Q&A for BM
 

I’ll go first:

BM, your annual compensation as CEO is 5.5 mill. In 2008, BA, the CEO compensation was 1.5 mill. That’s an increase of 3.6 times what the CEO used to make. Assuming captain in 2008 made $200k a year, at the same rate, today he would be paid 720k not 300K/yr….OR conversely, YOUR pay Mr BM would be 2.25 mill/yr. Also, you have M&A protection in your contract while the pilots do not.

Can you explain to me why CEO pay has more than tripled since 08 and you have job protection benefits in your contract that the pilots do not?

second article by the times now. Winning new customers everyday now

Oops, didn’t realize I linked to the reader comments but it sure seems a lot of the loyal customer base is PO’d. Oh to be a fly on the wall at the latest care coalition meeting 😂

The comments section…. Just “wow”
 

This is a challenging environment even we were in a good place contractually….. so many structural changes papered over and bs’d their way out of, but the fact that they refuse to fix the one literally laid right in front of them…. One where they could immediately get some good will, have pilots chipping in a little here and there, helping recruit, PR, etc….. and yet…. It’s just “nope….. one more officer level exec and ambiguous bromides oughta do the trick!!””

Will’s response was pretty epic. Will McQuillen, chair of the Alaska Airlines council for the Air Line Pilots Association union, said the problems run deeper than the calendar.

“I gotta tell you, there’s a month-to-month transition, literally every month,” he said.

Not sure about this comparison. Pilots are dime a dozen (until this decade). CEO is one per airline. The interesting comparison would be what other CEOs made at AA, UA, DL, SW, B6, HA, NK, and F9. I legit do not know what they made.

Delta CEO took a pay cut last year to only make $12M and change.

How much was pay, and how much was stock options built up several years, and just now excercised?

Best comment thus far:

Modern-day Alaska Airlines is a tale of two non-compatible strategies: on one hand, they want to be considered a national brand, with big airline ambitions, big airline marketing and, critically, big airline executive & upper management compensation & shareholder returns.


On the other hand, Alaska wants "team-player" employees who will step in to help during tough times, who will do more with less to make things happen, and customers to think they're doing the right thing by helping a small, local company.


Alaska execs frequently cite local companies like Costco as "inspiration" for what they'd like Alaska to be: loyal customers, loyal employees and solid products. What Alaska doesn't get, though, is that Costco intentionally invests in providing a consistent, reliable experience for customers and leading the industry in employee pay. Those are costs, costs that eat into Costco's wealth, costs that could go to shareholders, instead, but don't, because Costco believes in running a good business, first, and shareholder value second.


What Alaska is saying is that they want all the benefits of a unicorn but without the costs of the unicorn. They want the runaway executive compensation and they want to squeeze as much out of their customers and employees as possible to transfer that wealth to shareholders. And they have largely viewed frontline employees as easily replaceable cogs who, with enough mandatory in-person Kool-Aid sessions, will feel a sense of duty to bail out management's poor planning and decisions.


Alaska has relied on pliable and loyal labor for years, but they've burned bridges too many times. Executives have cried wolf about the operation with such regularity that it's now a routine way of doing business, because employees, time after time, bailed out failed executive decision-making. It sounds like that death-spiral "strategy" isn't working as well, anymore. There is no longer a deep well of mutual trust to draw from.

Well said. Costco got awarded the best employer of the year for 2 years in a row if I'm not mistaken. This is clear as water. It is just a consequence of being treated well.