B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

With B6 taking all these new aircraft, can the EWR growth they planned come to fruition once again?

Until the new Terminal A is complete, B6 is in a difficult position operationally. With current operations split between different terminals, it makes sense to scale back the flight schedule until the new terminal is complete. As has been repeated, they've opened a Flight/In-flight base in EWR and are committed to growth in this station with or without the NEA in place.

LX015 wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

With B6 taking all these new aircraft, can the EWR growth they planned come to fruition once again?

If the fine people at EWR are prepared for that growth. Last years rise in flights with their hiring was a bold move that didn't pan out the way B6 had hoped...

B6FLL954 wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

With B6 taking all these new aircraft, can the EWR growth they planned come to fruition once again?

Until the new Terminal A is complete, B6 is in a difficult position operationally. With current operations split between different terminals, it makes sense to scale back the flight schedule until the new terminal is complete. As has been repeated, they've opened a Flight/In-flight base in EWR and are committed to growth in this station with or without the NEA in place.

So why hire like that and add all those flights just to cut them indefinitely?

Kind of shocked they can't seem to run routes like SFO-EWR, AUS-EWR, EWR-RDU

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-r ... c-florida/

Big cuts from B6 here. The full list is in the article, highlights include 16 EWR routes (about half are already suspended), 12 FLL routes (all but one already suspended), five LAX routes (four already suspended) and three BDL routes (two already suspended, all apart of JetBlues pandemic era expansion there)

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

ctavgeek33 wrote:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-route-cuts-nyc-florida/

Big cuts from B6 here. The full list is in the article, highlights include 16 EWR routes (about half are already suspended), 12 FLL routes (all but one already suspended), five LAX routes (four already suspended) and three BDL routes (two already suspended, all apart of JetBlues pandemic era expansion there)

Twitter is not happy about these cuts for sure. Neither should any consumer. NK and UA are big winners though.

I'm not happy either. While most of the routes on that list have competition, the BDL ones do not. Maybe DL can bring back its CUN flight. Luckily Breeze will be taking over the LAS route, and maybe SFO in the future.

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

ctavgeek33 wrote:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-route-cuts-nyc-florida/

Big cuts from B6 here. The full list is in the article, highlights include 16 EWR routes (about half are already suspended), 12 FLL routes (all but one already suspended), five LAX routes (four already suspended) and three BDL routes (two already suspended, all apart of JetBlues pandemic era expansion there)

Twitter is not happy about these cuts for sure. Neither should any consumer. NK and UA are big winners though.

Considering my nonstop flight to SJO was now changed to a 5 hour layover in FLL, I'm certainly not. Maybe I'll just fly to that new European destination instead.

The article does state that B6 will "add more flying in its New York, Boston, Fort Lauderdale, Los Angeles and Orlando focus cities" in the coming weeks/months - I'm curious what that could mean for LAX. I do hope it means a few new LAX routes will replace the ones that were cut.

ctavgeek33 wrote:

https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-route-cuts-nyc-florida/

Big cuts from B6 here. The full list is in the article, highlights include 16 EWR routes (about half are already suspended), 12 FLL routes (all but one already suspended), five LAX routes (four already suspended) and three BDL routes (two already suspended, all apart of JetBlues pandemic era expansion there)

Jeez, are there any flights left going out of EWR???

pretty obvious what's going on here. They still don't have the staffing needed to fly more than 2019, but they have to add more flights at JFK and BOS as part of NEA, so they are cutting even more non-JFK/LGA/BOS flights. All the new flying the announced will be for next year. That's why they needed this NK merger. They need the additional crewmembers to fly the full NEA schedule + restore FLL + grow LAX + add back EWR + restore MCO.

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

What this sounds like to me is B6 got in a little too deep in the NEA and it’s backfiring across the network.

Absolutely.

Many of the “suspended” routes seem to be in B6’s sweet spot of southbound VFR or east-west premium leisure. Either they can’t retain enough people to run the airline, or they can’t compete outside of JFK and BOS. Either way, NK is not a magic solution since there’s no reason to believe the employees or customers will stay.

B6 is really betting the farm on NK. This does not bode well...

sxf24 wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

What this sounds like to me is B6 got in a little too deep in the NEA and it’s backfiring across the network.

Absolutely.

Many of the “suspended” routes seem to be in B6’s sweet spot of southbound VFR or east-west premium leisure. Either they can’t retain enough people to run the airline, or they can’t compete outside of JFK and BOS. Either way, NK is not a magic solution since there’s no reason to believe the employees or customers will stay.

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

bpat777 wrote:

sxf24 wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

What this sounds like to me is B6 got in a little too deep in the NEA and it’s backfiring across the network.

Absolutely.

Many of the “suspended” routes seem to be in B6’s sweet spot of southbound VFR or east-west premium leisure. Either they can’t retain enough people to run the airline, or they can’t compete outside of JFK and BOS. Either way, NK is not a magic solution since there’s no reason to believe the employees or customers will stay.

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

I feel like I am about to get an aneurysm listening to some of these lazy responses just to appeal to ones own bash B6 wagon. They are short staffed, United and American just cut a bunch of flying because of staffing issues, and a/c delivery issues. The priority is staffing the NEA flying which if they don't they lose the slots, it has nothing to do with "not being able to compete outside JFK/BOS." Network planning has alot of moving pieces and every move is integrated throughout the whole network, you move one piece it causes a cascading effect. These are temporary in case anyone of you missed that.

Abeam79 wrote:

bpat777 wrote:

sxf24 wrote:

Absolutely.

Many of the “suspended” routes seem to be in B6’s sweet spot of southbound VFR or east-west premium leisure. Either they can’t retain enough people to run the airline, or they can’t compete outside of JFK and BOS. Either way, NK is not a magic solution since there’s no reason to believe the employees or customers will stay.

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

I feel like I am about to get an aneurysm listening to some of these lazy responses just to appeal to ones own bash B6 wagon. They are short staffed, United and American just cut a bunch of flying because of staffing issues, and a/c delivery issues. The priority is staffing the NEA flying which if they don't they lose the slots, it has nothing to do with "not being able to compete outside JFK/BOS." Network planning has alot of moving pieces and every move is integrated throughout the whole network, you move one piece it causes a cascading effect. These are temporary in case anyone of you missed that.

Neither AA nor UA cut more than a handful of mainline routes recently, it’s all been contract flying. In general, none of the majors are having difficulty hiring.

If B6 can’t staff or compete on a route like EWR-AUS, SFO, LAX-AUS, RDU, or FLL-ORD, how are they going to grow with more resources?

fastmover wrote:

I’m confused here. The 190 was sent out west for a very short time in like the 2008 is time. Not sure the exact year but it was way back. They find not have the support and it was a fail as I said.

Base wise JetBlue likes very large bases. That’s just the way they do stuff. From what I understand they want at least 30 flights a day before they would even think about it.

What you are doing is mixing the old JetBlue and ideas vs the new ideas. I’m not even sure if the 220s will have a west coast base. We will see.

jetBlue is now flying BOS-SMF-BOS with the 220. Too long, I think, to operate with a turn-around crew, so they must have a 22+ hour layover in SMF. Not very efficient, and no nearby replacement should a crew member get sick.
And what support is there if the aircraft throws a mechanical? It is a seasonal flight, so are they just hoping a new 220 won't break until the end of the season?
I assume SMF isn't the only market with the trans-con 220, so where else is it landing, and is there at least some support presence on the West Coast?
--
Way back when, yes B6 operated the 190 on the LGB-West Coast segments, including SMF. I can only assume that LGB was the base for these, as they stayed on the West Coast, and weren't routed to the East Coast....the 320 did those.

sxf24 wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

bpat777 wrote:

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

I feel like I am about to get an aneurysm listening to some of these lazy responses just to appeal to ones own bash B6 wagon. They are short staffed, United and American just cut a bunch of flying because of staffing issues, and a/c delivery issues. The priority is staffing the NEA flying which if they don't they lose the slots, it has nothing to do with "not being able to compete outside JFK/BOS." Network planning has alot of moving pieces and every move is integrated throughout the whole network, you move one piece it causes a cascading effect. These are temporary in case anyone of you missed that.

Neither AA nor UA cut more than a handful of mainline routes recently, it’s all been contract flying. In general, none of the majors are having difficulty hiring.

If B6 can’t staff or compete on a route like EWR-AUS, SFO, LAX-AUS, RDU, or FLL-ORD, how are they going to grow with more resources?

Really? Thats a false equivalency, B6 doesn't outsource any flying so any cuts is "Mainline". Nonetheless, UA and AA cuts are still United airlines and American Airlines routes, regardless who is contracted to fly them. A passenger buying those tickets to those cut routes, is still a American Airlines Or United airlines ticket.
If everyone else is doing just fine with staffing then why are all the majors well below 2019 levels with record high demand? Its a industry wide issue of staffing and aircraft deliveries. Once you peel off your lenses to bash B6 like you always have, you'll see this is not a unique situation to just B6.

tphuang wrote:

pretty obvious what's going on here. They still don't have the staffing needed to fly more than 2019, but they have to add more flights at JFK and BOS as part of NEA, so they are cutting even more non-JFK/LGA/BOS flights. All the new flying the announced will be for next year. That's why they needed this NK merger. They need the additional crewmembers to fly the full NEA schedule + restore FLL + grow LAX + add back EWR + restore MCO.

They don't have the staff to fly these routes (some of them pretty basic) all the way past Summer 2023???

Acquiring NK doesn't really solve the staffing issue given NK is already staffed incredibly lean. Two lean-staffed airlines combining doesn't create a well-staffed airline.

The only way acquiring NK fixes the staffing problem is if you intentionally underutilize the former NK flying, and plop the NK staff on B6 flights. However, for obvious reasons that isn't really a very profitable course of action.

The NEA will be fully grown out by the time B6 gets its hands on NK's fleet anyway.

Abeam79 wrote:

sxf24 wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

I feel like I am about to get an aneurysm listening to some of these lazy responses just to appeal to ones own bash B6 wagon. They are short staffed, United and American just cut a bunch of flying because of staffing issues, and a/c delivery issues. The priority is staffing the NEA flying which if they don't they lose the slots, it has nothing to do with "not being able to compete outside JFK/BOS." Network planning has alot of moving pieces and every move is integrated throughout the whole network, you move one piece it causes a cascading effect. These are temporary in case anyone of you missed that.

Neither AA nor UA cut more than a handful of mainline routes recently, it’s all been contract flying. In general, none of the majors are having difficulty hiring.

If B6 can’t staff or compete on a route like EWR-AUS, SFO, LAX-AUS, RDU, or FLL-ORD, how are they going to grow with more resources?

Really? Thats a false equivalency, B6 doesn't outsource any flying so any cuts is "Mainline". Nonetheless, UA and AA cuts are still United airlines and American Airlines routes, regardless who is contracted to fly them. A passenger buying those tickets to those cut routes, is still a American Airlines Or United airlines ticket.
If everyone else is doing just fine with staffing then why are all the majors well below 2019 levels with record high demand? Its a industry wide issue of staffing and aircraft deliveries. Once you peel off your lenses to bash B6 like you always have, you'll see this is not a unique situation to just B6.

From a customer perspective, you’re right: a cut is a cut. I was looking at it more from a resourcing perspective. The US3 have done a better job attracting new pilots and other staff, allowing them to be less impacted - at mainline - than smaller carriers.

When comparing 2022 to 2019, it is important to recognize capacity is measured in ASMs and the loss of long-haul international has a disproportionate impact on ASMs. An airline like UA could have a mainline fleet in 2022 that is the same size, or even larger, than 2019 and still generate fewer ASMs because the wide body fleet is less productive, e.g. flying domestically rather than to Asia.

Midwestindy wrote:

tphuang wrote:

pretty obvious what's going on here. They still don't have the staffing needed to fly more than 2019, but they have to add more flights at JFK and BOS as part of NEA, so they are cutting even more non-JFK/LGA/BOS flights. All the new flying the announced will be for next year. That's why they needed this NK merger. They need the additional crewmembers to fly the full NEA schedule + restore FLL + grow LAX + add back EWR + restore MCO.

They don't have the staff to fly these routes (some of them pretty basic) all the way past Summer 2023???

Acquiring NK doesn't really solve the staffing issue given NK is already staffed incredibly lean. Two lean-staffed airlines combining doesn't create a well-staffed airline.

The only way acquiring NK fixes the staffing problem is if you intentionally underutilize the former NK flying, and plop the NK staff on B6 flights. However, for obvious reasons that isn't really a very profitable course of action.

The NEA will be fully grown out by the time B6 gets its hands on NK's fleet anyway.

Well, I assume they have to start some new routes out of JFK/BOS as part of NEA arrangements. Acquiring NK does help, since they are going to cut down schedule out of places like DFW/IAH/BWI and redeploy them to LAX/EWR/FLL/MCO.

Let's see if they make some new announcements in the next month. They have to be firming up their winter schedule soon.

tphuang wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

tphuang wrote:

pretty obvious what's going on here. They still don't have the staffing needed to fly more than 2019, but they have to add more flights at JFK and BOS as part of NEA, so they are cutting even more non-JFK/LGA/BOS flights. All the new flying the announced will be for next year. That's why they needed this NK merger. They need the additional crewmembers to fly the full NEA schedule + restore FLL + grow LAX + add back EWR + restore MCO.

They don't have the staff to fly these routes (some of them pretty basic) all the way past Summer 2023???

Acquiring NK doesn't really solve the staffing issue given NK is already staffed incredibly lean. Two lean-staffed airlines combining doesn't create a well-staffed airline.

The only way acquiring NK fixes the staffing problem is if you intentionally underutilize the former NK flying, and plop the NK staff on B6 flights. However, for obvious reasons that isn't really a very profitable course of action.

The NEA will be fully grown out by the time B6 gets its hands on NK's fleet anyway.

Well, I assume they have to start some new routes out of JFK/BOS as part of NEA arrangements. Acquiring NK does help, since they are going to cut down schedule out of places like DFW/IAH/BWI and redeploy them to LAX/EWR/FLL/MCO.

Let's see if they make some new announcements in the next month. They have to be firming up their winter schedule soon.

There will be new ones.

sxf24 wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

sxf24 wrote:

Neither AA nor UA cut more than a handful of mainline routes recently, it’s all been contract flying. In general, none of the majors are having difficulty hiring.

If B6 can’t staff or compete on a route like EWR-AUS, SFO, LAX-AUS, RDU, or FLL-ORD, how are they going to grow with more resources?

Really? Thats a false equivalency, B6 doesn't outsource any flying so any cuts is "Mainline". Nonetheless, UA and AA cuts are still United airlines and American Airlines routes, regardless who is contracted to fly them. A passenger buying those tickets to those cut routes, is still a American Airlines Or United airlines ticket.
If everyone else is doing just fine with staffing then why are all the majors well below 2019 levels with record high demand? Its a industry wide issue of staffing and aircraft deliveries. Once you peel off your lenses to bash B6 like you always have, you'll see this is not a unique situation to just B6.

From a customer perspective, you’re right: a cut is a cut. I was looking at it more from a resourcing perspective. The US3 have done a better job attracting new pilots and other staff, allowing them to be less impacted - at mainline - than smaller carriers.

When comparing 2022 to 2019, it is important to recognize capacity is measured in ASMs and the loss of long-haul international has a disproportionate impact on ASMs. An airline like UA could have a mainline fleet in 2022 that is the same size, or even larger, than 2019 and still generate fewer ASMs because the wide body fleet is less productive, e.g. flying domestically rather than to Asia.

It’s way easier for the big 3 to attract pilots

tphuang wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

tphuang wrote:

pretty obvious what's going on here. They still don't have the staffing needed to fly more than 2019, but they have to add more flights at JFK and BOS as part of NEA, so they are cutting even more non-JFK/LGA/BOS flights. All the new flying the announced will be for next year. That's why they needed this NK merger. They need the additional crewmembers to fly the full NEA schedule + restore FLL + grow LAX + add back EWR + restore MCO.

They don't have the staff to fly these routes (some of them pretty basic) all the way past Summer 2023???

Acquiring NK doesn't really solve the staffing issue given NK is already staffed incredibly lean. Two lean-staffed airlines combining doesn't create a well-staffed airline.

The only way acquiring NK fixes the staffing problem is if you intentionally underutilize the former NK flying, and plop the NK staff on B6 flights. However, for obvious reasons that isn't really a very profitable course of action.

The NEA will be fully grown out by the time B6 gets its hands on NK's fleet anyway.

Well, I assume they have to start some new routes out of JFK/BOS as part of NEA arrangements. Acquiring NK does help, since they are going to cut down schedule out of places like DFW/IAH/BWI and redeploy them to LAX/EWR/FLL/MCO.

Let's see if they make some new announcements in the next month. They have to be firming up their winter schedule soon.

This is what most people don’t understand, if B6 can’t fill the schoolhouse as well as retain pilots now, what makes their management think the NK pilots will be different and want to stay? The bottom line? If a 3-5 year FO sees greener pastures somewhere else, they’ll leave. B6, NK or any other carrier are all competing with the earning potential that the big 4 provide. Mix in the poor financials of both B6/NK? There’s little to retain either pilot group. In 5 years we’ll see if this was a bold move or lunacy.

fastmover wrote:

sxf24 wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

Really? Thats a false equivalency, B6 doesn't outsource any flying so any cuts is "Mainline". Nonetheless, UA and AA cuts are still United airlines and American Airlines routes, regardless who is contracted to fly them. A passenger buying those tickets to those cut routes, is still a American Airlines Or United airlines ticket.
If everyone else is doing just fine with staffing then why are all the majors well below 2019 levels with record high demand? Its a industry wide issue of staffing and aircraft deliveries. Once you peel off your lenses to bash B6 like you always have, you'll see this is not a unique situation to just B6.

From a customer perspective, you’re right: a cut is a cut. I was looking at it more from a resourcing perspective. The US3 have done a better job attracting new pilots and other staff, allowing them to be less impacted - at mainline - than smaller carriers.

When comparing 2022 to 2019, it is important to recognize capacity is measured in ASMs and the loss of long-haul international has a disproportionate impact on ASMs. An airline like UA could have a mainline fleet in 2022 that is the same size, or even larger, than 2019 and still generate fewer ASMs because the wide body fleet is less productive, e.g. flying domestically rather than to Asia.

It’s way easier for the big 3 to attract pilots

True, still doesn't omit from the reality that they can't get to pre pandemic levels due to short-staffing. Also ULCC's especially the startups are having even harder time staffing.

Tack wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

They don't have the staff to fly these routes (some of them pretty basic) all the way past Summer 2023???

Acquiring NK doesn't really solve the staffing issue given NK is already staffed incredibly lean. Two lean-staffed airlines combining doesn't create a well-staffed airline.

The only way acquiring NK fixes the staffing problem is if you intentionally underutilize the former NK flying, and plop the NK staff on B6 flights. However, for obvious reasons that isn't really a very profitable course of action.

The NEA will be fully grown out by the time B6 gets its hands on NK's fleet anyway.

Well, I assume they have to start some new routes out of JFK/BOS as part of NEA arrangements. Acquiring NK does help, since they are going to cut down schedule out of places like DFW/IAH/BWI and redeploy them to LAX/EWR/FLL/MCO.

Let's see if they make some new announcements in the next month. They have to be firming up their winter schedule soon.

This is what most people don’t understand, if B6 can’t fill the schoolhouse as well as retain pilots now, what makes their management think the NK pilots will be different and want to stay? The bottom line? If a 3-5 year FO sees greener pastures somewhere else, they’ll leave. B6, NK or any other carrier are all competing with the earning potential that the big 4 provide. Mix in the poor financials of both B6/NK? There’s little to retain either pilot group. In 5 years we’ll see if this was a bold move or lunacy.

The bottom line is I don't know of any pilots from what I understand would give up 4-5 years seniority, especially when merging into an airline that will give a 18% raise and with over 360 airplanes on order between B6/NK thats over new hire 3500 pilots in the next few years that will go behind said pilot, to then walk away. And the "Poor financials" is a lame point being that both are projected to make profits going forward. Yes hiring and retaining is going to be a challenge, but not at the level your stipulating.

Abeam79 wrote:

The bottom line is I don't know of any pilots from what I understand would give up 4-5 years seniority, especially when merging into an airline that will give a 18% raise and with over 360 airplanes on order between B6/NK thats over new hire 3500 pilots in the next few years that will go behind said pilot, to then walk away. And the "Poor financials" is a lame point being that both are projected to make profits going forward. Yes hiring and retaining is going to be a challenge, but not at the level your stipulating.

It’s happening right now at AS. Up to 5 year FO’s leaving for DL and UA. I know both B6 and NK, are faced with the same issue. I’m not sure of your role, if any, in the airline sector, but I’ve spent 36 years in the industry on the flight ops side. And financial performance is 100% a top 5 maybe a top 3 consideration for drivers. No one wants to waste years gaining a left seat only to have to start over. Low seniority right seaters are making the jump now for dough and security down the line. Pilot attrition is schedule plannings worst enemy.

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/jetb ... em-10.html

Tack wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

The bottom line is I don't know of any pilots from what I understand would give up 4-5 years seniority, especially when merging into an airline that will give a 18% raise and with over 360 airplanes on order between B6/NK thats over new hire 3500 pilots in the next few years that will go behind said pilot, to then walk away. And the "Poor financials" is a lame point being that both are projected to make profits going forward. Yes hiring and retaining is going to be a challenge, but not at the level your stipulating.

It’s happening right now at AS. Up to 5 year FO’s leaving for DL and UA. I know both B6 and NK, are faced with the same issue. I’m not sure of your role, if any, in the airline sector, but I’ve spent 36 years in the industry on the flight ops side. And financial performance is 100% a top 5 maybe a top 3 consideration for drivers. No one wants to waste years gaining a left seat only to have to start over. Low seniority right seaters are making the jump now for dough and security down the line. Pilot attrition is schedule plannings worst enemy.

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/jetb ... em-10.html

There will always be churn at the bottom of the list until the big guys are done with the retirement wave. It’s not “financial performance” otherwise why go to AA with their massive debt. The big guys win because they are the big guys. Large retirements, different fleets, many bases, the ability to fly a wide body and more. Even SWA is having a hard time it’s just the way it is.

Now the interesting part is the merger should make blue more attractive, it will be a real National carrier with European expansion. New bases and they will need a brand new joint contract for the pilots before the merger is done.

The big issue is the NEA it’s a contract and it must be complied with. They seemed to have signed it thinking they could run the operation hot (as always) and we would have stabilized attrition. Obviously anyone could tell them that was extremely optimistic but here we are. I pray everyday we get a new COO who knows how to run an airline and a board that will let them do it. If not………

Tack wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

The bottom line is I don't know of any pilots from what I understand would give up 4-5 years seniority, especially when merging into an airline that will give a 18% raise and with over 360 airplanes on order between B6/NK thats over new hire 3500 pilots in the next few years that will go behind said pilot, to then walk away. And the "Poor financials" is a lame point being that both are projected to make profits going forward. Yes hiring and retaining is going to be a challenge, but not at the level your stipulating.

It’s happening right now at AS. Up to 5 year FO’s leaving for DL and UA. I know both B6 and NK, are faced with the same issue. I’m not sure of your role, if any, in the airline sector, but I’ve spent 36 years in the industry on the flight ops side. And financial performance is 100% a top 5 maybe a top 3 consideration for drivers. No one wants to waste years gaining a left seat only to have to start over. Low seniority right seaters are making the jump now for dough and security down the line. Pilot attrition is schedule plannings worst enemy.

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/jetb ... em-10.html

I agree and attrition on the NK side is now going to increase because of the uncertainty. If I were a pilot living in one of the domiciles likely to close like ACY or DFW, I would be putting applications in at AA and WN and probably the other majors as well.The QOL increase from not needing to commute and increased advancement opportunities at other carriers makes jumping ship easily worthwhile.

On Sunday, I sat next to a UA pilot on IAD-TPA. And yes, she had bailed from B6. When asked if she felt good about her decision, she said it was the best she ever made.
Regarding the EWR pull down, I always knew there'd be a reason for it post-covid. B6 can't staff all of their needs at once. They may SAY it's temporary, but I don't think they'll pick that battle with UA again.

Tack wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

They don't have the staff to fly these routes (some of them pretty basic) all the way past Summer 2023???

Acquiring NK doesn't really solve the staffing issue given NK is already staffed incredibly lean. Two lean-staffed airlines combining doesn't create a well-staffed airline.

The only way acquiring NK fixes the staffing problem is if you intentionally underutilize the former NK flying, and plop the NK staff on B6 flights. However, for obvious reasons that isn't really a very profitable course of action.

The NEA will be fully grown out by the time B6 gets its hands on NK's fleet anyway.

Well, I assume they have to start some new routes out of JFK/BOS as part of NEA arrangements. Acquiring NK does help, since they are going to cut down schedule out of places like DFW/IAH/BWI and redeploy them to LAX/EWR/FLL/MCO.

Let's see if they make some new announcements in the next month. They have to be firming up their winter schedule soon.

This is what most people don’t understand, if B6 can’t fill the schoolhouse as well as retain pilots now, what makes their management think the NK pilots will be different and want to stay? The bottom line? If a 3-5 year FO sees greener pastures somewhere else, they’ll leave. B6, NK or any other carrier are all competing with the earning potential that the big 4 provide. Mix in the poor financials of both B6/NK? There’s little to retain either pilot group. In 5 years we’ll see if this was a bold move or lunacy.

At this point, I think what we are seeing is Big 3 plundering LCCs/ULCCs for crewmembers and LCCs/ULCCs plundering RJs for crewmembers and RJs not able to get enough people through the pipeline to replace the departures. As such, LCCs/ULCCs are not able to increase their staffing levels to meet the deliveries. RJs are shrinking because they don't have enough crewmembers.

In the near term, a merger with B6/NK allows the combined airline to re-allocate a lot of flying from former NK cities (that don't make sense under B6 cost structure) to quickly expand B6's focus city projects.

medium/long term, B6 & NK by themselves will continue to have staffing issues as long as they don't have a national network, widebody flying, competitive wages and work rules.

If they can bring in competent leadership to lead the combined airline through merger process, they will hopefully resolve most of those issues. You can imagine that with more bases around the country (rather than just in high cost coastal cities), there are more attractive bases for pilots to go to. With more aircraft types (including widebody in the future), that's another attractive factor for future pilots. And of course, having work rules and wages that are competitive with big 4 is also important.

all of this requires COMPETENT leadership. We will see if they can find that. Mergers are complicated even for the most well run companies.

Tyroneguy wrote:

On Sunday, I sat next to a UA pilot on IAD-TPA. And yes, she had bailed from B6. When asked if she felt good about her decision, she said it was the best she ever made.
Regarding the EWR pull down, I always knew there'd be a reason for it post-covid. B6 can't staff all of their needs at once. They may SAY it's temporary, but I don't think they'll pick that battle with UA again.

Oh I’m pretty sure they will be back but with the current terminal configuration it’s not a fight they want right now. JetBlue opened a crew base there. This company does not do that for no reason.

As for the pilot good for her, but that does not mean it’s for everyone.

tphuang wrote:

Tack wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Well, I assume they have to start some new routes out of JFK/BOS as part of NEA arrangements. Acquiring NK does help, since they are going to cut down schedule out of places like DFW/IAH/BWI and redeploy them to LAX/EWR/FLL/MCO.

Let's see if they make some new announcements in the next month. They have to be firming up their winter schedule soon.

This is what most people don’t understand, if B6 can’t fill the schoolhouse as well as retain pilots now, what makes their management think the NK pilots will be different and want to stay? The bottom line? If a 3-5 year FO sees greener pastures somewhere else, they’ll leave. B6, NK or any other carrier are all competing with the earning potential that the big 4 provide. Mix in the poor financials of both B6/NK? There’s little to retain either pilot group. In 5 years we’ll see if this was a bold move or lunacy.

At this point, I think what we are seeing is Big 3 plundering LCCs/ULCCs for crewmembers and LCCs/ULCCs plundering RJs for crewmembers and RJs not able to get enough people through the pipeline to replace the departures. As such, LCCs/ULCCs are not able to increase their staffing levels to meet the deliveries. RJs are shrinking because they don't have enough crewmembers.

In the near term, a merger with B6/NK allows the combined airline to re-allocate a lot of flying from former NK cities (that don't make sense under B6 cost structure) to quickly expand B6's focus city projects.

medium/long term, B6 & NK by themselves will continue to have staffing issues as long as they don't have a national network, widebody flying, competitive wages and work rules.

If they can bring in competent leadership to lead the combined airline through merger process, they will hopefully resolve most of those issues. You can imagine that with more bases around the country (rather than just in high cost coastal cities), there are more attractive bases for pilots to go to. With more aircraft types (including widebody in the future), that's another attractive factor for future pilots. And of course, having work rules and wages that are competitive with big 4 is also important.

all of this requires COMPETENT leadership. We will see if they can find that. Mergers are complicated even for the most well run companies.

This is correct. JetBlue is not use to the idea of neededing to compete for pilots. Before it was well we are JetBlue and all of the blue juice. The big guys were not as attractive but things have changed. However you need management to get out of the bubble and see real life. But that would cost money.

Having said the the JetBlue CEO dud say pilot pay will go up. They can absolutely stop most attrition but they would need to work with the pilot union on some new ideas contract wise.

We will see.

fastmover wrote:

tphuang wrote:

Tack wrote:

This is what most people don’t understand, if B6 can’t fill the schoolhouse as well as retain pilots now, what makes their management think the NK pilots will be different and want to stay? The bottom line? If a 3-5 year FO sees greener pastures somewhere else, they’ll leave. B6, NK or any other carrier are all competing with the earning potential that the big 4 provide. Mix in the poor financials of both B6/NK? There’s little to retain either pilot group. In 5 years we’ll see if this was a bold move or lunacy.

At this point, I think what we are seeing is Big 3 plundering LCCs/ULCCs for crewmembers and LCCs/ULCCs plundering RJs for crewmembers and RJs not able to get enough people through the pipeline to replace the departures. As such, LCCs/ULCCs are not able to increase their staffing levels to meet the deliveries. RJs are shrinking because they don't have enough crewmembers.

In the near term, a merger with B6/NK allows the combined airline to re-allocate a lot of flying from former NK cities (that don't make sense under B6 cost structure) to quickly expand B6's focus city projects.

medium/long term, B6 & NK by themselves will continue to have staffing issues as long as they don't have a national network, widebody flying, competitive wages and work rules.

If they can bring in competent leadership to lead the combined airline through merger process, they will hopefully resolve most of those issues. You can imagine that with more bases around the country (rather than just in high cost coastal cities), there are more attractive bases for pilots to go to. With more aircraft types (including widebody in the future), that's another attractive factor for future pilots. And of course, having work rules and wages that are competitive with big 4 is also important.

all of this requires COMPETENT leadership. We will see if they can find that. Mergers are complicated even for the most well run companies.

This is correct. JetBlue is not use to the idea of neededing to compete for pilots. Before it was well we are JetBlue and all of the blue juice. The big guys were not as attractive but things have changed. However you need management to get out of the bubble and see real life. But that would cost money.

Having said the the JetBlue CEO dud say pilot pay will go up. They can absolutely stop most attrition but they would need to work with the pilot union on some new ideas contract wise.

We will see.

Ultimately, B6 will have no choice but to do whatever it can to stop its pilots from jumping ship - it would be way more costly for JetBlue to be taking on 300+ new aircraft with the NK deal (plus retrofitting 180 existing Spirit aircraft) just to have a number of these planes grounded because of a lack of pilots. B6's model, even if its cost structure is getting closer to that of the legacies, still depends a lot more on aggressive fleet utilization than legacies. Plus, if the pilots know they can leverage higher pay and more friendly work rules from AA/DL/UA, why wouldn't they if it means better pay/working conditions either at B6 or with a legacy? At the end of the day, it's not the pilots' fault if B6 wants to schedule routes like LAX-AUS/RDU, EWR-ATL/AUS/CHS/JAX/RDU/SFO, FLL-CLE/PHL/ORD, etc. without having enough pilots to fly all of these routes. I think for B6 to finally be able to fly its full schedule and realistically think about expanding, management will need to realize that pilot retention should become a much larger priority so that B6 won't have to cut (or "indefinitely suspend") large batches of routes like we saw yesterday. Otherwise, we'll see a lot of new NEA stuff and cuts to any airport not named BOS/LGA/JFK... which runs exactly counter to any notion that JetBlue is even attempting to diversify its network.

hbernal1 wrote:

fastmover wrote:

tphuang wrote:

At this point, I think what we are seeing is Big 3 plundering LCCs/ULCCs for crewmembers and LCCs/ULCCs plundering RJs for crewmembers and RJs not able to get enough people through the pipeline to replace the departures. As such, LCCs/ULCCs are not able to increase their staffing levels to meet the deliveries. RJs are shrinking because they don't have enough crewmembers.

In the near term, a merger with B6/NK allows the combined airline to re-allocate a lot of flying from former NK cities (that don't make sense under B6 cost structure) to quickly expand B6's focus city projects.

medium/long term, B6 & NK by themselves will continue to have staffing issues as long as they don't have a national network, widebody flying, competitive wages and work rules.

If they can bring in competent leadership to lead the combined airline through merger process, they will hopefully resolve most of those issues. You can imagine that with more bases around the country (rather than just in high cost coastal cities), there are more attractive bases for pilots to go to. With more aircraft types (including widebody in the future), that's another attractive factor for future pilots. And of course, having work rules and wages that are competitive with big 4 is also important.

all of this requires COMPETENT leadership. We will see if they can find that. Mergers are complicated even for the most well run companies.

This is correct. JetBlue is not use to the idea of neededing to compete for pilots. Before it was well we are JetBlue and all of the blue juice. The big guys were not as attractive but things have changed. However you need management to get out of the bubble and see real life. But that would cost money.

Having said the the JetBlue CEO dud say pilot pay will go up. They can absolutely stop most attrition but they would need to work with the pilot union on some new ideas contract wise.

We will see.

Ultimately, B6 will have no choice but to do whatever it can to stop its pilots from jumping ship - it would be way more costly for JetBlue to be taking on 300+ new aircraft with the NK deal (plus retrofitting 180 existing Spirit aircraft) just to have a number of these planes grounded because of a lack of pilots. B6's model, even if its cost structure is getting closer to that of the legacies, still depends a lot more on aggressive fleet utilization than legacies. Plus, if the pilots know they can leverage higher pay and more friendly work rules from AA/DL/UA, why wouldn't they if it means better pay/working conditions either at B6 or with a legacy? At the end of the day, it's not the pilots' fault if B6 wants to schedule routes like LAX-AUS/RDU, EWR-ATL/AUS/CHS/JAX/RDU/SFO, FLL-CLE/PHL/ORD, etc. without having enough pilots to fly all of these routes. I think for B6 to finally be able to fly its full schedule and realistically think about expanding, management will need to realize that pilot retention should become a much larger priority so that B6 won't have to cut (or "indefinitely suspend") large batches of routes like we saw yesterday. Otherwise, we'll see a lot of new NEA stuff and cuts to any airport not named BOS/LGA/JFK... which runs exactly counter to any notion that JetBlue is even attempting to diversify its network.

Absolutely. It’s definitely a problem but will the company do anything. The dna in our leadership makes it hard for them to admit they need pilots and need to pay them more. They tend to view pilots as a problem to deal with not an asset. Just like all the employees actually.

Here is a perfect example. In the past when you got your captain position the company treated the captain class to dinner with a chief pilot. Now because of covid ot whatever they literally toss the wings at you in the middle of a class. Something that many work so hard for is treated like ehh who cares by our management. Is it a big deal not really but it shows how we are valued and that absolutely has an impact. But that’s the way the company is going as a whole. If they want this merger to work they need to get back to basics. Maybe we could keep more staff and not do these cuts.

fastmover wrote:

Here is a perfect example. In the past when you got your captain position the company treated the captain class to dinner with a chief pilot. Now because of covid ot whatever they literally toss the wings at you in the middle of a class. Something that many work so hard for is treated like ehh who cares by our management. Is it a big deal not really but it shows how we are valued and that absolutely has an impact. But that’s the way the company is going as a whole. If they want this merger to work they need to get back to basics. Maybe we could keep more staff and not do these cuts.

That may seem trivial to some, but for those of us who believed that B6 (AS for me) were our forever carriers, it's huge! That falls along with "actions speak louder than words". From where I come from, they are seeing 3-5yr FO's pull the loud handles to the big 4 and both cargo carriers. The schoolhouse needs to be overbooked to account for those that get a better offer and no-show. If it's happening at one medium sized carrier, sure as %&#! it's happening at B6. The departures of Jr. FO's to lock down better dough and seat opportunity is more than just the usual "churn". The C-suite group that realizes that the fastest and starts paying up is going to have the best chance to stem the tide and rebuild their network. I believe this could a brilliant purchase or a disaster, but a lot depends on keeping the most important asset - Pilots. There is no in between. In the mean time, you can tell how any carrier is meeting their driver quota by how many routes they keep cutting. Cheers

Tack wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

The bottom line is I don't know of any pilots from what I understand would give up 4-5 years seniority, especially when merging into an airline that will give a 18% raise and with over 360 airplanes on order between B6/NK thats over new hire 3500 pilots in the next few years that will go behind said pilot, to then walk away. And the "Poor financials" is a lame point being that both are projected to make profits going forward. Yes hiring and retaining is going to be a challenge, but not at the level your stipulating.

It’s happening right now at AS. Up to 5 year FO’s leaving for DL and UA. I know both B6 and NK, are faced with the same issue. I’m not sure of your role, if any, in the airline sector, but I’ve spent 36 years in the industry on the flight ops side. And financial performance is 100% a top 5 maybe a top 3 consideration for drivers. No one wants to waste years gaining a left seat only to have to start over. Low seniority right seaters are making the jump now for dough and security down the line. Pilot attrition is schedule plannings worst enemy.

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/jetb ... em-10.html

I consider adhering to APC forums as actual news akin to sourcing news from Infowars for news, etc. Especially since its just anybody saying anything on a keyboard, then again the same can be said about anyone, including myself, on this site, lol.
yes, are there a few that are up to 5 year leaving? Of course! Certainly not a large number by many means. That link they are mostly talking about new hires. I hear at B6 90% are guys under 2 years. Anyone would go anywhere if there is a better option. Lets not forget the top 2% seniority people at Delta, United, and American walked out the door for early retirement packages making a little less than staying on the job to not work at all for said companies, what does that say about "The highly awesome greener pastures" of the legacy places? And let me not remind you it wasn't insignificant, enough to have the disruptions cascading into what we are seeing now even 2 years later. Everything is integrated, and Yes B6 is challenged and they will have to improve management and employee contracts which the latter is in process with its pilots. Expanding into LATAM and EU, the next step after this NK integration is fully integrated and being more of a true national airline into 4 continents now, wide-bodies I think its the next natural evolution, and new hires are seeing a bit of this which from what I hear has slowed down attrition also, if there is a possible economic contraction, some would be hesitant to go to a legacy, all of them except for B6 being the only outlier, sent WARN notices. So yes, pilots do look at the economic pictures, but the fact that B6 has zero history of WARN and furloughs as compared to their legacy peers, it does put it higher in the list to consider for a good amount of pilots.

Abeam79 wrote:

Tack wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

The bottom line is I don't know of any pilots from what I understand would give up 4-5 years seniority, especially when merging into an airline that will give a 18% raise and with over 360 airplanes on order between B6/NK thats over new hire 3500 pilots in the next few years that will go behind said pilot, to then walk away. And the "Poor financials" is a lame point being that both are projected to make profits going forward. Yes hiring and retaining is going to be a challenge, but not at the level your stipulating.

It’s happening right now at AS. Up to 5 year FO’s leaving for DL and UA. I know both B6 and NK, are faced with the same issue. I’m not sure of your role, if any, in the airline sector, but I’ve spent 36 years in the industry on the flight ops side. And financial performance is 100% a top 5 maybe a top 3 consideration for drivers. No one wants to waste years gaining a left seat only to have to start over. Low seniority right seaters are making the jump now for dough and security down the line. Pilot attrition is schedule plannings worst enemy.

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/jetb ... em-10.html

I consider adhering to APC forums as actual news akin to sourcing news from Infowars for news, etc. Especially since its just anybody saying anything on a keyboard, then again the same can be said about anyone, including myself, on this site, lol.
yes, are there a few that are up to 5 year leaving? Of course! Certainly not a large number by many means. That link they are mostly talking about new hires. I hear at B6 90% are guys under 2 years. Anyone would go anywhere if there is a better option.

What you're discussing is a qualitative vs a quantitive sociological study. The APC forum provides one qualitative insight into how pilots at B6 feel. That is important. What is also important and is what you point to is how many pilots under 5 years are leaving? That is something we don't know, but I sure hope that JetBlue's management does..

Abeam79 wrote:

Lets not forget the top 2% seniority people at Delta, United, and American walked out the door for early retirement packages making a little less than staying on the job to not work at all for said companies, what does that say about "The highly awesome greener pastures" of the legacy places? And let me not remind you it wasn't insignificant, enough to have the disruptions cascading into what we are seeing now even 2 years later.

You're comparing apples and orangutans. A pilot at the end of their career has different motivations than one at the beginning. Some of those pilots might've been within a few years of retiring, and it made sense for them to just not deal with the disruptions of Covid. Or perhaps they had a family member at home who was especially at risk for a severe case of Covid, so it made sense to just take a buyout early. Airlines by definition know they're going to lose pilots as they get closer and closer to mandatory retirement age, paying a few to leave a bit early when they knew they definitely wouldn't be needed for a while wasn't a bad thing.


[quote="Abeam79"I
f there is a possible economic contraction, some would be hesitant to go to a legacy, all of them except for B6 being the only outlier, sent WARN notices. So yes, pilots do look at the economic pictures, but the fact that B6 has zero history of WARN and furloughs as compared to their legacy peers, it does put it higher in the list to consider for a good amount of pilots.[/quote]

There is nothing that prevents B6 from being required to send a WARN notice. There definitely have been some dramatic transformations in the industry over the past 40 years, which B6 hasn't had to deal with as a result of their upstart status.

Wingtips56 wrote:

jetBlue is now flying BOS-SMF-BOS with the 220. Too long, I think, to operate with a turn-around crew, so they must have a 22+ hour layover in SMF. Not very efficient, and no nearby replacement should a crew member get sick.
.

They have done flying like this for years, and all over. Let them get rid of decent and long layovers and then really watch them have a staffing issue.

tphuang wrote:

At this point, I think what we are seeing is Big 3 plundering LCCs/ULCCs for crewmembers and LCCs/ULCCs plundering RJs for crewmembers and RJs not able to get enough people through the pipeline to replace the departures. As such, LCCs/ULCCs are not able to increase their staffing levels to meet the deliveries. RJs are shrinking because they don't have enough crewmembers.

In the near term, a merger with B6/NK allows the combined airline to re-allocate a lot of flying from former NK cities (that don't make sense under B6 cost structure) to quickly expand B6's focus city projects.

medium/long term, B6 & NK by themselves will continue to have staffing issues as long as they don't have a national network, widebody flying, competitive wages and work rules.

If they can bring in competent leadership to lead the combined airline through merger process, they will hopefully resolve most of those issues. You can imagine that with more bases around the country (rather than just in high cost coastal cities), there are more attractive bases for pilots to go to. With more aircraft types (including widebody in the future), that's another attractive factor for future pilots. And of course, having work rules and wages that are competitive with big 4 is also important.

all of this requires COMPETENT leadership. We will see if they can find that. Mergers are complicated even for the most well run companies.

I normally just read these blogs very rarely do I ever post. However I work for one of the Big 3 airlines and we are hiring pilots like everyone else. What I noticed is we are receiving a lot of applications from LCC/ULCCs. In our most recent pool of applicants is there were around 65 or so Spirit pilots who applied and around 30 or so jetBlue pilots who applies. There were of course applications from pilots with Frontier, Allegiant, some cargo carriers and all the express RJ carriers as well as the startup carriers. In our most recent new hire class we hired 8 pilots from Spirit, some of these pilots have been with Spirit 6, or 7 years, we also hired 3 pilots from jetBlue one has nearly 9 years experience flying with jetBlue and decided to jump ship.

You used the word plunder and I understand why you used that particular word but we are not actively pursuing jetBlue or Spirit pilots these pilots are applying of their own free will to come work at our airline. I've been doing this for years and we've always had a healthy number of pilots from Spirit, Frontier and other ULCCs apply every time we hire pilots, however the number of jetBlue pilots that are applying to jump ship is growing at least where I work. I don't know what is going on internally at jetBlue and why in my opinion more pilots are applying elsewhere to jump ship. I don't think we are plundering as much as jetBlue now has a problem with pilot retention. The one airline we don't see a lot of applicants from is Southwest. Southwest doesn't have a pilot retention problem and they only operate the 737. I'm not sure jetBlue's retention problems are the lack of aircraft types I think it is much more than that and only jetBlue can stop the bleeding.

If you think jetBlue has a pilot retention problem it is much worst for their flight attendants. In our most recent flight attendant hiring event we had over 300,000 applications. Of that at least 300 applications were from current jetBlue flight attendants and over 800 from current Spirit flight attendants. Both of these airlines have huge retention problems with their current employees actively looking for employment at at the legacy carrier I work for. If this merger is to have any chance both these airlines need to get creative and stop their current employees from walking out the door heading to the legacies

CaptCoolHand wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

fastmover wrote:

Respectfully. I have been flying that blue 190 for over 10 years (as a pilot)

JetBlue did try it on the west coast but they never opened a crew or MX base out there. Everything flowed through Austin or another city out to the coast for a few days and flow back. It was a mess. With no support it was doomed to fail.

JetBlue is not about to open a base for a plane they are trying to get rid of as fast as they can.

You can use the 220 for the 190 flying, it’s more fuel efficient and has more seats and as a bonus it’s has the ability to do the late night transcons while the 190 can’t.

The 190 is basically very mission specific and just not needed any longer. It also helps with pilot headcount as going with 2 fleets vs 3 makes things much easier.

It’s done they have served their purpose and are going away. The only debate is should they have bought them in the first place.

the 190 OR the 220 is going to eventually need a western Maintenance center for trans-con flying. An out and back might net them some pax but probably only the ones they brought with them from the eastern USA. Piece-mealng a route network with no western Hub? Is a tall order and even though WN did it at OAK? B6 will need to do just as much and just as good or better to make a dent. Especially since it's been rumored they intend to make a run on Hawaii. And? Hawaii is farther than NYC-LHR with NO diversion points. So? they'll need not just the airplanes but? Somebody to actually look after said planes if for nothing else? Than to keep them moving and irregular maintenance. I wish them well.

Not sure your point on Hawaii? The 220 will not and cannot make that. B6 has a LAX base with mx for the 320's. B6 also has contract mx in all its outstations. If we do it the LR and XLR will make it.
Eventually, yes the 220 probably goes west, but that'll have nothing to do with the islands. 220 is currently doing red eyes from the west coast. As for the 190, it'll be a fart
in the wind by 2025.... gone.

By 2025? That still gives them time to open an intra west coast network going north and south from San Diego tp Seattle and east into LAS, SLC. PHX,TUS etc. Can the E190 fly LAX to ELP?? Until the A220 can take over and really make a western route network? they could use the E190's to be Pathfinders and scout new routes.
Sometimes you have to use what you got till you get what you want. and when they retire them? Victorville. Mojave and Marana are in close proximity to LAX, PHX or TUS.

BB78710 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

At this point, I think what we are seeing is Big 3 plundering LCCs/ULCCs for crewmembers and LCCs/ULCCs plundering RJs for crewmembers and RJs not able to get enough people through the pipeline to replace the departures. As such, LCCs/ULCCs are not able to increase their staffing levels to meet the deliveries. RJs are shrinking because they don't have enough crewmembers.

In the near term, a merger with B6/NK allows the combined airline to re-allocate a lot of flying from former NK cities (that don't make sense under B6 cost structure) to quickly expand B6's focus city projects.

medium/long term, B6 & NK by themselves will continue to have staffing issues as long as they don't have a national network, widebody flying, competitive wages and work rules.

If they can bring in competent leadership to lead the combined airline through merger process, they will hopefully resolve most of those issues. You can imagine that with more bases around the country (rather than just in high cost coastal cities), there are more attractive bases for pilots to go to. With more aircraft types (including widebody in the future), that's another attractive factor for future pilots. And of course, having work rules and wages that are competitive with big 4 is also important.

all of this requires COMPETENT leadership. We will see if they can find that. Mergers are complicated even for the most well run companies.

I normally just read these blogs very rarely do I ever post. However I work for one of the Big 3 airlines and we are hiring pilots like everyone else. What I noticed is we are receiving a lot of applications from LCC/ULCCs. In our most recent pool of applicants is there were around 65 or so Spirit pilots who applied and around 30 or so jetBlue pilots who applies. There were of course applications from pilots with Frontier, Allegiant, some cargo carriers and all the express RJ carriers as well as the startup carriers. In our most recent new hire class we hired 8 pilots from Spirit, some of these pilots have been with Spirit 6, or 7 years, we also hired 3 pilots from jetBlue one has nearly 9 years experience flying with jetBlue and decided to jump ship.

You used the word plunder and I understand why you used that particular word but we are not actively pursuing jetBlue or Spirit pilots these pilots are applying of their own free will to come work at our airline. I've been doing this for years and we've always had a healthy number of pilots from Spirit, Frontier and other ULCCs apply every time we hire pilots, however the number of jetBlue pilots that are applying to jump ship is growing at least where I work. I don't know what is going on internally at jetBlue and why in my opinion more pilots are applying elsewhere to jump ship. I don't think we are plundering as much as jetBlue now has a problem with pilot retention. The one airline we don't see a lot of applicants from is Southwest. Southwest doesn't have a pilot retention problem and they only operate the 737. I'm not sure jetBlue's retention problems are the lack of aircraft types I think it is much more than that and only jetBlue can stop the bleeding.

If you think jetBlue has a pilot retention problem it is much worst for their flight attendants. In our most recent flight attendant hiring event we had over 300,000 applications. Of that at least 300 applications were from current jetBlue flight attendants and over 800 from current Spirit flight attendants. Both of these airlines have huge retention problems with their current employees actively looking for employment at at the legacy carrier I work for. If this merger is to have any chance both these airlines need to get creative and stop their current employees from walking out the door heading to the legacies

Before I retired from United as a Fleet Maintenance controller on the Airbus fleet 3 guys from JBLU replaced my position. When I queried them about why they left B6? Mostly it had to do with lack of money and job dissatisfaction. Which tells me that B6 id paying start-up wages and they are Clearly NOT a Start-up. They're just plain CHEAP! It's no wonder why people are jumping like Rats off a sinking ship!

strfyr51 wrote:

CaptCoolHand wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

the 190 OR the 220 is going to eventually need a western Maintenance center for trans-con flying. An out and back might net them some pax but probably only the ones they brought with them from the eastern USA. Piece-mealng a route network with no western Hub? Is a tall order and even though WN did it at OAK? B6 will need to do just as much and just as good or better to make a dent. Especially since it's been rumored they intend to make a run on Hawaii. And? Hawaii is farther than NYC-LHR with NO diversion points. So? they'll need not just the airplanes but? Somebody to actually look after said planes if for nothing else? Than to keep them moving and irregular maintenance. I wish them well.

Not sure your point on Hawaii? The 220 will not and cannot make that. B6 has a LAX base with mx for the 320's. B6 also has contract mx in all its outstations. If we do it the LR and XLR will make it.
Eventually, yes the 220 probably goes west, but that'll have nothing to do with the islands. 220 is currently doing red eyes from the west coast. As for the 190, it'll be a fart
in the wind by 2025.... gone.

By 2025? That still gives them time to open an intra west coast network going north and south from San Diego tp Seattle and east into LAS, SLC. PHX,TUS etc. Can the E190 fly LAX to ELP?? Until the A220 can take over and really make a western route network? they could use the E190's to be Pathfinders and scout new routes.
Sometimes you have to use what you got till you get what you want. and when they retire them? Victorville. Mojave and Marana are in close proximity to LAX, PHX or TUS.

E-190s out in LA? How many times does it need to reiterated, JetBlue is not only done with getting creative with the E-190, they are closing MCO 190 next April, actively retiring the airplane as we speak, and eventually the only presence it will have is the eastern seaboard, primarily between DCA and BOS fulfilling the obligations of the NEA. JetBlue is investing in long-term growth out West with the airframes, crews, parts and maintenance they’ll need to build out a stable and reliable network. That airplane, in JetBlue colors, will never return, in any way, shape or form to California.

The E-190 experiment ended West of Texas a decade ago and it’s already over with West of the Mississippi.

They cannot replace those E90s fast enough. If merger with NK goes through, the A319CEOs can help with E90 replacement. Aside from that, A220 can replace E90s. They really need to start putting FC seats on these aircraft. I see them running these 200 seat aircraft on 5 to 6 hour flights and they waste space on these configurations to not go over 200 seats.

Abeam79 wrote:

bpat777 wrote:

sxf24 wrote:

Absolutely.

Many of the “suspended” routes seem to be in B6’s sweet spot of southbound VFR or east-west premium leisure. Either they can’t retain enough people to run the airline, or they can’t compete outside of JFK and BOS. Either way, NK is not a magic solution since there’s no reason to believe the employees or customers will stay.

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

I feel like I am about to get an aneurysm listening to some of these lazy responses just to appeal to ones own bash B6 wagon. They are short staffed, United and American just cut a bunch of flying because of staffing issues, and a/c delivery issues. The priority is staffing the NEA flying which if they don't they lose the slots, it has nothing to do with "not being able to compete outside JFK/BOS." Network planning has alot of moving pieces and every move is integrated throughout the whole network, you move one piece it causes a cascading effect. These are temporary in case anyone of you missed that.

Back when this EWR/LAX/RDU expansion was announced, several of us said that B6 needed to concentrate on their core markets before overextending themselves. I specifically mentioned the RDU expansion, EWR-AUS and EWR-LAX as routes that seemed foolish in light of B6 already abysmal operational performance and labor/equipment challenges. Others did as well. We all got told things like “you simply don’t get it.” Well, it looks like B6 is actually susceptible to the same challenges as the rest of the industry. Possibly more, in light of the fact that they were one of only two majors to report a loss in Q2. The Blue Kool Aid has been diluted quite a bit. B6 is now a mature airline with mature airline problems.

AMALH747430 wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

bpat777 wrote:

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

I feel like I am about to get an aneurysm listening to some of these lazy responses just to appeal to ones own bash B6 wagon. They are short staffed, United and American just cut a bunch of flying because of staffing issues, and a/c delivery issues. The priority is staffing the NEA flying which if they don't they lose the slots, it has nothing to do with "not being able to compete outside JFK/BOS." Network planning has alot of moving pieces and every move is integrated throughout the whole network, you move one piece it causes a cascading effect. These are temporary in case anyone of you missed that.

Back when this EWR/LAX/RDU expansion was announced, several of us said that B6 needed to concentrate on their core markets before overextending themselves. I specifically mentioned the RDU expansion, EWR-AUS and EWR-LAX as routes that seemed foolish in light of B6 already abysmal operational performance and labor/equipment challenges. Others did as well. We all got told things like “you simply don’t get it.” Well, it looks like B6 is actually susceptible to the same challenges as the rest of the industry. Possibly more, in light of the fact that they were one of only two majors to report a loss in Q2. The Blue Kool Aid has been diluted quite a bit. B6 is now a mature airline with mature airline problems.

I would describe markets like EWR-AUS, LAX, and Caribbean as fitting perfectly within B6’s core markets. If they can’t compete in these markets, particularly after opening a crew base in EWR, how are they supposed to rapidly expand in a hyper-competitive market like LAX?

bpat777 wrote:

sxf24 wrote:

B6SpiritofEWR wrote:

What this sounds like to me is B6 got in a little too deep in the NEA and it’s backfiring across the network.

Absolutely.

Many of the “suspended” routes seem to be in B6’s sweet spot of southbound VFR or east-west premium leisure. Either they can’t retain enough people to run the airline, or they can’t compete outside of JFK and BOS. Either way, NK is not a magic solution since there’s no reason to believe the employees or customers will stay.

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

FWIW, I had 2 segments on NK last week and the employees did not seem happy about the merger...

socaljoeyb wrote:

bpat777 wrote:

sxf24 wrote:

Absolutely.

Many of the “suspended” routes seem to be in B6’s sweet spot of southbound VFR or east-west premium leisure. Either they can’t retain enough people to run the airline, or they can’t compete outside of JFK and BOS. Either way, NK is not a magic solution since there’s no reason to believe the employees or customers will stay.

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

FWIW, I had 2 segments on NK last week and the employees did not seem happy about the merger...

There is concern about base closures and a requirement to commute to NYC or BOS.

strfyr51 wrote:

CaptCoolHand wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

the 190 OR the 220 is going to eventually need a western Maintenance center for trans-con flying. An out and back might net them some pax but probably only the ones they brought with them from the eastern USA. Piece-mealng a route network with no western Hub? Is a tall order and even though WN did it at OAK? B6 will need to do just as much and just as good or better to make a dent. Especially since it's been rumored they intend to make a run on Hawaii. And? Hawaii is farther than NYC-LHR with NO diversion points. So? they'll need not just the airplanes but? Somebody to actually look after said planes if for nothing else? Than to keep them moving and irregular maintenance. I wish them well.

Not sure your point on Hawaii? The 220 will not and cannot make that. B6 has a LAX base with mx for the 320's. B6 also has contract mx in all its outstations. If we do it the LR and XLR will make it.
Eventually, yes the 220 probably goes west, but that'll have nothing to do with the islands. 220 is currently doing red eyes from the west coast. As for the 190, it'll be a fart
in the wind by 2025.... gone.

By 2025? That still gives them time to open an intra west coast network going north and south from San Diego tp Seattle and east into LAS, SLC. PHX,TUS etc. Can the E190 fly LAX to ELP?? Until the A220 can take over and really make a western route network? they could use the E190's to be Pathfinders and scout new routes.
Sometimes you have to use what you got till you get what you want. and when they retire them? Victorville. Mojave and Marana are in close proximity to LAX, PHX or TUS.

What is the reason for your obsession with the E190s filling out an intra-West network? It is not going to happen. JetBlue have neither crew nor maintenance infrastructure in the West and will not be building such infrastructure for a fleet that is under an accelerated wind-down schedule. They are not going to use a high-CASM aircraft on low-yield intra-West flights. It would be a disaster from start to end.

AMALH747430 wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

bpat777 wrote:

I too have questioned whether B6 will really have all of NK's employees and passengers. Seems they're betting a lot on something that isn't guaranteed

I feel like I am about to get an aneurysm listening to some of these lazy responses just to appeal to ones own bash B6 wagon. They are short staffed, United and American just cut a bunch of flying because of staffing issues, and a/c delivery issues. The priority is staffing the NEA flying which if they don't they lose the slots, it has nothing to do with "not being able to compete outside JFK/BOS." Network planning has alot of moving pieces and every move is integrated throughout the whole network, you move one piece it causes a cascading effect. These are temporary in case anyone of you missed that.

Back when this EWR/LAX/RDU expansion was announced, several of us said that B6 needed to concentrate on their core markets before overextending themselves. I specifically mentioned the RDU expansion, EWR-AUS and EWR-LAX as routes that seemed foolish in light of B6 already abysmal operational performance and labor/equipment challenges. Others did as well. We all got told things like “you simply don’t get it.” Well, it looks like B6 is actually susceptible to the same challenges as the rest of the industry. Possibly more, in light of the fact that they were one of only two majors to report a loss in Q2. The Blue Kool Aid has been diluted quite a bit. B6 is now a mature airline with mature airline problems.

EWR-LAX is doing great. What are you talking about? They added a bunch of routes when they had too many crewmembers and aircraft sitting around doing nothing. Do you want to go to DOT website and take a look at their operational performance from end of 2020 to Spring of 2021, when these routes were announced? Were they suffering through absymal operational performance?

Now, they are short of crew members and have to add additional JFK/LGA flying, so a lot of them got rolled back for a while. I'm not sure what's the big deal? You do realize they have opened crew bases at both EWR and LAX, right?

sxf24 wrote:

I would describe markets like EWR-AUS, LAX, and Caribbean as fitting perfectly within B6’s core markets. If they can’t compete in these markets, particularly after opening a crew base in EWR, how are they supposed to rapidly expand in a hyper-competitive market like LAX?

who told you they can't compete in these markets?

They have to move aircraft away from FLL, LAX and EWR because they need to add flying at JFK and BOS as part of NEA obligations. What do you want them to do. Just give up LGA and JFK slots to DL? Should they destroy their BOS focus city so that they can keep FLL, LAX and EWR flights around?

strfyr51 wrote:

CaptCoolHand wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

the 190 OR the 220 is going to eventually need a western Maintenance center for trans-con flying. An out and back might net them some pax but probably only the ones they brought with them from the eastern USA. Piece-mealng a route network with no western Hub? Is a tall order and even though WN did it at OAK? B6 will need to do just as much and just as good or better to make a dent. Especially since it's been rumored they intend to make a run on Hawaii. And? Hawaii is farther than NYC-LHR with NO diversion points. So? they'll need not just the airplanes but? Somebody to actually look after said planes if for nothing else? Than to keep them moving and irregular maintenance. I wish them well.

Not sure your point on Hawaii? The 220 will not and cannot make that. B6 has a LAX base with mx for the 320's. B6 also has contract mx in all its outstations. If we do it the LR and XLR will make it.
Eventually, yes the 220 probably goes west, but that'll have nothing to do with the islands. 220 is currently doing red eyes from the west coast. As for the 190, it'll be a fart
in the wind by 2025.... gone.

By 2025? That still gives them time to open an intra west coast network going north and south from San Diego tp Seattle and east into LAS, SLC. PHX,TUS etc. Can the E190 fly LAX to ELP?? Until the A220 can take over and really make a western route network? they could use the E190's to be Pathfinders and scout new routes.
Sometimes you have to use what you got till you get what you want. and when they retire them? Victorville. Mojave and Marana are in close proximity to LAX, PHX or TUS.

So you just want JetBlue to burn through even more cash. I trawest flying does not work for them. They don't have enough critical mass anywhere on the West Coast to attract business travelers and will never offer enough frequencies to be competitive with WN/AS/UA.

Tack wrote:

That may seem trivial to some, but for those of us who believed that B6 (AS for me) were our forever carriers, it's huge! That falls along with "actions speak louder than words". From where I come from, they are seeing 3-5yr FO's pull the loud handles to the big 4 and both cargo carriers.

AS is an interesting situation. It's been stable and prosperous for two decades but the pilot pay arbitration ruling of 2017 said, in effect 'You don't deserve AA/UA/DL/FedEx money.' If you're an early-30s pilot, 8-10% a year compounded over another 30 years of flying is a LOT of money. It may be a decade before you get back to SEA or LAX, but you'll be able to do it.

There's going to be a way for B6 pilots to leverage the uncertainty of the NK merger and NEA agreement into higher pay. There's a non-zero risk of Chapter 11, though, and pilots in the last three decades have seen some real suffering in bankruptcies. Ask about PBGC haircuts, to start.

tphuang wrote:

AMALH747430 wrote:

Abeam79 wrote:

I feel like I am about to get an aneurysm listening to some of these lazy responses just to appeal to ones own bash B6 wagon. They are short staffed, United and American just cut a bunch of flying because of staffing issues, and a/c delivery issues. The priority is staffing the NEA flying which if they don't they lose the slots, it has nothing to do with "not being able to compete outside JFK/BOS." Network planning has alot of moving pieces and every move is integrated throughout the whole network, you move one piece it causes a cascading effect. These are temporary in case anyone of you missed that.

Back when this EWR/LAX/RDU expansion was announced, several of us said that B6 needed to concentrate on their core markets before overextending themselves. I specifically mentioned the RDU expansion, EWR-AUS and EWR-LAX as routes that seemed foolish in light of B6 already abysmal operational performance and labor/equipment challenges. Others did as well. We all got told things like “you simply don’t get it.” Well, it looks like B6 is actually susceptible to the same challenges as the rest of the industry. Possibly more, in light of the fact that they were one of only two majors to report a loss in Q2. The Blue Kool Aid has been diluted quite a bit. B6 is now a mature airline with mature airline problems.

EWR-LAX is doing great. What are you talking about? They added a bunch of routes when they had too many crewmembers and aircraft sitting around doing nothing. Do you want to go to DOT website and take a look at their operational performance from end of 2020 to Spring of 2021, when these routes were announced? Were they suffering through absymal operational performance?

Now, they are short of crew members and have to add additional JFK/LGA flying, so a lot of them got rolled back for a while. I'm not sure what's the big deal? You do realize they have opened crew bases at both EWR and LAX, right?

sxf24 wrote:

I would describe markets like EWR-AUS, LAX, and Caribbean as fitting perfectly within B6’s core markets. If they can’t compete in these markets, particularly after opening a crew base in EWR, how are they supposed to rapidly expand in a hyper-competitive market like LAX?

who told you they can't compete in these markets?

They have to move aircraft away from FLL, LAX and EWR because they need to add flying at JFK and BOS as part of NEA obligations. What do you want them to do. Just give up LGA and JFK slots to DL? Should they destroy their BOS focus city so that they can keep FLL, LAX and EWR flights around?

I meant to type “AUS-LAX” not EWR-LAX. Though they’ve dumped EWR-SFO too which I would put in the same category as EWR-AUS and LAX-AUS. Many on here said this wasn’t wise and it seems to have turned out to be the case.