|
Garbage Airline Keeps Cutting
Let the continued shrinking to profitability to win the west with our smiles and caring service!! Committed to kindness wooohoooo, it’s working great!
“This is a premium market, and in that sense Alaska Airlines has been woefully uncompetitive. Alaska Airlines is the only airline in the market to not offer flat beds.” https://onemileatatime.com/news/alas...k-lax-flights/ |
SFO - JFK probably on the chopping block near future…. But hey…. “Most West Coast”
We compete in ONE market…. PNW. That’s it. Period. Otherwise we fill niches till we get run out of them by either a cheaper alternative, better alternative, or the latest edition airline “friends with benefits” codeshare. It is absolutely BRUTAL to watch from inside the belly of the whale. Wonder how much money SWA is saving on all those ETOPS flights running Max’s back and forth while use em to bang up and down the West Coast. But, hey, we’re going to Belize soon!…. Till we don’t. AND we have a shiny new building in SeaTac you can take an Uber to from the airport if ya happen to be in the area. swear to god sometimes I think this whole thing is held together with duct tape and baling twine. |
This airline could run a dedicated 787 with only lie flats seats between NYC LAX and you guys would complain because they’d only serve Alaskan Amber as the onboard beer…
|
Originally Posted by Cruz5350
(Post 3255322)
This airline could run a dedicated 787 with only lie flats seats between NYC LAX and you guys would complain because they’d only serve Alaskan Amber as the onboard beer…
|
No I like that beer it’s great.. the onboard food and drink offering for guests is very good..Crew meals on the other hand..
but seriously, quitting this premium route is just another indicator that everything being “complained”about in regards to Alaska’s arrogance and stubbornness when it comes to evolving will be the eventual nail in the coffin
Originally Posted by Cruz5350
(Post 3255322)
This airline could run a dedicated 787 with only lie flats seats between NYC LAX and you guys would complain because they’d only serve Alaskan Amber as the onboard beer…
|
Originally Posted by av8or
(Post 3255314)
Wonder how much money SWA is saving on all those ETOPS flights running Max’s back and forth while use em to bang up and down the West Coast.
|
Originally Posted by Ala5ka
(Post 3255348)
No I like that beer it’s great.. the onboard food and drink offering for guests is very good..Crew meals on the other hand..
but seriously, quitting this premium route is just another indicator that everything being “complained”about in regards to Alaska’s arrogance and stubbornness when it comes to evolving will be the eventual nail in the coffin |
Lol as a nyc- lax commuter I can tell you this article is pretty spot on. Our product is a joke comparatively to the big boys. Commuting on own metal has been a last option for me as it is far more comfortable on the competitors if there were enough seats on their wide bodies.
Originally Posted by Cruz5350
(Post 3255420)
I wouldn’t take that article as gospel, during flight path it was said many times that they look at specific profit margins on routes as to wether they open them or keep them. Everyone knows how popular that city pair is and what aircraft are being flown on it. I wouldn’t say it’s that Alaska can’t compete on it they just choose not to. We don’t fly wide bodies that’s a strike against us, we don’t have a dedicated premium transcon airplane that’s another strike against them. I’m sure in whatever accounting fashion they ran the numbers on making one and it didn’t make sense, on top of it you know darn well this has something to do with the One World partnership.
|
Originally Posted by Ala5ka
(Post 3255448)
Lol as a nyc- lax commuter I can tell you this article is pretty spot on. Our product is a joke comparatively to the big boys.
Don't get me wrong, I would love for the company that signs my paychecks to be growing aggressively, to be competitive in every market, to have limitless resources to throw at winning customers, etc, and to still remain highly profitable. Unfortunately, I don't have any control over this company's business decisions and neither do you, we both just have to live with them (while simultaneously making this career as profitable as possible for ourselves). So I'm personally disappointed by a lot of their business decisions, but I'm also not stupid enough to think that they don't have good reasons for making them and without access to the same information they have and the same analyses that they've done, nobody here is qualified to say otherwise. Tell them you demand scope, tell them you demand industry leading work rules, tell them you demand higher wages, etc. Don't tell them which routes to fly. |
It seems that AK is only flying this route 4x/week as it is. Not a huge cut in my opinion.
|
Fair enough. Good points
Originally Posted by echelon
(Post 3255584)
Compared to an NFL quarterback, my ability to throw a football is a joke, but that's irrelevant because that's not how I've chosen to make money. This particular city pair is clearly not how Alaska has chosen to make money, or they WOULD have the lie flat seats and premium service.
Don't get me wrong, I would love for the company that signs my paychecks to be growing aggressively, to be competitive in every market, to have limitless resources to throw at winning customers, etc, and to still remain highly profitable. Unfortunately, I don't have any control over this company's business decisions and neither do you, we both just have to live with them (while simultaneously making this career as profitable as possible for ourselves). So I'm personally disappointed by a lot of their business decisions, but I'm also not stupid enough to think that they don't have good reasons for making them and without access to the same information they have and the same analyses that they've done, nobody here is qualified to say otherwise. Tell them you demand scope, tell them you demand industry leading work rules, tell them you demand higher wages, etc. Don't tell them which routes to fly. |
Originally Posted by echelon
(Post 3255584)
Compared to an NFL quarterback, my ability to throw a football is a joke, but that's irrelevant because that's not how I've chosen to make money. This particular city pair is clearly not how Alaska has chosen to make money, or they WOULD have the lie flat seats and premium service.
Don't get me wrong, I would love for the company that signs my paychecks to be growing aggressively, to be competitive in every market, to have limitless resources to throw at winning customers, etc, and to still remain highly profitable. Unfortunately, I don't have any control over this company's business decisions and neither do you, we both just have to live with them (while simultaneously making this career as profitable as possible for ourselves). So I'm personally disappointed by a lot of their business decisions, but I'm also not stupid enough to think that they don't have good reasons for making them and without access to the same information they have and the same analyses that they've done, nobody here is qualified to say otherwise. Tell them you demand scope, tell them you demand industry leading work rules, tell them you demand higher wages, etc. Don't tell them which routes to fly. When Alaska bought Jet America they paid $14 mill ($33 mill in today’s dollars) and other than pulling out of Long Beach they kept and expanded the Jet America/Cali footprint. That was an offensive move for Alaska. But, nobody believes that the purchase of Virgin was primarily a move to grow in California. Everybody knows that was a defensive move. Everybody knows that in early 2018 when management was asked “Hey, ummm, y’all concerned at all about Delta?” the response was, “No way man…. We got this… no problem. They can’t beat us in Seattle!” which quietly a year later turned into “OMG protect Seattle…. Run everything through Seattle!” Everybody knows that our current push on Hawaii is in direct response to Southwest gunning for us in the islands…. yet another defensive move. Fall of 2019…. Breaking off ties with American…. Spring 2020…. We’re absolutely code-sharing with American and joining OneWorld. Defense. And what you’re hearing,(most likely from folks who’ve watched and been a part of great airlines that eventually either got swallowed or ceased to exist altogether) is concern that this management team either lacks the skills, or forethought to navigate the fierce competition on more than one front. Nobody is telling management what routes to fly. If you’re decently senior here….. you’re probably fine either way. The rest of us are just scratching our heads and sayin, “Hey Gen Custer, ya sure ya want us to all gather in one spot at the top of the hill? It appears as though they have Winchester repeating rifles and we’re still using single shot Springfields.” And the response by some seems to be … “Listen here…. We’ve always won at Little Bighorn and the Springfield has served us well….. don’t you worry son.” I HOPE there’s a bigger picture cause my wagon is hitched to it. But, if there’s one other than Defense, defense, defense…. I’m still waitin to see it. |
Originally Posted by av8or
(Post 3255623)
I HOPE there’s a bigger picture cause my wagon is hitched to it. But, if there’s one other than Defense, defense, defense…. I’m still waitin to see it.
https://youtu.be/SW9OskQdHQQ?t=32 |
Excellent post. Spot on analysis and comparison. As much as I hate this place, my cart is also hitched to this mule
Originally Posted by av8or
(Post 3255623)
I think you are conflating concern with hubris.
When Alaska bought Jet America they paid $14 mill ($33 mill in today’s dollars) and other than pulling out of Long Beach they kept and expanded the Jet America/Cali footprint. That was an offensive move for Alaska. But, nobody believes that the purchase of Virgin was primarily a move to grow in California. Everybody knows that was a defensive move. Everybody knows that in early 2018 when management was asked “Hey, ummm, y’all concerned at all about Delta?” the response was, “No way man…. We got this… no problem. They can’t beat us in Seattle!” which quietly a year later turned into “OMG protect Seattle…. Run everything through Seattle!” Everybody knows that our current push on Hawaii is in direct response to Southwest gunning for us in the islands…. yet another defensive move. Fall of 2019…. Breaking off ties with American…. Spring 2020…. We’re absolutely code-sharing with American and joining OneWorld. Defense. And what you’re hearing,(most likely from folks who’ve watched and been a part of great airlines that eventually either got swallowed or ceased to exist altogether) is concern that this management team either lacks the skills, or forethought to navigate the fierce competition on more than one front. Nobody is telling management what routes to fly. If you’re decently senior here….. you’re probably fine either way. The rest of us are just scratching our heads and sayin, “Hey Gen Custer, ya sure ya want us to all gather in one spot at the top of the hill? It appears as though they have Winchester repeating rifles and we’re still using single shot Springfields.” And the response by some seems to be … “Listen here…. We’ve always won at Little Bighorn and the Springfield has served us well….. don’t you worry son.” I HOPE there’s a bigger picture cause my wagon is hitched to it. But, if there’s one other than Defense, defense, defense…. I’m still waitin to see it. |
Originally Posted by Smooth at FL450
(Post 3255349)
4000#s per crossing, on average. But ask me about my 6 leg inner island day in a couple weeks and all my time spent "Motoring"...
|
Originally Posted by hoover
(Post 3255729)
I thought the plan was to move some 700s over there for the inner island stuff?
|
Originally Posted by Texasbound
(Post 3255797)
What was the "source" of that plan?
|
Originally Posted by hoover
(Post 3255813)
flew with a SCR guy and that's what he told me. Al of this was before covid tho
|
Originally Posted by Texasbound
(Post 3255817)
The only proven reliable source is crew van drivers. "top men", SCR guys, homeless guy living outside the training center, they just repeat rumors.
|
Originally Posted by Smooth at FL450
(Post 3255349)
4000#s per crossing, on average. But ask me about my 6 leg inner island day in a couple weeks and all my time spent "Motoring"...
Still always in a hurry I see. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by Smooth at FL450
(Post 3255349)
4000#s per crossing, on average. But ask me about my 6 leg inner island day in a couple weeks and all my time spent "Motoring"...
|
Did you fellas see that ual announced a purchase order for 270 new aircraft- that’s 69 more new planes than our entire mainline fleet. Wll will have premium product, including seatback tvs with bluetooth connectivity. I thought Brad and Ben said people like to watch on their iPads? I hate to think they lied to us..but could it be???
oh yeah, also with the purchase order they are removing 200 rjs to be replaced with mainline flying But we won the lottery here so whatev. God I wish I wasn’t too old and could take thme pay cut. Anyone who can leave, leave!!! |
Why you stressing over things you have zero control over?
|
I have control over my vote and influencing others about scope. Others are bringing flying back to mainline while we are getting more RJs. I’ve never understood you, flew with you when you were an fo. You’re a sharp guy but your shift towards Alaska justifier apologist is confusing
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
(Post 3256288)
Why you stressing over things you have zero control over?
|
Originally Posted by Ala5ka
(Post 3256382)
I have control over my vote and influencing others about scope. Others are bringing flying back to mainline while we are getting more RJs. I’ve never understood you, flew with you when you were an fo. You’re a sharp guy but your shift towards Alaska justifier apologist is confusing
Of course I (and most nearly everyone else now) cares about scope and job protections. I just don’t understand the angst on topics like B vs A or what routes we fly or don’t fly. Now if the topic is smaller RJs doing more mainline flights, that’s certainly a concern. But cutting LA-JFK while adding other routes from JFK that increase frequency? I dunno, I suppose there’s bigger fish to concentrate on. |
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
(Post 3256508)
Dont get me wrong, I’m not happy either about what happened to NYC, displacement x2 to west coast, etc.
Of course I (and most nearly everyone else now) cares about scope and job protections. I just don’t understand the angst on topics like B vs A or what routes we fly or don’t fly. Now if the topic is smaller RJs doing more mainline flights, that’s certainly a concern. But cutting LA-JFK while adding other routes from JFK that increase frequency? I dunno, I suppose there’s bigger fish to concentrate on. |
😱😱😱…. What are you guys talking about.
I am sitting on the deck of the boat, looking at Friday Harbor, nice little breeze, it’s beautiful. The next 7 days look almost perfect. I just added 50ml of a blue labeled product to a tumbler, I think I will let it set a minute or two. We got 120 max aircraft coming, profit margins should be pushing back towards 18%. If the economy holds, a new contract is coming. End of June next year, best guess. We will have scope and a healthy raise. Things will not be perfect, but they never really are anywhere. If you don’t live on the west coast, this is probably not the airline for you. If you were taken hostage 5 years ago, sorry, that is a tuff break. If a HA merger takes place, that will slow things down… then we are probably looking at 18-24 mos as management tries to tuck everything into the merger. I am surprised many didn’t know when they got hired here that UA, DA, and AA are five times our size🤔. I think that is bigger, with many more planes. I think that means their orders should be larger too. RELAX, it’s summer! 🥃 I did just hear we had 30 captains leave to become flight attendants at United 😉. |
Because it’s easier to complain than dust off the old interview suit and resume and move on…. I’d really love to know what advice these folks would give to their kids if they were in a similar situation. Something tells me it isn’t just suck it up buttercup and yet that’s what they tell themselves.
|
Originally Posted by OTZeagle1
(Post 3256727)
I did just hear we had 30 captains leave to become flight attendants at United 😉.
There’s gonna need to be a monster 180 by the company on Scope negotiations for that to be the case. |
Originally Posted by Cruz5350
(Post 3256742)
Because it’s easier to complain than dust off the old interview suit and resume and move on…. I’d really love to know what advice these folks would give to their kids if they were in a similar situation. Something tells me it isn’t just suck it up buttercup and yet that’s what they tell themselves.
Like you can like your job and yet still be concerned about aspects of the company or the contract or negotiations right? It’s not binary. |
Originally Posted by OTZeagle1
(Post 3256727)
I just added 50ml of a blue labeled product to a tumbler, I think I will let it set a minute or two. 😉. |
Originally Posted by av8or
(Post 3256764)
😂😂😂🥃🥃
There’s gonna need to be a monster 180 by the company on Scope negotiations for that to be the case. 🥃🥃 |
Originally Posted by OTZeagle1
(Post 3257094)
It will happen, they know they have too, they are just playing their hand. First you will hear, early next June, that we are at an impasse, expect a strike or three more years of negotiations. Four weeks later there will be news of a TA. The economy or a merger could impact the timeline, If both hold serve, it will play out very close. We have an awesome negotiating committee, they are not budging. Relax, enjoy, flying less would probably help on both fronts.
🥃🥃 But in this day and age, few airlines want to actually go all the way to the mat. Too disruptive. |
Originally Posted by OTZeagle1
(Post 3257094)
It will happen, they know they have too, they are just playing their hand. First you will hear, early next June, that we are at an impasse, expect a strike or three more years of negotiations. Four weeks later there will be news of a TA. The economy or a merger could impact the timeline, If both hold serve, it will play out very close. We have an awesome negotiating committee, they are not budging. Relax, enjoy, flying less would probably help on both fronts.
🥃🥃 And if they do just buy Hawaiian, then don't we just get sodomized with yet another arbitrator-awarded wet dream for the company JCBA? What nobody (and yes I've asked this of our elected representatives) seems to be able to explain is what the company's motivation is to negotiate at all. ALL of the urgency is on our side of the table, and ALL of the leverage is on theirs. Attrition from the bottom of the list has never been enough of an issue, even in the midst of record hiring at the other majors, to present an action-worthy data point to the company. There will never be a shortage of regional pilots who would settle for any step up from their current shop, and as long as we have bases in PDX/ANC/SEA there will be locals who apply and who probably don't care that commuting to our schedules is a death sentence (or at the very least, grounds for an inevitable divorce). The long and the short of it is that we have virtually nothing with which to force their hand. As much as I'd love for the company to be terrified of our custom-wrap RV and all our unity cookouts, I just don't see it. Somebody change my mind. |
Originally Posted by OTZeagle1
(Post 3257094)
It will happen, they know they have too, they are just playing their hand. First you will hear, early next June, that we are at an impasse, expect a strike or three more years of negotiations. Four weeks later there will be news of a TA. The economy or a merger could impact the timeline, If both hold serve, it will play out very close. We have an awesome negotiating committee, they are not budging. Relax, enjoy, flying less would probably help on both fronts.
🥃🥃 |
I also have asked this of our union guys and have never gotten a good answer about why the company has any motivation to concede to any of our requests. All of your points are spot on. Airplanes are moving, seats are filled, and there is no shortage of applicants. If I were the company I’d never give an inch either. There would be no reason to. I greatly respect our Union guys and girls for the work they do and I hope they prove me wrong.
Originally Posted by echelon
(Post 3257192)
Why does this absurd idea that there will ever be a strike at a major airline, let alone the one that's counted on to deliver essentials to all the sh!thole nowheres in the state of Alaska, keep getting perpetuated? It will never happen (legally). Stop giving it attention like it's something that is realistically possible in this country in this century . And captains, I'm tired of hearing about how much you're contributing to your "strike fund," as if the strike that will never happen in the first place would last more than an hour.
And if they do just buy Hawaiian, then don't we just get sodomized with yet another arbitrator-awarded wet dream for the company JCBA? What nobody (and yes I've asked this of our elected representatives) seems to be able to explain is what the company's motivation is to negotiate at all. ALL of the urgency is on our side of the table, and ALL of the leverage is on theirs. Attrition from the bottom of the list has never been enough of an issue, even in the midst of record hiring at the other majors, to present an action-worthy data point to the company. There will never be a shortage of regional pilots who would settle for any step up from their current shop, and as long as we have bases in PDX/ANC/SEA there will be locals who apply and who probably don't care that commuting to our schedules is a death sentence (or at the very least, grounds for an inevitable divorce). The long and the short of it is that we have virtually nothing with which to force their hand. As much as I'd love for the company to be terrified of our custom-wrap RV and all our unity cookouts, I just don't see it. Somebody change my mind. |
Originally Posted by Ala5ka
(Post 3257330)
I also have asked this of our union guys and have never gotten a good answer about why the company has any motivation to concede to any of our requests. All of your points are spot on. Airplanes are moving, seats are filled, and there is no shortage of applicants. If I were the company I’d never give an inch either. There would be no reason to. I greatly respect our Union guys and girls for the work they do and I hope ya they prove me wrong.
|
Self Help
PLEASE do NOT promote, suggest, or hint at wildcat labor action on APC.
This is to protect you from yourself. |
Yep. You cannot advocate a change in the status quo once negotiations are underway. That includes simply following the CBA more reliably or advocating not doing certain actions - even if those actions are discretionary under the CBA.
Of course, a union is allowed to educate its members about their contractual rights and safety obligations, and in that context, it may not be a problem to call for strict compliance with the contract. A union may not, however, encourage strict compliance with the terms of an existing agreement in an effort to gain leverage in negotiations for a new or amended contract. When a union changes the status quo in aid of such an effort, the district court may enjoin the union's conduct. That is just what happened here with respect to blocking out, short-notice sick calls, and overtime. Atlas Air, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, No. 17-7172, 14 (D.C. Cir. Jul. 5, 2019) Since voluntary conduct can be part of the "status quo," the pertinent question in this case is what the pilots normally did before the Union informed Atlas of its intent to negotiate an amended CBA. See, e.g., Delta Air Lines, 238 F.3d at 1309-10 (encouraging pilots to decline optional overtime assignments violated the status quo). In other words, the question is what pilots normally did before the Union assertedly began trying to change the status quo. Atlas's statistical evidence shows that, prior to February 2016, pilots frequently departed before the scheduled time and only rarely departed precisely on time, and after February 2016, the inverse was true. Second, the Union argues that blocking out on time is not illegal, but instead ensures that pilots are "in compliance with [Federal Aviation Administration] rest, flight and duty time regulation." Union Br. 51. That may be so, but the issue is not whether pilots should block out on time; it is whether pilots altered their prior practice of blocking out before the scheduled time, when possible. And the answer to that question, the district court fairly concluded, was yes. https://casetext.com/case/atlas-air-...of-teamsters-4 So unless you want to screw over your own Union just…don’t |
Unity can never overcome Stupidity…Stupidity is the label for each and every Alaska Airlines pilot hired or merged that has not been strictly following our CBA from the day they showed up. To include each and every section no matter how inconvenient it is….For the 75% that have not been following it or who have been cherry picking it…It is too late for you..Enjoy the treatment you get from the ceo all the way down to your base chief cheerleader…pathetic
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:24 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands