QA4Jet-A
Veteran
Interesting, AirTran's 3 pending BOD members were elected today. Now maybe, Tim will finally listen to the shareholders instead of his own way of thinking...
Air Tran closer to Midwest Acquisition?
- Thread starter LGA Fleet Service
- Start date
KCFlyer
Veteran
The point of my letter was that the people in KC are used to "signature service" at Airtran and Southwest prices. Yes, Midwest has been a great corporate citizen, but in KC we pretty much have "signature service" exclusively. Put in a plane with 3+2 seats and you'll start hearing those folks scream "why have you forsaken me".
I mean I flew them to Orlando a month ago for $150 round trip. I doubt they made money on that, however, since they cancelled the nonstop late afternoon return, and routed me thru MKE, putting me home at midnight rather than 8, I just paid Southwest $74 for the one way nonstop return trip. So I guess they made a buck off of me. But for KC passengers, I think I'm the exception rather than the rule.
Gotcha KC, and I agree. I'm one of those people too, who don't want to see my almost-first-class service for less than most coach tickets disappear, but I'm not going to #### about it if it does. I'd rather it not, but I understand. I've already got my $180 with tax DCA-MCI RTs booked for July.
CynicalResAgent
Veteran
QA4Jet-A
Veteran
Yanno, I am so tired of hearing about the damn 'cookie', it makes me think what is Midwest thinking?looks like the cookie is one step closer to not being fresh baked but rather store bought
Granted, they have the comfy seating on the current 717 Fleet, which is about to change. I've flown them several times and I seriously could not tell the difference between Midwest & AirTran service other then more room for my Big feet. The Midwest Cabin Crew was so so, actually, I have had more pleasent F/As on an AirTran Flight. Yes, I work for FL but I am trying to be impartial here and call it like it is. Both Carriers have their Pros & Cons. I do believe a combination of the two will make for a better competitive carrier that will survive in the long run. Your turn to slam me ;-)) Go For it!
QA-I've always believed that when travelers talk about flying on Midwest and receiving a cookie, they're mostly referring to a pleasant flying experience. The "cookie thing" is lagniappe. I'm of the opinion that if you want a cookie, go to a bakery; a good meal, go to a restaurant; a movie, go to the theatre. Where we work, we don't promise any of those things. We get the customer from A to B, safely, on time, then efficiently (in that order).
It's because that's how we do things that there's the understandable hostility I've heard from Midwest customers about the proposed buyout. There's a huge market out there to do what we do, for the lowest cost (to the customer) as possible. Finding that "magic" cost is what causes such anger among airline employees and travelers. When my company refuses to spend a relative little amount of money to give me the tools to do my job professionally, it pisses me off. But, because I'm just a grunt in the trenches, I'm not privy to info such as, would spending that money have resulted in drawing down our unrestricted cash to a level that would have triggered increased interest rates on outstanding loans, thus costing the company a large increase in interest payments? The typical traveler sees this same experience in a negative light as well. But, while we are (allegedly) in the "service" industry, we have to make a profit as well, so that we can live to fly another day.
Another example that I've heard (on this board) about traveling on AirTran is that the service was so-so. Nothing good, nothing bad. One big reason for that (from a pilot and flt. attendant point of view) is that in order to keep revenue flowing during the day, we schedule very short turns. These range from 30 minutes at out stations to 40 minutes at hubs. That time allows the flt. crew just enough time to do what's necessary before it's time to depart again. My choices are between staying in the cockpit, loading the FMS for the next flt., etc., thus ensuring (from my end) that we'll be ready for an on-time or early departure, or I can stand in the cockpit door, while everyone deplanes, smiling and telling them goodbye. Once everyone's off, usually 15 minutes before the next flt's scheduled dept. time, I could then begin to get ready for the next flt. If I do that, we'll be lucky to leave on time. I choose the first option. If I get done early, I'll go up to the gate area and help the agent (with UMs, wheelchairs, etc.). This choice, on my part, my seem very impersonal to a customer ("The Captain didn't even say goodbye to us"). What that person doesn't understand is that because I did this exact same thing on the flt. before their's, their flt. was on time. I wish I had time to do my job and interact with the customers. Because keeping costs down and revenue up is necessary for survival, and because the planes have to keep moving, and because the best way to do this is short turn times, and because I have an obligation to the customer to do everything I can (without compromising safety) to be on time, doing my job seems "so-so" to some.
So what does all of this have to do with Midwest? I think you and KC have summed it up in previous comments. Midwest used to offer something that there was a market for. That market no longer exists, comments and complaints from die-hard Midwest fans not withstanding. If the market for what they offer was there, they would not have had to use a financial gimmick to report a profit during 1 of the 2 most profitable quarters of the year. And, as you pointed out, their plan to add seats (revenue), thus getting away from what set them apart from everyone else, is yet more proof that they can't stay what they used to be.
I wish Midwest nothing but the best. In fact, as I've stated before, I hope this buyout doesn't go through. I wish they would be profitable, and all this buyout talk would go away. I've read many complaints from Midwest customers about the buyout. Some have gone so far as to bad-mouth the company I work for. Instead of signing petitions and disparaging others, these people's time would be much better spent putting their money where their mouth is; sign a petition pledging to spend twice the amount they do now, to fly on Midwest. Don't just be "willing" to pay more; actually do it. This isn't about "cookies". It's about surviving financially. And, it's about time for some Midwest customers to understand that.
It's because that's how we do things that there's the understandable hostility I've heard from Midwest customers about the proposed buyout. There's a huge market out there to do what we do, for the lowest cost (to the customer) as possible. Finding that "magic" cost is what causes such anger among airline employees and travelers. When my company refuses to spend a relative little amount of money to give me the tools to do my job professionally, it pisses me off. But, because I'm just a grunt in the trenches, I'm not privy to info such as, would spending that money have resulted in drawing down our unrestricted cash to a level that would have triggered increased interest rates on outstanding loans, thus costing the company a large increase in interest payments? The typical traveler sees this same experience in a negative light as well. But, while we are (allegedly) in the "service" industry, we have to make a profit as well, so that we can live to fly another day.
Another example that I've heard (on this board) about traveling on AirTran is that the service was so-so. Nothing good, nothing bad. One big reason for that (from a pilot and flt. attendant point of view) is that in order to keep revenue flowing during the day, we schedule very short turns. These range from 30 minutes at out stations to 40 minutes at hubs. That time allows the flt. crew just enough time to do what's necessary before it's time to depart again. My choices are between staying in the cockpit, loading the FMS for the next flt., etc., thus ensuring (from my end) that we'll be ready for an on-time or early departure, or I can stand in the cockpit door, while everyone deplanes, smiling and telling them goodbye. Once everyone's off, usually 15 minutes before the next flt's scheduled dept. time, I could then begin to get ready for the next flt. If I do that, we'll be lucky to leave on time. I choose the first option. If I get done early, I'll go up to the gate area and help the agent (with UMs, wheelchairs, etc.). This choice, on my part, my seem very impersonal to a customer ("The Captain didn't even say goodbye to us"). What that person doesn't understand is that because I did this exact same thing on the flt. before their's, their flt. was on time. I wish I had time to do my job and interact with the customers. Because keeping costs down and revenue up is necessary for survival, and because the planes have to keep moving, and because the best way to do this is short turn times, and because I have an obligation to the customer to do everything I can (without compromising safety) to be on time, doing my job seems "so-so" to some.
So what does all of this have to do with Midwest? I think you and KC have summed it up in previous comments. Midwest used to offer something that there was a market for. That market no longer exists, comments and complaints from die-hard Midwest fans not withstanding. If the market for what they offer was there, they would not have had to use a financial gimmick to report a profit during 1 of the 2 most profitable quarters of the year. And, as you pointed out, their plan to add seats (revenue), thus getting away from what set them apart from everyone else, is yet more proof that they can't stay what they used to be.
I wish Midwest nothing but the best. In fact, as I've stated before, I hope this buyout doesn't go through. I wish they would be profitable, and all this buyout talk would go away. I've read many complaints from Midwest customers about the buyout. Some have gone so far as to bad-mouth the company I work for. Instead of signing petitions and disparaging others, these people's time would be much better spent putting their money where their mouth is; sign a petition pledging to spend twice the amount they do now, to fly on Midwest. Don't just be "willing" to pay more; actually do it. This isn't about "cookies". It's about surviving financially. And, it's about time for some Midwest customers to understand that.
QA4Jet-A
Veteran
Excellent Post CJ. I do agree with you on many of your views however, I do support this going through. If it does, things will iron themselves out in the long run. No doubt there will be chaos with merging work groups and I'm sure, yours will be one of them. On my side of the fence, we would love to get the Mx Hangar in MKE so we could possibly do 'A' Checks there as well as service checks. They have an excellent facility and we will need another Line Mx Base soon. MCO & ATL is overflowing on third shift checks and the others are crammed as well.
On another note, how is the T/A fiasco going? I am getting mixed reactions from quizzing Pilots. Spoke with Maddog 2 days ago... He said, "If they would read the T/A, they might understand it'! He does have a way with words, Southern drawl and all. One hell of a pilot!
Time for bed.... layta
On another note, how is the T/A fiasco going? I am getting mixed reactions from quizzing Pilots. Spoke with Maddog 2 days ago... He said, "If they would read the T/A, they might understand it'! He does have a way with words, Southern drawl and all. One hell of a pilot!
Time for bed.... layta
The TA is not doing very well at all. As reported in the AJC today, the vote has been called off, and union/company reps. will meet in Washington, D.C. the 2nd week of July. I had predicted (in an earlier post) that it would pass fairly easily. Closer scrutiny led me to lean against voting for it. The raises were very good. There were, however, other provisions not readily apparent (I know, I know - always read the fine print) that would/could have negated most of the increase in pay rates.
One major sticking point with some (not me): As things stand now, we begin getting paid when the main cabin door closes. In the TA, we would not begin getting paid until a/c movement or 6 minutes after the door closes, whichever occurs 1st. I figure this wouldn't cost us much per pilot per month, but others disagreed. I also figured that this could have been recouped with a very safe taxi speed .
Another major sticking point (this is my main disagreement with the TA) is average vs. cumulative pay. Right now, we get paid a minimum of 4 hrs. per day, cumulative. i.e. if I fly a 4 day trip, I'm going to get paid a minimum of 16 hrs. (4 hrs./day). If I fly one 1 hr. leg for the 1st two days of a 4 day trip, and then I fly 8 hrs. each day for the last two days, my pay is 24 hrs. (4+4+8+8). Under the TA, the minimum 4 hrs. per day would be averaged. The same previously mentioned trip would only pay 18 hrs. (1+1+8+8). I would receive 4 hrs. per day averaged over the 4 days, or whatever I actually flew, as long as it averaged at least 4 hrs. per day. I recently flew 2 trips in a row that were exactly like this. Having cumulative, as opposed to average somewhat forces crew planning to use us more efficiently.
Other issues I've heard about are reserve rules (under the current contract, our reserve pilots can easily make 90-100 hrs./month, whereas at just about any other carrier, & under the TA, they'd make minimum, in our case 70). Reduction in retirement insurance benefits was another one.
I've been told that many of the proposals in the TA would simply bring us to "industry standard". However, when they're a step backward, and the company's shown the ability to report yearly profits during trying times, it's hard to support this TA. We were in negotiations for (for us) a long time, and I have nothing but appreciation for our negotiators and their efforts. But in the last few weeks, there's been such a backlash against this TA as more details have been fully explained. Neither the company nor the union wanted to have the bad PR of an overwhelming "NO" vote, as would probably have happened. My "new and latest" prediction is that an agreement will be reached soon by resolving some of the issues listed above at the expense of reduced pay increases. We don't want to give up "quality of life" for pay raises. All parties want to hurry & get this done so attention can be turned back to the Midwest deal.
One major sticking point with some (not me): As things stand now, we begin getting paid when the main cabin door closes. In the TA, we would not begin getting paid until a/c movement or 6 minutes after the door closes, whichever occurs 1st. I figure this wouldn't cost us much per pilot per month, but others disagreed. I also figured that this could have been recouped with a very safe taxi speed
.Another major sticking point (this is my main disagreement with the TA) is average vs. cumulative pay. Right now, we get paid a minimum of 4 hrs. per day, cumulative. i.e. if I fly a 4 day trip, I'm going to get paid a minimum of 16 hrs. (4 hrs./day). If I fly one 1 hr. leg for the 1st two days of a 4 day trip, and then I fly 8 hrs. each day for the last two days, my pay is 24 hrs. (4+4+8+8). Under the TA, the minimum 4 hrs. per day would be averaged. The same previously mentioned trip would only pay 18 hrs. (1+1+8+8). I would receive 4 hrs. per day averaged over the 4 days, or whatever I actually flew, as long as it averaged at least 4 hrs. per day. I recently flew 2 trips in a row that were exactly like this. Having cumulative, as opposed to average somewhat forces crew planning to use us more efficiently.
Other issues I've heard about are reserve rules (under the current contract, our reserve pilots can easily make 90-100 hrs./month, whereas at just about any other carrier, & under the TA, they'd make minimum, in our case 70). Reduction in retirement insurance benefits was another one.
I've been told that many of the proposals in the TA would simply bring us to "industry standard". However, when they're a step backward, and the company's shown the ability to report yearly profits during trying times, it's hard to support this TA. We were in negotiations for (for us) a long time, and I have nothing but appreciation for our negotiators and their efforts. But in the last few weeks, there's been such a backlash against this TA as more details have been fully explained. Neither the company nor the union wanted to have the bad PR of an overwhelming "NO" vote, as would probably have happened. My "new and latest" prediction is that an agreement will be reached soon by resolving some of the issues listed above at the expense of reduced pay increases. We don't want to give up "quality of life" for pay raises. All parties want to hurry & get this done so attention can be turned back to the Midwest deal.
Has anyone heard any credible news on where things stand at the present? Seems like a good merger on paper for both airlines.
I keep hearing from our management, union reps., etc. that "it's a done deal" (which has been the death knell for many a transaction). I've also heard that management/union wants to get the pilot TA fixed, voted on, and approved prior to a buyout, and all of that is not going well.
QA4Jet-A
Veteran
I haven't heard a word Pro or Con on this in a while but my Gut feeling is.... Midwest will continue to turn FL down and Joe will walk away August 10, I believe that is the 'Drop Dead' date. At that time, expect a flurry of Lawsuits and pressure to be applied to the Midwest BOD. Then it will get interesting..... Until then, eat those warm cookies while they last. I'll take a Chocolate Mint bagged cookie over a Freshly Baked Pant stainer any day. CJ, Best of luck, to you Gents and Ladies who fly us all over, with your TA issue. I do hope you can settle it soon.
QA
CynicalResAgent
Veteran
Why Doesn't FL go after SY. They fly 737-800's I think. A hub in MSP would be geographically just as good as a hub in MKE.
The regional airline that has fought a hostile buyout from AirTran Holdings Inc. for months signaled Tuesday that it will consider the $389 million offer. Midwest, operator of Midwest Airlines, announced a committee of its board of directors will start discussions with AirTran. The operator of low-cost AirTran Airways has long argued a combination of the two would create a strong, national carrier.
Midwest said its committee also will meet with other companies that have recently expressed interest in the airline. It did not name those companies Tuesday and was quick to caution that the discussions do not mean a buyout is imminent.
story here
Midwest said its committee also will meet with other companies that have recently expressed interest in the airline. It did not name those companies Tuesday and was quick to caution that the discussions do not mean a buyout is imminent.
story here
Well from a midwest standpoint, for their ramp/gate/res people, I'd welcome it.
Since none of those groups are unionized(don't know about the pilots/f/a's/Amts) midwests people are FAR senior, and have more options.(like getting out of MKE, for ATL/MCO/FLL
Probably would'nt make a difference to the FL people either, meaning if I were working the ramp in ATL/MCO/FLL, I don't think I'd be "jumping" to go to MKE.
Can some one educate me to the union/NON union status of the Pilots/F-A's and AMT's of both carriers ?
Thanx
Since none of those groups are unionized(don't know about the pilots/f/a's/Amts) midwests people are FAR senior, and have more options.(like getting out of MKE, for ATL/MCO/FLL
Probably would'nt make a difference to the FL people either, meaning if I were working the ramp in ATL/MCO/FLL, I don't think I'd be "jumping" to go to MKE.
Can some one educate me to the union/NON union status of the Pilots/F-A's and AMT's of both carriers ?
Thanx
Similar threads
