Can I have my money back now?

Doug, I thought about starting a whole new thread but this seems an appropriate place. Its has to do with leverage and "why should the company pay you more now?".

Well, if the pilots are pissed off at mgmt, how common is it for pilots to take it out on the profitable company that dosent want to share by wasting company money by, say, taking on more fuel than you really need, running at higher power settings, not shutting off an engine on the ground, or simply being a bad employee.

Say you pull up to the gate and noones there to open up, instead of making calls to figure out the situation just saying "screw it, its not my job! I dont get paid enough for that"

How common is this kind of thinking? Does managment worry about stuff like this?
 
I know at the company I am at now they are doing a fuel monitoring deal. The dispatchers are being held accountable for putting extra fuel on for no reason and the pilots are also. The 2 contracts customers we have are they ones requested that it be done.
I would say that most of the pilots will make a call to the ramp tower if no one is there to park them or move the jetway up to the aircraft.
The airlines waste tons of money every year on BS stuff like having banners put up at the TOC or having tshirts or hats made for the employees. They think that is a moral booster but truly we know that they are just trying to sooth over the cuts. Airlines will never learn to be efficient in business. Its a nature of the beast
 
Andrew_VT said:
Doug, I thought about starting a whole new thread but this seems an appropriate place. Its has to do with leverage and "why should the company pay you more now?".

Well, if the pilots are pissed off at mgmt, how common is it for pilots to take it out on the profitable company that dosent want to share by wasting company money by, say, taking on more fuel than you really need, running at higher power settings, not shutting off an engine on the ground, or simply being a bad employee.

Say you pull up to the gate and noones there to open up, instead of making calls to figure out the situation just saying "screw it, its not my job! I dont get paid enough for that"

How common is this kind of thinking? Does managment worry about stuff like this?
Click to expand...

Pissing match, eh?
 
Speaking of In N Out. They are opening one up a mile from my house which means Im going to get fat. :) Doug, Whens the move to the 757/767?
 
iwareboy said:
50% cut is harsh. But would you be in a stronger position to negotiate a wage as soon as a company (still in bankruptcy with stock price hovering around $1) OR.... in a few years after you can get some new planes, establish profitability and a decent stock price, and reduced debt?
Click to expand...


Ok, so I've been up for 22 hours now and just got done flying a plane that got the crap beaten out of it by a lightning strike (radar dome dents, radar "dish" has a hole in it and the tail is missing 2 static wicks and a bunch of paint) but I don't see how getting a few shiny 777s are going to do anything to boost pilot leverage. Look why they were forced to take cuts the last 3 (or was it 4?) times. It has nothing to do with what fleet type (and age) they operate. I will agree with you that one month's profitability doesn't warrent snapbacks on all the consencionary contracts but it sure as hell does warrnent a good faith gesture to the pilots. And believe it or not for most pilots NOT suffering from SJS (which would I hope includes most DAL guys) getting a nice new airplane really doesn't mean crap.
 
iwareboy said:
Hey Doug... I know it hurts to take pay cuts, but as much as you've lost in the last 4 years, Delta shareholders lost a ton more. Perhaps the money should be re-invested into the business? If African and Vietnamese airlines can afford to order new planes, maybe it would be good if Delta could too. Besides 8 777's and some new 738's, Delta's fleet is going to be pretty rusty in the next few years.

Just playing devil's advocate.
Click to expand...

Do some research...this is exactly why all these airlines are in the mess they are. All of them had to have new fleets in the mid to late 90's, each preaching newer is better and running up their debt. Then, when they couldn't pay for them, and 9/11 hit around the same time, well you see what happens.
 
I'll tell ya right now, working for an airline that is profitable and has one of the best performance records as far as on-time and completion probably won't hep out, too much. Management will still wring their hands and say they need cuts or concessions. They'll say they need them to keep the flying you already have (regionals) or to keep customers from switching to other airlines so they can keep having fire sales on tickets (mainline). Trust me on this. Your airline can be profitable and not in bankruptcy, and management will STILL want to bend you over....
 
I am curious what it would cost to refurbish the interior of a say for instance 737. I am no expert, but if an airline were to put all new seats, interior paneling and some fancy new lcd tv's in the seat backs I bet passengers wouldn't know the difference between a refurb and a new plane. Whaddaya think?
 
Sorry. I didn't mean to change the topic. It was just a response to the suggestion that Delta buy new planes. Back to the original topic. GIVE DOUGS' FRICKIN MONEY BACK!
 
Check it out ya'll; people are going to continue to fly. Make it cost twice as much and people will fly. Want proof that people will pay more to travel? Look at gas prices. We complain, but people don't drive any less on average even when gas costs three times what it did a few years back. And people are simply not going to drive or take the train between New York and Seattle. Even if it cost $800 a seat to get there, people are willing to pay for that over spending a week on a train.

Raise the ticket prices, the market isn't going to disapear. And people don't care if they're flying new planes or old planes, they'll still complain that it's too small and they're not getting enough peanuts.
 
Yeah, I think it was 2 weeks ago, I think a couple of airlines tried to raise their fares by $5 and it was all over the news. They ended up not doing it.

What's the big deal, $5!! I'm not rich by any means but I don't think I would not buy a ticket because it was $5 more. I just bought a ticket for $372 to go from DCA to New Brunswick, CA. I would still have bought the ticket if it were $377. :whatever:
 
Sure it's just $5, but if the other airlines refuse to match the raise (which is what happened) then when people are looking on orbitz or travelocity and see a price that is $5 cheaper they are more likely to book it. Johns right, if ticket prices were doubled people would still fly, but everybody doesn't play along then the cheapest one (even by $5) will sell more seats. The question of course is are they actualy making more money on the airplane going out full with low fares or half empty with high fares? They pay people good money to figure that stuff out.
 
Doug Taylor said:
..
Click to expand...

OUCH! Reminds me of when DL let me go under Leadership 7.5. DL was telling us how we were making record profits but they still got rid of us in Frankfurt. I think it was because we were the only station that had a union for ground personnel.

Looks like not much has changed… :mad:
 
Ramsey said:
OUCH! Reminds me of when DL let me go under Leadership 7.5. DL was telling us how we were making record profits but they still got rid of us in Frankfurt. I think it was because we were the only station that had a union for ground personnel.

Looks like not much has changed… :mad:
Click to expand...

I hear the Frankfurt hub, as a pilot, was some of the best flying on earth. Quite a few guys moved over. I've heard lots of interesting stories about flying 727's over there intra-Europe during the cold war years.

If that ever came back, which I highly doubt, I'm sure Kristie wouldn't have any problem quitting and moving over with me!
 
meritflyer said:
Keep in mind that the airlines are run by businessmen and women who are most likely fiscally conservative. The days of the high paid pilots are gone I am afraid.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say your most fiscally conservative types run or invest in airlines. Especially given that the whole industry has still never made a cent since it's inception. Here's what Warren Buffett said after his spanking from his US Air investment:

“If a capitalist had been present at Kittyhawk back in the early 1900s, he should have shot Orville Wright. He would have saved his progeny money. But seriously, the airline business has been extraordinary. It has eaten up capital over the past century like almost no other business because people seem to keep coming back to it and putting fresh money in.

You've got huge fixed costs, you've got strong labor unions and you've got commodity pricing. That is not a great recipe for success. I have an 800 (free call) number now that I call if I get the urge to buy an airline stock. I call at two in the morning and I say: “My name is Warren and I'm an aeroholic.” And then they talk me down.”
 
Well you're mistaken. Regardless of your perspective, airlines have a legal obligation to their shareholders to increase business and boost net revenue. That results in conservative business practices.
 
For the most part, shareholders and analysts don't know jack about the business.

But by being a public company, you've got to make something for them to "chew on".

Whole system is screwed up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top