[Mulder]

"Blaming the Flight Attendants" is nonsense. The numbers simply don't add up.

Let's suppose that the average FA makes $1000 a week ($52 K a year-- maybe a little high but it keeps the math simple).

Also suppose that each FA works 4 days a week and does 2.5 flights per day for a total of 10 flights. That's $100 a flight per FA. Figure 4 FA's per flight, and you get $400 to staff a plane with Flight Attendants.

Assume 100 passengers, and that is $4 per ticket goes to pay your FA's. The proposed pay cut would result in a savings to the company of less than $1 per ticket.

If a company is running on that thin a margin, they're in trouble anyway. If they can't find another way to save $1 per ticket, they're in trouble as well.

Blaming the worker-bees for the problem is absurd.

[MonroeDNA]

What are the real figures? Sure don't see them here.

[sinkspur]

Blaming the worker-bees for the problem is absurd.

You left out benefits, such as:
Vacation pay
Mandatory corporate contributions to pension funds
Night pay (yes, FAs get extra for working at night)
Seniority Pay (yes, FAs get extra for every year over 10 that they've worked at a particular airline).

You need to take a senior FA's salary ($45-50K) and do your calculation.

[Beck_isright]

""Blaming the Flight Attendants" is nonsense. The numbers simply don't add up."

Not true. They needed the concessions to secure future financing. The banks have already said without these concessions in total, they will walk. Chapter 11, here they come.

[The Westerner]

A friend of mine is a flight attendant for AA. This person said that there are 51 Vice Presidents of AA. There used to be 18. These middle managers are well paid but refuse to take pay cuts. This was a sticking point for the negotiations, one of them, so I'm told.