I think I could run an airline

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Again - I certainly believe that a manager should have enough knowledge to understand at least generally what everyone below them is doing. However, simply having that knowledge is far insufficient to managing people. Regardless of Kid's opinion, it is most certainly difficult to get people to do what you want them to do, even once you know what they need to do. Far too many technical people are terrible managers; the challenge is finding the technical people who are also good managers (or the good managers who are also capable technically).

This is very true. Among my more technical clients (and their competitors), teh ones who score higher on teh various metrics of employee productivity, retention, etc., are teh ones who have different career tracks for technical people vs. managers. There's no reason why someone who's demonstrated a superior ability to perform technical tasks is necessarily well-suited to managing other people performing those tasks.

[Nugog]

Originally posted by LordShiva
There's no reason why someone who's demonstrated a superior ability to perform technical tasks is necessarily well-suited managing other people performing those tasks.

Very true.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Blake
For your perfect airline, remember to remove humans from the equation. It also might be a good idea to remove the weather and maybe just all of reality to be on the safe side.

My airline would have a strict no-born-again-Buddhist rule.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Unions reached their peak in the late sixties.

The median wage of Americans (adjusted for inflation) hasn't risen significantly since 1973.

Since 1980, the wealth of America has doubled, but neither the middle class nor the lower class have seen any increase.

Tell me again how we can just sit and wait upon the largess of corporate America to share some of its wealth with us.

Life is so simple for you. Unions = higher wages for everyone = good.

Do you not see the fact that these "high wages" (and it's not just wages, but the absurd benefits) are directly causing massive damage to the US Airline and US automotive industries? Or do you just not care?

Tell me, what is the average wage of the people Ford/GM have laid off to maintain the high wages/benefit demands that the market does not support?

[Nugog]

Unions do have a place in most workplaces.

They should be helping ensure safety and fairness for workers etc etc.

Ensuring that people are treated legally under that particular country's laws.

But Asher is correct in that higher wages for everyone - mandatory arbitrarily set higher wages - are not good for everyone.

They certainly are inflationary.

Wage rises should reflect the increase of the company's overall performance - and they should be based on individual performance. Those that work well/hard etc get more - those that slack off/underperform get less.

[Asher]

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Nugog
But Asher is correct in that higher wages for everyone - mandatory arbitrarily set higher wages - are not good for everyone.

They certainly are inflationary.

Hardly. They tend to keep wages up with inflation though. Otherwise all the money goes to shareholders and managers.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Gotta say, I've flown on communist airlines, third-world airlines, and tiny airlines in countries with very relaxed standards about, well, everything. And they were all better than any of my flights in post-9/11 America.

I also regularly transit one of the busiest airports in the world in one of the most security-obsessed coutries in the world (Singapore), and never have to take off my freakin' shoes.

It can't be that hard to do this right. Save us, Asher.

[Wiglaf]

Taking off the shoes has nothing to do with the airlines, it is government policy, but thanks for playing Rufus. And a big LOL to saying that Singapore is half the target the USA is.

[Nugog]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Hardly. They tend to keep wages up with inflation though. Otherwise all the money goes to shareholders and managers.

Depends on both the Union and the Company, and to some extent what country you are in.

The real shame is that wage rounds/negotiations can become highly contnentious arguments between two sides who really do not like each other.

This is a huge problem these days - and it is a problem caused by both sides usually.

Rufus - I think only the US requires you to remove shoes belts etc - which is another reason not to travel to the country that also wants your fingerprints just to get in.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
Taking off the shoes has nothing to do with the airlines, it is government policy, but thanks for playing Rufus. And a big LOL to saying that Singapore is half the target the USA is.

My point is that flying in the US is now a full-on 3rd-world experience -- except the 3rd world does it better.

And if yoou don't think Singapore's a bigger target than, say, Des Moines, you know nothing.

[Wiglaf]

Chicago is, which is right near Des Moines, you lunatic. And third world experience because you need to take your shoes off? BITE it!

[Nugog]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


My point is that flying in the US is now a full-on 3rd-world experience -- except the 3rd world does it better.

I know - I fly in and out of a 3rd world country every 6 - 8 weeks.

Gotta love it.

Seriously though - many people are not travelling to the US because of the entry demands.

Loss of tourism $$ is starting to show in the industry there.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
Chicago is, which is right near Des Moines, you lunatic. And third world experience because you need to take your shoes off? BITE it!

You have to give Singapore credit for not being named "Des Moines".

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Nugog

Rufus - I think only the US requires you to remove shoes belts etc - which is another reason not to travel to the country that also wants your fingerprints just to get in.

Japan fingerprints, too, FWIW.