Column written by Teddy Xidas. From the article sidebar, "Teddy Xidas is president of the Association of Flight Attendants Local Executive Council 40 and the new president of the AFA US Airways Master Executive Council."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04366/434979.stm

US Airways, 2005
From the flight attendants, some New Year's resolutions for all

Friday, December 31, 2004
By Teddy Xidas

Flight Attendants at US Airways get it. As employees of a struggling airline, we are doing everything we can to ensure the survival of our company. We're even considering a third tentative agreement that everyone knows is another step back down our career ladder, for every flight attendant. The vote on that proposal will be completed Wednesday, Jan. 5.

We have a lot of our lives invested in US Airways, and we're not willing to throw that away. That's why those recent reports of blaming flight attendants for supposedly calling in sick in "record numbers" and causing flight cancellations over the Christmas holiday weekend were so upsetting. That just wasn't true.

Our jobs revolve around the safety and comfort of US Airways passengers. We're not going to turn our backs on our passengers.

We fully appreciate that the airline industry is a customer-driven service industry. Flight attendants are ultra-sensitive to passenger satisfaction. We have more direct contact with our customers than anyone else at US Airways. Day-in and day-out, we see firsthand that the key to survival for our airline is meeting the needs of the customer. We do it at the personal level, and we depend on management to do it on the business end.

In the spirit of this New Year, with our airline poised at the brink of success, or oblivion, I'm offering five suggestions to management on how we can make US Airways soar, keeping a close eye on the passengers we serve.

1) Stop the blame game. Your employees are not the problem; we are the solution. Once you get beyond the finger-pointing, we can begin to work together to right our airline.

2) Share information. Let's lay our cards on the table, and we can see where we're going. Share your business plans, your goals and basic financial information with your employees. We'll share what we know about how to better meet our customers' needs. Building a great airline is a two-way street. We need each other.

3) Realize employees can't be squeezed anymore. We're beyond the limit, actually. Our members have taken pay cuts totaling $14,000, in real dollars adjusted for inflation, over the past 20 years. The average flight attendant now earns barely $22,000 in 1984 dollars. There's nothing more we can give. You'll have to look to other stakeholders for an equal sacrifice.

4) Tell the truth about those low fares. Deregulation has resulted in cutthroat competition that is rapidly killing the industry. Airline management needs to make the case to the flying public, and to policy makers, that the industry cannot survive the competitive downward spiral of fares below costs.

5) Find a new business model. The way you are conducting business simply does not work. Change it! This last point seems like a no-brainer, but US Airways and other major airlines continue to cling to a model that does not work, instead of a model similar to Southwest and other airlines that are turning profits while drawing raves from passengers.

US Airways may not be able to transform itself into Southwest, with its point-to-point service and its single aircraft model, but it could certainly learn a few lessons about how to restructure itself. Consider this: Southwest has the highest percentage of unionized employees in the industry, with the best contracts. But it's not complaining about being saddled with "high labor costs" or "disgruntled employees." In fact, it just celebrated its 31st year of profitability and was recognized with a Corporate Conscience Award for innovative work force retention after 9/11.

The Southwest model values its employees and encourages their participation in creating solutions, rather than blaming them for problems.

I challenge US Airways management to invite employees to participate in developing creative approaches to cost savings and customer service -- and more importantly, to treat its employees as the valuable asset we are in providing customers with the best service the industry has to offer. If we work together, I believe US Airways can thrive in 2005.

Column written by Teddy Xidas. From the article sidebar, "Teddy Xidas is president of the Association of Flight Attendants Local Executive Council 40 and the new president of the AFA US Airways Master Executive Council."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04366/434979.stm

US Airways, 2005
From the flight attendants, some New Year's resolutions for all

Friday, December 31, 2004
By Teddy Xidas

Flight Attendants at US Airways get it. As employees of a struggling airline, we are doing everything we can to ensure the survival of our company. We're even considering a third tentative agreement that everyone knows is another step back down our career ladder, for every flight attendant. The vote on that proposal will be completed Wednesday, Jan. 5.

We have a lot of our lives invested in US Airways, and we're not willing to throw that away. That's why those recent reports of blaming flight attendants for supposedly calling in sick in "record numbers" and causing flight cancellations over the Christmas holiday weekend were so upsetting. That just wasn't true.

Our jobs revolve around the safety and comfort of US Airways passengers. We're not going to turn our backs on our passengers.

We fully appreciate that the airline industry is a customer-driven service industry. Flight attendants are ultra-sensitive to passenger satisfaction. We have more direct contact with our customers than anyone else at US Airways. Day-in and day-out, we see firsthand that the key to survival for our airline is meeting the needs of the customer. We do it at the personal level, and we depend on management to do it on the business end.

In the spirit of this New Year, with our airline poised at the brink of success, or oblivion, I'm offering five suggestions to management on how we can make US Airways soar, keeping a close eye on the passengers we serve.

1) Stop the blame game. Your employees are not the problem; we are the solution. Once you get beyond the finger-pointing, we can begin to work together to right our airline.

2) Share information. Let's lay our cards on the table, and we can see where we're going. Share your business plans, your goals and basic financial information with your employees. We'll share what we know about how to better meet our customers' needs. Building a great airline is a two-way street. We need each other.

3) Realize employees can't be squeezed anymore. We're beyond the limit, actually. Our members have taken pay cuts totaling $14,000, in real dollars adjusted for inflation, over the past 20 years. The average flight attendant now earns barely $22,000 in 1984 dollars. There's nothing more we can give. You'll have to look to other stakeholders for an equal sacrifice.

4) Tell the truth about those low fares. Deregulation has resulted in cutthroat competition that is rapidly killing the industry. Airline management needs to make the case to the flying public, and to policy makers, that the industry cannot survive the competitive downward spiral of fares below costs.

5) Find a new business model. The way you are conducting business simply does not work. Change it! This last point seems like a no-brainer, but US Airways and other major airlines continue to cling to a model that does not work, instead of a model similar to Southwest and other airlines that are turning profits while drawing raves from passengers.

US Airways may not be able to transform itself into Southwest, with its point-to-point service and its single aircraft model, but it could certainly learn a few lessons about how to restructure itself. Consider this: Southwest has the highest percentage of unionized employees in the industry, with the best contracts. But it's not complaining about being saddled with "high labor costs" or "disgruntled employees." In fact, it just celebrated its 31st year of profitability and was recognized with a Corporate Conscience Award for innovative work force retention after 9/11.

The Southwest model values its employees and encourages their participation in creating solutions, rather than blaming them for problems.

I challenge US Airways management to invite employees to participate in developing creative approaches to cost savings and customer service -- and more importantly, to treat its employees as the valuable asset we are in providing customers with the best service the industry has to offer. If we work together, I believe US Airways can thrive in 2005.


All fine and good but if the IAM and Roach are not on board, then the airline is definitely toast.

The only way to try to obtain some investor/creditor and customer confidence is for them to sign and vote on a new deal before 1/14/05 -- and preferably sooner -- and for eveyone to vow to pitch in and have no more Christmas's like the one past. If the above does not ocurr, in its entirety, the ATSB will pull the plug.

After all, they can rightly lay the blame at the feet of not all the workers, but just those malcontents who called in sick over Christmas. Moreover, only those workers who wanted to see the airline continue flying and those customers who are diehards on this board do not want it to die. As for the rest of the customers who now vow they will never fly US Air again, as well as those wise FFers who dumped all their US Air miles ages ago, whatever happens, they will not feel a major effect with respect to the airline's demise.

To me, it just boggles the mind that the airline employees who called in sich did a stunt like this.

SW is invading -- and has been invading since the summer -- the last truly large population hub still has, it is capitalized to the tune of $2 Billion, can afford to fly loss leader airfares because of the fuel hedges, and has recently decided to rehabilitate another airline in bankruptcy -- ATA -- and the UNION employees at ATA are quite happy with SW's involvement because those who are laid off in its restructuring will be given priority in any new SW or ATA future hirings.

Contrast this attitued of big labor with the fools at US Air, who have slit their own necks. Be caredful for what one wishes for, as it may just come true.

Happy New Years to you to! My goal for this year is to become an omniscient analyst of the airline industry and the flying public. It seems there should be room for more than one such individual.

Happy New Years to you to! My goal for this year is to become an omniscient analyst of the airline industry and the flying public. It seems there should be room for more than one such individual.

There was no need for such sarcasm, especially since many people on this board have posted their views on the matter.

Of course, if one studies your response, the inescapable conclusion that one draws from it is that you do not appreciate views potentially opposite your own "omnisicient analyses of the airline industry and the flying public."

I agree with you, there "should be room for more than one such individual" on this board with views on the above -- sorry, that your monopoly is at an end.


By the way, Happy New Year to you, to[o] [sic]!! ;)

Got me on the spelling! I think your conclusion concerning my response isnt true. I dont mind at all when people express negative opinions. I do so myself if I feel it is appropriate. I think that your post reflected an absolute and overly simplistic view of the situation. In particular the customer response to all of this. I agree that it there are certainly negative and very potentially serious impacts to customer perspectives over this. However, I think it is complicated enough to not be completely clear in its total effect. I also think that efforts for the company to make a strong showing this weekend might have a positive effect that could (wouldnt say its likely) not only overcome the damage but turn the situation into a net positive with customers. I just think you look at these things, well, that isnt fair, I havent any idea how you look at them, but you express them in overly simplistic terms in my opinion.



And thanks for the Happy New Years message two ;)

4) Tell the truth about those low fares. Deregulation has resulted in cutthroat competition that is rapidly killing the industry. Airline management needs to make the case to the flying public, and to policy makers, that the industry cannot survive the competitive downward spiral of fares below costs.

This seems to me to be the crux of the issue all the way around. Can "the industry" not survive these fares or is it just a few of the airlines?

I didn't want to say anything negative on New Year's Eve, but this op-ed piece gives a misleading picture of the labor situation at US Airways.

"1) Stop the blame game. Your employees are not the problem; we are the solution."
A quick read of the US Airways flight attendant agreement reveals lots of pay premiums and restrictive work rules, which reduce efficiency and raise costs -- often unpredictably. The union is to blame for these contract terms. Many survive even in the tentative agreement.

"2) Share information. Let's lay our cards on the table, and we can see where we're going. Share your business plans, your goals and basic financial information with your employees. ..."
This sounds innocent enough, to ordinary newspaper readers who have no understanding of formal negotiation processes. But... Having the employer divulge its private plans would weaken the employer's position, just as having the union divulge its internal proceedings would weaken the union's position. And there's a particular risk to the employer: the union, which has relationships with competing airlines, could threaten to leak US Airways' plans. No, this is not an innocent information sharing request. It's an attempt to give one party an advantage over the other.

"3) Realize employees can't be squeezed anymore. ... The average flight attendant now earns barely $22,000 in 1984 dollars. ..."
This is misleading. First, 22,000 in 1984 dollars is 40,400 in current (2004) dollars. This is reasonable for a standardized job with few entry qualifications. Second, unlike many other workers at this level, the flight attendants have health insurance (funded almost entirely by the employer) and a pension (funded entirely by the employer). The tentative agreement does not touch health insurance for active employees; does not and cannot touch existing pension accruals (which will be preserved through PBGC even if the plan is terminated); and provides substantial contributions to new, cash-based retirement accounts.

"... There's nothing more we can give. You'll have to look to other stakeholders for an equal sacrifice."
According to documents that US Airways filed in bankruptcy court, more than one union is making the same claim. This 'me first' approach leads to a circus. To quote US Airways' reply, "It is unrealistic that Debtors could apportion the cost reductions in a way that would be agreeable to all Unions." So the airline is making proportional, accross-the-board cuts. It should be noted that executive and managerial employees are also affected.

"4) Tell the truth about those low fares. Deregulation has resulted in cutthroat competition that is rapidly killing the industry. Airline management needs to make the case to the flying public, and to policy makers, that the industry cannot survive the competitive downward spiral of fares below costs."
This statement is inconsistent with what comes afterward. Despite offering low fares, Southwest meets its operating costs and pays its employees well. The problem at other airlines may well be the exact opposite of what's described: a spiral of costs -- chiefly labor and fuel -- above fares. More below...

"5) Find a new business model. The way you are conducting business simply does not work. Change it! This last point seems like a no-brainer, but US Airways and other major airlines continue to cling to a model that does not work, instead of a model similar to Southwest and other airlines that are turning profits while drawing raves from passengers."
US Airways flight attendants would presumbly oppose the new business model. Southwest has no international routes, only one major aircraft type, limited on-board service, and no high fares. US Airways flight attendants enjoy pay premiums on international itineraries (to be suspended temporarily under the tentative agreement); special staffing levels on "new" aircraft types; pay premiums on certain aircraft types; and pay premiums for certain on-board positions. Based on #4, above, US Airways flight attendants favor higher fares. Finally, I would venture that the restrictive work rules in the contract would hamper Southwest-style operations.

Here's a link to the US Airways flight attendant agreement (http://afausairways.org/contract/index1.html). For the sake of fairness, note that compensation is based primarily on flight time, not duty time. Also note that the court has temporarily rolled back the base wage rates by 21%. The tentative agreement, summarized here (http://afausairways.org/Restructure/tahigh_12_16_04.htm), immediately restores 12%, in return for other changes.

Paul Marcelin-Sampson
Santa Cruz, California, USA

P.S.: I respect flight attendants, appreciate the work they do, and want them to be compensated fairly. I believe that the benefits and the average wage are reasonable, when compared to what's available in other jobs with similar entry requirements. With a potential 60% hourly wage gap between junior and senior flight attendants, I do think that the wages are distributed unfairly. My post to the CHAOS thread confronts the typical union choice of 'pay for seniority' over 'equal pay for work of equal value'.

I was at a party last night and found out that some of the persons I had just met are US employees......specifically IAM mechanics. We discussed the US situation, most of their position is that management has greatly screwed up the company and is to blame for it's demise. I was surprised that they had no concept for what was going on industry wide.

I detailed to them what fares I used to pay and how fares have dramatically dropped (such as PIT-SFO, used to be $2000....now $300). It's quite a magic act to keep the status quo in a company where the revenue was dropping, while costs were increasing....especially fuel.

I believe that the disconnect is between the union management (such as Dear Teddy) and the membership. These people want the company to succeed and certainly want to keep their jobs. If they knew the true situation with regard to revenue and costs........I bet that they'd be much more receptive to negotiating.

The average flight attendant now earns barely $22,000 in 1984 dollars.

I earn barely $20 in 1492 dollars.

I was surprised that they had no concept for what was going on industry wide.

Really, you were surprised?

1) Stop the blame game. Your employees are not the problem; we are the solution. Once you get beyond the finger-pointing, we can begin to work together to right our airline.


I've seen a whole lot more "it's management's fault" than I've seen "it's our employees fault". Has anyone heard a member of US's "management" say "we're in bankruptcy because of our lousy employees"?


2) Share information. Let's lay our cards on the table, and we can see where we're going. Share your business plans, your goals and basic financial information with your employees.

Yes, don't bother trying to run the airline. Spend time with us and let us use our extensive airline management experience to give you advice on how to run it. Why don't we take a few weeks off from actual work and I'll round up some FA's and we can dive into some deep market analysis, financial modeling, etc.....


3) The average flight attendant now earns barely $22,000 in 1984 dollars. There's nothing more we can give.


Hmmm, that's 42,000+ in current dollars, or just under the 50th percentile of all American household (not individual) earners. (http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/ie1.html). If there's nothing more to give, 50% of our county must not be able to survive...


4) Tell the truth about those low fares. Deregulation has resulted in cutthroat competition that is rapidly killing the industry. Airline management needs to make the case to the flying public, and to policy makers, that the industry cannot survive the competitive downward spiral of fares below costs.


Yes, yes, that's what we need - re-regulation and the government to run the airlines. This whole "competitive", free-market thing never works.

5) Find a new business model. The way you are conducting business simply does not work. Change it!

You suck, do something better. No, I can't tell you what - how about you just do what the guys who are doing better are doing...


Didn't she publish this exact same memo about six months ago. Or am I just getting deja vu all over again?

What ticks me off about employees who blame low fares as the problem is that's a problem in ALL industries. As a tech worker my job is going overseas because someone in India can do it cheaper than me. Yes, some of my colleagues whine enough that I think they can give these guys a run for their money, but in my case I innovate or die -- change my skill set constantly, most recently working for the military (a job that's difficult to outsource out of the country for many reasons). I expect I'll have to keep rolling with the punches, possibly even ditching the technical field completely as my industry becomes a commodity... sounds just like the airlines, huh?

I think that's the worst part of the typical union mindset -- the entitlement to a certain level of pay or benefits. I earn what the market can bear for my skills, and if the market can't bear any more, then it's MY responsibility to learn new skills, or I will get paid less. Simple!

What ticks me off about employees who blame low fares as the problem is that's a problem in ALL industries. As a tech worker my job is going overseas because someone in India can do it cheaper than me. Yes, some of my colleagues whine enough that I think they can give these guys a run for their money, but in my case I innovate or die -- change my skill set constantly, most recently working for the military (a job that's difficult to outsource out of the country for many reasons). I expect I'll have to keep rolling with the punches, possibly even ditching the technical field completely as my industry becomes a commodity... sounds just like the airlines, huh?

I think that's the worst part of the typical union mindset -- the entitlement to a certain level of pay or benefits. I earn what the market can bear for my skills, and if the market can't bear any more, then it's MY responsibility to learn new skills, or I will get paid less. Simple!

Nicely articulated! ^

I would not want to be one of the hard-working people at US that faces losing money on pay cuts yet again. But this is a reality in every business, and isn't just the airlines. In my world, when labor costs are too high, people's positions are replaced by people who make half of what the previous person did. The person making more doesn't get the option to make less - their position is eliminated, as are the benefits that come with tenure. The employees of this airline cannot get beyond, "It's management's fault" for anything. That's the solution. And I guarantee, if they hand-picked their next management team, they'd be trashing them on usaviation boards within a week. It simply boils down to the fact that US's labor costs are way too high, that US has to change the way it does business, but that the labor groups aren't willing to get to the point where the business can fuction, survive, and make a profit.

What no one in the labor group seems to understand is that you can't run a business on "employee dedication". That's great. I love US for it's employees who have kept this airline running for years. But guess what? LOYAL, and LONG-TERM employees expect better compensation - higher pay, more benefits, and that translates to higher costs. What investor is going to pump money into this airline? None. Legions of management at this airline have sung the same song - "we need to get costs down or we can't make a profit". It sounds like a smart idea to me. I understand that there are other things they can do, but labor is clearly the biggest obstacle to the airline's survival.

This OpEd just reinforces for me that, despite any recent agreements, it's never going to move beyond the "management is conspiring to take golden parachutes at the cost of labor" theory. It's what the union leadership has drilled into their heads. Unfortunately, some actually believe that they'd rather be unemployed than make the changes necessary. They may get their way. Then they can have a big union rally that says, "we showed them!"

I didn't want to say anything negative on New Year's Eve, but this op-ed piece gives a misleading picture of the labor situation at US Airways.


A quick read of the US Airways flight attendant agreement reveals lots of pay premiums and restrictive work rules, which reduce efficiency and raise costs -- often unpredictably. The union is to blame for these contract terms. Many survive even in the tentative agreement.


This sounds innocent enough, to ordinary newspaper readers who have no understanding of formal negotiation processes. But... Having the employer divulge its private plans would weaken the employer's position, just as having the union divulge its internal proceedings would weaken the union's position. And there's a particular risk to the employer: the union, which has relationships with competing airlines, could threaten to leak US Airways' plans. No, this is not an innocent information sharing request. It's an attempt to give one party an advantage over the other.


This is misleading. First, 22,000 in 1984 dollars is 40,400 in current (2004) dollars. This is reasonable for a standardized job with few entry qualifications. Second, unlike many other workers at this level, the flight attendants have health insurance (funded almost entirely by the employer) and a pension (funded entirely by the employer). The tentative agreement does not touch health insurance for active employees; does not and cannot touch existing pension accruals (which will be preserved through PBGC even if the plan is terminated); and provides substantial contributions to new, cash-based retirement accounts.




Marcelin,

Welcome to FT and thanks for pointing out the above piece of sophistry.

FWIW, I read that the IAM is to appear at Philly's 30th Street Station tomorrow, Monday Jan. 3, 2005, in the afternoon, to "explain" their side of the story on the Christmas debacle.

Should be quite interesting since I don't think that they will find a receptive crowd among the commuters and passengers who are innundated by delays from Amtrak and the suburban commuter lines into Philly.

As I read in one news article, one infuriated customer said, I can live with my travel plans being deep sixed -- but this was Christmas and I was going to see family -- you don't interfere with family. (My translation of the article).

Why don't the unions just make a bid in bankruptcy for the airline.

If they won't or can't negotiate with current management why not
negotiate with themselves.

If USAir can get the concessions they want from the unions they'll have the lowest labor costs in the industry and GE will then extend credit, etc.

If USAir can't get the concessions then I'm afraid its goodbye. Someone
should be doing "Remeber Eastern" mantras to the IAM.

Someone should be doing "Remember Eastern" mantras to the IAM.

Are you sure that they don't look on that as their most glorious and shining moment?

I agree with the point made by Mr Xidas who says "stop blaming employees ". But I take his point even further to suggest that we stop blaming US management and labor and just get on with it.

Blame gets us nowhere at this point. If you are a pax who depends upon US, then it is in your interest to see US survive. If you're not, then fly someone else and get on with it. Likewise every US manager or US employee has an interest in seeing that US survives -- if they want a job -- otherwise it's time to go flip hamburgers or whatever floats their boat.

As others so aptly note in this thread, today's airline industry is a cut-throat & ruthlessly competitive market where the rules are in constant flux. And it is indeed unfortunate to see loyal employees commit years to an airline only to get shafted as the game changes before their eyes and the (flying) carpet is pulled out beneath them. But that's life in the real world where we all make our living.

I continue to feel that the majority of US folks try to do the job right. Mr. Xidas is correct to assail innacurate or misleading media reports suggesting that an inordinate number of FAs called out sick. I recently read a press release from US which gives specific numbers for FA call outs for Christmas and Christmas Eve 2004 and 2003. The numbers are virtually the same for both years. So as Galley Wench suggests in another thread, there was no inordinate number of FAs who call in sick.

There does exist an undercurrent at the moment among specific union groups at US which is malevolant and pernicious. What recently goes on with the PHL baggage handlers is a prime example of individuals acting maliciously. Malcontent individuals decide to stop doing their job, and by so doing, they further jeopardize an already struggling airline. To be blunt this is thuggery plain and simple. And we pax don't need to put up with it.

About the only thing that we as individuals can control is the nature of the relationship that we have with others. That means that US management and labor need to break bread to reach a common goal. All parties should remember that the pax is their mission and source of income and livelihood. And we pax can also be more patient and introspective if we so choose. You get what you put into relationships. Last week's US fiasco certainly damages the US/pax relationship. Is it now too late for US? I don't know.

I hope that US can rally those employees who still want to stake their future with US, even at reduced wages. I hope that US survives. But I'm not purchasing any tickets for future flights until later in the month as the labor thing plays itself out in bankruptcy court. That's life.

Barry

I agree with the point made by Mr Xidas ............

Barry

Barry, FYI....Teddy is a lady. ;)

Thanks for the clarification.