Originally Posted by Transpacificflyer

Yes. I believe that 3 generic TPACs can be more profitable than some of the Diamond's pax flights. This is attributable to my understanding that the generic business class flyer does not redeem points or use upgrades, and is less likely to access all of the perks and benefits that some Diamond FF's access. Obviously, there are a sizeable number of FFs who spend significantly. When you reference FFs booking flights on a weekly basis in C class (or business class or J class for those who nitpick) are these local flights/regional, or are these on long haul to the EU or North America?
In respect to the % that you cite, please direct me to the financial documents where they are published as I find them educational. They are quite a divergence from public information on other airlines. (I am not doubting the validity, but am curious where I can learn more.)


Do you have a published comparison on this, or is this just your personal opinion? All I have to go by are the labour audits I have seen, and on that basis, I see that branch offices or subsidiaries of multinational EU based firms have some of the best compensation packages. Everything is relative: If one used USA's Google/ABC as the measuring point, everyone would have awful working conditions. (No one can touch Google's benefits and compensation packages.) Your comparison to Japan of benefits provided is given to hyperbole. Which Japanese companies and for which class of workers are you referring to?? Perhaps the working conditions are similar to that of retailers such as 7-11 or Family Mart, but the benefits (and pay) are not comparable with Japanese airlines. I am reasonable enough to recognize that it would be an unfair comparison anyway, as the living costs and social expectations of Japan are quite different than those of Taiwan.


Your comment was directed at someone else, but I do note your comment on per diem and offer that it is somewhat unfair. Please note that most companies with international travel requirements have per diem ranges that reflect travel zones and the employee position. Your $80 would not go very far in Tokyo. It is not unreasonable for per diems to reflect this.


It's unfortunate that you still have to fly 100,000 "butt miles" per year as you crudely put it. last year, I was able to reduce my mileage to just under 85,000 and hope to get it below 75,000 this year. Almost all of my travel was in business or first class. I do not go out of my way to support EVA, but will fly when the airfare or schedule is attractive. My reference to 2 TPACs was in reference to my flights on EVA. I usually fly on other airlines, either *A or SkyTeam.
I am surprised to read your issue with over heated food, as my meals are often served lukewarm . Despite that, I have no complaints about the quality of service and appreciate the professionalism of the cabin crew. I do not "think" my comment outweighs, the "majority" on the board. However, you are assuming that the small number of aggressive and bullying opinions expressed in the forum represent the full views of the customer base. People do not necessarily express their true sentiments, either because they do not wish to have a confrontation, or don't care what others think or can't be bothered. I do appreciate that there are some people who support the company position. I also recognize that there are some valid concerns raised by management. However,as I have stated multiple times. EVA has a labour relations problem. No amount of screaming or threatening or bullying will solve it. Leadership requires the ability to recognize when there is an impasse and when there is a persistent issue. The labour dispute we see today is a repeat of past disputes. Making allegations of sabotage or character assassination of the labour representatives will not help deliver a solution. It is quite obvious that there needs to be a change in the management approach and the negotiating strategy. This doesn't mean that the union is right, but if the company wants a solution it will have to show leadership and try a different approach. EVA is clinging to a negotiating style and approach that is outdated.

I mentioned it previously, but I will emphasize again, that time is on the workers side. Taiwan is a rapidly aging society. The median age is 41. In a about 5 years years, Taiwan will have what is called a "super aged" population. Despite claims by some in the forum to the contrary, there are not thousands of qualified candidates available to work as FAs. Taiwan has an unemployment rate of about 3.7%, which has resulted in a serious labour shortage. The unemployed are made up in large part by people who are either unemployable because of intellectual or physical deficit, or who are not appropriate for FA duties. Yes there are the infrequent polls that suggest that white collar workers consider the FA position a dream job. However, what is not covered in the polls is the opinion once the dreamers have the long hours and tedious working conditions explained to them. It is incorrect to assume that FAs can easily be replaced under the current economic and demographic characteristics. This is why the management mindset must change and view the FAs as an asset with some value. The current confrontational management style of both management and the union will only result in more fighting and bickering in future years.

Originally Posted by username

You know, another thing I am thinking is that these FAs basically grew up during the "democratization" period of Taiwan where law is secondary to loud voices and irrational attention grabbing behavior. So, maybe they think that is how things work and didn't expect BR to hold firm?