Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
"Open-Skies" agreement is coming - Your Opinion >

"Open-Skies" agreement is coming - Your Opinion

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

"Open-Skies" agreement is coming - Your Opinion

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-08-2007, 07:59 PM
  #71  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JMT21's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 305
Default Thank you W?

A few recent headlines:
Stocks end higher amid global stability signs

Jobless claims at lowest level in month

Fed: Most of U.S. seeing modest growth

and my favorite

Worker productivity rises as wages soar

Just a little taste of reality for all you "sky-is-falling", "outsourcing is killing America", "American jobs and wages are circling the drain" folks. Enjoy.
JMT21 is offline  
Old 03-28-2007, 05:43 AM
  #72  
Gets Weekends Off
 
NGINEWHOISWHAT's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 423
Default

Originally Posted by JMT21

Just a little taste of reality for all you "sky-is-falling", "outsourcing is killing America", "American jobs and wages are circling the drain" folks. Enjoy.
Hello JMT, I was doing some reading a found an article by a Princeton Economics professor. He reversed his position on globalization and free trade. The sky is falling ... actually, it's more of a gentle let down. I'll post the link.

Tom

http://www.princeton.edu/~ceps/worki...119blinder.pdf,

http://www.aflcio.org/issues/jobseco...born_China.pdf

Last edited by NGINEWHOISWHAT; 03-28-2007 at 06:21 AM.
NGINEWHOISWHAT is offline  
Old 03-28-2007, 07:28 AM
  #73  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Airbum's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 653
Default

Originally Posted by JMT21

Whats ANA pay? Whats Cathay pay? Whats JAL pay? These carriers are not driving wages down. The economics are similar, why can't the U.S. carriers compete? If we prohibit all foreign airlines from hauling cargo into the U.S., should the rest of the world prohibit UPS and FedEx from hauling cargo into their country?



Making a profit is their job, it's what the shareholders pay them to do.
As far as pay a quick look on apc showed Cathy US based side of pay well below the the two major US cargo companies, approxiamtely 25% lower. Being simply labor this fact IS brought up at the table during contract talks. And yes this drives down the US pilots pay.
Airbum is offline  
Old 03-28-2007, 06:26 PM
  #74  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 440
Default

..........

Last edited by Led Zep; 03-28-2007 at 06:45 PM.
Led Zep is offline  
Old 03-28-2007, 06:45 PM
  #75  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 440
Default

Originally Posted by NGINEWHOISWHAT
After reviewing the U.S.-E.U. tentative air transport agreement reached last Friday, ALPA has serious concerns about the agreement’s potential effect on airline workers in its provisions on ownership of U.S. airlines, on franchising, and on providing foreign airliners with crew to U.S. airlines.
I'm not trying to flame, but just one outsider's view of what is seen when looking at the passenger airline industry.

First, foreing ownership. Over the past 6 years, this is what has been observed when looking at the pax carriers:

1: 4 major U.S. airlines filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, one of
them filing for it twice.

2: Most of the carriers reporting record losses.

3: Employees receiving furlough notices in record numbers.

4: Employees forced to endure cutbacks in wages and benefits.

5: Pensions literally being erased.

I am not advocating foreign ownership of any U.S. corportation. I am looking at the way the airlines have been managed over the last half-decade and cannot help but wonder if the management blunders could possibly get any worse. People talk about how bad foreign ownership of U.S. airlines would be for it's employees, but one has to admit that the last 6 years have not exactly been a honeymoon for labor under the current domestic ownership.

Second, the airlines have to come to the realization that price is NOT the only factor when most people shop around for a ticket. Service should also rank very high. When travelling just a few hundered miles, I look for the lowest fare. But when travelling longer distances, especially overseas on personal travel, I am willing to pay a higher fare for better service. And I have no problem spending my money on a foreign carrier if they can provide that service.

The service on domestic carriers, with very, very rare exception is absolutely pathetic. If the pax carriers want to be successful, customer service and satisfaction has to improve.
Led Zep is offline  
Old 03-28-2007, 08:13 PM
  #76  
Gets Weekends Off
 
NGINEWHOISWHAT's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 423
Default

Originally Posted by Led Zep
I am not advocating foreign ownership of any U.S. corportation. I am looking at the way the airlines have been managed over the last half-decade and cannot help but wonder if the management blunders could possibly get any worse. People talk about how bad foreign ownership of U.S. airlines would be for it's employees, but one has to admit that the last 6 years have not exactly been a honeymoon for labor under the current domestic ownership.
My only concern with foreign ownership is this: If a Chinese airline could own an American carrier, they could do it a lot cheaper and almost overnight put thousands out of work. Other countries don't have to refine fuel to our levels. I don't know if this is true of jet a, but it's true of Diesel and they are nearly the same. Less refinement equals cheaper fuel.

The leases remain the same, but the cost of labor dramtically decreases. Instead of making 100-1500 per day, it's much less. So, THAT'S the primary concern my friend. We can not compete with a communist nation with a bazillion people.

If they come in and buy us, they can put whatever crews on whatever routes they want and downsize us. Keep the profitable flying for themselves and then sell us.

The Europeans can do the same thing, but I'm not an economist so I can't say for certain. A lot of costs are higher in Europe, but despite what some people say, the dollar is still king although it has taken a beating. Everyone still wants into the US market.
NGINEWHOISWHAT is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 06:29 AM
  #77  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 440
Default

Originally Posted by NGINEWHOISWHAT
My only concern with foreign ownership is this: If a Chinese airline could own an American carrier, they could do it a lot cheaper and almost overnight put thousands out of work. Other countries don't have to refine fuel to our levels. I don't know if this is true of jet a, but it's true of Diesel and they are nearly the same. Less refinement equals cheaper fuel.

The leases remain the same, but the cost of labor dramtically decreases. Instead of making 100-1500 per day, it's much less. So, THAT'S the primary concern my friend. We can not compete with a communist nation with a bazillion people.

If they come in and buy us, they can put whatever crews on whatever routes they want and downsize us. Keep the profitable flying for themselves and then sell us.

The Europeans can do the same thing, but I'm not an economist so I can't say for certain. A lot of costs are higher in Europe, but despite what some people say, the dollar is still king although it has taken a beating. Everyone still wants into the US market.
I understand what you are saying, and I don't disagree with you. As far as labor costs go, I personally think we are pretty much there already. My basis for that opinion lie with the likes of Skybus and the myriad of flying jobs that people are willing to do and accept the low wages in doing so for very long periods of time. I hope that trend changes.
Led Zep is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 06:55 AM
  #78  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Velocipede's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 737NG CA
Posts: 766
Default

Originally Posted by Led Zep
Second, the airlines have to come to the realization that price is NOT the only factor when most people shop around for a ticket. Service should also rank very high. When travelling just a few hundered miles, I look for the lowest fare. But when travelling longer distances, especially overseas on personal travel, I am willing to pay a higher fare for better service. And I have no problem spending my money on a foreign carrier if they can provide that service..
Oh, please. For domestic travel, price is the only consideration. All the yapping is just lip service from everyone who wants the "Pan Am" experience at the Southwest price.

The second half of your statement may be true. When you lock yourself in a tube for 15 hours, you may consider service, but for domestic operations, price is king.

The average passenger is only interested in going from Dallas to Orlando for $49. And everyone else has to suffer because the airlines won't price their tickets high enough to afford amenities anymore. You want something to eat? You'll pay extra for it. Take an extra suitcase? Pony up. Want a paper ticket? $10 please.

That's what you asked for when you supported deregulation and let the LCC monster out of the cage. Now everyone has to work toward the magic $.07 seat mile.
Velocipede is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 07:11 AM
  #79  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Default

Good,

I would rather not pay $475 to go DFW to MCO. Even if it included a $3 meal and a $.75 paper ticket.

Under regulation I probably would have a choice of 3 flights instead of 50 +. There are a whole lot more pilots flying those 50 flights than there were flying those 3 flights. A whole lot more people riding too. They may not meet your standards, but they are spending money.

Service does count. When I go to MCO I fly on NW at a little premium because I don't like the SWA cattle call. If it was a big premium I would probably take SW.

Last edited by FDXLAG; 03-29-2007 at 07:31 AM.
FDXLAG is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 08:34 AM
  #80  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Velocipede's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 737NG CA
Posts: 766
Default

Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Good,

I would rather not pay $475 to go DFW to MCO. Even if it included a $3 meal and a $.75 paper ticket.

Under regulation I probably would have a choice of 3 flights instead of 50 +. There are a whole lot more pilots flying those 50 flights than there were flying those 3 flights..
A whole lot more flying those flights at RJ or Skybus wages. That's because the only place left for the airlines to cut costs is labor. The price of capital is fixed, the price of oil is fixed. The ONLY way to sell a $49 ticket is to pay pilots B6 wages. Or worse yet, Skybus wages.

Once a B6 or Skybus proves that pilots will sell themselves for those rates, the other carriers have to match. Some use bankruptcy court, others use arbitrators. But the overall wages sink to the lowest common denominator and right now, that's jetBlue. Soon it will be Skybus.

Eventually, with Open Skies, you'll have a bunch of Chinese or Indian airlines flying from BWA to ORL. There will be 50 flights a day, as you put it, with ZERO American pilots on the flight decks.

But the consumer will be happy. The WalMartization of the airline business is about to start in earnest.
Velocipede is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Priority 3
Cargo
55
11-27-2006 03:29 PM
Linebacker35
Major
2
05-04-2006 10:30 PM
HSLD
Major
0
03-08-2006 08:31 PM
captain_drew
Cargo
3
06-01-2005 01:55 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices