Changes in cost and efficiency Â Â Â Â Â The situation today in the airline industry is basically a price/cost war. Companies are battling to cut and keep their operating cost low in order to remain competitive in an industry that is strongly driven by price. The principal cost factors that drive the industry are labor and fuel. In terms of labor Neeleman, Jetblueâ€™s CEO, said that â€œThe biggest problem in the industry isnâ€™t pay, its work rulesâ€. Labor cost accounts for the 38% of the overall operating cost of an airline company. Depending on the system that a company uses, its labor cost and labor necessity will vary. The point-to-point systems requires less personnel and the aircraft is less time on the ground, and more in the air, being able to flight more times that those aircrafts flying under the hub-and-spoke system. The first system is widely used by the new low-cost carriers, while the hub-and-spoke is very typical of the traditional airlines (Appendix 1). Moreover, labor cost is rising, which increases the overall cost per seat (Wright, September 8, 2003). In terms of labor efficiency, low-cost carriers are reducing labor or either by e-ticketing or by doing what Southwest states on their contracts, any qualified employee can perform any function (load, unload, cleaning, etc) as needed (Thompson.2005). Â Â Â Â Â The second, most important factor that determines the cost structure in the industry is fuel cost. It is said that for one-dollar increase in the price of a fuel barrel, is costs the industry a billion a year (Tang, C. April 11, 2005). Moreover, in the future, the price of fuel is expected to continue increasing, what will tighten even more profit margins. Â Â Â Â Â What other companies have done to lower their cost is to eliminate meals. Instead, in short flights, snacks are served to the passengers, and in long-distance ones, costumers are allowed to bring food with them or buy it on board.
1/11/2020 0 Comments
American Alcohol Prohibition - Thesis Example Crime, especially organized crime, was on the rise and many believed alcohol was at the root of many of these problems including the changing American family values. When Herbert Hoover introduced prohibition in 1919 he called it "the noble experiment", presenting it as a law that hoped to curb sin and poverty across America. In fact, the 18th Amendment was part of a wider reaction from white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPS) against social changes within the USA brought on by mass immigration and the growth in demand for African-American rights. Therefore despite claims of prohibition being a progressive reform, in fact, it symbolized a rejection of modernity. So, on January 17, 1920, the United States Government enacted the eighteenth amendment to the Constitution which â€œprohibited Americans from manufacturing, selling, or transporting alcoholic beverages.â€1 This decision, also known as the Noble Experiment, would remain in effect just short of thirteen years regardless of intense opposition. The position of those in favor of this law was that it was the duty and responsibility of the government to protect all of its citizens. In spite of the controversial nature of this decision, this was not a new concept as Asbridge and Weerasinghe note that â€œConcerted national policy efforts around prohibition in the United States began in 1913 (facilitated by the Webbâ€“Kenyon Act) followed, a few years later, with the enactment of the War Prohibition Act in 1918, banning the manufacture and sale of all beverages with more than 2.75% alcohol.â€2 Various states had their own adoptions of state restrictions on alcohol particularly in areas where alcohol-related incidents were high. â€œFor Chicago, alcoholâ€™s link to organized crime was particularly troubling. Not until the election of Mayor William Dever in 1923, a man who believed firmly in the letter of the law and who enforced prohibition stalwartly, did a formal attack on bootlegging and organized crime emerge; however, this led to intense territorial wars between organized crime gangs, including the famous Chicago Beer Wars that resulted in dozens of homicides.â€3 The hope was that limiting alcohol could limit the crime as well as growing immorality and concern of compromising ethical values of the American people. However, this act received huge opposition as it decreased income for many but also created losses in sales tax revenue. The demand for alcohol only led to the illegal sales of alcohol and bootleggers soon emerged creating additional problems while the sales of alcohol continued in spite of the legality. This example alone should have provided evidence that limiting alcohol on a national scale would not be any more successful. Although consumption of alcohol fell at the beginning of Prohibition, it subsequently increased. Alcohol became more dangerous to consume; crime increased and became "organized"; the court and prison systems were stretched to the breaking point, and corruption of public officials was rampant. No measurable gains were made in productivity or reduced absenteeism.