Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Mesa PHX, Ground Handling Change  
User currently offlineflyawa From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 200 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5333 times:

Earlier today Mesa Airlines informed their employees that they will discontinue passenger service and ground
handling operations in PHX, effective April 6. Piedmont Airlines, a wholly owned subsidiary of US Airways, will
assume the PHX US Airways Express passenger service and ground handling operations.

Piedmont will extend job offers to approximately 350 Mesa employees in good standing. The remaining 13 field stations with direct US Airways Express service from PHX will participate in a competitive bid process, which will include Piedmont, to determine who will handle passenger service and ground operations. All stations will transition from Mesa to the new handler by June 2011.

With this move Piedmont will now manage US Airways Express passenger service and ground handling operations in all three hubs; CLT, PHL and PHX.

Field stations up for ground handling bid
Bakersfield, Calif. (BFL) (3 average daily departures)
Durango, Colo. (DRO) (2)
Des Moines, Iowa (DSM) (2)
Fresno, Calif. (FAT) (5)
Flagstaff, Ariz. (FLG) (6)
Guadalajara, Mexico (GDL) (1)
Grand Junction, Colo. (GJT) (3)
Guaymas, Mexico (GYM) (1)
Hermosillo, Mexico (HMO) (1)
Monterey, Calif. (MRY) (2)
Palm Springs, Calif. (PSP) (6)
Santa Barbara, Calif. (SBA) (5)
San Luis Obispo, Calif. (SBP) (2)
Yuma, Ariz. (YUM) (6)


Better than most, not as good as some.
26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1962 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5320 times:

At first I thought this was about the Dash 8 flying.

User currently offlineNASBWI From Bahamas, joined Feb 2005, 1286 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5310 times:

So, Piedmont's DH8 flying will replace the CR2 and CR9 flying that was going on out of PHX (as well as the DH8 flying)? Is US trying to get another one of their partners (Air Wisconsin, maybe) to take over some of the longer routes previously served by the jets?


Fierce, Fabulous, and Flawless ;)
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5428 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5258 times:

Quoting NASBWI (Reply 2):
So, Piedmont's DH8 flying will replace the CR2 and CR9 flying that was going on out of PHX (as well as the DH8 flying)? Is US trying to get another one of their partners (Air Wisconsin, maybe) to take over some of the longer routes previously served by the jets?

No; the only thing that's changing right now is who is doing the ground and gate work. Mesa will still operate their own Dash-8s and CR2s and CR9s. The Dash's can be farmed out with 6 months notice, the 200s are slowly but surely disappearing, and the 900s are under contract for another 4 years.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineeraugrad02 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5202 times:

When are CRJ-900 seats getting updated? Wasn't that a part of the deal with the extended contract?

Desmond in ILM,



Desmond MacRae in ILM
User currently offlineUSXguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 984 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5145 times:

That is up for USAirways to determine, not Mesa. US decides the interior, paint schedules, and configuration of the aircraft.


xx
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5428 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5117 times:

Quoting USXguy (Reply 5):
That is up for USAirways to determine, not Mesa. US decides the interior, paint schedules, and configuration of the aircraft.

Just for clarification: that's solely because of the contract between US and Mesa. During the merger process, an agreement was struck that basically had US paying for most of the work.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinen7371f From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1644 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 4921 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting eraugrad02 (Reply 4):
When are CRJ-900 seats getting updated? Wasn't that a part of the deal with the extended contract?
Quoting USXguy (Reply 5):
That is up for USAirways to determine, not Mesa. US decides the interior, paint schedules, and configuration of the aircraft.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 6):
Just for clarification: that's solely because of the contract between US and Mesa. During the merger process, an agreement was struck that basically had US paying for most of the work.

The new capacity purchase agreement signed recently in Bankruptcy Court has several details regarding the refurbishing of the CRJ-900's. Mesa must meet several objectives on the aircraft interior: seats, carpeting, sidewalls, bulkheads and overheads. I don't have the specific document in front of me but I read it recently; it's very detailed. The cost is basically borne by Mesa as part of its deal to continue operating the CR9's for US Airways.


User currently offlineF9Animal From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4947 posts, RR: 28
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4864 times:

This is very rough news for Mesa employees. I sure hope Piedmont is able to take all, or a majority of the employees under its wings. Mesa is really in trouble!


I Am A Different Animal!!
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3786 posts, RR: 29
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4809 times:

Quoting flyawa (Thread starter):
Piedmont will extend job offers to approximately 350 Mesa employees in good standing.

Does anyone have a figure on how many PHX employees of Mesa above and beyond the 350 would be left to find new jobs elsewhere? Also...will the ~350 see their wages shrink with their transfer to Piedmont?

Seems unlikely that Piedmont could get by with less frontline staff at PHX than Mesa...so will it mainly be Mesa management/supervisory staff (along with employees not in good standing) who will not be offered positions with Piedmont? How is Piedmont to work for vs. Mesa?


User currently offlineyvphx From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 4731 times:

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 9):
Does anyone have a figure on how many PHX employees of Mesa above and beyond the 350 would be left to find new jobs elsewhere? Also...will the ~350 see their wages shrink with their transfer to Piedmont?

If their wages shrink any further, they will not be in compliance with Federal and State minimum wage laws. You also have to figure, a $0.25 raise a year, it would be a bit difficult for anyone to pay any lower.

As far as the 350 gate and ramp employees, I doubt it is that many. On any given day, there may be 30 total positions during the AM and PM shifts for gate and ramp. Where the figure of 350 came from, I have no idea.

Needless to say, this will be a huge improvement from the crap Mesa management dealt its' employees from the get go. ie: cold and undercooked turkey for thanksgiving, and the same leftovers served for Christmas. The promise of a summer bonus (when temps average over 115), that never happened. Equipment that is sub-par and under-maintained. There are many things wrong with Mesa that hopefully Piedmont will be able to fix.


User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3786 posts, RR: 29
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4702 times:

Quoting yvphx (Reply 10):
There are many things wrong with Mesa that hopefully Piedmont will be able to fix.

While one can hope... if Piedmont got PHX ground handling on the basis of cheapest bid rather than Mesa's unsatisfactory performance... wouldn't look for much if anything to change other than... the name of the company providing ground service at PHX for US Airways Express...


User currently offlineswa4life From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 380 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4687 times:

Quoting yvphx (Reply 10):
ie: cold and undercooked turkey for thanksgiving, and the same leftovers served for Christmas.

That has got to be the most ridiculous and sad thing I've ever heard. They actually kept the left overs and served it to them for Christmas?


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22302 posts, RR: 20
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4674 times:

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 11):
wouldn't look for much if anything to change other than... the name of the company providing ground service at PHX for US Airways Express...

You've lost me - EN does a pretty good job at both CLT and PHL. Why would PHX be any different? Are Arizonans intrinsically lazy?



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5428 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4632 times:

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 8):
This is very rough news for Mesa employees.

Actually, several I've talked to are very excited about it. Remember, Piedmont rampers just voted in a union, something Mesa was able to prevent by having a 75% turnover rate every 6 months. Better work rules, better pay, it's just an all around better situation for them. Honestly though, it can't get worse.

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 8):
Mesa is really in trouble!

Well, that's a given. They couldn't justify paying people to handle 2 flights a day in most of their stations, and there's no point in keeping the rest around either.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 9):

Seems unlikely that Piedmont could get by with less frontline staff at PHX than Mesa...so will it mainly be Mesa management/supervisory staff (along with employees not in good standing) who will not be offered positions with Piedmont? How is Piedmont to work for vs. Mesa?

Everyone will be getting job offers with EN, in fact, as long as the employee is in good standing, they won't even have to interview. The only exceptions are the supervisors and managers; they will have to interview, and I have a feeling most of the managers won't be given job offers.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 11):
While one can hope... if Piedmont got PHX ground handling on the basis of cheapest bid rather than Mesa's unsatisfactory performance

Remember, Piedmont is wholly-owned by US. It basically comes down to management style: Piedmont has one. There's a reason all the rank-and-file will still have jobs. Piedmont already runs the express ops at PHL and CLT, it only makes sense to fix things up in PHX.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 13):
Are Arizonans intrinsically lazy?

No, our brains are just fried by the summer heat.  

Nothing much will change (from the pax perspective), because it's basically the same employees. And let me tell you, despite all the crap Mesa gets (and deservedly so), their agents work freakin miracles with what they're given.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineUSXguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 984 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4588 times:

How do we know that Mesa isn't the one that went to US about it? By Mesa getting out of the ground handling business, that frees up a lot of people at corporate who no longer have to be there.

Regarding the union at Piedmont, remember what happened to all the PSA folks, who are union. PSA doesn't ground handle anymore stations. In fact, if you look at the current USAirways job reductions in PIT, PSA used to be the exclusive handler for all USX flights. Then US took over everything, and now Republic is bringing in its own staff to handle the USX flights.

While things are greener at Piedmont than Mesa, there are still issues at EN. SSO can only do so much, there's only so much budget for EN. New ground equipment is few & far between (but it is out there).

I think this is good news all around - for Mesa, for Piedmont, and for USAirways.



xx
User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1439 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4561 times:

All part of Piedmont slowly going to a ground operation only. Give it a few years and the flight ops will be gone.

User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5428 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4540 times:

Quoting USXguy (Reply 15):
Regarding the union at Piedmont, remember what happened to all the PSA folks, who are union. PSA doesn't ground handle anymore stations.

Not really a good comparison: remember that EN is now handling at 70 airports (including all 3 US hubs), and has contracts with 7 other airlines.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 16):
All part of Piedmont slowly going to a ground operation only. Give it a few years and the flight ops will be gone.

It wouldn't surprise me to see EN merge their ops with JS, just like the Allegheny brand was, and spin off Piedmont into a DGS-like entity.

Quoting USXguy (Reply 15):
New ground equipment is few & far between (but it is out there).

They don't need any brand new equipment, but just stuff that works (and is safe), something that Mesa was sorely lacking.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1962 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4509 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 17):
It wouldn't surprise me to see EN merge their ops with JS, just like the Allegheny brand was, and spin off Piedmont into a DGS-like entity.

Why go through all the expense of a merge when they can just shut down EN for a lot less. They could offer preferential hire at JS or US and start them all over at the bottom of the payscale again.


User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3786 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4491 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 13):
You've lost me - EN does a pretty good job at both CLT and PHL. Why would PHX be any different?

Just questioning whether a ground handling company that can "out lowball" Mesa (if that even is indeed why Piedmont got the PHX bid) is able to do so without cutting as many proverbial corners as Mesa seems to.

[Edited 2011-01-13 20:11:21]

User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5428 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4445 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 18):

Why go through all the expense of a merge when they can just shut down EN for a lot less. They could offer preferential hire at JS or US and start them all over at the bottom of the payscale again.

Contractual issues aside, that's just evil.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 19):
Just questioning whether a ground handling company that can "out lowball" Mesa

As was said before, there was no "lowballing" here. Mesa wanted to get rid of their ground ops, and Piedmont slid in. I'm not even sure there was an open bid, as the plans for Piedmont to come in and take over have been out there since 2008 (and, in fact, what is happening now are those plans being put into motion, on a slightly longer timescale).



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1439 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4380 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 17):
It wouldn't surprise me to see EN merge their ops with JS, just like the Allegheny brand was, and spin off Piedmont into a DGS-like entity.

Isn't going to happen. Idiot Kirby is on camera in CLT saying the 2 million or so in savings just isn't worth the headache of merging the two operations. Translated.... "We need both carriers in tact for the time being so we can whipsaw them against one another. After PSA gets another subpar contract, we'll shut down PDT. It will be easy since they're down to 5, -100 airframes as the early model -100s that we own are all timed out and the leases on the -300s expired a couple of years ago. Even better, we saved MILLIONS in not negotiating with PDTALPA on their concessionary contract that expired in '09 through not giving any of their now 30 year captains and 10+ year FOs a raise since then."

Quoting silentbob (Reply 18):
Why go through all the expense of a merge when they can just shut down EN for a lot less. They could offer preferential hire at JS or US and start them all over at the bottom of the payscale again.

Bingo. They already have / had preferential hire at US, and I doubt you'd see many PDT pilots touch a PSA RJ.

The ALG / PSA merger was easy compared to what a PDT / PSA merger would be. ALG / PDT was a straight DOH merger of two carriers flying the same aircraft. We even had airframes on both certificates at the same time. Maintenance had to change out the manuals, sign the logbook, and we were off. Their pilots had to go through the full training course, but the money spent there was easily recouped by Airways in PDT being the surviving carrier with our cheaper pilot contract.


User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4124 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 5 days ago) and read 4303 times:

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 21):
Translated.... "We need both carriers in tact for the time being so we can whipsaw them against one another. After PSA gets another subpar contract, we'll shut down PDT. It will be easy since they're down to 5, -100 airframes as the early model -100s that we own are all timed out and the leases on the -300s expired a couple of years ago. Even better, we saved MILLIONS in not negotiating with PDTALPA on their concessionary contract that expired in '09 through not giving any of their now 30 year captains and 10+ year FOs a raise since then."

Based on a memo I read today from the ZW ALPA, PSA, PDT, and ZW pilots are all taking part in each others contract negotiations to prevent management from doing exactly that, playing the express carriers off of each other.

I work with the Piedmont ground handlers on a daily basis. For the most part, they do a pretty good job, or as good a job as you can expect at the express level. The one place I have an issue with them is in DCA, and that is more related to the setup in DCA than it is the actual people working there.


User currently offlineF9Animal From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4947 posts, RR: 28
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4075 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 14):
Actually, several I've talked to are very excited about it. Remember, Piedmont rampers just voted in a union, something Mesa was able to prevent by having a 75% turnover rate every 6 months. Better work rules, better pay, it's just an all around better situation for them. Honestly though, it can't get worse.

Which is my hope that Piedmont will be able to retain most of the workforce. Mesa may not be the best managed airline, but they do have some very good workers. Anyone that can take the kinds of abuse they take and keep on working, are darned good employees in my book. Imagine what they would be able to do if they were managed better, and thrown a bone? I bet you will see some significant changes to the workforce!



I Am A Different Animal!!
User currently offlineca2ohHP From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 948 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4045 times:

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 16):
All part of Piedmont slowly going to a ground operation only. Give it a few years and the flight ops will be gone.

I agree. I believe EN is also taking over a lot of the ground handling contracts as a result of the recent US furlough/outsourcing initiative. Personally speaking, I have always found the YV folks in PHX to be very professional and helpful.

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 21):

Bingo. They already have / had preferential hire at US, and I doubt you'd see many PDT pilots touch a PSA RJ.

I've found, through first hand experience, EN is marketed as the preferred ground handling source, but there has to be a legitimate business case for it. EN has been shown the door in a handful of operations (ALB and STL to name a couple).


25 cactus742 : Can't find any information about this move anywhere on the web. Was it just an internal memo or is there an outside source someone can link to or post
26 DashTrash : I know that Air Whiskey and PSA had guys in the room at some or all of the PDT negotiations. Those "negotiations" consisted of management walking int
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...
Power Out At DL In ATL posted Mon Nov 29 2010 08:48:26 by n92r03
Mesa Dash 8 Problem At PHX? posted Mon Feb 15 2010 11:03:20 by DesertFlyer
Arik Air 737-700 Rolls Out At Renton In Full C/s! posted Wed Mar 28 2007 02:06:33 by RobK
In-N-Out At LAX posted Sat Jun 3 2006 01:16:46 by USAF757300
TED A320 At The HP Hanger In PHX posted Tue Jun 28 2005 18:05:25 by AV8AJET
What's IN & Out At CO In 2001 posted Tue Jan 23 2001 10:27:57 by Iahcsr
US Red-Eye Expanding Out Of PHX posted Thu Nov 25 2010 16:55:07 by WhatUsaid
DC-10 Parked At BWI? 737-100 In ATL? posted Sun Sep 5 2010 15:53:34 by delta777lr
Aero Union P-3's Hanging Out At Kiwa posted Sat Jun 26 2010 17:37:16 by coiah756ca
Varig 777 At AV Maintenance Hangar In Bogota posted Sun Apr 4 2010 07:21:19 by ACES320