NWA pilots prefer pay cuts to job cuts

Malko

Malko

ughhh
Staff member
Liz Fedor, Star Tribune
May 26, 2004NWA0526
[ QUOTE ]

Pilots at Northwest Airlines want their $200 million in annual labor savings to come primarily through pay cuts rather than changes in scheduling, vacations or other work rules, a pilots union leader said Tuesday.

"Our philosophy is to make our cost reductions in W-2s rather than changing work rules," which could produce more job losses, said Curt Kruse, a spokesman for the Northwest branch of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA).


[/ QUOTE ]
Minneapolis StarTribune - Full Article
 
I still think short term lay offs are the way - every airline pilot takes 1-2 months of unpaid vacation per year, rather then cutting 10% of the workforce. Every pilot I know would jump at the opportunity to take a month of (paid or not) just to spend time with their family, and do the things they want to do!
 
Iain,

On the face, that looks like a great idea. Do you know if that has ever been brought up in the past? I wonder what would stop the pilots unions from doing that.

My numbers may be off, but in NWA's current situation, they would almost need to have it be two months to match there current hours.

Here is my (latenight at work) thought process:

# of pilots - 6200 x 80 hrs (month) x 12 (months) = 5,952,000 manhours/yr
# of furloughed pilots 881 x 80 hrs(month) 12(months) = 845,760 mhrs
# of current hours for NWA Pilots = 5,106,240

hours with change in schedule:

# of pilots - 6200 x 80 hrs (month) x 10 (with 2 months off for each pilot) = 4,960,000

Maybe it has been proposed in the past, I just wonder what issues both sides would have with an arrangement like this.

This may be too much of a generalization, I was just trying to see how the hours would look if something like this was adopted.

confused.gif
 
NO.

Here's what would happen. You would take your two month "unpaid leave" based on the company's interpretation of seniority. Which means that all the senior guys are off during the summer and you are off the two months before christmas season.

No it would be a nightmare. I can see so many possible abuses I can't even type anymor
 
I think you guys are missing the point here. The NWA guys currently get lots of time off. No problem for most of them getting a month or two off under the current contract. They want to preserve that and give all their concessions in pay.

The company on the other hand wants productivity and pay cuts. They are looking long term and want to see productivity nearer to say SWA, whose pilots fly quite a bit more than the majors.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I still think short term lay offs are the way - every airline pilot takes 1-2 months of unpaid vacation per year, rather then cutting 10% of the workforce.

[/ QUOTE ]
Iain - that is actually a great idea, which has already been put to use during this current economic downturn (albeit not in aviation) and it worked/is working BEAUTIFULLY!

My uncle is the CEO of a a major corporation with 14 subsidiaries throughout the world.

Not only did he institute the short-term layoffs (those being laid off were ASSIGNED one of two time periods when they would take their layoff), but he - quietly - cut his own salary in half and that money was put towards helping his employees who were without a job for the term of the layoff.

So far - not ONE person has permanently lost their job.

IMHO - I think it's a great idea.

R2F
 
[ QUOTE ]
They are looking long term and want to see productivity nearer to say SWA, whose pilots fly quite a bit more than the majors.

[/ QUOTE ]

And there is once again the biggest problem with the management at many of the airlines. They are trying to out-Southwest Southwest. It cannot be done. There are way too many differences between operating a fleet of multiple aircraft with a route system that spans the entire world and Southwest.

Apples and oranges? Nah, more like apples and kiwis.
 
[ QUOTE ]
but he - quietly - cut his own salary in half and that money was put towards helping his employees who were without a job for the term of the layoff.

So far - not ONE person has permanently lost their job.

IMHO - I think it's a great idea.

R2F

[/ QUOTE ]

from what I've been hearing since 2001, I seriously doubt that any airline CEO would have the guts to do that. I have never seen one airline CEO (except for the JetBlue CEO who I met in person) care that deeply about the welfare of his/her employees. At least not in action.
 
[ QUOTE ]
but he - quietly - cut his own salary in half and that money was put towards helping his employees who were without a job for the term of the layoff.


[/ QUOTE ]
If only we had more people like that in this country/world. Your uncle seems like a hell of a guy!
 
[ They are trying to out-Southwest Southwest. It cannot be done. There are way too many differences between operating a fleet of multiple aircraft with a route system that spans the entire world and Southwest.

Apples and oranges? Nah, more like apples and kiwis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your point is well taken. NWA won't become SWA. On the other hand, there are certainly productivity enhancements available in the NWA contract. The pilots know there are and are trying to avoid taking them. The idea is more jobs through less work. The only problem there is; as a long term solution this just won't work. As a short term solution it can avoid some layoffs.

Increasing productivity is one way to keep a career secure. Histroically when productivity stops going up, that industry, or that segment of an industry goes away. That's why when jets were introduced, instead of hurting pilot's carrers, as ALPA believed they would, jets actually accelerated pilot careers. It's hard sometimes to see cause/effect clearly.

Feather-bedding worked in a regulated environment. In a deregulated, dog-eat-dog, environment employee groups that don't want to produce will get shut out. Sad but true. It's almost as certain as gravity.
tongue.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
NO.

Here's what would happen. You would take your two month "unpaid leave" based on the company's interpretation of seniority. Which means that all the senior guys are off during the summer and you are off the two months before christmas season.

No it would be a nightmare. I can see so many possible abuses I can't even type anymor

[/ QUOTE ]

It would not be a bid package.
 
I think you are trying to over-complicate the situation. The way I envision it - it would be handed down, with 1 months notice given. In July I think there would be fewer pilots off due to the increase in traffic. This would also cut down on overtime which is costing the airlines $$$.
 
Basically what is being 'envisioned' here is what we (at Eagle) used to call TOWOP (Time Off With Out Pay). If there happened to be too many people for the flying published for the month, the company would include these TOWOP lines in the monthly bids, this allowed people who had the financial ability and/or desire to, to take the month off with no pay. These were great, it gave people who wanted the month off the ability to bid to do so.

The company can not just 'hand down' involuntary time off with no pay! Imagine your employer telling you "oh, by the way, next month we don't need you, and we don't want to pay you, so you're (essentially) furloughed for the month". They can't just do this to whomever they (the company) wants, at any time, with little advance warning! How are you supposed to plan your budget, pay the mortgage, car payments, day care etc, when you have to live in perpetual fear of not having a paycheck the next month?

In the airline world, anything related to bidding, or schedules, is done on a senority basis. The company can not just arbitrarily assign whichever pilots they please 'unpaid' status at their whim.

Many people (*not everybody!*) would jump at the chance to have a month off, paid or not, but it needs to be incorporated into the monthly bidding.
 
How is this any different from a Leave of Absence?

(which is granted by seniority and company requirements)
 
[ QUOTE ]
How is this any different from a Leave of Absence?

(which is granted by seniority and company requirements)

[/ QUOTE ]

If I remember right (and I never took the TOWOP, I couldn't afford it) when a person was on TOWOP they kept all their benefits, (D2 card, insurance, everything) and you were never placed on a formal 'LOA' (Leave of Absence) status. The benefits you had on LOA varied per the kind of LOA you were on. For example, on a Personal Leave, you kept your medical insurance, but you had to pay full cost , and on an Educational Leave, you only got one or two round-trip D2s per calender year. There were many other 'types' of LOAs, and each had it's own rules and to what kinds of benefits you kept, which ones you lost, and which ones you paid for.

The TOWOP was simply a bid award that was held for the month.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top