Company wants addittional SJ Authority...

[USAirBoyA330]

ALPA is reporting that the company wants additional 70 SEAT RJ''s flown at contract carriers. The don''t want the 70 seaters limited to MidAtlantic. (If there ever is a MidAtlantic)
The ALPA MEC will convene a special meeting next week to discus the matter.

 

[Eris]

With thousands of Mainline employees furloughed, they now want to farm out work to a company with thousands of employees that make less than half the wages...

As a customer I fully expect that the savings will be passed on to me. I'll feel real comfortable buying the SUPER Nintendo with my cost savings for my kid’s Christmas present, while more Mainline employees get a pink Christmas card from uncle Dave that says they are no longer needed...


Q: When do you tell a vacuum cleaner salesman to leave? A: Before he starts to suckup.

 

[cubfan02us]

A couple of days ago Mesa reported earnings.An analyst
commented that Mesa was picking up rj flying for U,and
that he anticipated that they would be getting more.
I'd tell Dave and his band of merry men ,and the boys
at Mid-Atlantic...show me the money!!!

 

[chipmunn]

MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE - November 1, 2002

This is Roy Freundlich with a US Airways MEC update for Friday, November 1:

MEC Chairman Chris Beebe has called a special MEC meeting to convene in Pittsburgh on Wednesday, November 6 at 10 a.m. and adjourn at the completion of business.

The agenda is as follows:

1. To consider the Company’s request for additional small jet relief. [The Company has requested that small jet code sharing authority be expanded beyond the authority granted in the Restructuring Agreement. Management is requesting authority to operate 70-seat small jets at affiliate (non-wholly own) carriers, instead of only at MidAtlantic Airways.]

2. Negotiating Committee update including Retirement and Insurance issues.

3. ALPA Economics and Financial Affairs Department Update

By mutual agreement MidAtlantic contract negotiations will continue next week without facilitation. The facilitation and arbitration process is scheduled to begin the following week in Pittsburgh. An updated Negotiations Progress Sheet is being posted on the pilot only section of the MidAtlantic pilot website.

 

[mrplanes]

IMHO:
We do not have the money to get the 70 seaters and get started at MDA. Mesa does. We need the 70 seaters to fill the holes we have made at various locations by pulling out mainline jets because they were losing money. So Dave asks ALPA for authority to use 70 seaters for that very reason. My answer would be sure Austin Dave. And as soon as we emerge from BK you have exactly 6 months to replace those Mesa jets with MDA jets. Because after 6 months the authority we grant expires. That would solve the problem.

Look folks, we have given what we have been asked. While I fully agree that Austin Dave may need more IN THE SHORT TERM, any further givebacks must be conditioned with snap backs to our original deals. We MUST help the company to get through this BK/revenue shortfall/Iraq conflict/high fuel etc... problem, but we absolutely have got to SNAP BACK to the original deals. That is what he wanted and that is where we must stand. If he and his team know what they are doing, then he got what he said they needed in the original go around. Temporary relief now? Yes. Making that permanent? No way. His response to that deal will tell us whether he intends to make this company run or break it up into pieces. Just my humble opinion.

mrplanes.

 

[fatburger]

I do indeed hope that the USAirways MEC does not give relief on the 70 seat RJ issue. There is a restructuring agreement signed already. They can talk in 2008.

Jon Orenstien is bad for aviation(pilots) and he and Dave are joined at the hip it seems.

 

[exagony]

I guess what goes around comes around eh? For years the WO's have been trying to get RJ's but ML kept outsourcing them to Messup Air and S@*ttaqua. No problem - because it didn't hurt ML career's - only the WO's. How does it feel now? You made your bed now go lay in it. All you had to do was get your heads out of your a$$es years ago and allow the RJs to remain in house at the WOs. Nope - too much greed at ML - I hope all the RJ's go to the contract carriers at ML's expense. You reap what you sow. I feel bad for the non-pilots at U - I wish you the best - but the ML pilots - you're greater than thou attitudes will surely get you a job at the local gas station. I am a former WO pilot and I hope the Wo's survive - they are after all the only profitable part if U. But for all the ML maggots out there I'll see you on the unemployment line.

 

[sabre]

Ask, ask, ask...then sell. For all of you who have your eyes closed, this is the same song played by airlines in the past. I hate to bust your bubble but Austin Dave isn't doing anything new here.
Unfortunately, there is not much hope for me. Even my fellow employees are kind of weared down and are now saying whatever happens so be it.

We can't even get enough cards signed to get AMFA and have hit a stall. It is truly sick that even some of the more vocal friends of mine have become so frustrated by how the IAM screwed us and had us vote on the same thing twice that everyone feels it won't matter anyways, the IAM is going to get any vote they may need. We are doomed. Chip wins and Dave will get everything he wants.

 

[LDKIAM]

What is AMFA gonna do? Not a damn thing, when are you people gonna realize, if we did not accept the concessions they would have gutted our contract. Even if AMFA is voted in, the company does not have renegoiate our contract till 60 days before the amendable date. You people need to realize how bad things are and accept reality of this industry today.

 

[p.o.-ed w.o.-ed]

ML's: This attitude (exagony's) is not from just a kook, this is the way ALL the WO's pilots think about you. You've shown us that it is everyone-for-themselves. So much for union brotherhood. You have fulfilled your own fear: Now we would gladly take your jobs for less money. Management couldn't have done it better.

 

[OldpropGuy]

[P]It appears that now the plan is to give the mainline flying to the contract carriers. [STRONG]Now that the wholey-owneds are slowly being eliminated (even though no one seems to care), as their flying is taken over by Mesa and the other low bidders, the next obvious target is the high-dollar group. [/STRONG]Think of the millions this will save! Eventually, the company will not be operating any aircraft and the savings will be unimaginable. [/P]
[P]Obviously, this is the only right thing to do as US Airways is not in the position to buy any of the badly needed RJ's at the present time. We should all quickly agree for the sake of the company. We all must give and not think only of ourselves in these trying times.[img src='http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/images/smilies/6.gif'] [/P]
[P]It's hard to be an optomist as this ship continues to sink.............. [STRONG]It's way past time to get on the life jackets![/STRONG] The future here is not very bright at the moment.[/P]

 

[p.o.-ed w.o.-ed]

Guess what airline Dave is most likely talking about flying those 70 seaters? FREEDOM AIRLINES It will be interesting what your MEC will do and how national ALPA will react. Will Freedom suddently become acceptable? Yeah, I know, show me the money. Hell of a morality.

 

[chipmunn]

US management is changing its business plan to include a marketplace that has a U.S. lead invasion of Iraq. Apparently, the company does not want to spend precious capital on aircraft acquisitions during the worsening industry-wide economic environment.

The restructuring plan announced last Spring did not take into account the pending Middle East invasion and its effect on the airline industry. Who could have guessed this?

The company does have holes in its route network that need to be filled and planned on MDA, other WO, and affiliate RJ expansion to fill the gap, but now the only aircraft capital acquisition available is controlled by the affiliates (some by Mesa/Freedom Air), who have not agreed to J4J.

In my opinion, the US ALPA MEC will provide increased RJ authorization via LOA 79, but it's unclear how the 70-seat issue will be resolved.

We'll know more later this week.

Chip

 

[TBONEJ4J]

.......the company does not want to spend precious capital on aircraft acquisitions during the worsening industry-wide economic environment


Chip,

They have no need to. That's why Lease Agreements exist. Allowing a wet-lease to dry-lease arrangement will keep the aircraft in the US Air Group for the same or less cost than contracting for the same aircraft. This can all be done within the parameters of the current agreements.

To extend the permissions of LOA79 is unconscionable when there are going to be 1800 US Airways pilots on the unemployment line.

If Dave thinks we can generate revenue and make a profit by contracting out the flying of 50 or 70 seaters, we can most certainly do the same by leasing the equipment from those providers.

NO CAPITAL OUTLAY REQUIRED.

The bills get paid as the revenue generates, and 1,800 US Airways pilots have a shred of hope that they may see another paycheck for flying an airplane, just like their 'Senior' Union Brothers.

 

[TBONEJ4J]

Whoever has the 70 seaters that 'Dave' wants, is surely only interested in making money with their shiny new airplanes. Can anyone here say Wet-Lease?

Do not outsource any more flying!!!! There is no need to contract out any flying. For the love of God, NO MORE OUTSIDE CONTRACTING.

MDA, or even PSA, PDT or ALG can wetlease the necessary equipment (from MESA or whoever) until such time as their own crews are trained, at which time the Wet-Lease can become a dry lease. Problem solved and the flying stays in the group. If US Airways can, in bankruptcy, enter into a new code share agreement for 70 seaters, it can most certainly Dry or Wet lease the same aircraft.

When our buddy Dave took over he emphasised the immense value and brand recognition of the US Airways 'FRANCHISE'. I fear that was not a slip of the tongue. Correct me if I'm wrong but US Airways is an Airline with real property and employees. It is not a 'Franchise'.

Of course if you contract most or ALL of the flying out to franchisees.........