Come Fly With John McCain: His proposal would help airlines get labor costs under control.

Wall St Journal ^ | January 29, 2003

[SJackson]

America's airlines are in one of their periodic bankruptcy runs, with United and USAirways using the blunt instrument of Chapter 11 to force concessions on their unions. Maybe it's time Congress listened to Arizona Senator John McCain so we can avoid this financial and labor carnage in the future.

[SJackson]

Congress could also do more to deregulate gates, privatize air traffic control and restore some sanity to antitrust law. But none of those other things will matter unless airlines are able to get their labor costs under control and function as healthy companies

Those are the places to start. Half-way deregulation has failed. Of course, the Railway Labor Act is part of that.

[B.O. Plenty]

These days airline unions abuse the process simply by waiting it out and then threatening to strike....(as do ALL unions)

...Nobody is going to get labor costs under control as long as union leadership is in charge...period.

Everybody is complaining about jobs going to Mexico, and most of the job loss can be traced to union leadership demands. You cannot tell me that the ordinary worker is so hard headed that he loses his job because industry cannot pay what union leadership demands.

What is needed is a law that restricts what union leadership can be paid. Set the salarys that any union "official" can be paid at, say, $25000 a year. Then the "officials" will truly have the best interest of the membership in mind....not getting a bigger raise and more power for themselves.....

[bobg]

NO WONDER WHY SOUTHWEST IS THE ONLY AIRLINES MAKING MONEY.
THEY OPERATE ON THE KISS PRINCIPLE...KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID.
I CAN FLY FROM LOUISVILLE TO ORLANDO ON SOUTHWEST FOR ABOUT $100. I RECENTLY FLEW TO ATLANTA, WHERE SOUTHWEST IS BANNED, AND THE COST OF 2.5 MORE FOR A SHORTER TRIP.

[yoe]

Unions may be necessary to some I can't argue that point. But their tactics and demands are pricing the very workplaces that make/give them jobs, out of competition with trade here and abroad; companies fold under some union demands leaving people jobless. Apparently it take 3 union people to change a table cloth in PA. So how many baggage handlers are reduced to handling only one kind of bag or can remove or load just so many bags on an airplane? How many union personnel does it take to change a light bulb...? You might be surprised.

By the way the last time the unemployment rate was 6% was at the height of the so-called “Clinton economic boom”, statistics don’t lie, but biased media and politicians do. Daschle and his unions are saying 'today' under the Bush administration is the worst unemployment, it just ain’t so!

[MoodyBlu]

Runaway labor costs are not the only airline ills. Congress could also do more to deregulate gates, privatize air traffic control and restore some sanity to antitrust law. But none of those other things will matter unless airlines are able to get their labor costs under control and function as healthy companies.

I am an air traffic controller @ PHL and wonder if there are many members of FR who feel that the air traffic control system in this country should be privatized. If you agree with the the WSJ on this question, please tell me why. Thanks,

MoodyBlu

[jlogajan]

Unions should not be restricted by government from gaining any kind of contract they can. On the other hand, unions should not have special legal status with the government. It should be a free market, not one controlled one way or the other by the government.

[Protagoras]

It should be a free market, not one controlled one way or the other by the government.

Spot on.

[Nov3]

If McManiac is for it . . . . . . . . . . . .

[F16Fighter]

"If McManiac is for it . . ."

Right -- there has to be a deeper darker reason...

[Wright is right!]

"I am an air traffic controller @ PHL and wonder if there are many members of FR who feel that the air traffic control system in this country should be privatized. If you agree with the the WSJ on this question, please tell me why. Thanks,"

ATC would be a difficult sector to privatize, for several reasons.

For ATC to privatize, it has to become a business. A business has to have customers, make a profit, and do a better job for less money than a similar endeavor run by the government. I have a hard time believing that such would be the case were it privatized.

For one thing, ATC - as pervasive as it is - does not have a comparatively large work force, and that work force, while well-paid, is not "out-paid," i.e., paid more than it's worth. In fact, considering the spatial and managerial skills involved, I'd say that most good ATC guys make LESS than they could in other industries.

So privatizing ATC would not save money on labor costs. And, while it WOULD have a built-in customer base (all the existing airports), those airport authorities would now have to start paying for something they now get either free or for very little investment. So a private ATC company would not have a huge guaranteed revenue stream on which to rely. Which questions its ability to make money.

And the next generation of ATC technology is going to take some investment in equipment and training - and that investment has to be recouped somehow if this business is to somehow make a profit.

I just don't see ATC as a candidate for privatization - largely due to the fact that for the life of me I can't imagine a workable business plan for it.

BTW, the people who are ATC have and display some of the most amazing skill sets in any profession I can think of. It is a profession which routinely operates on about .00001 percentage of error, as close to perfection as is possible with humans involved. Anyone who doubts this should spend a week listening to ATC at some our businest airports - and then you'll understand the sheer artistry of ATC's professionals.

BTW, to apply to be ATC, you can be NO OLDER than THIRTY-ONE. How long you been pushin' tin?

Michael

[MadIvan]

The Economist had the real answer to these costs in their Christmas issue - the technology is getting to the point where pilotless aircraft are possible. These aircraft will be available in the next 10-20 years, and will become normal and routine for passengers.

Airlines will be able to chop out huge amounts of salary they save on the pilots.

Regards, Ivan

[jlogajan]

Airlines will be able to chop out huge amounts of salary they save on the pilots.

It probably only costs between $500 and $1000 to pay the pilot and co-pilot's wages on a typical airline flight. That's only $20 per person if only 50 people are on the flight. Obviously it is NOT the major cost of flying -- which is amortizing capital equipment, fuel, and infrastructure.

[Mamzelle]

Would be interested to know how Daschle's wife figures in this, as a highpowered airline lobbyist.

[cynicom]

Last time I looked, Southwest was an airline, making money and expanding, how come???? Simple, the majors need to downsize, labor will get the hint, but no, they each need to be the biggest player. Slash their schedules and workers, deep, and when they strike, leave them go. They are in or near bankruptcy anyway.