us in other sectors to understand. I was offered a salary and pay band when I joined the Airport. I was happy with it, so I accepted it. It never occurred to me, five years later, that I should suddenly demand a new contract because someone else at another airport is making more. It would also never occur to me to ask for more money for doing the same job simply because the company is making more money.

The contract became amendable in your example, they just didn't up and decide to demand a new contract because Brand X is making more. But since the contract is now amendable, yeah its time to even things out pay wise. Or hopefully, raise the house by +1 or 2.

But likewise, management after five years also has their hands out too. Saying we want you to agree to this JV. Or agree to more 76 seaters or worse 90-110 seaters at the regionals, et al. Again both sides have their hands out asking for more gives and more money when the contract is renewable.

 

[BobDDuck]

It's all sides. No one is innocent during negotiations. Management wants to low ball whatever employee group wants gains. And the employee group wants to raid the company bank. Nasty things are said and done on both sides. It's petty, juvenile. It's a game. It's politics. It's a process. Then magically once the deal is done and signed. Everyone is happy and friends again. Until next time.

While it's true neither side is "innocent" during a contract negotiation, I've never seen something play out the way you are describing. In general, management isn't trying to low ball an employee group. They have a max amount they can spend and they try to keep it as far under that number as they possibly can. Remember, a CEO has a fiduciary responsibility to share holders. Regrettably, in this time of maximized short term share holder value, earning reports matter way more than long term structure. So not spending money on retaining talent or building up R&D or whatever it is, gets bigger rewards than investing in the future.

Likewise, very few employee groups are trying to raid the company bank. Sure, there are guys running around saying I want it all and I want it now, but with a few rare exceptions none of those guys are in a position to direct the path of negotiations. And generally, in a normally negotiation, very little nasty, petty or juvenile things are done or said. It's a business deal and that's about it.

Hard for those of us in other sectors to understand. I was offered a salary and pay band when I joined the Airport. I was happy with it, so I accepted it. It never occurred to me, five years later, that I should suddenly demand a new contract because someone else at another airport is making more. It would also never occur to me to ask for more money for doing the same job simply because the company is making more money.

I agree that this is a place where people outside probably don't get it. There are two things driving the ideology though. First, a pilot is, in general, tied to their seniority number and their narrow band of skill sets. You didn't feel it was necessary to ask for more 5 years later because if they didn't recognize your contributions and reward you at a rate (financially, QOL wise of responsibility level) at a satisfactory level, you could leave and start over at another airport management gig elsewhere pretty much at the same level you left at, if not higher. Or, you could go to another industry and do a similar thing for pay (etc) that you felt was reasonable. At an airline, you can't do that. You leave, you start over. And your specific skills are ONLY good for flying an airplane.

The second issue (and this goes back to Max's comment about raiding the bank), is that airlines, in recent history have been VERY quick to take pay away from employees, through both the real and the sham bankruptcy process. Now that things are going well, employee groups are trying to get back to the level (percentage wise) that they were at before. Sure, it appears that they are demanding a large part of a companies profits, but remember, there was a time where they had those, fairly, due to years of negotiating their worth, and then suddenly they didn't.

The final point is that pattern bargaining is the normal method that airline labor has use for years and years. It's normal in this industry to ask for more because somebody else is already getting it. For the most part, we each do the exact same job as a guy at another airline and should be compensated the same. Management has gotten smart and started using relative size and the efficiencies generated by them to fight off that argument, which is where the recent Alaska arbitration decision comes from.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

While it's true neither side is "innocent" during a contract negotiation, I've never seen something play out the way you are describing. In general, management isn't trying to low ball an employee group. They have a max amount they can spend and they try to keep it as far under that number as they possibly can. Remember, a CEO has a fiduciary responsibility to share holders. Regrettably, in this time of maximized short term share holder value, earning reports matter way more than long term structure. So not spending money on retaining talent or building up R&D or whatever it is, gets bigger rewards than investing in the future.

Likewise, very few employee groups are trying to raid the company bank. Sure, there are guys running around saying I want it all and I want it now, but with a few rare exceptions none of those guys are in a position to direct the path of negotiations. And generally, in a normally negotiation, very little nasty, petty or juvenile things are done or said. It's a business deal and that's about it.




I agree that this is a place where people outside probably don't get it. There are two things driving the ideology though. First, a pilot is, in general, tied to their seniority number and their narrow band of skill sets. You didn't feel it was necessary to ask for more 5 years later because if they didn't recognize your contributions and reward you at a rate (financially, QOL wise of responsibility level) at a satisfactory level, you could leave and start over at another airport management gig elsewhere pretty much at the same level you left at, if not higher. Or, you could go to another industry and do a similar thing for pay (etc) that you felt was reasonable. At an airline, you can't do that. You leave, you start over. And your specific skills are ONLY good for flying an airplane.

The second issue (and this goes back to Max's comment about raiding the bank), is that airlines, in recent history have been VERY quick to take pay away from employees, through both the real and the sham bankruptcy process. Now that things are going well, employee groups are trying to get back to the level (percentage wise) that they were at before. Sure, it appears that they are demanding a large part of a companies profits, but remember, there was a time where they had those, fairly, due to years of negotiating their worth, and then suddenly they didn't.

The final point is that pattern bargaining is the normal method that airline labor has use for years and years. It's normal in this industry to ask for more because somebody else is already getting it. For the most part, we each do the exact same job as a guy at another airline and should be compensated the same. Management has gotten smart and started using relative size and the efficiencies generated by them to fight off that argument, which is where the recent Alaska arbitration decision comes from.

I have little to no experience in this area, so I bow to yours. But I will say that my mom was a teacher for thirty-five years and a union member. And I remember hearing many stories growing up about management (school district) being pretty petty towards the union and the teachers during renegotiations. Maybe I was just seeing/hearing things from the teachers perspective because it directly affected my mother. Looking out, vs looking in.

With airlines, we have stuff like what's going on with Avianca, and years ago the Northwest CEO suggesting pilots dumpster dive. Negotiations can be/get nasty at times.

 

[Murdoughnut]

While it's true neither side is "innocent" during a contract negotiation, I've never seen something play out the way you are describing. In general, management isn't trying to low ball an employee group. They have a max amount they can spend and they try to keep it as far under that number as they possibly can. Remember, a CEO has a fiduciary responsibility to share holders. Regrettably, in this time of maximized short term share holder value, earning reports matter way more than long term structure. So not spending money on retaining talent or building up R&D or whatever it is, gets bigger rewards than investing in the future.

Likewise, very few employee groups are trying to raid the company bank. Sure, there are guys running around saying I want it all and I want it now, but with a few rare exceptions none of those guys are in a position to direct the path of negotiations. And generally, in a normally negotiation, very little nasty, petty or juvenile things are done or said. It's a business deal and that's about it.




I agree that this is a place where people outside probably don't get it. There are two things driving the ideology though. First, a pilot is, in general, tied to their seniority number and their narrow band of skill sets. You didn't feel it was necessary to ask for more 5 years later because if they didn't recognize your contributions and reward you at a rate (financially, QOL wise of responsibility level) at a satisfactory level, you could leave and start over at another airport management gig elsewhere pretty much at the same level you left at, if not higher. Or, you could go to another industry and do a similar thing for pay (etc) that you felt was reasonable. At an airline, you can't do that. You leave, you start over. And your specific skills are ONLY good for flying an airplane.

The second issue (and this goes back to Max's comment about raiding the bank), is that airlines, in recent history have been VERY quick to take pay away from employees, through both the real and the sham bankruptcy process. Now that things are going well, employee groups are trying to get back to the level (percentage wise) that they were at before. Sure, it appears that they are demanding a large part of a companies profits, but remember, there was a time where they had those, fairly, due to years of negotiating their worth, and then suddenly they didn't.

The final point is that pattern bargaining is the normal method that airline labor has use for years and years. It's normal in this industry to ask for more because somebody else is already getting it. For the most part, we each do the exact same job as a guy at another airline and should be compensated the same. Management has gotten smart and started using relative size and the efficiencies generated by them to fight off that argument, which is where the recent Alaska arbitration decision comes from.

These are fair points, and you're certainly right regarding seniority and starting over.

The only point I have trouble with is the idea of expecting to be paid the same as someone at airline X. A Director of Marketing for a non-profit does the same job as someone at a for-profit company, but there's never expectation that they would be paid the same. People take non-profit jobs for a variety of reasons that matter less to them than the pay differentiation: closer to home, easier job to be hired at, quality of work, etc. I could see someone going to a Spirit because they don't want to hold out for a mainline carrier, they really want to live in FLL, etc. - it just seems odd to me that the same person would come back after accepting the job/pay and say "oh, BTW - I should be paid the same as the Delta guy flying the same equipment."

 

[derg]

Edit: somewhat watchable on mute whilst killing time on the crapper.

Obnoxious bordering on ridiculous as a substitute for a proper safety briefing.

Ick. Yeah, I'd have to say "Oh HELL naw".

 

[jtrain609]

These are fair points, and you're certainly right regarding seniority and starting over.

The only point I have trouble with is the idea of expecting to be paid the same as someone at airline X. A Director of Marketing for a non-profit does the same job as someone at a for-profit company, but there's never expectation that they would be paid the same. People take non-profit jobs for a variety of reasons that matter less to them than the pay differentiation: closer to home, easier job to be hired at, quality of work, etc. I could see someone going to a Spirit because they don't want to hold out for a mainline carrier, they really want to live in FLL, etc. - it just seems odd to me that the same person would come back after accepting the job/pay and say "oh, BTW - I should be paid the same as the Delta guy flying the same equipment."

Jimmy is going to kill me for this, but...

Spirit pays the same amount for fuel, for airplanes, for parts, as Delta. Are there some variations in those numbers based on bulk purchasing? Sure, there are. But Spirit can't call the fueler and say, "Listen, we're not as big as Delta, we don't make as money as Delta, and because we only made a third of what they did this year, we'd like to pay you a third of what Delta pays for fuel. KTHXBYE."

In the same way, if pilots are going to be treated like a commodity, then companies should be paying the same amount for a pilot. We fly the same planes, on the same routes, in the same airspace, and all do exactly the same job. We're not in a position to influence the bottom line, unlike you, and because of the uniform nature of our job, the argument goes that pay should be uniform across the industry.

And I hate to quote Todd, but, we're motor oil; it costs what it costs.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Just slightly worse than the "founded by CE Woolman and get to sit at his desk everyday" video.

I liked that video! And I miss Anderson.

It's funny seeing a thread of airline pilots pretending domestic US flying is different among carriers.

I think you're blinded by your status as a pilot rather than as a paying customer. The differences are stark.

I've spent time with Gary Kelly and his wife, and of all of the corporate CEOs and big wigs I've spent time with over my career, they are hands down the most genuine, down to earth ones I've met.

Yeah, he was so "genuine and down to earth" when he was lying to our faces. I spit in his general direction. Pfft!

And I hate to quote Todd, but, we're motor oil; it costs what it costs.

Wait, I'm not on your ignore list? Progress!

 

[BobDDuck]

Jimmy is going to kill me for this, but...

Nope... No going all Game Of Thrones needed. That's pretty much exactly correct.

 

[bucksmith]

Edit: somewhat watchable on mute whilst killing time on the crapper.

Obnoxious bordering on ridiculous as a substitute for a proper safety briefing.

How is this even a legal safety brief?? English is my first language and I had to read the subtitles. I think I'd rather opt out of the video and get a personal safety brief from the VA FA of my choice.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

I liked that video! And I miss Anderson.



I think you're blinded by your status as a pilot rather than as a paying customer. The differences are stark.

But I jumpseat through the year on various carriers for different reasons (training, vacation, medical, personal, etc). In the last 12 months have been on VX, UA, DL, AA. I've had good and bad experiences on pretty much all of them. I don't think I can make a blanket statement of "Delta sucks" or "United sucks." Domestically, they're all about the same.

The only thing domestically speaking that got me to say "oh cool, that's really neat and no one else does it" is when I flew on jetBlue and the plane had free gate to gate wifi. Not just free chat like most airlines, but free wifi period.

Anyway, most of the complaints I hear from my non-aviation friends in NJ are beyond the airline control.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

But I jumpseat through the year on various carriers for different reasons (training, vacation, medical, personal, etc). In the last 12 months have been on VX, UA, DL, AA. I've had good and bad experiences on pretty much all of them. I don't think I can make a blanket statement of "Delta sucks" or "United sucks." Domestically, they're all about the same.

The only thing domestically speaking that got me to say "oh cool, that's really neat and no one else does it" is when I flew on jetBlue and the plane had free gate to gate wifi. Not just free chat like most airlines, but free wifi period.

Anyway, most of the complaints I hear from my non-aviation friends in NJ are beyond the airline control.

Sorry, but there's just no comparing the customer experience between Delta and Southwest. I can't even buy a first class ticket on Southwest.

 

[phill1174]

Last week I was on a SWA flight that had a Chicago crew and as we taxied out the lead sang a full Alicia keys song over the PA. I had my headphones on and I could still here it.

I use SWA out of PHX a lot and I think FA’s like this are far and few between. Unless most of them are just out east. The way they do things keeps customers coming back though so it works for them but it’s not for everybody. Thankfully we have choices.