SWAcapt

Actually SWA is hedged in the $30's for the next 3 years and as far as UAL vs SWA capt pay, SWA is $12 higher than a UAL 747 driver. This of course only matters if you've bought-in to the legacy carrier management position that corporate profits are tied directly to pilot hourly pay rates. Our hourly rate is high because we are the most productive. Our labor cost are still comparitively low (right at industry avarage) due to the employee productivity.

fireman0174

This is a very important point that many seem to forget.

SkyHigh

That is if they survive that long. Frontier has been loosing money for most of the last few years. So far SWA is still earning money. I think they would last much longer in hard times.

SkyHigh

Hunt599

....................

snopilot

Frontier and ual are much better than Swest... as a passenger. The prices right now are as low as they ever have been out of Den. I would pay a little more to fly f9 and ual before stepping on a swest plane.
Frontier has a very loyal crowd in Den and the region. F9 will survive. Ual will as well. Sw will have a niche in den and that is all.
adios

CO737,3,5,7,8,9

I would tend to disagree on your issue of productivity. CAL now builds lines to an average of 80-85 hrs a month, has no trip or duty rigs, and at every opportunity passes on the increasing cost of health care on to the employees. etc. etc. Comparing a 747 CA to a 737 CA only illustrates how much more SWA is paying in pilot cost per butt moved per mile. A CAL 737 CA makes $150 you make $185, we are flying the same airplanes, albeit CAL's MX cost are higher as we have a fully functional HNAV/VNAV/autothrottle, and a few other gizmos. If you would research the numbers I believe you will find that per passenger mile flown, CAL pilots are a heck of a lot cheaper than SWA pilots. SWA biggest advantage right now is the fuel hedge and 2nd ,only by a little , is a managment /employee relationship that fosters productivity rather than hindering it. Who else here can say my company has never furloughed pilots? I think SWA is a great company and I wish you guys well, but I think you will definitely see pressure on your wages and increasing ticket prices at SWA as your fuel advantage decreases.

SWAcapt

Well, I actually did research the numbers and here is a brief synopsis. The following data is taken from US DOT Form 41 data. The data is from 1Q and 2Q 05.

Core Cost / ASM (all operating costs less labor & fuel)
CAL;7.6 Ind Ave;5.97 SWA;2.9

Pilots / airplane
CAL;11.5 IA;12.5 SWA;10.4

Block hours flown / pilot
CAL;639 IA;664 SWA;766

Total Pilot Expense / ASM
CAL;1.14 IA;1.14 SWA;1.11

Total Labor Cost
CAL; 3.5 IA;3.26 SWA;3.3

Total Operating Expense / ASM
CAL;13.4 IA;NA SWA7.7

You will find that a CAL pilot cost / ASM is not a 'heck of a lot cheaper than SWA pilots' and that your statement 'SWA biggest advantage right now is the fuel hedge' is also in error. CAL's core cost is 1/10th of a cent less than our Total Operating expense...ie, if CAL had no labor costs or fuel expenses, then we'd be just about even on total operating cost.

I have great admiration for CAL and think you guys have an excellent product. In fact, the only airline ticket I've purchased in the last 10 years was CAL. I think CAL has become more competitive and will be around for a long time. Best wishes to you and all my airline bretheren. Let's hope things get better sooner than later.

CO737,3,5,7,8,9

[QUOTE=SWAcapt]

Total Pilot Expense / ASM
CAL;1.14 IA;1.14 SWA;1.11

Total Labor Cost
CAL; 3.5 IA;3.26 SWA;3.3


You will find that a CAL pilot cost / ASM is not a 'heck of a lot cheaper than SWA pilots' and that your statement 'SWA biggest advantage right now is the fuel hedge' is also in error.

Thanks for the numbers, I don't dispute them but it would be interesting to know excactly how they were derived. The CAL crew is paid 25-30% less to fly the same number of people the same distance. If you are looking at crew cost alone ( hourly wages, training, health benefits, retirement contributions etc.) it would seem the difference would be more pronounced. Especially considering that would take into account the 757,767,777 crew who are carrying significantly more people at still lower crew wages then the 737 SWA crew. Could be that some of the difference is in aircraft utilization and seating configuration. If you were to take crew cost (what it cost to pay the crew wages, training, and benefits) for the airline as a whole, and divide that by the total passenger milage I would have thought it would be a larger difference. Won't be the first time I've been wrong though, just ask my wife.

SWAcapt

[QUOTE=CO737,3,5,7,8,9]The previous stuff was just reported 'fact'. Here is my guess / opinion to your question. Your hourly pay is just one component of your pay. CAL has both an A & B retirement plan which I'm guessing is woth about 10% of your total cost as an employee. We receive that money as cash (higher hourly wage) and invest on our own (and it can't be taken away). The other 15-20%difference could be our productivity. On average, CAL pilots would need to fly 20% (19.87) more block hours annually to equal ours. Hope this helps.

hnljay

I think you need to factor in the total company body count per airplane in order to fully appreciate how efficient SWA is on staffing. I was told they are at around 60 per A/C. My carrier is around 77 even after tremendous cuts. The hub and spoke system creates jobs at out stations that are very costly per hour of flight time.