Guest lupin Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 robert...the 27% seems to be the only thing he can change.Its also more convenient than trying to ask the oil companies for a 10% reduction in oil prices,the leasors for a 10% rent reduction etc... lupin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lupin Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 robert...the 27% seems to be the only thing he can change.Its also more convenient than trying to ask the oil companies for a 10% reduction in oil prices,the leasors for a 10% rent reduction etc... lupin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Its funny how AC employees are equal to or the best paid in their respective trades, bar none. And yet the attitude of a significant minoroity of the employees is probably the worst of all the airlines within their respective trades. Best paid = worst attitude. Kinda funny. How about you go and ask the fuel suppliers to take a 10 or 15% cut in their cost for aviation fuel, Robert? You should get out a little more and get the big picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp fa Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 "Is that a pay reduction?" I'm sure your bank manager would think so (not to mention your wife), but technically, I think it qualifies as a voluntary job loss mitigation program, ie. work sharing. Apparently the ones that are ranting that no pilots have been laid off are not aware that the pilot group has already taken several significant hits when it comes to job reductions. But I believe that the 10%, or whatever it ends up being in the long run will be applied to the hourly wage, and will be above and beyond any reductions in DMMs. Just my own speculative opinion, and I sincerely hope it works out for everyone. Cheers, Jennifer BTW, in case you're wondering, all of these reductions are automatically applied to CCP's wages as well. Now, does anyone know where my husband hid my credit cards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rollingrock Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Jazz has laid off more than 300f/a's starting back in jan. and is laying off 140 pilots starting in june. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stickle Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 I can't believe that a number of you think that the company is sitting here with their entire focus on the employee costs. If you actually believe that, you are sadly misguided. I know for a fact that they have people working with all of the suppliers to AC. While they may not be making as much noise surrounding these initiatives they are well under way and hopefully they will yield some positive changes to the balance sheet. I must remark though that there seems to be some "business as usual" attitude amongst the senior team. I personally don't feel that we are getting out of unproductive flying fast enough. The board of directors seem to be oblivious to all of this. They should take the time to drill down into the numbers that they are given to validate the plan is actually solid. As a management employee I sit here on a Saturday morning not knowing if I will have a job by the end of next week. There has been much talk about how "management" have screwed up this company. There have undoutedly been some decision that, in hindsight, have turned out the wrong way. At the time they seemed like the right thing to do. There are going to be many managers out of jobs in the coming week. I only hope that they are going to make some changes at the top. When I look at the org chart for the VP's you look and see that some of them have been shuffled from portfolio to portfolio and they are just some of the good ole boys. Real change has to, and should, start at the top. Unfortunately, I don't think that this will be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimer V Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 I agree.Dave Richie and people like him need to stay out of the press Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 "How about you go and ask the fuel suppliers to take a 10 or 15% cut in their cost for aviation fuel, Robert?" How about the gov dumping the excise tax? Wouldn't that be a good start? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 "A 10 percent cut for 60 days. Oh boo hoo." Let's get real. The 10% for sixty days will become 25% + forever. How is it that AC management is now and only after the gun has been put to their head able to find all these savings in areas such as the UL Grand Prix, laying off managers, re inventing the fleet, returning airbus products, etc etc etc? I'm not entirely in disagreement with your position re the unions however, the bums at the top have failed the corp and they must go. Without a change in thinking we'll just see more of the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Aside form the fact that the Feds aren't the fuel suppliers, it's a reasonable request. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 If you are an ACPA pilot and were making 10 bucks an hour a year ago, you are still making 10 bucks an hour. That we have not received our bonus and our negotiated raise, as of April 01, is not realizing a pay raise, not realizing a pay ‘cut’ either. So, ‘technically’, along with any other way you want to look at it, I agree. I hope so too. cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp fa Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Re: pay raises and bonuses not realized. I agree, it's already starting to add up. In this regard, I think the other unions are in the same boat. Personally, I am bracing for the worst, and I'm not going to be surprised no matter how much the final tally ends up being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Virtual Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Sounds more like a voice of reason here. Discount airlines are now the Walmart of the travel industry... and we will have to adjust like big box stores do or become obsolete like Eatons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Virtual Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Yes...it seems that management needed to change it's thinking ... and it appears that it is starting to. Now, reciprocally, can the unions change their thinking so it reflects the current market demands/changes? That's your part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Virtual Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Dave Richie is also a manager ...albeit of a union...still a manager. Can he change his way thinking to reflect the changing travel industry or does he still adhere to the 'old school' himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest texas Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Don't pay Nav Can eh? Pretty tough to fly YVR- YYZ blo 12,500. smiley thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scooter667 Posted May 3, 2003 Share Posted May 3, 2003 Just to add some light to your world. First the membership of the IAM is "theoretically" divided into two major groups, skilled and unskilled. The majority of the members including most of it's "representatives" fall under the unskilled classification (airports). These are the individuals who have been extremely overpaid for their trade. This has been accomplished by riding on the coat tails of the Maintenance Dept. Please keep in mind if the skilled AME's were to take a 10% pay cut however temporary. This would have us paid LESS than even the fine people who work at WestJet. But have no fear I'm sure the IAM majority members "unskilled" will offer to take a 20% to cover us from going below industry standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 George, your ignorance is amazing,so you think I am the best paid, guess again!Milton wants West Jet wages, with the 10% cut I as an AME will be below West Jet Wages, I carry more than the single endorsement that the West Jet AME requires,as a result I am forced to be qualified on each of my endorsements, I am required to know heavy check procedures and regulations, heavey checks, something West Jet does not have, but yet you along with Milton see fit that my wage be below West Jet.Well George, you do not work in maintenance, so you do not have the slightest clue of our pay structure, responsibilities and requirements, so maybe it should be you who gets out and get a view of the big Picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 "It's not that AC has "declared war" on you, it's that it is patently clear that it can no longer afford to pay the highest wages in this country for services that are provided - safely, expertly and politely -at other airlines for less, sometimes a lot less." When the company fires people who are on mids for taking a cat nap on their lunch break, or suspend pending discharge for some one doing his duty during a trip check be cause he opened a gallet cupboard because the door was not hanging properly, searching tool boxes and other tactics that had never been done before, I call that declaring war, as I have said to you before Dagger, you do not work for AC,so to sit back and make a generalized comment such as yours is rather uninformed. As to not being able to afford paying my present wage any more, I will say this to you also, I AM NOT THE HIGHEST PAID IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!!! As I just said to George above, Milton wants WEST JET wages!!! with this 10% cut he is trying to push on us, we in maintenance will now be BELOW West Jet wages, at present we are below industry average, we do not make astronomical salaries like some of the flight deck folk on the heavy metal,we in maintenance are not 40% ahead of our nearest counterpart as the station attendants are, but yet we in maintenance have sustained the heaviest losses to date, when we are already at bare minimum staffing. As I have said before, I am willing to give up some items in my contract, but my base salary is not one of them. At $65000 per annum I feel that I am by no means over paid, especially for the responsibilities that I carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 Agood start and good for all airlines,BTW George, much of that 73% I mention applies to all airlines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 Agood start and good for all airlines,BTW George, much of that 73% I mention applies to all airlines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 "Declaring war? Did your pay cheque or direct deposit not arrive on time? Were you unable to submit your medical or dental claim and did it not get reimbursed? Were your travel privileges cancelled? The answer to all 3 is no." Firing people for taking cat naps on their luch break, a mechanic being suspended for opening a calley door because it was not hanging properly, my expense cheque that has bounced twice,(I am waiting for the third, and they do not want to pay the nsf fees I am hit with), yes I call that war!Instead of being smug, educate yourself, find out what is going on in other departments before shooting your mouth off. AS to the other 73%, AC should be all over the fed to get releif from excise taxes on fuel, security tax,transportation tax,gate fees, airport rents, not just for AC but all airlines.Ac needs to have parts on hand to allow people such as myself to be able to repair aircraft so that they can be out generating funds instead of being on the ground for days at a time, waiting for these parts (half the time ends up being a costly pool part).Purchase parts from ouside vendors instead of directly from the manufacturer,etc etc, all items that save big dollars. "Have you been stuck in a place where only the censored news from the IAM gets through?" I do not believe a word the IAM says, how can anyone in maintenance beleive anything from these fools when the VP of this so called ASSociation publicly states F@#K maintenance.As previously stated, educate yourself on what is happening in other departments and exit your sheltered pilots world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 "-Cut out promotions (Grand Prix, Air Canada Cup Teporary -Not paying NavCda and Airports Temporary, will have to pay eventually -Negotiating leases to current market rates should have been done when financial troubles started, closing the barn door after the horses have left -Laying off 600 managers still could be more -Returning A340-500s to Airbus should have taken them, returned older 340's -Reducing Aeroplan benefits again should have been done earlier -Charging more for Aeroplan points see above -Stiffing bondholders Unfortunate -Not paying some trade creditors temporary, still need permanent solutions that are equiteable to bothe sides -Selling one-third of Aeroplan and making plans to sell part of ACTS (stiffing shareholders) -Cancelling annual meeting afraid to face the heat -Cancelling print version of Horizons we had mentioned this along with apropos a few years ago, but know one listened. "At first, the excuse was that the unions - and many of you - wanted others to take a haircut WITH you. Now that everyone is lining up for theirs, some of you are becoming very shy. Hell, a 10 precent cut for 60 days, what's that going to cost you after taxes you wouldn't have to pay? $300? $500? " Milton was the one who publicly stated it was the unions fault for AC financial position, what a stupid comment. 10% becomes 15 then 20 then 25, all you have to do is ask some of the ex cail folk that one, as far as management taking a hair cut,10% of 1.2 million is squat, as soon as this happens you can guarentee the retention bonuses will be handed out. "You're telling me that 10% is too much to save the best paying airline careers in the country?" No way, if I was like yourself being paid over a hundred grand a year, I would not be so hard line, but at $65000 per year, a 7 grand cut hurts and hurts bad, FYI, not all departments are the best paid, ignorant generalization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inchman Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 Reductions in some of our costs will certainly help in the short term, but let's not forget that WJ gets the same benefit if these government or quasi-government fees are reduced. If all of our external costs were reduced to zero, the percentage difference between AC tickets and WJ tickets would be even greater. For example... Let's say there is a fare YYZ-YYC and WJ sells it at $250, all in. Of that 250, 100 is fees and taxes. If we remove the fees and taxes, the passenger can travel for $150. But AC can't afford to sell it at that because of it's total cost of producing that seat. The aircraft cost the same, the fuel costs the same... the major thing that is different is the cost of employees. So, AC has to charge $170 for that same seat to break even. With all the charges in, the difference between the seats was 250/270: WJ is 7% cheaper. Without the $100 external fees, WJ is now almost 12% cheaper. So even though employee costs "only" make up 27% of the cost, they make up the vast majority of the variable cost that forces the price higher than the competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IFG Posted May 4, 2003 Share Posted May 4, 2003 Hi. inchman - I'm sure you know full well that percentages are ornery things which often send people down blind alleys. You're quite correct that industry fee reductions would be a zero sum game viv-a-vis relative costs between companies, but the greater percentage difference that results from a comparison of total customer price with no taxes doesn't change the sacrifice required to eliminate it at all. In your example, $20 of cost reduction is required to match the other price without loss, a 12% reduction of the company's costs, period; it doesn't matter whether there was $0 in fees, which as you say made for the same 12% difference ticket to ticket, or $1000, which would have rendered the total customer prices less than 2% apart. I just wondered if some might draw an inference from your analysis that fee reductions would make your task harder. (Or maybe you want massive user fees to obscure WJ's cost advantages?) If you made it this far, inchman, you're probably one of only a few who didn't fa.... zzzzZZZZZ .... .... one "numbers guy" to another, IFG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.