Stillageek From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 69 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4184 times:
APA Proposal:
Section 1.B.4 - Modify the definition of a Commutr Air Carrier to allow operation of jet aircraft with maximum passenger configuration of 76 seats, certification in the United States or Europe for not more than 86 seats, and a maximum gross takeoff weight of 89000 lb.
I don't think the APA boys will bend over on this one, but it sure is bold for AMR to ask for this right out of the gate. United, Northwest, Delta and US Airways all have aircraft between 50seats and 140+ seats to fill the gap. AA has a whole 25 CRJ700s to fill that gap. I have been on many MD80s that have been less than half full. While I like the room.....its a waste of a flight. AA could be stronger if they could put a mix of aircraft on the same route to match demand. I can ride 3 different types of A/C on United between DFW and ORD/DEN/LAX. AA needs that option.
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15810 posts, RR: 50 Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4161 times:
Quoting Stillageek (Thread starter):
I don't think the APA boys will bend over on this one, but it sure is bold for AMR to ask for this right out of the gate.
If the APA is going to ask for a 50% pay increase, I don't see why AMR can't ask for something totally reasonable like scope relief.
AA767400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2271 posts, RR: 25 Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4003 times:
This scope has only hindered AA. There are too many routes out there that need a plane smaller than an 80, but larger than a CRJ. Hopefully the Pilots will give, so as to receive.
Slider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6518 posts, RR: 36 Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3991 times:
Quoting Stillageek (Thread starter): I don't think the APA boys will bend over on this one, but it sure is bold for AMR to ask for this right out of the gate.
They either play ball or they'll get bent over, it's that simple. It needs to happen.
Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 2): AA is uncompetitive in RJ's because it can't go bigger then 50 seats, so they have nothing between the 0 seats and an MD-80.
Same with CO--both AA and CO have very restrictive scope clauses. Like AA, CO will have a major fleet problem once the 737-300/500s are parked. It's strategically vulnerable because of an artificial constraint such as a scope clause provision.
AJMIA From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 713 posts, RR: 16 Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3948 times:
Why does not AA simply buy 70-90 seat jets and operate them as mailine with a F/Y configuration?
The APA contract could be amended with a new lower pay scale for that equipment.
If AA guaranteed the current pilots that they would not have to slide backwards into that lower pay scale then I think it would be a win/win situation. New AA pilots would coming in under the current pilots lifting their seniority; and the new pilots would like it because they would have more years of their career with a major thus increasing their pension at retirement.
If Eagle is going to be spun off it does not make too much sense to build it up with new larger aircraft.
Aaway From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1445 posts, RR: 14 Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3895 times:
Quoting AJMIA (Reply 5): Why does not AA simply buy 70-90 seat jets and operate them as mailine with a F/Y configuration?
The APA contract could be amended with a new lower pay scale for that equipment.
Quoting AJMIA (Reply 5): If Eagle is going to be spun off it does not make too much sense to build it up with new larger aircraft.
The proposal is not limited to Eagle. In short, expect AMR to shop for the lowest cost provider of regional feed - either through the acquiescence of APA, or via bankruptcy.
Unless APA were to really cave in, 70-90 seat a/c operated as mainline is a non-starter.
With a choice between changing one's mind & proving there's no need to do so, most everyone gets busy on the proof.
AJMIA From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 713 posts, RR: 16 Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3861 times:
Quoting Aaway (Reply 6): The proposal is not limited to Eagle. In short, expect AMR to shop for the lowest cost provider of regional feed - either through the acquiescence of APA, or via bankruptcy.
Ok point well taken, it does not have to be Eagle it could be American Connection, or Horizon, or anyone else, but still would it not make sense for both AA and APA to find a way to profitably grow the company from within?
PanAm330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2603 posts, RR: 10 Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3551 times:
Quoting Fleet Service (Reply 9): Should have kept those 717's eh boys? The APA had pay rates for them via TWA LLC and in this fuel critical time, they would've helped quite a bit.
Too bad their lease rates were astronomical. I'd be willing to bet they'd have kept them if they knew where fuel was going to be just a few years later.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10224 posts, RR: 62 Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3431 times:
Quoting AJMIA (Reply 7): but still would it not make sense for both AA and APA to find a way to profitably grow the company from within?
Oh please, that is just far to logical and rational, and I think we all know that means that it is totally out of keeping with present APA policy.
The APA is so hell-bent on making life miserable for Gerard Arpey that they are willing - in my opinion aiming - to put the company into bankruptcy just to stick it to him.
Sick.
Quoting Fleet Service (Reply 9): Should have kept those 717's eh boys? The APA had pay rates for them via TWA LLC and in this fuel critical time, they would've helped quite a bit.
It's easy to say that now.
Nobody knew in 2003 that fuel was going to triple in five years. Not to mention that it is still debatable whether keeping the 717s would have been worth it. It would have been a small fleet (about 30, if I remember correctly) anyway, which would not have been the best for maintenance and material costs.
Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 10): Dream on, AA! AA pilots are too arrogant and selfish to let this one fly. AA is in a real competitive disadvantage in that sense...
Agreed.
The APA will screw this issue up just like several more before it. As others said, if the union was truly look out for the best interests of its members, it would come to some sort of a compromise with the company and recognize that its ridiculous SCOPE limitations are no longer competitive with the market and are placing AA at a severe disadvantage. After all, as the union knows - but will never admit - what is good for AA is, ultimately, good for its pilots.
Fleet Service From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 622 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3378 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 12): Not to mention that it is still debatable whether keeping the 717s would have been worth it. It would have been a small fleet (about 30, if I remember correctly) anyway, which would not have been the best for maintenance and material costs.
Small fleet you say? Maintenance and material costs you say? A300.
30 on the property and 20 options on the 717, which went away due to AMR deciding the F-100 was a better choice for the 100 seat market.Never mind it had one of the if not the highest maintenance cost per block hour of any thing in the fleet at the time.
Boeing would have given its eyeteeth for a follow on order for the 717 from American,but the powers that be decided against it.Blew up in their faces when the AD for the F-100 took the 100 seat plane out of the fleet and left them with nothing to bridge the gap between RJ and S80.
Yes, I actually *do* work for an airline,how about you?
Flyingcat From United States of America, joined May 2007, 510 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3346 times:
At this point I really believe that AA will enter bankruptcy just to impose a more realistic contract. With new rules for bankruptcy these days it more than likely will cost them in planes or even a hub.
Alias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2648 posts, RR: 2 Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3325 times:
Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 10): Dream on, AA! AA pilots are too arrogant and selfish to let this one fly. AA is in a real competitive disadvantage in that sense...
What is arrogant about trying to save the jobs of junior pilots at AA? Arrogant and selfish would be agreeing to give up scope in exchange for pay increases. Think about it, AA wants to park mainline aircraft and put those pilots on the street, while giving the flying to somebody else. Basically, AA is hoping that the senior pilots will feed the junior pilots to the wolves in exchange for some extra money.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10224 posts, RR: 62 Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3194 times:
Quoting Fleet Service (Reply 15): Small fleet you say? Maintenance and material costs you say? A300.
The A300 is a unique circumstance: it's a maintenance hog, but it serves a purpose that other planes can't. It's niche cargo-hauling capability is unlike any other plane. So that is why that fleet was kept around - even with only 34 aircraft - while the 717s went away.
Not to mention, again, that nobody knew fuel was going to triple in three years.
At these fuel levels, there aren't that many things that couldn't - purely based on the Excel spreadsheet - be deemed inefficient, uneconomic, and expendable.
As Arpey said: "there is nothing about this industry that was built for $130 oil."
Quoting Flyingcat (Reply 16): At this point I really believe that AA will enter bankruptcy just to impose a more realistic contract. With new rules for bankruptcy these days it more than likely will cost them in planes or even a hub.
They may be left with no choice.
It looks like even the flight attendants - which have historically been AA's most militant union group, by far, are beginning to recognize that the situation today is not only unprecedented, but could very possibly lead to the demise of the company if everyone isn't real careful. In today's economic environment, it would be real hard for AA's 25,000 flight attendants to find new jobs, and they know it.
The TWU will probably talk the big talk, but ultimately roll over, as usual. The senior guys in Tulsa will make sure of it, much to the chagrin of the rampers, as usual.
That leaves the pilots - with an incomparable arrogance and bloated sense of their self worth that is nothing short of incredible.
The pilots at American are already overpaid as it is. That is indisputable fact for anyone looking at the industry as it stands today - and no, I'm not just talking about FedEx, UPS, and Airborne, thank you very much APA.
The compensation structure that the pilots currently enjoy is not economically sustainable going forward, as it is higher than just about every one of AA's competitors.
AA knows it, the other unions know it, and indeed, of course, the APA knows it.
Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 17): Think about it, AA wants to park mainline aircraft and put those pilots on the street, while giving the flying to somebody else. Basically, AA is hoping that the senior pilots will feed the junior pilots to the wolves in exchange for some extra money.
Incorrect.
I'm sure that AA would be more than happy - given a bit of push and pull - to give this flying to mainline pilots displaced by mainline furloughs.
There's one major problem, though: the APA will never agree to payscales that are even marginally competitive with what the Mesas, SkyWests and Republics of the world are paying.
If they would agree to those sorts of payscales, AA would already be flying 100 of these planes today.
This is the crux of the problem: AA is never going to give this flying to mainline unless it is "cost-neutral," meaning unless the pay for the pilots is comparable to what other (almost universally non-mainline) pilots making pushing these ships around. The APA wouldn't and won't agree to that.
Until the APA agrees to more reasonable pay scales in line with what pilots get paid in 2008 for flying 75-seat jets, the APA won't get this flying. But alas, I know that's a bit too much to ask for, since the APA also seems to have an extremely unrealistic view of what pilots get paid in 2008 for flying 150-, 200-, and 250-seat jets, as well.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3162 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 12):
The APA is so hell-bent on making life miserable for Gerard Arpey that they are willing - in my opinion aiming - to put the company into bankruptcy just to stick it to him.
They will only wind up sticking it to themselves when their contracts are thrown out and their pensions get sent down the tubes.
PITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 3 Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3140 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 12): The APA is so hell-bent on making life miserable for Gerard Arpey that they are willing - in my opinion aiming - to put the company into bankruptcy just to stick it to him.
Because pilots and employee groups always come out ahead in bankruptcy.
Tozairport From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3114 times:
Quoting Slider (Reply 4):
They either play ball or they'll get bent over, it's that simple. It needs to happen.
Oh that's rich, and exactly what I would expect coming from an airline manager. So the APA should sell out it's THOUSANDS of furloughees to prop up an incompetent management that has managed to squander the BILLIONS in concessions that the APA has already given. APA pilots should fly those jets, and AA should negotiate an appropriate rate for them. With fuel costs what they are, the pilots could fly for free and AMR would still be in trouble.
Quoting AA767400 (Reply 3): This scope has only hindered AA. There are too many routes out there that need a plane smaller than an 80, but larger than a CRJ. Hopefully the Pilots will give, so as to receive.
So as to receive what? AA is parking jets and furloughing more pilots and agreeing to this decimation of their scope clause will only cause more lost jobs. RJ agreements in the past have only caused lost jobs, so why would the AA pilots entertain this?
Quoting Commavia (Reply 12): Oh please, that is just far to logical and rational, and I think we all know that means that it is totally out of keeping with present APA policy.
The APA is so hell-bent on making life miserable for Gerard Arpey that they are willing - in my opinion aiming - to put the company into bankruptcy just to stick it to him.
I think the APA is hell bent on keeping Gerry accountable and responsible for his performance. So far, if his pilots had the same performance as him, then AA would have crashed several jets. It seems that, on the A.net boards, the easy way to cure management incompetence is with labor concessions. Labor has already given too much. It's time for management to do their job.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3096 times:
Quoting Tozairport (Reply 21):
Oh that's rich, and exactly what I would expect coming from an airline manager. So the APA should sell out it's THOUSANDS of furloughees to prop up an incompetent management that has managed to squander the BILLIONS in concessions that the APA has already given.
Now would you care to explain to me, besides WN and their fuel hedges, which US-based carrier (both legacy and LCC) isn't losing money, firing employees, cutting routes, removing plans,etc. ?
Quoting Tozairport (Reply 21): I think the APA is hell bent on keeping Gerry accountable and responsible for his performance.
His performance would increase if he was given the ability to do his job-which includes, but is not limited to getting the right plane to fly a particular route.
Quoting Tozairport (Reply 21): So far, if his pilots had the same performance as him, then AA would have crashed several jets.
One of the most asinine comments I've heard on A.net (and in my 4 years here, I've read a number of them).
Quoting Tozairport (Reply 21): It's time for management to do their job.
Maybe a trip to BK would speed (and help) things up.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21286 posts, RR: 19 Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3072 times:
Quoting Aaway (Reply 6): Unless APA were to really cave in, 70-90 seat a/c operated as mainline is a non-starter.
So what do they want? I'm honestly confused by this. Here are some pay scales to look at...
YV/ CR9
F/O
Y1: $22
Y5: 35
C/A
Y1: $61
Y5: $69
Y12: $85
AA/ S80
F/O
Y1: $35
Y5: $92
C/A
Y1: $35 (we should probably throw this number out; Y2 pay is $149)
Y5: $153
Y12: $161
US/ 190
F/O
Y1: $41
Y5: $51
C/A
Y1: $79
Y5: $86
Y12: $95
AA's pay scale for M80 pilots isn't in line with what anyone pays CR9 or 190 pilots-- unsurprising since the M80. But if you reduce it by a third (since you're reducing seat capacity by a third), you're roughly in line with where US is. Why is that a non-starter for APA?
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
Ckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 4683 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3065 times:
Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 11): Quoting Fleet Service (Reply 9):
Should have kept those 717's eh boys? The APA had pay rates for them via TWA LLC and in this fuel critical time, they would've helped quite a bit.
Too bad their lease rates were astronomical. I'd be willing to bet they'd have kept them if they knew where fuel was going to be just a few years later.
A friend of mine is a pilot for AA, and he believes that if management has a crystal ball, which would have foretold of $130 a barrel oil, as well as the escalting maintenance issues with the F100, AA would have kept the planes they had, as well as take the planes scheduled for delivery and some of the planes on options. Trying to run AA without a 100-seat, 2-class jet has been a headache.
Quoting Commavia (Reply 12): The APA is so hell-bent on making life miserable for Gerard Arpey that they are willing - in my opinion aiming - to put the company into bankruptcy just to stick it to him.
My friend has said that most pilots know that Arpey and management are playing straight in terms of the current fianacial problems. The problem was that the former union leadership was perceived as being too agreeable with managment and was incapable of getting the best possible offer from management. The rank and file wanted a more militant leadership that would get every last dime that management could afford and still make money. Then, there's the stock bonus issue, which has been hashed on A.Net many times.
The problem now is that the leadership can't see the forest through the trees, which has a lot of pilots scared.
Quoting Flyingcat (Reply 16): At this point I really believe that AA will enter bankruptcy just to impose a more realistic contract. With new rules for bankruptcy these days it more than likely will cost them in planes or even a hub.
This is what scares some the rank and file, that the APA leadership will push AA into Chapter 11, which will worsen the contract and probably wipe out the pension.
Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 17): Think about it, AA wants to park mainline aircraft and put those pilots on the street, while giving the flying to somebody else. Basically, AA is hoping that the senior pilots will feed the junior pilots to the wolves in exchange for some extra money.
Well, the UAW did it at GM. All of those employees taking the buy-outs will be replaced with employees on a different wage scale. And don't forget that AA had a B-scale in the 80s and 90s. Many of AA's pilots wouldn't be working at AA, if the APA hadn't agreed to the B-scale.
But remember that whilel AA is retiring 40 or so mainline jets this year, it's taking delivery of 34 737-800s next year and 36 737-800s in '10. Your point would have more merit, if AA wasn't scheduled to take any deliveries in the next 2 years.
NorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1715 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3035 times:
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 22): Maybe a trip to BK would speed (and help) things up.
so you'd like to completely destroy whatever morale the employees have left by forcing upon them a contract that they consider completely ridiculous? And what is management going to give in return? Sacrifice should be a two way street, the rank and file have sacrificed alot, what has management sacrificed? Anything?
Now, if i were management and i were smart, i'd offer the following to the pilots: in return for accepting a 25 percent pay raise over five years (which is a compromise, it's more than management wants to give and less than the pilots want to accept), plus a relaxation of the scope clause with the understanding that any new pilots hired to fly these new planes will be mainline, that the flying will not be famed out and that those pilots are guaranteed salaries that are at least ten percent higher than what they'd earn at the regional level, we'll lay off several hundred/thousand non-union professional/junior management staff, we'll also dictate that all management stock options will be placed into a fund that benefits the children of rank and file employees.
If the APA accepted the offer, i'd know that they're really interested in actually negotiating, if not, then i'd probably come to the conclusion that future negotiations are probably pointless, and i'd withdraw the offer and recommend to the board that AA file bankruptcy. And, finally, when i followed through on that threat, i'd make sure that the contracts of everyone but the pilots are protected, then i'd let APA leadership deal with the pissed off rank and file.
I could have elite status if I wanted it, but flying the same airline all the time is boring.
25 MAH4546: BK would be a nice wake-up call to a greedy bunch of employees. Where are they going to go? In today's market, they can't really get jobs anywhere el
26 Commavia: Which is the really amazing comical thing about this, at least for me. I honestly think that the APA leadership truly thinks they'll get a better dea
27 Jacobin777: Its not management doing it...blame it on the APA. Pay cuts, loss of stock options (or stock option which basically have no value). You have got to b
28 NorthstarBoy: the numbers weren't necessarily realistic, i admit that, but the point is, despite the fact that the pilots are likely being ridiculous, management ne
29 Aaway: It isn't a non-starter for APA (obviously their interest would be to keep the flying in-house),but a non-starter for AMR to operate the a/c as mainli
30 Commavia: Precisely. This isn't about being pro- or anti- either side. I have close friends on both sides, and I respect the perspectives of both sides - both
31 FlyPNS1: Because AA can't operate these planes cost effectively. Even if the AA pilots agreed to a payscale equal to that of the regionals, AA's cost on these
32 Jacobin777: No its not... The problem is given the current macro-economic (as well as micro-economic) climate their pay-scale is "too far to the right" of the pe
33 AA767400: Not the APFA. They know the writing is on the wall. They are willing and able. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...us.ART.State.Edition1.45e9aa0.h
34 Commavia: Which is actually the most shocking development of all vis-a-vis AMR-union relations lately. The fact that the APA (the union, not necessarily all of
35 Incitatus: Actually a management team that lets a rule like a scope clause be written into a union contract is indeed incompetent!
36 PITrules: Don't quote me out of context. You ridiculously said: to which I sarcastically replied:
37 Brilondon: That pretty much sums up the reason you don't want to force your employer into bankruptcy.
38 FlyPNS1: Yes, it is. Though it depends on the airline, pilot pay accounts for less than 10% of total cost. Maybe, but maybe it's not employee pay that's the p
39 Alias1024: AA is going to use those 737s to replace some of the MD-80s. That means no growth for APA pilots from those aircraft. Allowing regionals to fly the a
40 Commavia: Sorry I quoted you out of context. What is so ridiculous about it? I can find no other explanation for their behavior. What else could possibly expla
41 Jacobin777: Yes..thats' the correct statement....regardless, the plane doesn't fly with pilots only. You know there is a very large amount of staff which gets ev
42 Alias1024: Yes they do. It's being done by MD-80s right now. Management wants to switch some of it to 75 seat jets because they can keep the frequency while red
43 Commavia: Right, and much of that flying will be leaving in the next few years because it is no longer economical. If the APA were being rational, they could s
44 Cubsrule: I'm really curious whether folks think APA would accept mainline flying the 175 or 190 for about what US pilots make. It seems pretty reasonable to m
45 Commavia: Well, I'm sure that what AA has offered on this flying is probably the lowest market rate they can find, probably on par with what some of the region
46 FlyPNS1: I don't think the pilots have said this. The 75 seater certainly has better economics than the 50 seater, but whether its the new "sweet spot" is def
47 Commavia: That is precisely why the APA has an amazing and very far-sighted opportunity here to fundamentally change the equation and reshape the industry for
48 SYfan100: AA should get the 124 seat Boeing 737-700 if they are looking for a aircraft under 162 seats but over 100 seats. Get 25 of those to takeover some of t
49 ElmoTheHobo: The economics of a 737-800 are so good that they carry more passengers at a lower per trip and per seat cost than an MD-80. On top of that, there is
50 SYfan100: Correct me if I am wrong: So then they would just have for mainline the Boeing 737-800, Boeing 757-200, Boeing 767-300 and the Boeing 777-200ER. I am
51 MAH4546: The future fleet would likely be 738, 752, 763, 772, and an A300 replacement. The A300s will be heading out, but nothing in the current fleet can rep
52 Commavia: As Elmo said, the 700 is only a few seats smaller than the 800, and given that, and their very similar operating economics and technical and performa
53 Cubsrule: Oh, I agree. I'm wondering whether APA would agree to the (somewhat higher) rate paid to US' 190 pilots. If anything, that's a little low (as AA gene
54 MAH4546: What changes are coming with the new 738s that make for 160 seats? I know they will have drop down LCDs monitors instead of the CRTs, but what else?
55 Commavia: I'm not sure how they are going to do it, but the plan - at least as of now - is to have these planes have 160 seats, with 12 additional seats all in
56 Par13del: This may not add anything positive to this discussion but I don't think any of the economic aspects of the scope clause makes any difference here, we
57 Osiris30: Yep.. I'll agree with that.. I think AA may go Chp. 11 just to break some of the BS they are stuck in. Look, AA tried HARD to avoid backrupcy and to
58 Saab2000: I wonder which company it was that got rid of the F100s? Hmmm..... Don't ask for scope relief. Rather offer the larger planes to APA pilots and the co
59 Cubsrule: If the choice is between outsourcing some jobs and liquidation, any rational workgroup will choose the outsourcing. Of course, there's no guarantee t
60 Commavia: Nobody is suggesting they should have kept the F100s. That would have been nuts. The 717 argument is a reasonable one - since the planes were basical
61 LAXdude1023: While theyre at it, I would like to see that stupid Distance Clause gone from the APA's contract. That way AA could fly any route they wish without ha
62 Aaway: Your thought is certainly rational. Insource some flying, perhaps return some furloughees to the cockpit...APA protecting its own as it did when it c
63 FlyPNS1: Except that AA's management doesn't want this flying brought in house. Even if APA offered regional level payscales, AA's management will say no for
64 Commavia: They have been amiable to the idea in the past, because they recognized how valuable this flying would be. Now, at these fuel levels, this flying is
65 Tozairport: On a recent flight from IAD-SFO (full A319) the cost per passenger for the fuel was about $130. The cost to pay the Captain and F/O was about $13. Th
66 Commavia: Yeah, it is. It's one of them, anyway. Fuel and labor. Fuel is near-totally out of the airlines' control, short of some limited hedging that the airl
67 Okie73: You are correct. Pilot costs are a small piece of the pie. If the pilots fly a 75 seat RJ for the same pay as a regional, yet the major still cannot
68 Cubsrule: Did you miss the rest of my post? I understand what the non-labor costs of adding a fleet type are, but I wonder if they're really significant over a
69 MQTmxguy: I think alot of folks are missing a big part of the issue here, the Eagle divestiture or lack thereof. Eagle is the largest regional in the world in o
70 Commavia: True, but they are a critical piece. With the pilots' agreement, these 75-seaters don't fly. It's that simple. Well why presuppose that AA still coul
71 Cubsrule: There's an important difference between your other examples and YV, though: YV's flying is spread out, and no carrier relies so heavily on YV that th
72 FlyPNS1: And even if AA had DL/UA/US's labor costs, they'd still be bleeding red ink. Cutting labor costs isn't going to save AA....nor any other legacy for t
73 MQTmxguy: And I've seen our agents at my station do the same thing, just it was the other way around. Yeah good thing mainline AA never gets into a mess...oh w
74 MQTmxguy: Exactly what I was trying to say, but was too tired. thanks
75 Commavia: Cutting labor costs may not save AA, but raising them sure as hell is going to bankrupt it. Huh? Legacy airlines added capacity in the 1980s because
76 Cubsrule: I think it depends on the location some. The MQ employees at ORD are generally great. There are some other hubs where it is much as you describe.
77 Commavia: Very true, and that goes for mainline, too: some stations are great, others awful. LaGuardia's agents are some of the best - efficient and great at t
78 LAXdude1023: It really does depend. At LAX and DFW, ive had nothing but good experiances.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 69 posts, 
From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2005, 1022 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
