FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Misery at 35,000 Feet

by CARL FINAMORE

It’s been a dizzying season of hookups and breakups for airlines. Everyone said they were single and ready to mingle. But, as it turned out, players found the game was not as easy as it first appeared.

The plan was simple enough. Coupling up would decrease expenses. But ultimately, the various living arrangements did not fly.

Opposition began to surface once it became clear the real business objective was to stuff more passengers into smaller aircraft, to reduce domestic service and to lay off workers.

As a result, major consumer and labor groups loudly protested. Especially since most carriers were fresh from receiving substantial bankruptcy relief from employees and debtors.

In particular, the two airlines most interested in cuddling, NWA and Delta, just emerged from bankruptcy court with huge savings less than a year ago.

The largest union in transportation, the Machinists Union, stated “that none of the mergers currently being proposed will benefit employees, passengers or the cities that these airlines serve.” The AFL-CIO made a similar statement. Both heavily lobbied Congress.

Rep. James L. Oberstar, influential chair of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, reacted coldly to merger fever with a flat “Hell No!”

Forty seven other members of Congress were less direct but still emphatic in their letter to the US Attorney General that “we are strongly concerned that future mergers could result in diminished service to small and medium size cities, job losses, less competition, higher fares and fewer options for consumers.”

But any chance of a honeymoon for the carriers really failed to take off once the historically troublesome pilot seniority issue appeared on the radar.

Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) members at Delta and Northwest (NWA) never agreed on how the two pilot groups would combine into one carrier. This is a huge concern. Senior pilots at NWA are still angry about being bypassed by junior Republic pilots in a merger over twenty years ago.

A dispute with 12,000 pilots, along with the growing list of other opponents of consolidation, was too much baggage for skeptical investors already nervous about rising oil prices and a recession. The romance between NWA and Delta cooled.

Today, there is little talk of airlines combining. Instead, mothballed business plans to reduce service are back on the table.

Increasing Revenue or Reduce Service

Except at Southwest Airlines, which consistently expands into locations vacated by other airlines, industry executives have accurately been accused of lacking imagination and growth innovation.

Instead of making their operation more efficient and attractive, they cut back. Instead of increasing customer service and building up the business, their predictable, lame inclinations are to fly less and charge more.

Each airline looks across the aisle to see if competitors follow suit. So far, most carriers are on the same page.

Fares have been raised six times by the majors since January 2008 according to FareCompare.com. Predictions are that it will continue.

At the same time, US capacity is being dramatically reduced by shifting routes to much more profitable international destinations. Delta, for example, plans to reserve 41% of its seats for international routes by the summer.

So, where do we stand after the merger craze seems to have subsided?

Airlines are raising fares, cutting back domestic service and threatening layoffs. These were the precise objections to consolidation in the first place.

But just as their pursuit of mergers failed to stabilize the industry, so too will these latest policies. Reducing the operation is a discredited shortcut that utterly fails to increase revenue and therein lies the problem.

“Cutting its fleet of airplanes does not address the larger cost problems that continue to beleaguer this airline,” said United Airlines ALPA chairman Captain Steve Wallach. “Instead of doling out hundreds of millions of dollars to shareholders and pocketing millions of dollars in bonuses and salary increases, perhaps management should reinvest that money into our operation.”

Simply put, when airlines cut back, earnings generally fall more rapidly than costs. Therefore, insufficient income is generated to cover expenses such as excessive fuel costs which alone increased an astounding 75% in 2008.

But despite these outrageous fuel charges, the majors were still profitable in 2007 without clipping their wings. In fact, they are estimated to collectively have stashed away $25 billion in savings.

Yet, management continues to squander these savings. Much of the income generated by employee concessions is being spent on executive bonuses and stock dividends rather than on enhancing customer service and offering attractive fares capable of expanding markets.

The latter, ultimately, is the only business plan consumers will find attractive.

CARL FINAMORE is former President (ret), Air Transport Employees, Local Lodge 1781, IAMAW. He can be awakened from his frequent naps at local1781@yahoo.com

 

 

 

 

More articles by:

Carl Finamore is Machinist Lodge 1781 delegate, San Francisco Labor Council, AFL-CIO. He can be reached at local1781@yahoo.com

Weekend Edition
February 23, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Richard D. Wolff
Capitalism as Obstacle to Equality and Democracy: the US Story
Paul Street
Where’s the Beef Stroganoff? Eight Sacrilegious Reflections on Russiagate
Jeffrey St. Clair
They Came, They Saw, They Tweeted
Andrew Levine
Their Meddlers and Ours
Charles Pierson
Nuclear Nonproliferation, American Style
Joseph Essertier
Why Japan’s Ultranationalists Hate the Olympic Truce
W. T. Whitney
US and Allies Look to Military Intervention in Venezuela
John Laforge
Maybe All Threats of Mass Destruction are “Mentally Deranged”
Matthew Stevenson
Why Vietnam Still Matters: an American Reckoning
David Rosen
For Some Reason, Being White Still Matters
Robert Fantina
Nikki Haley: the U.S. Embarrassment at the United Nations
Joyce Nelson
Why Mueller’s Indictments Are Hugely Important
Joshua Frank
Pearl Jam, Will You Help Stop Sen. Tester From Destroying Montana’s Public Lands?
Dana E. Abizaid
The Attack on Historical Perspective
Conn Hallinan
Immigration and the Italian Elections
George Ochenski
The Great Danger of Anthropocentricity
Pete Dolack
China Can’t Save Capitalism from Environmental Destruction
Joseph Natoli
Broken Lives
Manuel García, Jr.
Why Did Russia Vote For Trump?
Geoff Dutton
One Regime to Rule Them All
Torkil Lauesen – Gabriel Kuhn
Radical Theory and Academia: a Thorny Relationship
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: The Work of Persuasion
Thomas Klikauer
Umberto Eco and Germany’s New Fascism
George Burchett
La Folie Des Grandeurs
Howard Lisnoff
Minister of War
Eileen Appelbaum
Why Trump’s Plan Won’t Solve the Problems of America’s Crumbling Infrastructure
Ramzy Baroud
More Than a Fight over Couscous: Why the Palestinian Narrative Must Be Embraced
Jill Richardson
Mass Shootings Shouldn’t Be the Only Time We Talk About Mental Illness
Jessicah Pierre
Racism is Killing African American Mothers
Steve Horn
Wyoming Now Third State to Propose ALEC Bill Cracking Down on Pipeline Protests
David Griscom
When ‘Fake News’ is Good For Business
Barton Kunstler
Brainwashed Nation
Griffin Bird
I’m an Eagle Scout and I Don’t Want Pipelines in My Wilderness
Edward Curtin
The Coming Wars to End All Wars
Missy Comley Beattie
Message To New Activists
Jonah Raskin
Literary Hubbub in Sonoma: Novel about Mrs. Jack London Roils the Faithful
Binoy Kampmark
Frontiersman of the Internet: John Perry Barlow
Chelli Stanley
The Mirrors of Palestine
James McEnteer
How Brexit Won World War Two
Ralph Nader
Absorbing the Irresistible Consumer Reports Magazine
Cesar Chelala
A Word I Shouldn’t Use
Louis Proyect
Marx at the Movies
Osha Neumann
A White Guy Watches “The Black Panther”
Stephen Cooper
Rebel Talk with Nattali Rize: the Interview
David Yearsley
Market Music
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail