Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA Modifies Republic E175 Leases - Reduces Count  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24823 posts, RR: 46
Posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9532 times:

AA apparently has modified its proposed agreement with Republic Airways to operate Embraer 175 aircraft under the American Eagle banner.

Under terms of the original deal announced in January, AA was planning on utilizing 53 firm aircraft.

AA now has modified this, and reduce the planned lease count to 47.

It looks to be the 6 removed aircraft were the 6 used planes that Republic was going to place with AA. Now instead AA will only receive the 47 planned new deliveries.

Story:
American Airlines takes six used jets out of proposed Republic Airways deal
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...oposed-republic-airways-deal.html/

=


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9179 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 9309 times:

I can see why TWU would have issues with this, they don't want to see their work outsourced over to Republic, which I am guessing is what would happen here.

Unions need to understand something here. Yes, it is a pain, but this company is trying to restructure its costs to get out of bankruptcy. If it is cheaper to lease Republic E175s rather than using their existing model, then so be it.

I do wonder where AA plans to use these planes...



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently onlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1607 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8849 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting steeler83 (Reply 1):
I do wonder where AA plans to use these planes...

My guess is a majority will be ORD based.


User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3717 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 8531 times:

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 2):
Quoting steeler83 (Reply 1):
I do wonder where AA plans to use these planes...

My guess is a majority will be ORD based.

Last I heard, that will be the case.

That said, where will the used 175s go - RAH flying for United Express, RAH for Delta Connection, or a non-RAH operator?



I don't work for FWA, their tenants, or their ad agency. But I still love FWA.
User currently offlineFRNT787 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1319 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 8324 times:

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 3):
That said, where will the used 175s go - RAH flying for United Express, RAH for Delta Connection, or a non-RAH operator?

I believe they were to come from other sources, such as leases. RAH has no spare E175 and I do not believe DL or US are planning on shrinking their operations.



"We have a right to fail, because failure makes us grow" --Glenn Beck
User currently offlinefloridaflyboy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2007 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 7653 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
It looks to be the 6 removed aircraft were the 6 used planes that Republic was going to place with AA. Now instead AA will only receive the 47 planned new deliveries.

That is correct. Bryan Bedford announced on the Q4 call last week that the 6 used planes were dead and would not be taken and that the agreement would now be just for the 47 new-build aircraft (still pending BK court approval of course, which is scheduled to be reviewed March 12).

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 2):

My guess is a majority will be ORD based.

Yes, initially at least, these aircraft will be ORD based.

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 3):
That said, where will the used 175s go - RAH flying for United Express, RAH for Delta Connection, or a non-RAH operator?

They were to be sourced from other operators, so they will now simply not be taken by RAH.



Good goes around!
User currently onlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1607 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 7581 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

No knowing but I would guess from ORD the first markets would be EWR, MSP and ATL. Without the US merger PHL and DCA would be good adds, but the merger will boost AA in these markets so they will go all mainline.

User currently offlinefloridaflyboy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2007 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 7250 times:

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 6):
No knowing but I would guess from ORD the first markets would be EWR, MSP and ATL.

Agree with these, and in addition, you will also almost guaranteedly see service to RAH maintenance/crew bases in IND, CMH, PIT, and/or MCI.



Good goes around!
User currently offlineN737AA From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 270 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6577 times:

When are these aircraft to be delivered?

N737AA


User currently onlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1607 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6480 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting floridaflyboy (Reply 7):
Agree with these, and in addition, you will also almost guaranteedly see service to RAH maintenance/crew bases in IND, CMH, PIT, and/or MCI.

Yeah. Plus I forgot YYZ likely. I didnt know RAH had an MX base in MCI.


User currently offlinenorcal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5844 times:

It'd be nice if they cancel the whole contract. Republic can't staff the flying they have now, their Q-400 operation isn't the best and their pilot group is itching to strike. Even if they don't strike they can slow things down.

AMR has a serious problem developing on their hands, the merger with US Airways triggered a 95% furlough protection clause for American Eagle pilots meaning 2800 pilots now must be furlough protected instead of the original 2000. That includes keeping captains at their current pay even if they can no longer hold positions as captains.

There isn't enough space left in the scope clause for this contract to survive and keep American Eagle pilots working instead of just collecting pay checks and sitting at home.

Something is going to have to give.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11414 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5715 times:

Quoting norcal (Reply 10):
There isn't enough space left in the scope clause for this contract to survive and keep American Eagle pilots working instead of just collecting pay checks and sitting at home.

And how do you know that? How do you know what AMR's long-term fleet plan is for Eagle?


User currently offlinenorcal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5656 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):

Count the current combined US Airways fleet and the American Eagle fleet and compare it to the scope under the MOU.

http://www.audriesaircraftanalysis.c...-new-aa-regional-system-look-like/

With systems merged there is room for approx~ 30 more aircraft under the system before 75% is exceeded. The Republic award should put the new American fleet beyond 75%. Unless
The combined mainline narrow-body fleet grows by just over 30 aircraft in the next year, subsequently making room for the additional regional aircraft beyond the current limitations.
Regional capacity is retired at another regional airline in the system.
Under the American Eagle Pilots agreement with AMR they were furlough protected to 60% of the Regional feed for American or a charted number in the contract; whichever was less. This clause only remains in affect if they did not merge.
If they do merge another set of clauses go into affect, which are a bit more complicated. It should be noted though that 95% of the pilots currently at Eagle upon date of approval of the Bankruptcy court should be furlough protected. Interestingly, in the event American Eagle does retire Eagle aircraft and therefore becomes overstaffed and unable to furlough because of this agreement then it will boost the percentage of training slots. The boost at American could be up to 50-60% depending upon circumstances. In short this is how the New American will be incentivized to reduce its fleet at other airlines besides Eagle, who may not have the same protections or long term contracts.


User currently offlinerealsim From Spain, joined Apr 2010, 645 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5542 times:

Quoting norcal (Reply 12):
With systems merged there is room for approx~ 30 more aircraft under the system before 75% is exceeded. The Republic award should put the new American fleet beyond 75%. Unless the combined mainline narrow-body fleet grows by just over 30 aircraft in the next year, subsequently making room for the additional regional aircraft beyond the current limitations.

AA will retire 33 Eagle aircraft this year (9 AT7, 21 ER3 and 3 ERD), so with the new 47 Republic aircraft, the regional fleet will represent around 73% of the mainline narrow-body fleet of the combined airline.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11414 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5488 times:

Quoting norcal (Reply 12):
Count the current combined US Airways fleet and the American Eagle fleet and compare it to the scope under the MOU.

http://www.audriesaircraftanalysis.c...like/

Yeah ... and?

As others have said, statically counting tails today is rather meaningless, as the number is dynamic and changing rapidly. Eagle alone is dumping dozens of planes this year. Not to mention the huge number of 50-seat RJs that AA is likely to pull out of the system over the next five years (a la DL). And, for that matter, the mainline fleet is changing and will continue to change, too.

Besides - do you honestly think management is planning to have pilots "just collecting pay checks and sitting at home?" Come on. Let's be real. Besides, between flow up, retirements, open positions at mainline (not to mention at other higher-paying carriers), and the very real possibility that Eagle will be getting new capacity, I think it is quite likely that Eagle may in a few short years find itself facing not a surplus but a shortage of pilots.

I've yet to see anything concrete - as opposed merely to conclusions jumped to here on A.net - to suggest doom and gloom for Eagle pilots.


User currently offlinenorcal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 5368 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 14):

Horton tried till the very end to resist the merger. It was never something he wanted. Republic was his plan, not Parker's or part of the new merged carrier. Everything is up for review, Parker said that.

The current parking of Eagle's planes was based on a fleet size to support a pilot group of 2,000 for the next couple of years. They have over 3,000, the numbers don't add up. The merger changed the entire dynamic.

The flow through to American has never worked as intended, most of those pilots were supposed to be over ther shortly after they signed the 1997 contract at Eagle, they are still there. According to Eagle pilots on other web boards they are losing about 20-25 a month. The planes are being parked much faster than that so they will end up with pilots sitting at home doing nothing.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11414 posts, RR: 62
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5313 times:

Quoting norcal (Reply 15):
Horton tried till the very end to resist the merger. It was never something he wanted. Republic was his plan, not Parker's or part of the new merged carrier. Everything is up for review, Parker said that.

The current parking of Eagle's planes was based on a fleet size to support a pilot group of 2,000 for the next couple of years. They have over 3,000, the numbers don't add up. The merger changed the entire dynamic.

The flow through to American has never worked as intended, most of those pilots were supposed to be over ther shortly after they signed the 1997 contract at Eagle, they are still there. According to Eagle pilots on other web boards they are losing about 20-25 a month. The planes are being parked much faster than that so they will end up with pilots sitting at home doing nothing.[/quote]

So ... in other words ... more conjecture and speculation.

Why would the merger "change the entire dynamic" or the plan to add more large RJs? I highly doubt Parker would be in too much of a rush to add more of these - after all, he's already flying well over 100 of them at his current airline.

Again - you have no idea what AMR's fleet plan for Eagle is. Or do you? I don't, but I'm not jumping to conclusions yet. You keep stating over and over that "the numbers don't add up," despite the fact that you don't seem to know precisely what all of the actual numbers are. How do you know that AMR isn't planning to put 50 new CRJ700s with Eagle?

Anything is possible. So far what you've repeated over and over is that Eagle is parking planes.


User currently offlinenorcal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5029 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 16):

Eagle is parking airplanes while the new aircraft are going elsewhere. AMR only had to guarantee positions for 2,000 Eagle pilots and their current plan reflected that (shrinking to a size of about 200 aircraft as ATRs and ERJs are parked this year and into next year). Now with the merger they have to protect the jobs of an additional 800 pilots. The merger was something Horton didn't want and all of his plans for Eagle and AA reflected his wishes to go it alone. The scope clause doesn't allow room for addtitional aircraft and parking more ERJs and replacing them with new large RJs (to stay with in the new scope) doesn't provide jobs for the additional furlough protected pilots, all it does is continue to follow the old pre merger plan.

They can't keep losing all of those aircraft with out any kind of replacement, in fact they need a little growth otherwise they will have people sitting around at home doing nothing.

I don't know what is so hard to understand? Nearly every regional airline staffs planes at a ratio of 10 pilots per plane. 2800 pilots won't efficiently do the work of a plan for 2,000 pilots.

Putting 50 new CRJ-700s at Eagle can't be done right now unless they park 50 ERJs because of the scope but you are back at square one with the same number of pilots doing the same amount of work. They need some growth.

Like I said the dynamic has changed.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11414 posts, RR: 62
Reply 18, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4584 times:

Interesting filing today with the Court regarding AMR's E175 agreement with Republic.

No earth-shattering news in the release, but a few notable points:

* The "goal" of AMR's business plan is "to acquire up to 215 large regional jets by 2018"

* AMR is specifically interested in a 76-seat E175 or CR9

* AA issued RFPs to Eagle and six "independent operators" to operate either E175s or CR9s

* 5 of the operators submitted a total of 25 bids with different combinations of new/used aircraft; Eagle was viewed as non-responsive as it did not already have E175s or CR9s, and was not viewed as being able to finance them right now

* The E175 was deemed as superior for the competitive ORD market due to its "product experience...more similar to a narrow body aircraft versus the CRJ-900" (many of us AA FFs will no doubt be thrilled to hear AA acknowledge that)

* The Republic E175s will begin phasing into the AA system in "mid-2013" at ~2-3/month

* "Republic will acquire, finance, and/or own all aircraft" - AMR assumes absolutely no direct liability for the aircraft themselves


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8401 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4525 times:

Worth noting, Republic already operates E-175s for US Airways. So, those deserve to be included in these discussions. It is a useful and comfortable airplane!

User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5177 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4526 times:

Quoting norcal (Reply 17):
Putting 50 new CRJ-700s at Eagle can't be done right now unless they park 50 ERJs because of the scope but you are back at square one with the same number of pilots doing the same amount of work.

But I thought this scope was for the entire AA-US, not just the PMAA side of the business.

ZW have 71 CR2s with US that are coming towards the end of their contract. Replace those 71 CR2s with Eagle RJs that were heading to the desert, and you're pretty much back to 2,800 pilots.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlinecrj900lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4409 times:

Those 71 CR2's can't leave fast enough. Nothing but problems with them on a daily basis. And their crews are always so cheerful!! I would love to see that flying that ZW is attempting to do for us now go to Eagle/PSA/Piedmont. I'm sure Parker and his boys have a plan and it will be interesting to see who is doing what flying where.

User currently offlineUAL Bagsmasher From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2146 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3903 times:

Is anyone on this forum old enough to remember old fashioned LP's? Remember the skip they would develop and play the same few notes over and over? That scenario brings to mind the sour grapes of a certain individual on here who can't seem to come up with anything productive to forum discusssions. The only play in his book is to bash ZW. It's getting old guy...

User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3683 times:

Quoting realsim (Reply 13):
so with the new 47 Republic aircraft, the regional fleet will represent around 73% of the mainline narrow-body fleet of the combined airline

If I'm reading this correctly, that means that 3 out of 4 narrowbody planes operating as "AA" will be planes owned and operated by airlines other than AA?


User currently offlinerealsim From Spain, joined Apr 2010, 645 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3643 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 23):
If I'm reading this correctly, that means that 3 out of 4 narrowbody planes operating as "AA" will be planes owned and operated by airlines other than AA?

No, it means that for every 100 mainline narrow-body aircraft operated by AA, up to 75 (additional) regional jets can be operated by regional airlines. All the aircraft operating as American (mainline) will be flown by AA. The percentage of outsourced regional aircraft (either operated by owned or third party carriers), will be less than 40% of the combined American + American Eagle total fleet.

[Edited 2013-03-13 18:10:52]

User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 25, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3696 times:

Quoting realsim (Reply 24):
No, it means that for every 100 mainline narrow-body aircraft operated by AA, up to 75 (additional) regional jets can be operated by regional airlines. All the aircraft operating as American (mainline) will be flown by AA. The percentage of outsourced regional aircraft (either operated by owned or third party carriers), will be less than 40% of the combined American + American Eagle total fleet.

Yep, I understand that American (mainline) will be flown by AA.

But focusing in our your very interesting original observation, and your clarification, it appears that for every 175 narrow-body planes operating as "AA" (using the term to encompass mainline and regional, because most pax book a flight on AA, not on American Eagle, American Connection - it's "AA" to the pax, anyway, for every 175 narrowbody "AA" aircraft, 75 of them will be not operated by "AA" so to speak.


User currently offlinerealsim From Spain, joined Apr 2010, 645 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3663 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 25):
But focusing in our your very interesting original observation, and your clarification, it appears that for every 175 narrow-body planes operating as "AA" (using the term to encompass mainline and regional, because most pax book a flight on AA, not on American Eagle, American Connection - it's "AA" to the pax, anyway, for every 175 narrowbody "AA" aircraft, 75 of them will be not operated by "AA" so to speak.

Yes, that is correct, and for sure that percentage will be reached. However, AA will be the legacy with a higher ratio of mainline aircraft, as the 75% reference is for narrow-body aircraft instead of mainline aircraft, which is what is used with DL and UA. If we add that AA will own (at least for now), American Eagle, PSA and Piedmont, we can say that the chances of flying AA with a mainline aircraft or an aircraft operated by a wholly owned carrier will be considerably higher than with UA or DL. I know that business dictates that for the mainline airline it is better to have all the regional operations outsourced and diversified in order to be able to contract them as cheap as possible, but I like that almost all of AA's regional flights are (were) operated by a wholly owned carrier, so, as this will not be possible anymore, I like, at least, that AA will fly a higher relative number of mainline and owned regional aircraft than its competitors.


User currently offlineKD5MDK From United States of America, joined Mar 2013, 301 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3523 times:

Quoting realsim (Reply 24):

Quoting realsim (Reply 13):
so with the new 47 Republic aircraft, the regional fleet will represent around 73% of the mainline narrow-body fleet of the combined airline

If I'm reading this correctly, that means that 3 out of 4 narrowbody planes operating as "AA" will be planes owned and operated by airlines other than AA?

It was already corrected in text, but the correct ratio would be 3/7.

I'm looking forward to bigger RJs in ORD so I can have a more comfortable flight to YOW (I hope).


User currently offlinefloridaflyboy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2007 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3388 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 19):
Worth noting, Republic already operates E-175s for US Airways. So, those deserve to be included in these discussions. It is a useful and comfortable airplane!

Correct, and in a bit different configuration (8/72 at US versus 12/64 at AA). I wonder what the final configuration will be post-merger.



Good goes around!
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3379 posts, RR: 5
Reply 29, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3370 times:

Quoting norcal (Reply 10):
AMR has a serious problem developing on their hands, the merger with US Airways triggered a 95% furlough protection clause for American Eagle pilots meaning 2800 pilots now must be furlough protected instead of the original 2000. That includes keeping captains at their current pay even if they can no longer hold positions as captains.

There isn't enough space left in the scope clause for this contract to survive and keep American Eagle pilots working instead of just collecting pay checks and sitting at home.

I do not know the specifics of the new scope agreement, but I have been in this industry long enough to know that. No one is getting paid to sit at home and do nothing

Merger details are still being worked out. Bankruptcy details are still being worked out.

But don't ever think for a second that a Pilot Contract is so iron clad that Management can not get around it if they throw enough time and energy at it.

I have flown with countless Eagle pilots who were guaranteed a spot at AA. Yet they were and are flying a 20 year old RJ.

I have flown with countless US Air guys who had a no furlough clase...yet they are flying with me at my current airline.

Ask the TWA guys about the 330s they were supposed right now.

Ask Mid Atlantic guys about Jets for Jobs

All on paper, not reality.


Long story short, if AA wants to outsource regional flying (and they do) they are going to find a way to do it.

At the end of the day, the loser in this scenario thus far is original Eagle:

1. They lost their name

2. They lost SJU, LAX, and part of DFW

3. They lost their turboprops

4. They have gained nothing thus far


Will the tide turn? Will they be thrown E170s? Possibly. But if I was a betting man in Vegas, I would go with the current fleet and the Under.


User currently onlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1607 posts, RR: 1
Reply 30, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3335 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KD5MDK (Reply 27):

I wouldn't count on seeing E75s on YOW. Possibly YUL definitely YYZ.


User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 31, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3086 times:

The agreement was approved and we are starting in June with the new build 175's. ORD will be the first base. Yes we were offered Eagle to purchase but we refused it as the small RJ market is pretty much dead.


Also we are the only Express carrier in the US system offering inflight Internet. ZW is done when the contract expires. They have no future. And nobody wants the airplanes.



I Don't know where I am anymore
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25004 posts, RR: 85
Reply 32, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3064 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FutureFO (Reply 31):
The agreement was approved

  

The SEC filing:

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/130313/rjet8-k.html

On March 1, 2013, the Company signed Amendment No. 1, to the Company's capacity purchase agreement ("CPA") with American Airlines executed on January 24, 2013. The amendment reduces the number of aircraft covered under the agreement, from 53 aircraft to 47 aircraft and includes certain other economic concessions.

American filed a motion for approval of the original CPA to be heard before the court on February 14, 2013. The hearing on that motion was subsequently adjourned until February 26, 2013. On February 14, 2013, US Airways and American Airlines announced a merger agreement. On February 21, 2013, the hearing on American's motion to approve the CPA between the Company and American was adjourned to March 12, 2013.

On March 12, 2013, the bankruptcy court approved the amended CPA agreement.


mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlinenorcal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 33, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2996 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 29):


You won't get any disagreement from me. My whole point has been the promises made to Eagle in terms of job protections haven't been met. If you look at the scope clause for the combined AA/US and past statements made by AMR regarding Eagle's "fleet plan," it becomes clear that there will be more pilots than jobs.

I have no doubt that AMR will violate the promises it made to Eagle pilots in their contract rather than violate a CPA to protect their jobs. They'll get around it, because the laws are heavily stacked against labor.

It seems that Eagle is heading more and more down the Comair route. Read this statement from the filing:

"Accordingly, the Debtors’ business plan contemplates that American Eagle will remain American’s largest regional service provider and will continue to operate at competitive costs."

Eagle was supposed to be the largest regional provider, now AMR is only contemplating that role for Eagle. Most every other carrier is receiving their fleet plans for the new AA. Just like this filing said I think Eagle will always lose out on these CPAs because they can't "secure the financing" because AMR won't let them secure the financing. They'll keep shrinking and fade away just like Comair.

On a side note AMR isn't directly paying for the Republic's planes, but rather indirectly via a stipend designed to cover Republic's burden of buying the aircraft. It's not 100% of the cost and it still relieves AMR from the debt (also removes the equity on the aircraft though too) but it certainly isn't zero cost to AMR as implied.


As for pilots sitting around and doing nothing, some of that is occurring right now according to Eagle pilots. The number and rapid pace if displacements and base closures have overwhelmed their training department (mostly just poor logistics and planning on AMR's part) to the point where they have people now not being utilized as efficiently as possible or sitting at home doing nothing. In fact some of their recent new hires are discussing how they are being told they will likely go home till June or July because of the poor planning in the Eagle training department (check APC).

Eagle management is also apparently violating the seniority system by assigning junior low time FOs lines that more senior pilots had in order to get them to 1500 hours. There is a provision in the contract to address this problem but the company is ignoring it and violating the contract anyways. It was management's choice to risk hiring low time pilots yet they are making the pilots pay for it costing some of them thousands of dollars in lost pay not to mention lost quality of life.


Republic simply isn't a great choice for this from an operational standpoint. They are failing to meet their current obligations with their recent Q-400 contract.

"Republic’s problems are rooted in the carrier’s decision to take on another contract with United Express that was previously held by Colgan Air."

http://durangoherald.com/apps/pbcs.d...EWS01/130209817&template=mobileart

They can't staff the 30 airplane contract they got recently and now they are going to try to staff an additional 47?!?! I wonder how and for who RAH will prioritize their limited crews? Will Delta contracts get the attention? Will Uninted? Or will American? This is a ton of flying for a company that is in a very unstable position right now.

Furthermore the company is still struggling with Frontier and has an incredibly pissed of pilot group that is itching to strike. Eagle pilots just gave the company everything they wanted in concessions and a stable 8 year labor agreement. Apparently not enough.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11414 posts, RR: 62
Reply 34, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2962 times:

Quoting norcal (Reply 33):
My whole point has been the promises made to Eagle in terms of job protections haven't been met.

And what promises would those be, specifically, that "haven't been met?" Has any Eagle pilot yet been furloughed or lost CA/FO slots as a result of a capacity purchase agreement with another regional? Or, for that matter, for any other reason? As you've said - Eagle is hiring pilots, not laying them off, so not sure exactly which "job protections" are supposedly being violated? I'd genuinely be interested to learn more about that.

And either way, were Eagle pilots "promised" anything - specifically, contractually - with regards to Eagle and its place within the AMR network? Were they "promised" - again, specifically and contractually, not just vague generalities that somebody mentioned in an interview or court filing - about Eagle retaining a certain amount of flying? And if so, have those contractually-binding, legally-enforceable promises been broken? If so, then ALPA needs to be grieving that to the hilt.

Quoting norcal (Reply 33):
If you look at the scope clause for the combined AA/US and past statements made by AMR regarding Eagle's "fleet plan," it becomes clear that there will be more pilots than jobs.

Again - how does that become clear at all?! You seem to still keep making straight line assumptions. Are you assuming that there will be zero new capacity placed with Eagle. Do you know that for a fact? Are you assuming that there will be zero flow-through from Eagle to mainline? Do you know that for a fact? Are you assuming Eagle isn't going to be experiencing heightened attrition over the next five years as tons of mainline pilot across the industry retire and other airlines hire them? Do you know that for a fact? Those three dynamics right there indicate to me that there is a very real chance in a few years that Eagle could have more jobs than pilots, and not the other way around.

Quoting norcal (Reply 33):
It seems that Eagle is heading more and more down the Comair route. Read this statement from the filing:

"Accordingly, the Debtors’ business plan contemplates that American Eagle will remain American’s largest regional service provider and will continue to operate at competitive costs."

Eagle was supposed to be the largest regional provider, now AMR is only contemplating that role for Eagle.

I think you're reading too much into the word "contemplate." That's a word used often in legalese and in this context seems to be referring more simply to something that is not yet a contractually-binding, legally-enforceable outcome. Until such time as it is, in the eyes of the court, it's merely "contemplated." That word appears again and again in many of AMR's filings with the court on various matters besides just this Republic deal.

And, yet again, when you used the word "supposed to" I am left wondering what, precisely, you mean. As I'm sure any AMR union employee will tell you from years of experience negotiating with the company, if it's not in writing in a contract, it's meaningless. You have repeatedly made this claim that Eagle was "supposed to be" this or that. Did AMR sign up to that in a written contract or a verbal contract that would hold up in court? Is that written in the ALPA CBA? If not, the company is not obligated to abide by it, if they even said it to begin with.

I would hope they would honor any non-legally-binding promises they may or may not have made, but frankly, by this point, Eagle's pilots - if not also their union - should know better. And, I have no doubt they do. I find it hard to believe that any Eagle pilots are really all that particularly shocked that AMR is going out and placing more and more feed with other companies. After all, AMR was saying a year ago that that was their firm intention. "Diversifying feed" is one "promise" I highly doubt any sane Eagle pilot ever expected AMR to break.

Quoting norcal (Reply 33):
Just like this filing said I think Eagle will always lose out on these CPAs because they can't "secure the financing" because AMR won't let them secure the financing.

How do you know AMR doesn't have something else in mind for Eagle and just hasn't revealed it yet?

Quoting norcal (Reply 33):
but it certainly isn't zero cost to AMR as implied.

Well, it gets rolled into the cost of the monthly lease - just like how every other lease on earth works. But the key point - as stated multiple times in the filing - is that AMR assumes no balance sheet liability from this deal.

[Edited 2013-03-14 21:21:36]

User currently offlinenorcal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 35, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2642 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
And what promises would those be, specifically, that "haven't been met?" Has any Eagle pilot yet been furloughed or lost CA/FO slots as a result of a capacity purchase agreement with another regional? Or, for that matter, for any other reason?

Not yet. The pre-merger plan had Eagle settling in at around 2,000 pilots for several years, roughly enough to staff 200 aircraft worth of flying. The merger triggered a clause in the new Eagle contract guaranteeing 95% of the pilots furlough protection, or roughly 2800 pilots. Horton never wanted to merge and fought pretty hard to prevent it. The plans for Eagle and this new RAH contract were based on AMR remaining a stand a lone company and diversifying feed. AMR is now supposed to find work for an additional 800 pilots as part of a much larger US/AA combined feed system.

Part of the agreement made by the APA pilots with Parker set a scope clause for the new merged carrier. With the Republic deal there is simply no more space for growth at Eagle to meet this new furlough protection obligation. The earliest CPA I know of expiring is Air Wisconsin's in 2015, that's a year and a half from now before AMR could add flying to Eagle after removing flying from them (assuming they don't award Air Wisconsin new flying, they could get new planes too).

When you look at the numbers and the fact that AMR intended to remain alone you have to wonder what the actual plan is for Eagle, if there even is one.

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
Eagle is hiring pilots, not laying them off, so not sure exactly which "job protections" are supposedly being violated? I'd genuinely be interested to learn more about that.

I wouldn't read much into hiring, airlines will literally hire till the day they furlough (yes they are that poorly run). Eagle in fact furloughed a new hire class after less than a week a little over a year ago. They then proceeded to furlough dozens more pilots who had been with the company a few weeks.

Eagle pilots are talking on other forums about how they have frozen hiring for flight attendants and are now offering LOAs. Regional FAs have a much higher turn over rate than pilots so you have to wonder why they stopped hiring?

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
And either way, were Eagle pilots "promised" anything - specifically, contractually - with regards to Eagle and its place within the AMR network? Were they "promised" - again, specifically and contractually, not just vague generalities that somebody mentioned in an interview or court filing - about Eagle retaining a certain amount of flying?

They have contractually guaranteed furlough protection. AMR either has to work the pilots or they are supposed to pay them to sit at home and do nothing. AMR hasn't traditionally been great at following either the spirit or the letter of it's CBAs (hence once of the reasons why employee relations are so bad there). However it is a long a drawn out process for the pilot's union to fight AMR if they do furlough (again why would they keep people on the pay roll doing nothing, managers being the exception to this rule). Violating a CPA with another regional in order to provide Eagle with flying to keep its pilots flying is a far bigger deal than violating the CBA with ALPA. When given the choice AMR will break it's contractual promises to labor rather than a CPA with another company.

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
Again - how does that become clear at all?! You seem to still keep making straight line assumptions. Are you assuming that there will be zero new capacity placed with Eagle.

The scope is maxed out now with the Republic deal there is no space for growth at Eagle.

Right now the best Eagle can hope for is a 1:1 replacement of their current capacity. That does nothing to fix the furlough obligation they owe to the additional pilots. Again the Eagle fleet plan and this Republic deal were all made as part of an AMR stand alone plan. The merger changes the dynamic and not in a good way for Eagle.

Another thing to keep in mind is the direction the industry is going. Delta and United are both up-gauging the size of their regional aircraft while decreasing the overall size of the fleet. Delta is going from 600 RJs down to 450, United has similar plans. Why would AMR do anything different? They constantly copy exactly what Delta and United do.

Swapping out the current fleet of 200 Eagle aircraft for 200 large RJs adds a lot of seats into the market, that with the massive domestic fleet of the two carriers is a lot of domestic capacity. Parker has stated that there won't be any changes to the fleets or hubs but similar statements were made by Richard Anderson about CVG and MEM.

When you look at all the pieces together, the continued delay of releasing the fleet plan, the furlough protection that Eagle is supposed to maintain, and the fact that wholly owned carriers don't do well in mergers it's hard to imagine how Eagle will be so different. It's not like AMR has ever been particularly fond of it's regional carrier.

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
Are you assuming that there will be zero flow-through from Eagle to mainline?

You mean that same amazing flow through program that had current Eagle pilots flowing in 1997? Is that the one you are referring too? Even if the 824 agreement survives the merger (no guarantee), Eagle pilots make up only 50% of new hire classes, but can be metered to 20 a month if dictated by staffing. Based on the fact that the Eagle training department is an absolute mess right now with a back log from all the displacements due to outsourcing it's likely that they will be metering to 20 a month. In fact, several Eagle pilots I've talked to have told me that Jim Winkley has gone so far as saying that they will be metering pilots because of the training back log. 20 a month from the top isn't that great of relief.

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
Are you assuming Eagle isn't going to be experiencing heightened attrition over the next five years as tons of mainline pilot across the industry retire and other airlines hire them?

There could be, but Delta isn't hiring and United still has furloughs to work through. Not to mention the fact that this is just the beginning of the wave and there are thousands of regional pilots that are looking to get out and move on. Five years in an awfully long time to keep a bunch of excess pilots employed doing nothing.

Plus airline managements wait too long to hire pilots. I have no doubt that both United and Delta will end up behind the power curve on the hiring. I've witnessed it throughout my career and any other pilot you ask can attest to this.

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
Well, it gets rolled into the cost of the monthly lease - just like how every other lease on earth works. But the key point - as stated multiple times in the filing - is that AMR assumes no balance sheet liability from this deal.

That's exactly what I said, just pointed out AMR is still helping pay for the planes, they just don't have the debt on the books (nor. on the flip side, the equity in the aircraft for the matter).

Another question that has to be answered, is why would AMR change their opinion about debt sheet liability in a few months or even the next year (when they'd likely be ordering aircraft) for Eagle? If they truly do like getting that liability off the books, why would they all the sudden go and buy a new fleet for Eagle consisting of 200+ new RJs (or even more to get close to the furlough protection number) for billions of dollars?

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
I find it hard to believe that any Eagle pilots are really all that particularly shocked that AMR is going out and placing more and more feed with other companies.

Eagle pilots are well aware of the situation. They voted in a concessionary contract with furlough protections under the guise that they would be part of the new American. They've now watched Republic, SkyWest, Mesa, and ExpressJet all get aircraft with out even a hint or word on the future plan of Eagle. They know what the scope clause is and what their furlough protection is and like me, they don't see how the numbers add up. Given their past treatment by AMR, they are assuming the worst, I don't blame them for assuming that.

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
I think you're reading too much into the word "contemplate." That's a word used often in legalese and in this context seems to be referring more simply to something that is not yet a contractually-binding, legally-enforceable outcome.

See, no commitment to Eagle, despite the fact they have a CBA guaranteeing furlough protection. They are leaving themselves a legal out (with the bankruptcy court) to violate the ALPA contract.


User currently offlinerealsim From Spain, joined Apr 2010, 645 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 2551 times:

Quoting norcal (Reply 35):
They have contractually guaranteed furlough protection. AMR either has to work the pilots or they are supposed to pay them to sit at home and do nothing. AMR hasn't traditionally been great at following either the spirit or the letter of it's CBAs (hence once of the reasons why employee relations are so bad there). However it is a long a drawn out process for the pilot's union to fight AMR if they do furlough (again why would they keep people on the pay roll doing nothing, managers being the exception to this rule). Violating a CPA with another regional in order to provide Eagle with flying to keep its pilots flying is a far bigger deal than violating the CBA with ALPA. When given the choice AMR will break it's contractual promises to labor rather than a CPA with another company.

Management will not pay pilots to stay at home and do nothing. If they want to contract other airlines for their regional operations, they can just shut down Eagle and then, when the company ceases to exist, the furlough protection is worthless and goes away. The aircraft belong to AMR, so they could trade with Embraer a big part of the ERJs for a smaller number of EJets, and lease them, along with the CRJs, to another regional airline. In my opinion, that option should not be discarded, because if AMR wanted to, they would have already placed a big Ejets order for Eagle. I really hope that management don't make the decision to shut down Eagle, but it's a rumor (and a fear) that employees have.   

[Edited 2013-03-16 11:42:46]

User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 37, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 2526 times:

Quoting realsim (Reply 26):
I like, at least, that AA will fly a higher relative number of mainline and owned regional aircraft than its competitors.

Yes, I agree with you on that.


User currently offlinenorcal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 38, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 2534 times:

Quoting realsim (Reply 36):

Correct. The longer that Eagle goes with our a fleet plan, the more likely this is going to happen. The old plan was based on a stand alone AA. Things have changed. Another thing to keep in mind is that Eagle is going to have skyrocketing training costs because of all the outsourcing and displacements. Adding a new fleet type or even transitioning all the ERJ pilots to new CRJ pilots will be very costly and time consuming. There is a finite amount of simulator resources available and Eagle will also have to compete with other regionals for access (unless they buy their own, but that's a lot of $$$)

Pinnacle faced a similar situation with their merger. The had a lot of pilots on the Saabs that went to the Q-400s and then had to switch to the CRJ. They had FOs going to Captain and Captains going back to FOs and a ton of base shuffling because of displacements. All that training and moving costs he company a lot of money and was one of the reasons they went bankrupt.

Eagle is going through a similar big shuffle. Those training costs might be another reason that cause AMR to reevaluate Eagle's future.

If a carrier like SkyWest comes along (they have stellar credit) and offers to self finance a fleet like Republic that removes the debt burden which AMR clearly doesn't like. It might be too tempting not to shut down Eagle despite the contractural promises that AMR made.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24823 posts, RR: 46
Reply 39, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2461 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 18):
* The "goal" of AMR's business plan is "to acquire up to 215 large regional jets by 2018"

So with that plan in mind, and the court approving the Republic E175 deal this week there should be RFP out there for 168 additional frames in the coming years.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9289 posts, RR: 14
Reply 40, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2407 times:

Quoting FutureFO (Reply 31):
Also we are the only Express carrier in the US system offering inflight Internet.

huh? All of Delta big RJs have GoGo. So Shuttle, Compass, ASA, SkyWest, GoJets etc offer inflight internet.



yep.
User currently offlinexpfg From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 633 posts, RR: 7
Reply 41, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2377 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 40):
huh? All of Delta big RJs have GoGo. So Shuttle, Compass, ASA, SkyWest, GoJets etc offer inflight internet.

I believe he meant US Airways system.


User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 42, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2210 times:

Yes I mean the USAirways system. Using their code.


I Don't know where I am anymore
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12885 posts, RR: 100
Reply 43, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2127 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting commavia (Reply 34):
Quoting norcal (Reply 33):
My whole point has been the promises made to Eagle in terms of job protections haven't been met.

And what promises would those be, specifically, that "haven't been met?"

What was the specific contractual promise to Eagle? I understand they're losing jobs, but what has been promised to their pilots in writing/contract?

Quoting norcal (Reply 17):
AMR only had to guarantee positions for 2,000 Eagle pilots and their current plan reflected that (shrinking to a size of about 200 aircraft as ATRs and ERJs are parked this year and into next year). Now with the merger they have to protect the jobs of an additional 800 pilots.

Are those 2,000 pilots contractually guaranteed? And please explain how the merger forces the protection of another 800 jobs... I'm curious as to what clause is triggered.

Quoting commavia (Reply 18):
Eagle was viewed as non-responsive as it did not already have E175s or CR9s, and was not viewed as being able to finance them right now

In other words, American must have others borrow to grow their larger RJ fleet (vs. DL who buys their aircraft to assure the best deal).

Quoting commavia (Reply 18):
* "Republic will acquire, finance, and/or own all aircraft" - AMR assumes absolutely no direct liability for the aircraft themselves

AMR is financing as many aircraft as possible. They have to have others pay for the RJs IMHO.

Quoting norcal (Reply 38):
If a carrier like SkyWest comes along (they have stellar credit) and offers to self finance a fleet like Republic that removes the debt burden which AMR clearly doesn't like. It might be too tempting not to shut down Eagle despite the contractural promises that AMR made.

Will AMR have a choice?

Quoting norcal (Reply 35):
Delta is going from 600 RJs down to 450, United has similar plans. Why would AMR do anything different?

They cannot. It is due to the better economics and hub consolidation with all the mergers. However, Eagle has one hope. With the merger of AA and US, they will eventually consolidate RJ feed too.


Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinenorcal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 44, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1846 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 43):
Are those 2,000 pilots contractually guaranteed? And please explain how the merger forces the protection of another 800 jobs... I'm curious as to what clause is triggered.

There were two portions to the furlough protection section of Eagle's new bankruptcy CBA. One in the event of AA emerging as a stand a lone carrier. This provided the Eagle pilots with approximately 2,000 furlough protected positions. The second portion was in the event of a merger. If a merger was announced with AA and another carrier than that triggered a 95% furlough protection clause for Eagle pilots. The Eagle list is officially 3200 pilots. However I've been told by current Eagle pilots that the real number of active pilots right around the time of the merger announcement was 3000, so that's roughly 2800 pilots that are now protected.

Like I've been saying, Horton wanted to remain a stand a lone carrier. There was a ton of work done behind his back by the AA unions and Parker to make the merger happen, the WSJ had a great article on this (pretty sure it was in the WSJ). The dynamic changed with the merger and with a much large group to now furlough protect its strange that all this flying continues to be awarded to outside carriers, particularly since the scope is now maxed out.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 43):
In other words, American must have others borrow to grow their larger RJ fleet (vs. DL who buys their aircraft to assure the best deal).

AMR is now stuck with Republic for 12 years ( starting after the last aircraft is delivered). Their pilot group has gone since 2003 with out a raise. I doubt they'll go more than a decade longer with out one, their costs will be rising. Eagle has a clause in their new bankruptcy contract that benchmarks their pay and longevity against the two most competitive (read cheapest) regionals every four years. Republic has no such clause, makes you wonder who will be more cost competitive in the long run.

This is one reason why owning the aircraft like Delta does is beneficial. As soon as a carrier gets too expensive, Delta moves the aircraft. AMR doesn't have this option, they are stuck with Republic for awhile.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 43):
Will AMR have a choice?

It comes down to desire. Do they think Eagle is an asset or a anchor?

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 43):
They cannot. It is due to the better economics and hub consolidation with all the mergers. However, Eagle has one hope. With the merger of AA and US, they will eventually consolidate RJ feed too.

Exactly my point, does Eagle really have any hope in a consolidation scenario with such a large fleet of ERJs? They are the ones most likely to be eliminated since they don't have the right aircraft. Eagle is a subsidiary so it's entirely up AMR on the financing issue. Dan Garton won't go rogue and get financing with out permission of the higher ups. I think it's entirely possible that we'll see more RFPs awarded to other carriers and the excuse for Eagle will always be, "we couldn't get financing." Well of course they can't get financing if their parent company doesn't let them. If there is a shutdown of Eagle it won't happen over night, it'll be gradual much like Comair. The real question is what are AMR's intentions? Do they want to invest in Eagle or outsource all the work? To me they seem to be a carrier that loves outsourcing anywhere and everywhere they can.


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...
Republic: US Air Ends 9 E145 Leases; Delta Adds 10 posted Fri Feb 8 2013 19:51:48 by LAXintl
AA Files To Reject 9 More Super 80 Leases posted Mon Feb 13 2012 14:45:36 by gdg9
AA Files To Reject 18 More Aircraft Leases posted Fri Jan 13 2012 12:23:52 by gdg9
AA Temporarily Reduces 763 Capacity posted Tue Jan 27 2009 23:40:45 by QQflyboy
AA Reduces MIA A300 Flying posted Sat Jun 7 2008 19:12:42 by AJMIA
AA Reduces JFK-CCS posted Sat Jun 23 2007 15:25:20 by Chiguire
AA Parks Seven A300s, Extends Leases posted Sat Sep 16 2006 18:05:12 by QQflyboy
AA And WN Have Signed New Leases At STL posted Fri Nov 18 2005 07:34:24 by MrSTL
AA Reduces In STL? posted Sat Sep 10 2005 10:04:11 by STLGph
AA Changes To Colombia; Reduces Capacity To Cali) posted Fri Aug 12 2005 04:16:29 by SOUTHAMERICA