Originally Posted by
morningcoffee
Half a dozen replies about RA65 and none mention the negative affect it would have on C scale career progression.
I’m guessing you’re all B scalers?
Wow.
IMHO, you, sir, sound a great deal like the company guy who writes their version of the contract proposals. Writing to push everyone down into the bottom five percent and hit things with a stick rather than have incentives for the talented people we hire to aspire to the top 5 percent (which in a way results in a self-fulfilling prophecy). And divide the house against itself with the hopes that a divided house can be controlled, hoodwinked, chiseled, and manipulated. Exploiting resentment, division, envy and strife rather than a cohesive team with hope and vision toward the future.
It's this kind of thinking that has got us to where we are today. A divided house cannot stand. And isn't.
To your 'point', it's NOT a zero sum game (in fact it's NEVER a zero sum game), and doesn't have to have ANY negative effect whatsoever (quite the opposite). But this demands one have the attitude of profit, incentive, growth, investment and upgrade--rather than the attitude of contraction, slash, burn and malaise. Here's a novel idea--how about we make people happy and upgrade everyone we can--and embrace an upgrade process that results in maximum gain with minimum pain (doing so as close to when an individual becomes eligible as possible in a process with a high success rate and minimum collateral time spent during the process). Other airlines that are 'winning' not only have high success rates in upgrade but also ARE upgrading their people at relatively early points in their career (which sets the forward looking stage for future expansion of the carrier). Setting the standard that people WANT to get in the door, WANT to stay, and WANT to make this the most awesome place on the planet. Where pulling the pin and leaving is unthinkable from a job satisfaction perspective rather than based on the sunk cost of acquired seniority and starting over.
At the end of the day it's not about minutia and money--it's about how people perceive they are being treated. And how their team is being treated. And the level of dedication they have to their institution.
Like I've said, I have absolutely NO idea whatsoever whether the losses are due to a bad bet or an elaborate capital laundering scheme. If it WAS a gamble it was a very bad one; not so much on the loss itself but where the loss went.
If we ARE going to gamble, how about we gamble on our people ? Your oil can't love you back.