Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 132): Some will, some wont. I work with a company that (at least 8-10 times a week) spends $1200 per person to fly from Dallas to Cedar Rapids. I work with another that often pays $1400 to fly from Dallas to Memphis.

Exactly. The essential business travel will be happening, but any non-essential business travel for stuff like training, corporate meetings, periodic scheduled customer follow up will be axed. That will put tremendous pressure on the industry, and yes, pilot salaries in the long-term.

Quoting aluminumtubing (Reply 137): I can only speak for the AA pilots. We are just desperate for a change in leadership. Once Crandall left, no one here feels that any of the top leadership, and I use the term loosely, has had the interest or ability to LEAD this airline long term. We just feel that Parker, while not perfection, would put someone in charge that wants to run a world class airline. The merger would not be a panacea, but right now, it is the only thing that gives us any hope for the future.

You are delusional to think that Parker is your White Knight. You guys hated Crandall. Then you hated Carty, then you hated Arpey. Now you hate Horton. You will certainly hate Parker, too. What you guys/gals seem oblivious to is that management is the liaison between you and market forces. What is driving the airline is dictated not by management but by market forces. The problem is that market forces are not in your favor, but you think that "treating the symptom" will "heal the disease".

The only way that you guys will see a true difference is if a CEO was hired that was willing to defy the markets and Wall Street...someone who would not care about the stock price, but only about internal metrics. Someone like Gordon Bethune in his early CO days. The problem is that Parker is not that person, and that it will be very difficult to find such a CEO.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 141): Continental executives who learned under Gordon Bethune. Bethune did an amazing job after CO came out of bankruptcy, and the CEOs who followed him kept CO out of bankruptcy after 2001.

Not so sure...Jeff Smisek was a Bethune protege and take a look what his short term thinking is doing to UA in the last year...

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 145): Guys in the business know that businesses will adapt. Some will continue on flying as if nothing had happened because it is essential to generating sales and/or a marginal part of their expenses overall, others will learn to love video-conferencing (if they can) or Skype.

Well...the person I responded to did not at all acknowledge that business travel will suffer. Au contraire. And again...you are right. Some business travel will vanish and some will stay. But even if 40% of business travel evaporates, that will HORRIBLE news for any of you working in the industry, especially the most well paid (read: pilots) because the margins will be squeezed with a larger proportion of leisure travel.

Quoting aluminumtubing (Reply 137): I can only speak for the AA pilots. We are just desperate for a change in leadership. Once Crandall left, no one here feels that any of the top leadership, and I use the term loosely, has had the interest or ability to LEAD this airline long term.

Do you really believe this? Really...??? If at this particular moment in time your wages and benefits were not on the chopping block, would you be as concerned? Or would most AA pilots be as concerned? Say if AA was losing gobs of money for having a bad CEO, but pilots' wages and benefits were somehow shielded, would you be "desperate for a change in leadership"? You seem to be deceiving yourself. This is not about the CEO or whoever. It is about money, YOUR money.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 141): And for pete's sake, don't hire someone with a finance degree. Horton is a finance guy. Arpey is a finance guy. Finance guys don't understand that you sometimes have to spend money to make money, and they are clueless about marketing. Read Bob Lutz's last book and you will learn how finance guys make life miserable for the people who really understand a business.

Amen!!!!

Quoting silentbob (Reply 144): I could not agree more. Stop looking at the next quarter and build the company for the long term.

But thats what all Wall Street cares about so thats not likely to change.

N737AA

Quoting N737AA (Reply 152): I could not agree more. Stop looking at the next quarter and build the company for the long term. But thats what all Wall Street cares about so thats not likely to change.

There are people on Wall Street who do understand that regular earnings growth (say 5% to 7% annually) is better than trying to do something that doubles a stock's price in less than 12 months.

I've heard Jim Cramer say that it's great, if you find a stock that is poised for an explosive price increase, because it's launching a new product that will sell faster than the company can make it. But, he still suggests looking a 5 year+ timeline, when buying a stock.

But, then, you get people like Norman Pelz and Carl Icahn who expect immediate results, when they start buying a company. We know that Icahn is clueless about managing a company. If it weren't for him, TWA would still be flying. And Pelz tried to convince H.J. Heinz that too few people were putting ketchup on their fries, because of bad marketing.

At least he didn't try to convince Heinz to market ketchup for hot dogs in Chicago. Some people might consider that a felony.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 141): And for pete's sake, don't hire someone with a finance degree. Horton is a finance guy. Arpey is a finance guy. Finance guys don't understand that you sometimes have to spend money to make money, and they are clueless about marketing. Read Bob Lutz's last book and you will learn how finance guys make life miserable for the people who really understand a business.

I disagree with that premise.

There is nothing wrong with having finance-savvy people in the airline business. In an industry as challenged at value creation and short on capital as the airline industry, prudent financial management is absolutely critical. Crandall was one of the most successful "finance guys" to ever work in the airline industry, and AA thrived under his leadership.

The problem at AA in recent years isn't finance guys, per se, but rather that there is less of a strong operational presence as there once was. There is a far larger disconnect between finance and operations, and as a result the finance guys have less of an understanding of the operational implications of financial decisions, and the operational guys have less of an understanding of the financial implications of operational decisions. You no longer have the Bob Bakers of the world, and guys like that, who could straddle those two worlds, credibly, and balance finance and operations. That balance has been lost, and needs to be restored - whether that means an operations guy surrounded by finance people or a finance guy surrounded by operations people.

It's accepted as a "fact" on this board that there is a pilot slow-down of some sort going on - but where's the beef?

That is, has AA provided any evidence of this? And if there is evidence of this, then why hasn't AA gone to the court to seek an injunction? Again, "where's the beef?"

From another board - so I won't copy and paste the comments here - pilot sick calls at AA are BELOW historical levels.

No doubt, things are toxic at American right now, but in my experience, it takes more than one group to produce that type of environment. It seems to me, that AA - like so many other companies - has lost sight of the human element.


*There have been a lot of excellent posts on this matter, in this thread and others, by many posters ("AAexecplat" comes to mind). Other than "AluminumTubing," are any of the posters actually AA employees?

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 155): It's accepted as a "fact" on this board that there is a pilot slow-down of some sort going on - but where's the beef?

It's being accepted as "fact" because, to use the courtroom analogy, circumstantial evidence may not constitute a "smoking gun," but it is still admissible in court. There is plenty of anecdotal, circumstantial evidence - up to and included the press releases issued by the pilots union itself - essentially confirm what is going on.

The internet is littered with reports from flyers of pilots announcing maintenance issues, at or right before the time of departure, for seemingly non-critical and non-safety-of-flight issues like coffee pots, seat cushions, etc., and/or taxiing at painfully slow speeds, to name but a few. Anecdotal, yes - but are all of these "eye witnesses" imagining what they saw and heard?

In addition, it is rather peculiar that the horribly-mismanaged operation with chronic under-staffing, old airplanes, and demoralized employees was managing on-time rates in the 70-75%+ range until just after the 1113 abrogation occurred, at which time those numbers dropped by in some cases 25-30 points or more. Again - circumstantial, but hard to imagine being coincidental.

And finally, we have the APA itself, which issued press releases stating (quoting): "management chose to reject the APA-American Airlines Collective Bargaining Agreement, which served as an operating manual for our pilots. Management’s action has generated significant uncertainty for our pilots with respect to employment protections and operating rules" and "pilots are taking a prudent and cautious approach in their operational decision-making process," The APA isn't stupid, and they're not going to acknowledge what's happening because it would expose them to liability.

But in both of those statements and press releases they are not really disputing what AMR management is saying - that pilots are exhibiting different behavior with regard to maintenance than they were 2-3 weeks ago. The APA is essentially acknowledging the phenomenon that everybody sees and the statistics obviously bear out - they are just providing a different explanation for it (without a CBA pilots fear losing their FAA license and/or being fired if they aren't abundantly cautious on maintenance) than management's explanation (some pilots are intentionally slowing things down to harm AA).

An airline doesn't go from 75% on-time to 45% on-time in the span of a few days because planes magically get older or the schedule suddenly becomes excessive at present staffing levels. Some have suggested that perhaps the maintenance folks are demoralized by the notice of a few thousands layoffs, causing them to be less motivated to fix things quickly. I could see that to an extent, but it still - in my mind - does not come anywhere close to explaining a 30-point drop in on-time. The self-evident reality is that some pilots are absolutely writing up more maintenance, demanding more maintenance items are fixed, and sooner, and taxiing "aggressively safe[ly]" (read: painfully slow). Whether you buy management's argument that some pilots are doing this intentionally, or the APA's argument that they are doing it to be abundantly safe and not risk their jobs - and I think it's probably a mix of both - is immaterial to the reality that, regardless of the reason, this is happening. Thousands of AA passengers - to say nothing of other thousands of AA employees - aren't imagining things.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 155): pilot sick calls at AA are BELOW historical levels.

Sick calls are the least of the issue.

Quoting AAexecplat (Reply 150): You are delusional to think that Parker is your White Knight.

I figure the honeymoon period on a US/AA merger would be about six months. After that time the s**t storm will start. Merging seniority lists? Yikes, I can't imagine the agony. I still can't figure out why the AA staff is so enamoured of the US merger, I guess it's just change from what they have now.

Thanks AAexecplat for your posts, they are consistently on the mark.

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 149):

Southwest's industry leading wages are a result of the rest falling down around them, prior to all of these bankruptcies Suthwest was near the bottom of the stack in pay.

Is that conversation before or after the few is junior manned to fly on their days off the FAR limits? Before or after AA exploits the loss of monthly minimum guarantee to screw them pay-wise? Before or after they outsource more mainline flying? I promise you no mainline pilot will say anything positive about a CRJ-900 flying routes that should be and used to be flown by pilots on their seniority list, no matter how pretty the paint job.

Quoting commavia (Reply 156): The internet is littered with reports from flyers of pilots announcing maintenance issues, at or right before the time of departure, for seemingly non-critical and non-safety-of-flight issues like coffee pots, seat cushions, etc., and/or taxiing at painfully slow speeds, to name but a few. Anecdotal, yes - but are all of these "eye witnesses" imagining what they saw and heard?

My wife had an AA flight to DFW yesterday afternoon. Took 40 minutes to taxi from the arrival runway to gate. She described it as a "slow crawl".

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 158): Southwest's industry leading wages are a result of the rest falling down around them, prior to all of these bankruptcies Suthwest was near the bottom of the stack in pay.

... not to mention of course Southwest's conscious strategy of buying off labor peace using unsustainable fuel hedging gains. Southwest's organic growth is over, and their business model which was kept profitable for years by fuel hedges has now ended. Southwest is, as a result, rapidly restructuring itself and evolving its business model to meet a new competitive landscape where there are fewer, larger, lower-cost competitors, and where Southwest is by no means the lowest-cost operator anymore. As part of that, labor is going to have to participate in that business model restructuring. It is absolutely inevitable, as Southwest's CEO himself has alluded to. Whether that labor-cost-restructuring at Southwest comes in the form of outright compensation reductions, or productivity and efficiency gains, or some combination is TBD - but it is coming one way or another.

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 158): Before or after they outsource more mainline flying? I promise you no mainline pilot will say anything positive about a CRJ-900 flying routes that should be and used to be flown by pilots on their seniority list, no matter how pretty the paint job.

And I don't think anybody being honest could blame any pilot for feeling that way.

Nonetheless, if AA pilots - for example - have a big problem with AA trying to outsource their flying to non-owned large-RJ operators, it does beg the question of what those pilots believe AA should do to remain competitive with Delta, United and USAirways, all of which have for years been doing just that - to a far larger degree than AA has thus far ever been permitted by scope clause to do.

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 158): ? I promise you no mainline pilot will say anything positive about a CRJ-900 flying routes that should be and used to be flown by pilots on their seniority list, no matter how pretty the paint job.

Why not? The pilots agreed to that scheme.

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 158): I promise you no mainline pilot will say anything positive about a CRJ-900 flying routes that should be and used to be flown by pilots on their seniority list, no matter how pretty the paint job.

That is certainly the answer I would expect. But as you sit 7th for takeoff behind 6 large RJs with someone else's pretty paint job on them, crewed with pilots not on that carrier's seniority list, filled with passengers paying fares to someone other than AA, what you gonna do? Hope that with AA can somehow evade those market forces or take the opportunity to make some money off them?

Quoting commavia (Reply 156): It's being accepted as "fact" because, to use the courtroom analogy, circumstantial evidence may not constitute a "smoking gun," but it is still admissible in court.

Then why isn't AA in court seeking an injunction?

Quoting commavia (Reply 156): The internet is littered with reports from flyers

Yes, the internet is full of anecdotes about everything.

Again, "Where's the beef?" If AA has proof of a job action (or whatever you want to call it), why not - at this point - go to the Judge and seek help? Since it's already been threatened, why not do it?

Blaming your employees - the AA pilots in this case - is not a solution to improving your service.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 163): Then why isn't AA in court seeking an injunction?

Seems like they are pretty close to it, and I am sure there is some strategy as to how long to wait to do so:

"American Airlines threatened to take its pilots union to court if its members continue to disrupt flight operations and acknowledged that the delays are damaging revenue."

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/09...es-threatens-to.html#storylink=cpy

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 163): Then why isn't AA in court seeking an injunction?

Because the burden of proof is much higher in a court of law than in the court of public opinion. I doubt AMR has enough concrete proof of intentional actions to stand up in court - I agree with your implication that if they had said sufficient evidence, they would already be in front of a judge seeking injunctive relief.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 163): Yes, the internet is full of anecdotes about everything.

Okay, so I'll take that response to mean that you believe all of these people - myself included - who have personally witnessed some of the aforementioned things happening are just imagining things, or willfully lying. Incredible.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 163): Blaming your employees - the AA pilots in this case - is not a solution to improving your service.

Is it "blame" or just "reality?" The operation has slowed down - dramatically. The publicly-available statistics "prove" that. This slowdown is in large part related to maintenance. Nobody is disputing that - including the pilots union.

I'm going to break this down and make it really easy for you to understand, and quote directly from the APA itself.

The APA issued a press release with "DECLINE IN AMERICAN AIRLINES’ OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE" in the headline, and stated that it has observed "increased operational unreliability ... in mechanical delays."

So are you suggesting that the APA is imagining things, or lying? Is that sufficient proof that something has happened, to the point that the APA itself felt compelled to issue a press release?

There is plenty of debate about the reason for the maintenance slowdown. The company claims that some pilots are intentionally using disruptive tactics to harm the operation. The union claims that pilots are acting with an abundance of caution because of the "uncertainty" related to increased FAA oversight and the lack of any protective CBA. But to my knowledge, there is really no debate that a slowdown is occurring, except perhaps from you.

Again - incredible.   

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 149): CA: "We don't just own 13.5% of AA, we own 13.5% of AMR." (fist-bump)

Well UA pilots had a portion of UA before and that did not work out so well, as with everything else, just owning shares does not mean you will be a successfull investor.

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 164): Seems like they are pretty close to it, and I am sure there is some strategy as to how long to wait to do so:

In this case another poor business decision to wait this long, I guess they have sufficient cash in hand to blow a few million.

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 161):

Agreements were made when times were different. I'd be more open to management suggestions had the pilots been allowed to work with management to find a balance and re-negotiate scope rather than watch a loophole be exploited for larger RJs at the expense of mainline jobs or watch their contract be shredded in bankruptcy and RJs forced down their throats.

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 162):

Above my pay grade. As I sit in line I'm going to focus on the tasks at hand. When I'm not between the blocks I'm going to focus on protecting mainline pilot jobs and quality of life. AA could put big RJs on mainline property. IIRC the AA pilots nearly did so with the CRJ-700s that Eagle now operates but something beyond their control stopped it. I may be wrong but I do recall hearing the AA pilots agreed to fly them.. They'd still get the benefit the equipment offers while employing their own crews. I know Delta has pay rates for large RJs out there as well, so the precedent has been set. Instead they're outsourced to squeeze a few extra dollars into the bottom line.

Quoting commavia (Reply 160):

I agree, Southwest made extremely savy moves to remain viable and grow when others were struggling. I also agree that their compensation will change, but I'll support their pilots when they try to minimize the cuts that will come. Time will tell what the end game for Southwest will be. They're an apples to oranges comparison anyway because the cost structures and business styles are so different from traditional carriers. As far as AA goes, it seems Delta has found a healthy balance and I believe has plans to increase mainline flying, Continental survived with 50 seat limitations and a few turboprops (look, another exploited loophole) but somehow AA has been too inept. Going full blown Airways style with scope isn't the answer.

[Edited 2012-09-28 10:37:57]

[Edited 2012-09-28 10:38:29]

[Edited 2012-09-28 10:43:26]

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 167): As far as AA goes, it seems Delta has found a healthy balance and I believe has plans to increase mainline flying

Delta has found a "healthy balance," and that healthy balance, apparently much to the chagrin of many Delta and non-Delta mainline pilots in the U.S., includes tons of large regional jets - precisely the same regional jets AA wants to add. DALPA just signed a new contract that allows Delta to reduce uneconomic small jet flying and actually further increase the use of outsourced large regional jet flying. As for increasing mainline flying - all I would say is that yes, it appears Delta is moving to do that, but given that right cost structure, it appears AA is moving that direction, too.

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 167): Continental survived with 50 seat limitations and a few turboprops (look, another exploited loophole)

Continental "survived" with an uncompetitive scope clause - but I think it is very much an open question how long they would have been able to persist with that limitation without having to get relief and compete with all of the other major U.S. airlines who were flying at least some large regional jets.

Quoting commavia (Reply 168):

Right, however the overall number of aircraft and seats being outsourced will be reduced. More large RJs, yes, but an overall decline in RJ flying. They're also adding aircraft to mainline albeit at somewhat of a neutral gain because of the Diesel 9s going away. I believe one of the big selling points for their new contract was the overall reduction of regional flying and an increase in mainline pay and flying. Any DL guys care to comment/correct?

Al that being said, I merely meant use it as a framework for an agreement, DL and AA are in different positions. If big RJs have to be used to make AA viable, there are better ways to do it than virtually unlimited outsourcing. Putting them on the mainline certificate, to be flown by mainline pilots would be the best of both worlds but unfortunately I doubt we'll see that.

We'll never know how CO would have fared now, much like the discussion over Crandall's response, it's meaningless. If it survives to be part of the JCBA for the new United (doubtful) we'll surely have an interesting discussion on our hands.



Side note: holy thread drift!

[Edited 2012-09-28 11:17:26]

[Edited 2012-09-28 11:18:34]

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 169): Right, however the overall number of aircraft and seats being outsourced will be reduced. More large RJs, yes, but an overall decline in RJ flying. They're also adding aircraft to mainline albeit at somewhat of a neutral gain because of the Diesel 9s going away. One of the selling points for their new contract was the overall reduction of regional flying and an increase in mainline pay and flying.

Right ... and as I said, AA is moving in much the same direction. AA has, as of now, open firm orders or near-firm commitments on, by my count, 404 Boeing 737/777 and Airbus A320 family jets, and that does not include the 42 787 nor 100 737MAX non-firm orders AA is still carrying, to say nothing of the hundreds of additional options. All told, that amounts to nearly 600 jets before options.

Being extremely conservative, and assuming:

* AA never takes delivery of a single 787 or 737MAX (which is doubtful)
* AA uses the narrowbodies currently on order to replace every single non-777 aircraft currently in inventory except the newer 737s (all but the original batch) (which is also doubtful)
* the new 777-300ERs replace existing widebodies on a 1-for-1 basis

that would still yield a net reduction in mainline of a mere 22 aircraft. And, again, that is with assumptions that are unrealistic and highly unlikely to materialize. I think it's clear that AA management's plan is for AA's mainline fleet to grow - particularly if they are able to emerge from bankruptcy with costs as low as AA is apparently shooting for - with that mainline growth likely be deployed far more intensively in international markets than domestic markets.

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 169): If big RJs have to be used to make AA viable, there are better ways to do it than virtually unlimited outsourcing.

The LBFO AA proposed to the APA did not included "unlimited outsourcing." It did permit expansive use of regional jets, including by 2016 large regional jets (65-79 seats) up to 40% of the mainline fleet count. But it wasn't "unlimited."

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 169): Putting them on the mainline certificate, to be flown by mainline pilots would be the best of both worlds but unfortunately I doubt we'll see that.

Preaching to the choir. I have, for several years, been advocating a compromise where AA pilots agreed to competitive compensation structures for large regional jets in order to get that flying back at the mainline union. Nonetheless, that proposal was apparently not the direction that either the company and/or the union went, and either way it isn't really the way the industry has gone. Delta, United and USAirways have made no moves to cut deals with their pilots that bring large regional jet flying back to the mainline - all of have sought, and gotten, the right to keep that flying outside of the mainline pilot contract.

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 140): Correction please. You are repeating the APA public relations talking points. Nobody can "speak for the AA pilots"... especially APA. The AA pilot group has not been a unified group for more than 2 DECADES. Thanks to the internal politics of.... APA. The AA pilot group and the union that is known as APA have different demographics.

Well, semantics aside, APA is STILL the AA pilot's agent and as they are not decertified, they DO speak for the pilots. If there is a disconnect between the APA and the pilots, that's an internal issue. Vote the scoundrels out if they don't speak for "The Group."

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 155): From another board - so I won't copy and paste the comments here - pilot sick calls at AA are BELOW historical levels.

Well, sure, they want in on the "fun!" 

Quoting commavia (Reply 168): allows Delta to reduce uneconomic small jet flying and actually further increase the use of outsourced large regional jet flying.

Well, sort of...total DCI frames are being reduced and the capacity is tied to ML growth. It's a little disingenuous to say they're "adding" LRJ's.

Quoting B727FA (Reply 171): Well, sort of...total DCI frames are being reduced and the capacity is tied to ML growth. It's a little disingenuous to say they're "adding" LRJ's.

No, not sort of. I was never speaking about the overall allowable fleet size of DCI in totality. I was speaking specifically about small RJs versus large RJs. Under the new contract, the fleet or large RJs is tied to the mainline fleet, and at the current mainline fleet size, before even accounting for any prospective mainline growth, the fleet of large RJs is permitted to grow. Yes?

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 167): When I'm not between the blocks I'm going to focus on protecting mainline pilot jobs and quality of life.

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 167): Delta has found a healthy balance and I believe has plans to increase mainline flying,

So DL, the folks that invented the RJ and exploited it with the LEAST restrictive SCOPE clause in the industry, has been able to grow the whole business including mainline? And, AA, with MOST restrictive SCOPE clause and pilots centered on "protecting the profession" from market forces, is in bankruptcy with less and less to "protect"? But this has no bearing on the future of the company and APA?

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 169): Side note: holy thread drift!

Hey, it's Friday--the mind wanders. The mods don't want another AA thread anyhow
 

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 173): So DL, the folks that invented the RJ and exploited it with the LEAST restrictive SCOPE clause in the industry, has been able to grow the whole business including mainline? And, AA, with MOST restrictive SCOPE clause and pilots centered on "protecting the profession" from market forces, is in bankruptcy with less and less to "protect"?

  

It is a fascinating dichotomy. It definitely raises questions about who is actually protecting what, and challenges "conventional wisdom" and logical assumptions about what is actually in the best interests of who.

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 173): And, AA, with MOST restrictive SCOPE clause and pilots centered on "protecting the profession" from market forces, is in bankruptcy with less and less to "protect"? But this has no bearing on the future of the company and APA?

Come on, let's be fair, the APA and pilots are doing enough to warrant our wrath, we don't need to have selective memory and pretend as if DL did not enter Chpt.11 just so that they could impose / get those consessions.

Remember now, AA seems to want to follow DL, unfortunately for some, they did not follow them a few years ago.
Better late than never 

Quoting commavia (Reply 165):

After reading your reply, it's clear that we're addressing two somewhat different issues. I've primarily been addressing the alleged pilot "sick-out" while you're addressing the broader delays and cancellations. In my last reply, I didn't specifically say that, though.

Quoting commavia (Reply 165): Okay, so I'll take that response to mean that you believe all of these people - myself included - who have personally witnessed some of the aforementioned things happening are just imagining things, or willfully lying. Incredible.

I didn't say they weren't happening, the question is why are they happening?

The pilot in command is required by regulation to ensure the airworthiness of a flight. To NOT do so is to risk a violation (up to $10,000 per) and suspension of his or her pilot certificate (months of lost pay). If a discrepancy is discovered before pushback, it must be dealt with. It's my understanding that numerous F.A.A. Air Safety Inspectors are on property, so it's only prudent to make sure that every "T" is crossed and "I" is dotted.

Further, "commavia" what is your background? Have you sat at the controls of any airliner? Or any airplane? If you're not at the controls of any AA flight, your conclusions (as are mine) can, by definition, only be based on circumstantial evidence. For example, I was once accused of a "too-slow" taxi by a passenger, but what had happened was that we got stuck in long line with a disabled aircraft at the head of it and that was compounded by a taxiway closure.

While my anecdote doesn't explain the delays at AA, it's an example of how wrong a conclusion can be.

Quoting commavia (Reply 165): Is it "blame" or just "reality?" The operation has slowed down - dramatically. The publicly-available statistics "prove" that. This slowdown is in large part related to maintenance. Nobody is disputing that - including the pilots union.

Again, why? DId AA wait too long to replace their relatively old fleet? Are they trying to get too much time per day out of the aircraft that remain? UA failed miserably this summer when they tried to use the sUA airplanes the way they had with sCO planes. Or was that a pilot slow-down, too?

Quoting commavia (Reply 165): So are you suggesting that the APA is imagining things, or lying? Is that sufficient proof that something has happened, to the point that the APA itself felt compelled to issue a press release?

Again, why? Airlines are remarkably complex operations and it only takes one weak link in the chain to bring things to a halt.

Are the AA pilots unhappy? Of course. But I've NEVER known a pilot to make a "write-up" that wasn't true. Do you have proof to the contrary?

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 167): Agreements were made when times were different. I'd be more open to management suggestions had the pilots been allowed to work with management to find a balance and re-negotiate scope rather than watch a loophole be exploited for larger RJs at the expense of mainline jobs or watch their contract be shredded in bankruptcy and RJs forced down their throats.

RJs were not forced anywhere. The union pilots agreed to allow other union pilots, in smaller planes flying for other companies, fly these routes. Unions have maintained the work. Next issue..

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): After reading your reply, it's clear that we're addressing two somewhat different issues. I've primarily been addressing the alleged pilot "sick-out" while you're addressing the broader delays and cancellations.

You are correct. I was never once referring to a "sick-out." I take the APA entirely at its word that that is not happening.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): I didn't say they weren't happening, the question is why are they happening?

Like I said. Again - I don't think anyone is really disputing that it is happening. The question is, indeed, "why?"

AA claims that it is, at least to some extent, caused by pilots (1) intentionally calling in maintenance issues at or near the time of departure, and (2) demanding they are fixed immediately rather than deferred, and/or (3) taxiing in and/or out excruciatingly slowly, all in an intentional attempt to disrupt the operation.

The APA claims that it is because of (4) AA's old fleet, (5) AA's tight crew scheduling and aircraft utilization, (6) AA's unenthusiastic, soon-to-be-laid-off maintenance workers, and/or AA pilots being extremely cautious with anything maintenance related because of (7) increased FAA oversight and (8) procedural "uncertainty" and the fear of AA firing pilots at-will now that there is no longer the protection of a CBA.

Of the above, I find (4) rather ridiculous, since AA's fleet didn't change in the last few weeks, since when AA was running at around 70-75% on-time. (2) is believable in the sense that pilots pissed off and with less economic incentive under the new 1113 terms are working less overtime. (6) and (7), and to a lesser extent (8) I find entirely plausible, but I do not believe that those things alone are capable of cutting 30 points of AA's on-time numbers. I think (3) is definitely happening - again, I believe I experienced it myself and the plethora of reports of it happening are too numerous to ignore - and I believe, based on what I have read, that (1) and (2) probably are also happening to a certain extent as well, but again the APA is claiming that if they are happening it is merely a result of (7) and (8), and not intentional.

Again - I think it's clearly obvious that something is happening, but why? And who to believe?

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): The pilot in command is required by regulation to ensure the airworthiness of a flight. To NOT do so is to risk a violation (up to $10,000 per) and suspension of his or her pilot certificate (months of lost pay). If a discrepancy is discovered before pushback, it must be dealt with. It's my understanding that numerous F.A.A. Air Safety Inspectors are on property, so it's only prudent to make sure that every "T" is crossed and "I" is dotted.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): Further, "commavia" what is your background? Have you sat at the controls of any airliner? Or any airplane? If you're not at the controls of any AA flight, your conclusions (as are mine) can, by definition, only be based on circumstantial evidence. For example, I was once accused of a "too-slow" taxi by a passenger, but what had happened was that we got stuck in long line with a disabled aircraft at the head of it and that was compounded by a taxiway closure.

Never commanded a plane, and never will. And for that matter, I have enormous respect for the responsibility of those who do. I trust my life to AA pilots on a fairly regular basis.

Nonetheless, I myself just last weekend experienced a painfully slow taxi on a day when there was no meaningful weather or OSO issue, when there was no major congestion, at an airport (DFW) with ample capacity, and where there was absolutely no line for departure once we finally made it to the runway (first for takeoff, from spool up to rotation in under 30 seconds). I have flown in and out of this airport literally hundreds of times in my life, and seldom ever seen a pilot taxi that slow. Is this just a coincidence? Perhaps.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): While my anecdote doesn't explain the delays at AA, it's an example of how wrong a conclusion can be.

Absolutely. All of these anecdotal experiences could be people jumping to conclusions and connecting dots that shouldn't be connected. Are thousands of AA passengers all wrong? Maybe. But, like with so many other things, when there are so many dots out there, people are naturally going to connect them - as AA management, and AA customers, have - whether correctly or incorrectly.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): DId AA wait too long to replace their relatively old fleet?

Perhaps, but the age of the fleet didn't appreciably change on September 5. So what to make of the dramatic spike in maintenance delays just in the last several weeks?

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): Are they trying to get too much time per day out of the aircraft that remain?

Perhaps, but the aircraft utilization didn't appreciably change on September 5. So what to make of the dramatic spike in maintenance delays just in the last several weeks?

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): UA failed miserably this summer when they tried to use the sUA airplanes the way they had with sCO planes. Or was that a pilot slow-down, too?

I do not enough about that situation to comment on it.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 176): Are the AA pilots unhappy? Of course. But I've NEVER known a pilot to make a "write-up" that wasn't true.

To be clear: I never have, and am not now, accusing any American Airlines pilot of "make" a maintenance write-up that "wasn't true." Absolutely not. I think what the company is suggesting, however, is that some pilots are taking maintenance write-ups that previously would have been considered non-critical, and been deferred, and now demanding that they are fixed immediately or the chalks aren't moving.

Quoting commavia (Reply 178): (3) taxiing in and/or out excruciatingly slowly, all in an intentional attempt to disrupt the operation.

A question, does airport ground controllers or ATC have some say in this, or at least if the slow taxis start to affect airport operation efficieny, can they not cite AA or regster a complaint?
I don't think they can determine how fast but certainely there is not an unlimited amount of time to clear runways and or taxi ways.

Quoting AAexecplat (Reply 150): You are delusional to think that Parker is your White Knight. You guys hated Crandall.

I was speaking about what I am hearing from my fellow pilots. I have been called a lot of things, but never delusional.  .

I certainly don't think he will necessarily be a white knight. I have used the analogy with my fellow crew members that while things are terrible here, we need to careful that we do not make a pact with the devil either. A lot of the employees did in fact hate Crandall. I was not one of them. I met him a number of times and always respected him.

I probably need to do a better job of differentiating what I am hearing from my fellow crew members and what I personally feel.

Quoting aluminumtubing (Reply 180): I have used the analogy with my fellow crew members that while things are terrible here, we need to careful that we do not make a pact with the devil either.

  

Two words: Carl Icahn.

"Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it."

I'm not saying the unions aren't smart to have been doing what they have been doing with Parker, and I take the word of the union leaders when they say that they believe the merger and deals with Parker are in the long-term best interests of their members. Nonetheless, I think they should be approaching this entire thing very carefully, which I think they are.

Quoting aluminumtubing (Reply 180): A lot of the employees did in fact hate Crandall. I was not one of them. I met him a number of times and always respected him.

I think people respect his candor, his obvious commanding knowledge of the operation and the finance side, and his vision. While I have been more than happy to support AMR management over the last few years when I think they made right decisions, or heap ample criticism on them for the myriad of stupid things I think they've done, I would agree - I think with most AA employees - that there has been no leader at AA since May 1998 who was the equal of Bob Crandall.

Quoting commavia (Reply 178): (3) taxiing in and/or out excruciatingly slowly, all in an intentional attempt to disrupt the operation.

This is quite plausible, since APA has done it in the past. My understanding is that pilots were doing this in 1990-91, while they were in contract negotiations.

I can't be bothered to read 182 posts from a load of whiners for the answer....

Is there any truth to the rumor of a one-day AA pilot walk out Nov 1? Sure hope not as months ago I made the mistake of booking AA travel Oct 29, Nov 2 and 5. Whoops.

Quoting 26point2 (Reply 183): I can't be bothered to read 182 posts from a load of whiners for the answer.... Is there any truth to the rumor of a one-day AA pilot walk out Nov 1? Sure hope not as months ago I made the mistake of booking AA travel Oct 29, Nov 2 and 5. Whoops

I have not heard ANYTHING to that affect. I hope I didn't say that in a whiny way...

Quoting B727FA (Reply 171): Well, semantics aside, APA is STILL the AA pilot's agent and as they are not decertified, they DO speak for the pilots. If there is a disconnect between the APA and the pilots, that's an internal issue. Vote the scoundrels out if they don't speak for "The Group."

If speaking in an official capacity as an APA official, then it is acceptable to claim you are speaking for all AA pilots. That claim may or may not be true, but you can at least make the claim. When speaking as an individual, it is not acceptable to claim you are speaking for all AA pilots (unless you have already received confirmation from ALL AA pilots).

IMHO, aluminumtubing made a proper correction: those were the thoughts of those AA pilots he has spoken with. My experience is the direct opposite. Being the Captain on my flights, I know "junior" crewmembers will be cautious about showing disagreeing opinion(s), but my experience is that only a small minority of AA pilots buy into the APA rhetoric and that small percentage hasn't changed much in the last 20+ years.

Quoting 26point2 (Reply 183): I can't be bothered to read 182 posts from a load of whiners for the answer

Why would anyone even bother to address your concerns with a post-starter like that??

AA ORD

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 177):

Yes, RJs were allowed by scope relief back when pilots received an increase in compensation and a good contract. Then airlines started using Chapter 11 to get rid of those contracts, the increased compensation and get further scope relief not agreed to by their own pilots. Between 2000-2008, more than 800 mainline airplanes were lost along with several thousand mainline pilot jobs and regional airlines grew like crazy. Many were old gas guzzlers but those lost airframes could have been replaced by the RJs rather than outsourced. This doesn't just happen to coincide with when bankruptcies hit most legacy carriers. Most pilots weren't offered a chance to fly those airplanes, nor were they given a choice when their compensation and quality of life was nuked.

I will admit, restructuring was needed but there were far better ways to have gone about it, and promises that were made to get some kind of mutually agreed upon relief weren't even remotely kept.

We're seeing it happen right now with AA. It's still a very relevant issue.

[Edited 2012-09-28 17:22:32]

[Edited 2012-09-28 17:23:31]

And the fun continues ...

The Dallas Morning News' indispensable airline business blog has collected American's on-time statistics for over a month going back to August 12, and the numbers - particularly when graphed on a chart - pretty much speak for themselves and make it fairly obvious what's going on. I won't copy the entire thing here, but I'll highlight the bottom line takeaway: "For 2012, the Sept. 13-26 average (I don’t have Thursday’s numbers yet) was 52.7% on time. The Sept. 1-12 average was 72.7% on time, 20 percentage points higher."

The APA is out with another statement tonight again restating that AA pilots are simply being abundantly cautious, and again restating a laundry list of legitimate maintenance issues that have arisen on AA planes in recent days. I'm not entirely sure what the APA thinks these statements are accomplishing, as some of the repeated statements about AA's fleet being excessively old, etc. just simply don't make sense, and particularly since nobody was ever doubting that legitimate, safety-of-flight maintenance issues should always obviously lead to maintenance calls, emergency landings, etc.

AA apparently replied to the latest APA statement with a statement that, while needlessly aggressive, essentially makes the point that many here have been making: nobody is disputing that pilots should be careful, that maintenance and safety are important, or that legitimate maintenance issues do come up, but the striking way in which so many maintenance issues have so suddenly arisen in the last two weeks does seem suspect. The AA statement also says - and I have no idea if this is true or not - that "the number of reports where a mechanic has responded to a pilot’s complaint and found nothing wrong have risen 97%." If true, interesting.

Quoting commavia (Reply 172): before even accounting for any prospective mainline growth, the fleet of large RJs is permitted to grow. Yes?

No. AFTER ML growth. Words matter. While your basic statement is true (LRJ gowth is permitted) your factual statement is false...that it's coming at the price of scope. Have to tell both sides of the story pal...this ain't "fixed news."

Quoting commavia (Reply 178): Nonetheless, I myself just last weekend experienced a painfully slow taxi on a day when there was no meaningful weather or OSO issue, when there was no major congestion

That YOU could perceive. You weren't (as far as I know) in the FD. There could have been a herd of endangered wombunnies on the taxi way...you don't know.

Quoting justplanenutz (Reply 173):

You make a good point and I do agree that RJs are a necessary function of a successful airline. I still defer to CO and their scope, they were a viable competitor until merger mania began and mega-airlines were created. A quick glance at their earnings history shows them to have been consistent with other airlines that had more relaxed scope clauses. Now with the UA merger we wont know what might have been.

As I've already stated, there is a way to combine both. Put big RJs on mainline certificates to be flown by mainline pilots. Delta, the arr jay kreatorz has pay rates published for large RJs. IIRC, so does AA. I doubt they'd publish these rates unless they thought flying those airplanes at those rates would be profitable. Jobs are saved by allowing pilots to fly on a mainline certificate with traditionally better compensation and work rules. The bottom line for the company has a brighter future and less, if not uncontested use of regional jets. Except, perhaps from passengers who dont like "little jets."   Of course I'd also love Brooklyn Decker to walk into my hotel room on an overnight wearing only high-heels. I'll let you guess which one I think is more likely to happen.

Most pilots don't care what they're flying if the compensation and quality of life is there. Now that we have seen what a weak scope clause can do to mainline jobs, the majority of airline pilots, at least in my experience have a similar attitude.


Another side note: y'all have a great weekend.

[Edited 2012-09-28 22:09:56]

Quoting commavia (Reply 188): AA apparently replied to the latest APA statement with a statement that, while needlessly aggressive, essentially makes the point that many here have been making: nobody is disputing that pilots should be careful, that maintenance and safety are important, or that legitimate maintenance issues do come up, but the striking way in which so many maintenance issues have so suddenly arisen in the last two weeks does seem suspect.

"Striking way" - LOL! 

In any case, where does this all leave us?

We get it that you're unhappy because your travel plans are all fouled up, and your favorite airline is falling apart. We get it that AA is unhappy because they are losing revenue. AA can/should be using whatever legal recourse they have available, but so far, they are not - why not?

It's abundantly clear that the place we are at today has been predictable for months if not years, so what's AA's plan?

Please don't tell us that they were so arrogant as to think the pilots would not react this way to the yanking of their contract.

Please don't tell us that they are being gracious and trying to build bridges by not using legal action - that's just plain silly.

They've had the brass knuckles out for a while now, one more punch isn't going to matter.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 191): In any case, where does this all leave us? We get it that you're unhappy because your travel plans are all fouled up, and your favorite airline is falling apart. We get it that AA is unhappy because they are losing revenue. AA can/should be using whatever legal recourse they have available, but so far, they are not - why not?

I’ve watched in post after post as people arm chair quarterback management (all airlines) and their decisions with what on the surface appears very little business knowledge. I raise this because it answers your question.

After the judge’s ruling I’d bet anyone here management put in place plans to monitor and record disruptions caused by the pilots knowing as other’s have said that “poking the pit bull in the nose” would have consequences. The pilots didn’t disappoint. AA’s been tracking by pilot, by aircraft, by hub every incident that’s been reported and every statistic that’s deviated. Their gracious offer to protect inconvenienced travelers on other airlines is also being tracked. As things have played out, it’s doubtful the APA warning to the pilots will be headed and the disruptions will continue. AA, with their carefully calculated analytics, will present the judge with the detail s/he needs to issue a TRO. In addition, APA will end up paying for all the financial hardship (including flying passengers OA) in the long run. Who’s the spider and who’s the fly? Contrary to popular opinion, management isn't as stupid as they are being portrayed.

Quoting BarryH (Reply 192): In addition, APA will end up paying for all the financial hardship (including flying passengers OA) in the long run

Management isn't the only party allowed access to bankruptcy court.
.
Any judgment AMR sought against the union can be dealt with the same way AMR dealt with its contractiual obligations - by eliminating them in bankruptcy. There is already a precedent of pilots quickly disolving and re-creating a new union.
.
...and besides fining the union, which can be overcome by the union declaring bankruptcy, what else can be used to enforce a TRO against thousands of pilots?

Pu

Quoting BarryH (Reply 192): After the judge’s ruling I’d bet anyone here management put in place plans to monitor and record disruptions caused by the pilots knowing as other’s have said that “poking the pit bull in the nose” would have consequences. The pilots didn’t disappoint. AA’s been tracking by pilot, by aircraft, by hub every incident that’s been reported and every statistic that’s deviated. Their gracious offer to protect inconvenienced travelers on other airlines is also being tracked. As things have played out, it’s doubtful the APA warning to the pilots will be headed and the disruptions will continue. AA, with their carefully calculated analytics, will present the judge with the detail s/he needs to issue a TRO. In addition, APA will end up paying for all the financial hardship (including flying passengers OA) in the long run. Who’s the spider and who’s the fly? Contrary to popular opinion, management isn't as stupid as they are being portrayed.

And I believe your statement is very factual.

Based on the "adult" response of APA to the threatening AA letter to take this to court for a TRO.

Here is how I see this playing out:

AA will indeed do so early next week and the APA will have to fight the TRO in court.

The 4 APA appeals to the court will be denied both by Judges Lane and Kaplan.

This will leave the APA with very little bargaining power, because AA will require, and rightly so, that the additional damages that these rogue pilots are causing AA will be deducted from the LBFO that they will present to the pilots.

And beyond that chapter 7 is still a possibility, should these guys think that they are really in charge of AA's future.

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 187): Between 2000-2008, more than 800 mainline airplanes were lost along with several thousand mainline pilot jobs and regional airlines grew like crazy. Many were old gas guzzlers but those lost airframes could have been replaced by the RJs rather than outsourced. This doesn't just happen to coincide with when bankruptcies hit most legacy carriers. Most pilots weren't offered a chance to fly those airplanes, nor were they given a choice when their compensation and quality of life was nuked.

Quoting futureualpilot (Reply 187): I will admit, restructuring was needed but there were far better ways to have gone about it, and promises that were made to get some kind of mutually agreed upon relief weren't even remotely kept.

Pilots alll over admit this but nothing ever happened, so the RJ business grew, airlines within an airline etc. etc. etc.
DL's change which some are attempting to follow was also as a result of chpt.11, the same process being used by AA, the big difference is in the track record of the relationship between the groups, but the technicalities of scope and its prevention of bringing RJ flying into mainline at an affordable cost remains.

Quoting BarryH (Reply 192): AA, with their carefully calculated analytics, will present the judge with the detail s/he needs to issue a TRO. In addition, APA will end up paying for all the financial hardship (including flying passengers OA) in the long run. Who’s the spider and who’s the fly? Contrary to popular opinion, management isn't as stupid as they are being portrayed.

Well from a financial position they are, whether we like it or not, the pilots are not doing anything illegal or against the rules and regulations that the FAA, NTSB or AA have put in place. So they can fine the APA into oblivion, how does that get a pilot to do his job differently, or better yet, how do they not pay the pilot for doing his job, or attempt to take his pay to pay the fine that his trade organization is responsible for, legally, since there is no contract with the APA at this time, can they be held responsbile, court battles will continue.

However, what it could show is that AA is putting together a hit list of pilots and mechanics for when they emerge from chpt.11, want to take bets on the natire of the workplace environment? Unions will be legally able to strike then, so unless they somehow get rid of all unions in chpt.11, everyone is going to have to play nice for AA to survive.

To be pessimistic, supporters of both sides will be able to have pride if AA goes belly up, standing on one's principles does count for something, at least it should, everything cannot be for sale.

Quoting mcg (Reply 157):

The only fair way to do a AA/US merger is to integrate all three pilot groups under one seniority list. By Seniority ONLY.

DP has not been able to do this with the present USw/USe scenario, how can everyone think they can do it when a third element comes into the mix. How does the APA membership feels about such integration?
Based on previous dealings specially with TW / APA expects everyone to fall behind them ! ......Not sure that is going to work if US/AA should find the honeymoon suite.

Quoting commavia (Reply 172): Under the new contract, the fleet or large RJs is tied to the mainline fleet, and at the current mainline fleet size, before even accounting for any prospective mainline growth, the fleet of large RJs is permitted to grow. Yes?

Here's an explanation from a DALPA email, my understanding is the large RJs growth requires the 717s, though I haven't found the email specifying that yet:

Currently, the Company operates 598 regional jets through their DCI partners. This agreement establishes a hard overall cap of 450 DCI aircraft (and now includes large turboprops in that number) when the Company takes delivery of additional 76-seat aircraft
– Includes a hard cap of:
• 125 50-seat aircraft
• 102 70-seat aircraft
• 223 76-seat aircraft

– Requires the physical removal of six seats from all 76-seat aircraft if a pilot on the seniority list at date of signing is furloughed; these seats cannot be reinstalled until the most junior furloughed pilot is offered recall
– Requires there be no furlough of Delta pilots for 24 months in the event of a merger
Minimum required ratio of flying between mainline and DCI
– If mainline block hours decrease beyond threshold in the future, a corresponding decrease in DCI block hours will be required
- Eliminated conversion of 70-seat aircraft to 76-seat aircraft based on mainline growth
– 3:1 conversion to 76-seat aircraft above 767 mainline jets eliminated

Far more restrictive than the AMR's Last Best Final Offer

The maximum number of such regional /small jets with greater than thirty (30) seats (as operated) up to and including sixty-five (65) seats (as operated) cannot exceed thirty- five (35) percent of the total mainline narrowbody fleet count, except as provided in (c) below.

At 35% of the mainline fleet the company can operate 210 CRJ-700s if they so chose to do. That is double what Delta has. It is also far more flexible in allowing them a mix of aircraft.

There is no limit on turbo props less than 50 seats

The maximum number of such regional /small jets with greater than sixty-five (65) seats (as operated) up to and including seventy-nine (79) seats (as operated) cannot exceed the following percentages of the total mainline narrowbody fleet count in the years indicated:
i. 2012 – 2014 25% ii. 2015 30% iii. 2016 & beyond 40%

79 seats as operated, 3 more than Delta and 9 more than United (United is limited to jets certified to 70 seats i.e. CRJ-700s so in reality this is a bigger advantage)

By 2016 they'll have at least 240 79 seat RJs.

Most important thing there is no hard cap like Delta

Quoting BarryH (Reply 192): AA’s been tracking by pilot, by aircraft, by hub every incident that’s been reported and every statistic that’s deviated.

Seems like the right thing to do from their side.

Quoting par13del (Reply 195): the pilots are not doing anything illegal or against the rules and regulations that the FAA, NTSB or AA have put in place

There is precedent for judges to decide, as mentioned above, work-to-rule is an illegal job action, just by showing the stats that BarryH is mentioning.

No idea if that precedent will be followed, but I think it's fair to say that history doesn't favor the pilots.

Quoting par13del (Reply 195): So they can fine the APA into oblivion

They can also jail the union leaders which is a huge escalation.

Quoting xdlx (Reply 196): DP has not been able to do this with the present USw/USe scenario, how can everyone think they can do it when a third element comes into the mix.

He doesn't have to. He could run AA on a separate certificate till conditions allow full integration.

Quoting norcal (Reply 197): Far more restrictive than the AMR's Last Best Final Offer

The huge difference is that the deal was negotiated, not imposed. The DL pilots got something in return for their concession, mainly the 717 flying. AA pilots feel that their previous concessions have only gotten them promises that AA management has never delivered on.

Well, it's D-Day for me. Currently sitting on AA 277 MIA-LAX.... they boarded us around 10am for a 10:45am scheduled departure. Well, it's coming up on 11:30am, 1.5 hours on the plane and we're still at the gate while maintenance tries to "deactivate" a broken air conditioning vent in one of the galleys.

1) This plane got in from GRU around 6am and just sat. Why does AA just wait until 5 minutes before departure to find out about this "non-essential" in the words of the Captain mx item?

2) I'm wondering if the "other shoe" will drop and once we actually start up the engines, there'll be some "other" issue that requires mx which of course will lead to the inevitable cancellation.

Ugh...

On a positive note: The flight attendants are all super friendly and attentive (as is my usual experience on AA).