Media misses the mark on CEO private jet story.
It was widely reported by the media and bloggers today that the CEO’s from the Big Three automakers flew to their appearances before Congress on private jets. While we are in no way sympathetic to the management of the automakers (in fact, we think each of them should be fired as a part of any potential bailout), the criticism leveled at them over the private jets is off the mark.
Despite GM and Ford’s absurd justification that their CEOs are required to fly private jets for “security” reasons, there are in fact legitimate reasons for them to fly private. That is, they should be spending 100% of the available time in their days figuring out how to fix their companies. They shouldn’t be sitting in airport terminals and on tarmacs with the rest of the poor souls who have to fly the unfriendly commercial skies.
Yes, private jets are terrible for the environment, and yes, they are extremely expensive, but this is an emergency situation and these CEO’s time is hopefully better spent in the office than at an airport lounge.
With that said, we have zero sympathy for these guys. It was their mismanagement, incompetence, naked self-interest, and greed that drove their companies into the ditch where they now lie. Flying private jets at this time is not wrong, in and of itself, but it is illustrative of the poor judgment and misunderstanding of the real world that these CEOs thoroughly possess. That is the real story.
- Similar Posts:
- GM forfeited right to privacy for private jet when they asked for a public bailout
- CEOs trying to “save an industry” drive themselves to Washington
- Detroit’s Big Three CEOs return to Washington for a second bite at the apple
Comments
4 Comments on Media misses the mark on CEO private jet story.
-
Jason on
Thu, 20th Nov 2008 10:21 am
-
Fred on
Thu, 20th Nov 2008 12:44 pm
-
Lee on
Fri, 21st Nov 2008 8:42 am
How much time is lost by the GM representatives when they have to check in for a flight two hours early, or when the GM representatives are not to talk about business during the flight due to insider trading concerns?
The question is what is lost? When 12 people fly on a private jet it costs about $20,000. When 12 fly commercially to DC it costs about $12,000. Is a $8,000 savings worth the time lost?
Isn’t it really worth it in the long run?
[Reply]
I don't agree with your argument. Almost all airlines have concierge services which will meet you at curbside at your car, holding your pre-printed ticket, escort you directly thru security with no waiting, and walk you straight to the airport lounge. When your flight is called, the staff will then walk you directly from the lounge to the boarding gate and to your seat. The small amount of time spent in now way compares to the environmental damage and cost of taking a private jet.
[Reply]
I think when someone is preparing to ask for money from congress / taxpayers that they need to convey the fact that they are struggling and are barely staying afloat. Flying on lavish private jets and a multi-figure salary does not portray that image. They should have considered flying coach on a discount carrier or driving in one of their hybrids. Bose makes noise cancelling headphones which they could’ve worn in the airport terminal or while sitting onboard the aircraft while they pondered on ways to fix their ratty auto companies. Hey guys, let’s sell a Chevy Tahoe with a Cadillac badge and add 40 grand. Not smart. Thank you for reading.
[Reply]
Please contribute to the discussion by leaving a comment below. No need to agree with the post or other commenters, but please be constructive and respectful.
forcechange Reply:
November 19th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Fred, I agree with you that private jets have disproportionately high environmental and financial costs. My point is limited to the idea that flying private jets under the current emergency situation facing the auto companies far outweighs the specific environmental and financial costs incurred from that travel.
Private air travel, in general, is extremely wasteful. However, if the decision was between the discrete emissions from these specific flights, and losing time that could have been spent trying to save one of our country’s biggest industries from imminent collapse, I think it is appropriate to fly private.
Like I said though, I’m very unsympathetic to these CEOs and am critical of private jet travel, in general.
But I do believe the media can blow these things a bit out of proportion, as I also argued here yesterday:
http://forcechange.com/2008/11/18/the-ap-misses-the-point-with-carbon-footprint-analysis-of-schwarzeneggers-global-climate-summit/
That is an interesting point you make about the concierge services that airlines now offer. I wasn’t familiar with that, but it wouldn’t help for flight delays that often occur once a plane is already on the tarmac or in flight.
[Reply]