JetBlue TrueBlue - Barger Gives Back - Cuts Salary in Half

Just saw the filing (http://investor.jetblue.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=131045&p=irol-SECText&TEXT=aHR0cDovL2NjYm4uMTBrd2l6YXJkLmNvbS94bWwvZmlsa W5nLnhtbD9yZXBvPXRlbmsmaXBhZ2U9NTc5NDU5MiZhdHRhY2g 9T04%3d) come across this afternoon. Barger is foregoing half of his base salary for the rest of calendar 2008, from $500K to $250K, "in recognition of the challenges faced by the Company and its employees in the current industry environment."

A pretty classy move overall. CO's top two gave up their entire salary for the year a couple months ago for similar reasons. Neither one is a significant dollar savings, but it does show that they realize that with everyone in the organization being forced to make sacrifices the guys at the top are, too.

That is a great move.

^^ I really respect Dave for doing this.

All other provisions of his employment agreement remain in full force and effect.I'm sure he's being well taken care of.

I'm sure he's being well taken care of.

Having been at the company since day 1, he deserves to be. A 50% salary cut (from a modest salary to begin with) is still very positive.

You guys should take a look at what some of the other airline CEO's are pulling down.

Barger's salary is tiny compared to, let's say Tilton's.

You guys should take a look at what some of the other airline CEO's are pulling down.

Barger's salary is tiny compared to, let's say Tilton's.

Tilton's Salary for 2007 (most recent filing I could find (http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/100517/000104746908005255/a2184547zdef14a.htm)) was $850K. The real money is in other benefits for Tilton and the rest of the CEOs. Still, it is a nice gesture. No one is worried about the airline CEOs not making it to their next paycheck to buy food for the family.

I am sure they do. Stock options, bonus, expense accounts, car, housing?

Does anyone know what other perks Barger gets?

Tilton's Salary for 2007 (most recent filing I could find (http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/100517/000104746908005255/a2184547zdef14a.htm)) was $850K. The real money is in other benefits for Tilton and the rest of the CEOs. Still, it is a nice gesture. No one is worried about the airline CEOs not making it to their next paycheck to buy food for the family.

Did you see his stock compensation?


Millions!

I am sure they do. Stock options, bonus, expense accounts, car, housing?

Does anyone know what other perks Barger gets?

Barger's perks, while not tiny by everyday Joe standards, are pretty small for airline CEOs, amounting only to a few hundred thousand on top of his salary.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/sky/2008/07/jetblue.html

Did you see his stock compensation?


Millions!

As is usual.

But that's based on the performance of the company's stock.
The way that airline stocks have performed this year, this year's stock compensation is going to be tiny.

All in all, it still a great move. For him, yeah, it may be a relatively small amount but it still shows he's willing to give compensation up if others in the company will have to as well (i.e. flight crews not pulling as many shifts, BNA and CMH being closed down).

Lead by example^^

Very good indeed! Still, I can't help being cynical. A few years ago all SK-staff agreed to take a X% cut to their salaries, including upper management. Of course though, that cut didn't include the management's bonuses etc, so it was no bigge for them really..

Lead by example^^

example? for cutting his own pay then his employees?

example? for cutting his own pay then his employees?

I believe all our pilots just all got a raise.

I'd be more impressed if he stopped the strategy-of-the-week he's currently running in SoCal, launching routes and killing them weeks later. Also the dollar headset charge is ridiculous, and looks chincy, feel badly for the FAs walking up and down the aisle asking for a dollar, like they're homeless people.

He doesn't seem to have a clear, consistent vision like WN, although I still think B6 has a much better product than WN does. I'd like to see more thought into route planning and development, and less indecision on what do in key markets and with add-on charges.

Also the dollar headset charge is ridiculous, and looks chincy, feel badly for the FAs walking up and down the aisle asking for a dollar, like they're homeless people. Boy, I hope I don't look like I'm homeless going down the aisles... I see nothing wrong with no free headsets. People complain that they have to use a credit card. They don't, there are canisters with poster size signs in the terminal area (at every gate at smaller airports) where cash is an option. Additionally, when we used to give free headsets away, that's the most popular thing I'd find in the seatback to be thrown away. Nowadays I see people coming onboard with their $1 headsets from a previous flight (cord wrapped around it), so they're being held on to and not wasted. It's funny, now the most popular thing I find in seatback pockets are water bottles, and a lot of the time they're still half full. I am not ashamed of going down the aisle for headsets.

Boy, I hope I don't look like I'm homeless going down the aisles....

Don't mean to insult, especially because I think B6's FAs are the most attentive in the business.

It just makes the airline look like it doesn't know what it's doing strategically, so it's asking people for a buck. Charging premiums for legroom or earning commissions from travel sales on jetblue.com seem like more sensible, sustainable ways of increasing revenue.

It is an impressive move by a leader to set the example. I applaud him. If only the leaders at other major airline would do what they have asked of their employees.
Morale is powerful.

I don't think he took it as an insult! No harm there. While I do agree that the selling of headsets has greatly cut down the amount of headsets that are left behind and that makes the cleaning go a lot faster because those old disposable headsets would get tangled around everything!

I do have to say that sometimes I feel kinda dumb telling people that they can't pay me with a $1, that is has to be a credit card. I do however make an announcemet that we don't accept any cash onboad but every once and awhile I get somebody who doesn't pay attention. So if you want the best sound possible get the $1 headsets, or even better....bring your own! I do! :D


Don't mean to insult, especially because I think B6's FAs are the most attentive in the business.

It just makes the airline look like it doesn't know what it's doing strategically, so it's asking people for a buck. Charging premiums for legroom or earning commissions from travel sales on jetblue.com seem like more sensible, sustainable ways of increasing revenue.

I don't think he took it as an insult! No harm there. You're right, I'm not bothered by anything :p

At the end of the day, even if its a revenue thing, the headset issue is very much a green thing, too, and theres nothing to be embarrassed about.

As I recall from another threat, the headsets were completely unrecyclable. Given how much better bringing your own headset sounds, I think everybody comes out a winner.

It is an impressive move by a leader to set the example. I applaud him. If only the leaders at other major airline would do what they have asked of their employees.
Morale is powerful.Zoolander, welcome to FlyerTalk!

It is an impressive move by a leader to set the example. I applaud him. If only the leaders at other major airline would do what they have asked of their employees.
Morale is powerful.

Great first post; I couldn't agree more!

As for the headset move being a green thing, it might be, but that wasn't the motivation or the deciding factor. It was just a good marketing bit. The airlines are not "going green" for the sake of the environment. They are implementing "green" policies where it benefits the bottom line and not doing so where it costs them money.

Great first post; I couldn't agree more!

As for the headset move being a green thing, it might be, but that wasn't the motivation or the deciding factor. It was just a good marketing bit. The airlines are not "going green" for the sake of the environment. They are implementing "green" policies where it benefits the bottom line and not doing so where it costs them money.

Yes and no.

Clearly not everything here affects the bottom line: http://www.jetblue.com/green/

While I do agree that it is not necessarily the motivation/deciding factor, and that they may put a marketing spin on it - no one can deny that it doesn't help the environment. More and more companies are "going green" these days, and I applaud the ones that do. If saving money is behind it, then so be it...it's a win-win situation. However, you can't convince me that every little aspect in the above link is solely to improve profitability.

Zoolander, welcome (on your first post) to FlyerTalk!

Yes and no.

Clearly not everything here affects the bottom line: http://www.jetblue.com/green/

While I do agree that it is not necessarily the motivation/deciding factor, and that they may put a marketing spin on it - no one can deny that it doesn't help the environment. More and more companies are "going green" these days, and I applaud the ones that do. If saving money is behind it, then so be it...it's a win-win situation. However, you can't convince me that every little aspect in the above link is solely to improve profitability.

Which of those efforts doesn't also affect profitability? Certainly the choice to not have paper tickets, reducing de-icing fluids and working to recycle oils from the vendors are all efforts that save the company money, no?

I'll give you the "win-win" answer, but at the heart of it the companies wouldn't be doing it if it cost them real money.

Great first post; I couldn't agree more!

As for the headset move being a green thing, it might be, but that wasn't the motivation or the deciding factor. It was just a good marketing bit. The airlines are not "going green" for the sake of the environment. They are implementing "green" policies where it benefits the bottom line and not doing so where it costs them money.


Well of course. Thats why I accounted for it being a revenue thing first. But my main point is that even if its a rationalization after-the-fact, I still would say its that the green benefit is enough to counter any of this "embarrassment" in-flight crew might have about having to collect money for them.

How about he gets to make more when he stops constantly changing strategies on route planning, and makes the company profitable enough to actually fund the profit sharing plan to its max. Celebrating a pay cut might make sense if he were running Aeroflot in 1983, but this is just a reflection of indecisive, visionless management.