I don't know....I don't think so at least. Maybe you can refresh my memory.eddie said:
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Airlines & The Unions: The Classic Love-Hate Relationship:
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
Exactly! And why do I need a union to help me figure this out? Why does a third party need to be introduced into this process? Oh, that's right. For the strong arm tactics.A4sForever said:
Maybe I should go work for the upper management who keep getting all those pay and benefits increases.A4sForever said:Many of you want to work for the airlines at some point in time --- so now is the time to start paying attention and educating yourself to the realities of the industry instead of snorting uninformed, knee-jerk reactions. If you don't take the opportunity to learn now, you wil learn later and probably be disappointed ....
BTW, do union members (i.e. pilots, mechanics, flight attendants, etc) get to choose whether to be a member or not of their respective union? Are union dues "mandatory" whether by it being a condition of employment or through peer pressure? What happens if you say you don't want to be a member?
This is kind of complicated, so I'll try to keep it simple. For all of us .... and not just Steve ...Steve Wilkins said:
Labor relations in American industry and their history are another planet unto themselves. Many craft unions in the US and Canada started out as "closed shops" in the various industries they participated in ... such as longshoremen, construction, muscicians, restaurant employees , etc., etc ... the old "hiring halls". These industries typically had high employee turnover and the unions wanted to preserve previous gains and keep management from continuously replacing workers with cheaper labor that would work longer for less. A closed shop required all prospective employees to be a member of the respective union as a pre-condition of employment.
This was replaced by the "union shop" with the arrival of the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947 which outlawed the closed shop but permitted the union shop. A total political solution --- the ultimate mating of all the whores of industry --- politicians, union leaders, and senior management. The union shop required all employees to join the union(s) or pay the equivalent in dues (anyway) which effectively perpetuated much of the earlier closed shop. Some "right-to-work" states have passed laws that prohibit a requirement of union affiliation as a condition for getting hired or continuing to work. Those states have experienced higher growth over the past 10 years than those states that are not "right-to-work" ... but many argue that the jobs are subsistence jobs as opposed to the earlier, higher paid , unionized manufacturing jobs .....
The National Labor Relations Act (there's those politicians again) still permits construction employers to enter into pre-hire agreements, in which they agree to draw their workforces from a pool of employees dispatched by the union (equivalent to the old closed shop) --- right-to-work laws statewide or not. However .... the NLRA prohibits pre-hire agreements outside the construction industry. You say potato, I say potahto ....
Politicians, bureaucrats, unions, capatalists .... you roll 'em all together and what do you get? Hypocrisy and economic relativism ..... that's what.
This is too hard ...... look it up for yourself.
A4sForever said:
Steve Wilkins said:
Nope ... exactly wrong. Did you miss the rest of the paragraph and therefore the whole point??? Or do YOU plan on becoming management's favorite employee --- the proverbial BOHICA BUNNY who will do anything to keep whatever you are offered just to keep your job ??? They are gonna love you .....
The point is that some things are worth fighting for .... (gee .... where have I heard that before ?? ...) even to the point of making the ultimate sacrifice --- in this case --- it's your hard-won career. "They" want to take away something that was previously agreed to ... get it ??? Good grief --- instead of repeating the same reactionaly anti-union B.S. that is deep within your psyche --- open your ears, eyes, and mind and learn something for a change, STEVE.
I've been there before .... losing my job --- it's scary. Evidently you haven't .... bully for you. But you might someday -- unless you're independently wealthy.
I think I've had enough of repeating myself to you ......
..... You figure it out .... time to go squeeze some limes.What's up at United?
A4s- What's going on at United? My neighbor seems to be pretty senior cabin crew having commenced his cabin crew career at Pan Am - the first one - decades ago. From what I've gathered from the news, United is trimming or holding in abeyance or cancelling their pension plan or plans. So far my neighbor seems to still be flying but have United pension plans all been cancelled or what?
A4s- What's going on at United? My neighbor seems to be pretty senior cabin crew having commenced his cabin crew career at Pan Am - the first one - decades ago. From what I've gathered from the news, United is trimming or holding in abeyance or cancelling their pension plan or plans. So far my neighbor seems to still be flying but have United pension plans all been cancelled or what?
Driftwood
The pain train's coming! WOO WOO!!!
My girlfriend's dad is a pilot with United too, and wasn't too pleased about the pensions and stuff although the details on that are fuzzy. He complains about it a lot and through the information cascade I hear about it a little. Seems to get paid a lot to not fly though...something about having a route where other pilots need to earn the qualifications or something like that so he gets bumped and paid to stay home. Not that any of this answered you questions, but yeah, what is going on A4s?
USN99 said:....A4s- What's going on at United?
Well .... O.K. guys, here we go, at least as best as I can glean from conversations with my United friends. Maybe some UAL drivers can provide better info ... ??? I occasionally used to fly for United ... whenever I was at the bar and got drunk or too loud and someone said: "Who do you fly for, A-hole??" .... "Me? Why, United Airlines" was usually my slurred, blurred answer. My Doctor's wife is a senior F/A for UAL ... but I'm not supposed to call her anymore .....Driftwood said:
Retirement: The UAL pilots have lost their A-plan .... gone --- zero, nada. Some had many, many dollars in it. Big money. They still have the B-plan ... which is a shadow of the original value of the A-plan ... I cannot get into the contractual differences of the two plans, because I don't know. At one of my former airlines --- we also had an A and a B plan ... the A was where the "real" money was for retirement --- but it wasn't protected like the B-plan, which held much less money .... ditto for UAL.
They are concocting something of a "C-plan" as we speak --- probably going to be more of a 401-K which might appear after UAL emerges from bankruptcy --- assuming it does --- in late summer or this fall (??). The problem is the dollars going in start at "zero" .... not too good for anyone 45-50 years or older with families, bills, houses, and significantly less income.
The old UAL ESOP ??? Your stock??? The famous, now infamous UAL "employee" owned airline??? Busted .... that's what. One of my UAL friends had @ $200,000 worth of stock in UAL several years ago --- even though he came onboard LATE after doing 24 years with Big Blue --- and he was cashed out of the ESOP @ $2500 ........ That's right. $200,000 to $2500 ..... sounds like me gambling in Reno.
A couple of guys I know are going to fly past age 60 if it is approved by the Feds and they can qualify ... physical standards will be tough and the jury is still out on that one. They basically have lost most of their retirement, must rely on the PBGC for any portion of what they worked years (some decades) for, and they don't have enough money to meet current responsibilities (houses, kids-college, ex-wives
) ) etc. ) without selling and retrenching. Just what you want to do after working for years and now facing retirement. Soooo .... Pay scales? They are out there if you dig a little --- but I know that one of my 747 First Officers makes more today (even with our pay cuts) in the Whale right seat (@ $146/hour) than a UAL CAPT does on the 767 .... unbelievable for a company where 3-4 years ago the UAL 767 CAPT made @ $240/hour. But then, 3-4 years ago I can also remember everyone in the industry anxiously waiting for their next contract negotiation so all could "bump up" to UAL pay rates. How the worm has turned. Seems like UAL pilots led us up .... and now they are leading us back down.
Hmmmm .... sounds like that's a Ballistic trajectory.... and that usually goes "boom" at the bottom, doesn't it???
The old airlines are hitting the wall of today's business realities.
When airlines were regulated, flight crew and ground crew unionized and demanded ever higher wages and benefits. Since the government was calling the shots, no one else could enter the industry and thus the majors had a oligopoly.
When the airlines were deregulated, anyone could enter the business as lonmg as they met the FAA requirements. New carriers were started with young personnel (especially people just leaving the military) who were willing to fly or work on airplanes for 20% of what the majors paid their people. It didn't take long for the majors to start losing business to new competitors who were charging 1/2 or 1/3 the fares of the majors.
Then 9-11 hit, and people stopped flying. But the big airlines with humungous monthly finance charges on their big, new airplanes had to keep paying. Many airlines went into Chapter 11 then and never came out. Some reorganized and kept flying. Some folded (Eastern, Pan Am, etc.) But the air abd ground crews fought tooth and nail not to give up any of their high pay and benefits. Until recently it was common for a senior captain at a major airline to make $ 300,000/year and work just twelve days a month. That's over, yet many pilots with a lot of fancy toys refuse to give up without a fight. ALPA has reached a point of continuous confrontation with both management and the government over everything.
About half the pilots I flew with on initial active duty in VP went to the airlines for a career. Half are still flying; half lost everything when their lines folded or pay dropped so steeply that they could no longer afford to fly for a living. Several others are retiring just in time for their airlines to welch on their pensions and retiree health coverage.
With the military making far fewer pilots and the average age of the civilian flight instructor now 50, there aren't a lot of rosy outlooks for a flying career outside of the military unless you are able and willing to live month to month.
For passengers it will only get worse. Airline travel is becoming like riding the train but with a much greater chance of losing your luggage and having the trip canceled. ALPA and the other airline unions are being kept alive by machine and are, in my view, becoming strictly self-serving entities for union management. You cannot keep demanding high pay and benefits from an industry that is gone.
When airlines were regulated, flight crew and ground crew unionized and demanded ever higher wages and benefits. Since the government was calling the shots, no one else could enter the industry and thus the majors had a oligopoly.
When the airlines were deregulated, anyone could enter the business as lonmg as they met the FAA requirements. New carriers were started with young personnel (especially people just leaving the military) who were willing to fly or work on airplanes for 20% of what the majors paid their people. It didn't take long for the majors to start losing business to new competitors who were charging 1/2 or 1/3 the fares of the majors.
Then 9-11 hit, and people stopped flying. But the big airlines with humungous monthly finance charges on their big, new airplanes had to keep paying. Many airlines went into Chapter 11 then and never came out. Some reorganized and kept flying. Some folded (Eastern, Pan Am, etc.) But the air abd ground crews fought tooth and nail not to give up any of their high pay and benefits. Until recently it was common for a senior captain at a major airline to make $ 300,000/year and work just twelve days a month. That's over, yet many pilots with a lot of fancy toys refuse to give up without a fight. ALPA has reached a point of continuous confrontation with both management and the government over everything.
About half the pilots I flew with on initial active duty in VP went to the airlines for a career. Half are still flying; half lost everything when their lines folded or pay dropped so steeply that they could no longer afford to fly for a living. Several others are retiring just in time for their airlines to welch on their pensions and retiree health coverage.
With the military making far fewer pilots and the average age of the civilian flight instructor now 50, there aren't a lot of rosy outlooks for a flying career outside of the military unless you are able and willing to live month to month.
For passengers it will only get worse. Airline travel is becoming like riding the train but with a much greater chance of losing your luggage and having the trip canceled. ALPA and the other airline unions are being kept alive by machine and are, in my view, becoming strictly self-serving entities for union management. You cannot keep demanding high pay and benefits from an industry that is gone.
Supply & Demand - nothin' new here
A4s and ip568 paint two grim pictures. The former paints a very stark, almost tragic, reality of senior guys seeing their retirement evaporate. ip568 gives a brief economics and history lesson leading to the same aforementioned stark reality.
I don't lose sight of the fact that there were other industries, not at all glamorous, which felt the impact of competition that drove their industries into massive retrenchment. Some examples. Does any U.S. firm make TVs in the U.S. any more? Our textile industry also has largely moved off-shore. In those cases, the corporations went toward lower costs, specifically labor to keep their products price-attractive to U.S. consumers. Our auto industry is under the same pressure.
The airlines, for so many decades one of the most glamorous occupations, are being squeezed by rising fuel costs vs. finance costs for new capital investments (a.k.a., planes & ground infrastructure) and labor contracts negotiated when profitability was markedly higher. Assuming the finance costs are unchangeable, the airlines focused on the labor costs. There is no way to get fuel costs under-control. There were and are victims in this squeeze and A4s has described them. Steel workers in the U.S., like textile workers, got the same raw deal as U.S. steel plants went under. They aren't glamorous and never were glamorous but their families got hit the same - and their kids had little prospect of colleges anyway.
Flying for the airlines was not supposed to contain the same risks as faced by the venture capitalist. I remember all the "FAPA" wannabees in my first squadron. Seems like the glamour is fading away with the airline pension plans. And I can see air travel is already becoming train or bus travel - the glamour is gone there also. That's the ticket - the glamour is gone from the airline industry. It's become not the Porsche but the Ford.
A4s and ip568 paint two grim pictures. The former paints a very stark, almost tragic, reality of senior guys seeing their retirement evaporate. ip568 gives a brief economics and history lesson leading to the same aforementioned stark reality.
I don't lose sight of the fact that there were other industries, not at all glamorous, which felt the impact of competition that drove their industries into massive retrenchment. Some examples. Does any U.S. firm make TVs in the U.S. any more? Our textile industry also has largely moved off-shore. In those cases, the corporations went toward lower costs, specifically labor to keep their products price-attractive to U.S. consumers. Our auto industry is under the same pressure.
The airlines, for so many decades one of the most glamorous occupations, are being squeezed by rising fuel costs vs. finance costs for new capital investments (a.k.a., planes & ground infrastructure) and labor contracts negotiated when profitability was markedly higher. Assuming the finance costs are unchangeable, the airlines focused on the labor costs. There is no way to get fuel costs under-control. There were and are victims in this squeeze and A4s has described them. Steel workers in the U.S., like textile workers, got the same raw deal as U.S. steel plants went under. They aren't glamorous and never were glamorous but their families got hit the same - and their kids had little prospect of colleges anyway.
Flying for the airlines was not supposed to contain the same risks as faced by the venture capitalist. I remember all the "FAPA" wannabees in my first squadron. Seems like the glamour is fading away with the airline pension plans. And I can see air travel is already becoming train or bus travel - the glamour is gone there also. That's the ticket - the glamour is gone from the airline industry. It's become not the Porsche but the Ford.
Your post is about 1/2 right ... which is better than most. But still a lot of mistakes .... about standard for those who are on the "outside" and have not walked the walk of deregulation. I and my comrades have ..... and I from a line pilot and from a management perspective. I'll try to give my view of them over this weekend if the WX is not too good and I therefore don't drink too many Margaritas.ip568 said:
There are so many misunderstandings about what really happened post 1978 .... most people only know what the scribes put forth and it's usually "old news" and incorrect.
ALOHA
So really then, how is one to learn?A4sForever said:There are so many misunderstandings about what really happened post 1978 .... most people only know what the scribes put forth and it's usually "old news" and incorrect.
Steve Wilkins said:
Well, if I didn't have anything better to do but post on Air Warriors, maybe I could help explain the past 26 years of the airlines .... but since I do --- in the interim --- you might try to squeeze more limes and drink more Margaritas ....
ALOHABig Arithmetic
Big Arithmetic is costs have to be below revenue. If our market-oriented economy were not regulated, Big Arithmetic would run rampant as businesses acted to make costs less than revenues. The Big Arithmetic applies to all of private industry including publically held companies, as well as steel mills, auto-factories, IT firms, oil-service companies, and airlines. Not much calculus is required here; regression analysis is also not particularly insightful. It's just simple arithmetic.
The pains and woes, the micro-economic machinations of airline de-regulation served to shape how the Big Arithmetic was and is carried out. But it still operates. Costs have to be less than revenue or private sector businesses go bankrupt. And yes the arcane bankruptcy laws also shape how the Big Arithmetic works but they can only delay for so long the economic juggernaut which is the Big Arithmetic.
Our multitude of state and federal laws all work on the Big Arithmetic to lessen its negative aspects but they don't eliminate the unstoppable imperative of getting costs under revenues.
I can accept detailed explanations of how those companies who own airlines may have mis-calculated demand and revenue; may have under-estimated the costs of fuel; and simply zero'ed in on labor costs in order to appease the Big Arithmetic. But I won't accept that they can fundamentally impact the cost of crude oil on the world market.
I can accept that they are making air travel more like bus travel in order to keep prices in line with demand. But I won't accept that they should simply acquiesce to an airline industry labor supply that seeks a price (i.e., salaries and benefits) from a cost structure from decades past - when fuel was much cheaper and profits much higher. The newest air carriers are, I assert, in fact the shape of the air transport industry of the future.
I call your attention to robotics in auto plants. Decades ago, when they were first introduced as a component of auto manufacturing, there was much wailing by the UAW. Seen a U.S. auto plant of today? You'll see robotics. They were the future and change was painful. But these robots were serving to keep costs below revenues. But auto workers are not "Hollywood" or glamorous like the workers in the airline industry that captivate us.
I'm not even the chicken or the pig in this "ham & egg breakfast". But I can accept that several industries have acted to acquire lower cost labor or lower costs of the same labor supply. What may fascinate us, and stimulate way too many A/W posts, is that the air line industry is so glamorous. I would even bet someone else's money that A4s is a pretty handsome dude. :icon_smil He's so claaaaasic.
Nevertheless, Big Arithmetic is working on the airline industry too like it worked on textiles, consumer electronics, steel and other industries. Those laborers in those industries, who were never what we would call glamorous, just got worked over by Big Arithmetic and faded from sight entirely. They did not leave the planet, however. They adapted in a multitude of different ways which we can't see.
I respect the insight and wisdom, typically, of A4s. He is a sage. Add margaritas and he's an oracle. But independent of all our collective wisdoms and ignorances stands what I call the Big Arithmetic.A4sForever said:Well, if I didn't have anything better to do but post on Air Warriors, maybe I could help explain the past 26 years of the airlines .... but since I do --- in the interim --- you might try to squeeze more limes and drink more Margaritas ....
Big Arithmetic is costs have to be below revenue. If our market-oriented economy were not regulated, Big Arithmetic would run rampant as businesses acted to make costs less than revenues. The Big Arithmetic applies to all of private industry including publically held companies, as well as steel mills, auto-factories, IT firms, oil-service companies, and airlines. Not much calculus is required here; regression analysis is also not particularly insightful. It's just simple arithmetic.
The pains and woes, the micro-economic machinations of airline de-regulation served to shape how the Big Arithmetic was and is carried out. But it still operates. Costs have to be less than revenue or private sector businesses go bankrupt. And yes the arcane bankruptcy laws also shape how the Big Arithmetic works but they can only delay for so long the economic juggernaut which is the Big Arithmetic.
Our multitude of state and federal laws all work on the Big Arithmetic to lessen its negative aspects but they don't eliminate the unstoppable imperative of getting costs under revenues.
I can accept detailed explanations of how those companies who own airlines may have mis-calculated demand and revenue; may have under-estimated the costs of fuel; and simply zero'ed in on labor costs in order to appease the Big Arithmetic. But I won't accept that they can fundamentally impact the cost of crude oil on the world market.
I can accept that they are making air travel more like bus travel in order to keep prices in line with demand. But I won't accept that they should simply acquiesce to an airline industry labor supply that seeks a price (i.e., salaries and benefits) from a cost structure from decades past - when fuel was much cheaper and profits much higher. The newest air carriers are, I assert, in fact the shape of the air transport industry of the future.
I call your attention to robotics in auto plants. Decades ago, when they were first introduced as a component of auto manufacturing, there was much wailing by the UAW. Seen a U.S. auto plant of today? You'll see robotics. They were the future and change was painful. But these robots were serving to keep costs below revenues. But auto workers are not "Hollywood" or glamorous like the workers in the airline industry that captivate us.
I'm not even the chicken or the pig in this "ham & egg breakfast". But I can accept that several industries have acted to acquire lower cost labor or lower costs of the same labor supply. What may fascinate us, and stimulate way too many A/W posts, is that the air line industry is so glamorous. I would even bet someone else's money that A4s is a pretty handsome dude. :icon_smil He's so claaaaasic.
Nevertheless, Big Arithmetic is working on the airline industry too like it worked on textiles, consumer electronics, steel and other industries. Those laborers in those industries, who were never what we would call glamorous, just got worked over by Big Arithmetic and faded from sight entirely. They did not leave the planet, however. They adapted in a multitude of different ways which we can't see.
Great post (above) .... nothing that I can add to this précis on basic, simple, modern economics .... thanks for saving me the effort USN99 .... Speaking of economics --- by virtue of your time-saving post ... I can devote more time to squeezing more limes .... :icon_rast .... now THAT's economy.
And yes, I AM extremely handsome. Stunningly handsome. Extraordinairly handsome. I'm an Aviator, am I not??? :captain_1 ALOHA
And yes, I AM extremely handsome. Stunningly handsome. Extraordinairly handsome. I'm an Aviator, am I not??? :captain_1 ALOHA