Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA Eagle Pilots: May Cut 250 Routes  
User currently offlineBigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2926 posts, RR: 6
Posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7453 times:

Current contract would prohibit an independent/spun off Eagle from operating Love, Kansas City and San Jose flights.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/071214/american_eagle_flights.html?.v=1

Saber rattling? Legitimate? Any insight or thoughts?

39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7398 times:

Isn't 250 flights a small number of the total flights operated by American Eagle, much ado about nothing?

User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5804 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7213 times:

The union also says that RDU and SNA would likely lose flights.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...story/12-13-2007/0004722728&EDATE=



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently onlineVictorKilo From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 312 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 7024 times:

It's worth noting that the clause in question is in the American Airlines contract with one union (APA), while the press release is from the Eagle pilots union (ALPA).

The clause in question is open to interpretation:

Quote:
In a recent document distributed to American Eagle employees, Mr.
Bowler referred to a section of the collective bargaining agreement between
American Airlines and its pilots' union, the Allied Pilots Association that
requires all flights that do not fly to or from an American Airlines hub to
be flown by a wholly-owned carrier of AMR. American Eagle currently is
wholly owned by AMR but if American Eagle is divested, a number of those
flights would no longer be operated. A point-to-point flight is one that
does not begin or end in an American Airlines "hub" and represents
approximately 250 of American Eagle's 1,700 daily flights.

So if RDU doesn't count as a "hub", where else would flights need to get cut? BOS? DCA? LGA? (Not that the end of slot squatting by AA would be a bad thing for LGA....)


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23034 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6892 times:



Quoting VictorKilo (Reply 3):

The clause in question is open to interpretation:

It seems pretty clear to me...

I wonder what the history of this clause is. It may have come from the TW purchase, i.e. out of a desire to keep Connection contained in St. Louis. If that's the case, AA ought to be able to convince the pilots that the need for such a clause has passed and, in fact, that the divestiture of Eagle is such a fundamental change that they ought to get rid of the clause for everyone's benefit. Of course, that presumes that the union will act in the best interest of the pilots, which is probably a risky assumption...

OTOH, AA does have some flexibility. They do have two certificates for Eagle right now, and they could easily keep OW around, move some ERJs over to OW, and fly the p2p routes that way (and probably, in that scenario, some hub routes as well). There are options...



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3474 posts, RR: 47
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6833 times:



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):
I wonder what the history of this clause is.

It arose from the ashes of the 91 contract where the "progressives" took control of the union and essentially gutted the Scope Clause from three paragraphs ("all flying done by..., on behalf of..., its parent corp..., sister corp...., or controlled by... etc.) to a multi-page listing of "exceptions." Then the "progressives" tried to arbitrate Scope in a Canadian case where there was clearly no Scope violation --that lead to even more "exceptions." They've been trying to "rebuild" Scope ever since.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):
They do have two certificates for Eagle right now

Used to be a dozen or more, but I'm not sure of the legal status of the multiple AE operating certificates after the "one-airline" fiasco of years gone by.



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23034 posts, RR: 20
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6816 times:



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 5):
Used to be a dozen or more, but I'm not sure of the legal status of the multiple AE operating certificates after the "one-airline" fiasco of years gone by.

OW (ATRs) is still separate from MQ (jets and Saabs). Among other reasons, it makes things a little easier to keep all the overwater flying on a separate certificate.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently onlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32799 posts, RR: 71
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6809 times:



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 4):

It seems pretty clear to me...

Not even close to being clear. Hence the PR puts the word "hub" in quotations and is heavy on hedge words like "might". The reason? The word hub is defined so loosely that stations like Raleigh and Boston can be interpreted as being a hub. While it will be up to a court to interpret the term, in reality, what this will likely effect is a very small amount of flights that are truly point-to-point, like SNA-SFO. A court interpreting it would then likely have to decide what the customary airline industry definition of "hub" is, and Boston, Raleigh, and maybe even San Jose, could likely make the definition.

More greedy AA pilots trying to slow down AA's progress. Shame on them.



a.
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23034 posts, RR: 20
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6788 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 7):
The word hub is defined so loosely that stations like Raleigh and Boston can be interpreted as being a hub. While it will be up to a court to interpret the term, in reality, what this will likely effect is a very small amount of flights that are truly point-to-point, like SNA-SFO. A court interpreting it would then likely have to decide what the customary airline industry definition of "hub" is, and Boston, Raleigh, and maybe even San Jose, could likely make the definition.

The problem is that a court will first look to the agreement itself and then to other dealings between pilots and AA in order to define hub (all of this prior to looking at industry use of the word). Given that RDU was a hub (and a pilot base) and closed, AA will be hard-pressed to argue that RDU is a hub, and yet, looking at the number of connections, RDU is probably the most 'hub-like' of the cities we're discussing. AA doesn't have a strong case here, unfortunately.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently onlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32799 posts, RR: 71
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6682 times:



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 8):
The problem is that a court will first look to the agreement itself and then to other dealings between pilots and AA in order to define hub (all of this prior to looking at industry use of the word). Given that RDU was a hub (and a pilot base) and closed, AA will be hard-pressed to argue that RDU is a hub, and yet, looking at the number of connections, RDU is probably the most 'hub-like' of the cities we're discussing. AA doesn't have a strong case here, unfortunately.

I disagree that it's going to be that simple. I think it will get to the point where AA will be allowed to bring in extrinsic evidence to define the use of the word hub as the industry standard, and RDU would most likely satisfy that definition. The use of the word hub is much more broad within airlines and pilots than it is the way it is used to the public. I think AA has a strong case, and they will likely win. They also, probably, have better lawyers.

We are also talking about American Eagle operations here, not American Airlines mainline. AA can show how, even though they closed the "hub", since around 2000, they have heavily rebuilt the RDU hub. They also carry some connecting traffic via RDU. It isn't a lot, but it is enough to strengthen their hub argument.



a.
User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3474 posts, RR: 47
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6455 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 7):
The word hub is defined so loosely that stations like Raleigh and Boston can be interpreted as being a hub.

The contractual language is actually "Hub or Major Airport Departures" and clearly defining those as being: "...shall carry passengers on behalf of the Company only into or out of the following airports: DFW, ORD, MIA, SJU, SFO, LAX, LGA, STL and JFK." Naturally there are legal "exclusions" for government imposed restrictions (i.e. DCA) as lawyers like to have loopholes to work around/through/past.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 7):
More greedy AA pilots trying to slow down AA's progress. Shame on them.

Please learn to differentiate between "AA pilots" and "APA" (the union). As so many (a few thousand) AA pilots like to say: "I didn't leave APA, APA left me."



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlinePlanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3527 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6420 times:



Quoting AirCop (Reply 1):
Isn't 250 flights a small number of the total flights operated by American Eagle, much ado about nothing?

Might be good for eagle - they are majorly hurting for pilots right now. They've been using all their reserves like mad for almost two years, and now they're starting to reassign pilots on 3+ hour layovers to short out and backs because they just don't have the coverage.



Do you like movies about gladiators?
User currently offlineAirspeed777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6345 times:

MAH4546:
How would you like to work for a company that denied you a salary and benefits increase for five years?

[Edited 2007-12-15 07:50:29]

User currently onlineVictorKilo From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 312 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5826 times:



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 10):
The contractual language is actually "Hub or Major Airport Departures" and clearly defining those as being: "...shall carry passengers on behalf of the Company only into or out of the following airports: DFW, ORD, MIA, SJU, SFO, LAX, LGA, STL and JFK." Naturally there are legal "exclusions" for government imposed restrictions (i.e. DCA) as lawyers like to have loopholes to work around/through/past.

With that as the definition of "hub", there's only about 65 roundtrips on MQ or OW that don't meet that criteria, with 30 of those roundtrips on routes also served by WN, and only 8 daily roundtrips on the three routes that aren't routes served by other airlines.

Served by other airlines:

SJC-SNA
SJC-SAN
FLL-NAS
DAL-AUS
DAL-MCI
BOS-CMH
BOS-YYZ
RDU-JAX
RDU-MCI
RDU-SDF
RDU-EWR
RDU-BOS

Not served by other airlines:

RDU-CMH
RDU-XNA
RDU-BDL

I think this may actually turn out to be a really smart move by AA, as it allows AA to remove high CASM aircraft from competitive routes that aren't core to AA's network, but do so under the cover of APA accommodation.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5793 times:



Quoting VictorKilo (Reply 13):
SJC-SNA
SJC-SAN
FLL-NAS
DAL-AUS
DAL-MCI
BOS-CMH
BOS-YYZ
RDU-JAX
RDU-MCI
RDU-SDF
RDU-EWR
RDU-BOS

...add SJC-LAX... Wink



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5804 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5668 times:



Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 14):
...add SJC-LAX...

He was referring to flights to cities NOT considered a hub. SJC-LAX falls under the LAX hub flying.



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8675 posts, RR: 16
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5637 times:

A small number compared to the current route structure. I take AE wants to cut down on the less profitable routes.

Hunter



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3474 posts, RR: 47
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5637 times:



Quoting VictorKilo (Reply 13):
With that as the definition of "hub",

Not the definition of "hub." It is the actual contractual language contained in the Scope Clause (Section-1, AA/APA contract).

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 14):
...add SJC-LAX...

Note that LAX is listed in the Scope Clause language.



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
User currently offlineSNAFlyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 86 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5503 times:

I really hope Eagle doesn't stop flying out to SNA, I love to watch those beautiful ERJs come in...

 Sad

~SNAFlyboy


User currently offlineTXKF2010 From Bermuda, joined Nov 2005, 208 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5381 times:

I guess i can forget gettin a job with them now...


...Rastafari Stands Alone...
User currently onlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32799 posts, RR: 71
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5282 times:



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 10):

The contractual language is actually "Hub or Major Airport Departures" and clearly defining those as being: "...shall carry passengers on behalf of the Company only into or out of the following airports: DFW, ORD, MIA, SJU, SFO, LAX, LGA, STL and JFK." Naturally there are legal "exclusions" for government imposed restrictions (i.e. DCA) as lawyers like to have loopholes to work around/through/past.

If the contract defines those markets, then there won't be disputing. I didn't know it defined them.

Quoting Airspeed777 (Reply 12):
MAH4546:
How would you like to work for a company that denied you a salary and benefits increase for five years?

You mean a company that also didn't get rid of my pensions and already pays me better or competitively with the entire rest of the industry? I'd feel just fine.



a.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25442 posts, RR: 49
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5218 times:

Why the big panic?

Let AA/AMR do what it feels is best. If this means shedding AE and the subsequent flying fine.

As we have seen and more airlines start to realise there cannot continue to remain sacred or nostalgic ideas around when it comes to routes, subsidiaries, or other parts of the business.

As with any other business, airlines are not employment agencies and must make the often tough strategic decisions that will provide the best return to the bottom line helping ensure long term corporate success.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23034 posts, RR: 20
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5045 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 20):

If the contract defines those markets, then there won't be disputing. I didn't know it defined them.

 checkmark  FWIW, that probably makes RDU MORE likely to lose some flying, as there's hardly enough there for AA to try to amend the contract (though it would arguably be in the pilots' best interest to permit AA to amend the contract to include RDU).



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5022 times:



Quoting FATFlyer (Reply 15):

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 14):
...add SJC-LAX...

He was referring to flights to cities NOT considered a hub. SJC-LAX falls under the LAX hub flying.



Quoting AAR90 (Reply 17):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 14):
...add SJC-LAX...

Note that LAX is listed in the Scope Clause language.

..my bad... footinmouth  crazy 



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineDFW13L From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 4914 times:

I think they might be hard-pressed to define RDU as a hub. It's a hub because of Eagle. Unless they can maybe define RDU as a hub simply because of the LGW flight. All AA flying is to hubs, with the exception of one LGA flight and one LGW flight per day, but that hardly makes it a hub.

I think the biggest problem with this would be XNA. Eagle flies to many places from XNA, but the two newest--RDU and DCA, would have to be cut, which might create a big problem for all the business there.

This is really an interesting problem.


25 MAH4546 : DCA point-to-point flying is exempt in the contract.
26 Post contains images AAR90 : It was taken directly from the contract. People need something to talk about.
27 MAH4546 : SNA would be an interesting situation, because AA has always done very well on their Bay Area-SNA flights. I am willing to bet that AA would replace
28 Cubsrule : [quote=MAH4546,reply=27]SNA would be an interesting situation, because AA has always done very well on their Bay Area-SNA flights. I am willing to bet
29 XJET : What aircraft do you think AA would use on these routes. That runway is greatly restricted. The only two aircraft in the fleet that could do it would
30 XJET : Actually I guess the MD83 can do it....... never mind. I just looked at the numbers. I thought the MDs needed more runway than that.
31 Cubsrule : MIA-SNA is long for an 83, and MIA isn't a S80 hub. I'd say a 738 is more likely; I'm not sure how restricted it actually would be. Bear in mind that
32 ElmoTheHobo : Way long in fact. Even with adequate runways the MD-80 would run out of fuel over Arizona. That or a 757. CO runs 737s transcon out of SNA, though II
33 MAH4546 : A 738 should be able to do MIA-SNA. Even if it weight-restricted on the west-bound, the yield would probably make it up for it (or at least that's wh
34 Post contains images Jacobin777 : I would never have thought SNA-ORD-SNA would see 4X B757's...I've taken those flights countless amount of times and they have always been packed.....
35 MAH4546 : For AA, it does. SNA is one of their absolute highest yielding domestic stations, bar none. And AA is very strong at SNA. I think they are the second
36 Post contains images SNAFlyboy : I think you must be correct regarding this. Working out on the ramp, it begins to seem like, during certain times of the day, the south side is overr
37 Post contains images AAR90 : We'd be weight restricted east-bound due to KSNA's runway --Note: we're often severely weight restricted to KDFW, especially on hot days. Historicall
38 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ....bit surprising...I never would have thought AA would have such good yields...even though AE/MQ is one of the larger carriers out of LAX and 2nd a
39 Post contains images AAR90 : "Yields" are much different than "loads." The average SNA-DFW flight has more than a dozen AAdvantage Platinums on the airport standby list (already
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
RUMOR: AA (Eagle) May Drop SJC posted Wed Aug 1 2007 19:07:32 by AA787823
AA/AA Eagle Launch Few New Routes posted Tue May 29 2007 20:48:24 by Jimyvr
AA Eagle To Cut BOS-EWR And ORD-IAD posted Mon Feb 26 2007 16:37:13 by AJMIA
AA Eagle BOS Routes. How Many Are Left? posted Sun Dec 4 2005 23:30:13 by SaabFA71
AA Eagle/AA Connection Adds STL Routes posted Sun Aug 7 2005 14:55:49 by Stl1326
AA / Eagle New Routes, How They Doing? posted Fri Jul 8 2005 03:57:18 by NoMoreRJs
AA Eagle ATR Routes? posted Fri Jul 2 2004 18:50:07 by Juanchie
Ryanair May Cut Under Used New Routes posted Mon Nov 3 2003 17:10:29 by Airblue
Caribbean Star May Buy AA Eagle SJU Operation posted Thu Feb 14 2002 17:26:00 by CactusA319
CX May Cut Routes 7 Close Stations. posted Tue Oct 23 2001 13:44:16 by CXFA