December 27 Airline News

C

chipmunn

Guest
[H2][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Air Travel Up Slightly, but Revenue Still Lags[/FONT][/H2][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]NEW YORK (New York Times) - Like the vanished vapor trail of a jet, the flush days of holiday air travel have disappeared.[/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]For the last year, people working in the air travel industry had hoped - and analysts had predicted - that this holiday season would lift the industry. But while more people are flying this year than at the same time last year, when the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks kept many at home, the numbers do not nearly approach those during the holiday season in 2000, considered a boom year for the industry.[/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Complete Story: [/FONT][A href=http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/28/business/28AIR.html?ex=1041656400&en=8db67cff32b8249a&ei=5040&partner=MOREOVER][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#0000ff size=3]http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/28/business/28AIR.html?ex=1041656400&en=8db67cff32b8249a&ei=5040&partner=MOREOVER[/FONT][/A][/NYT_HEADLINE][NYT_BYLINE type= version=1.0][/SPAN][/FONT][BR][BR][FONT color=#000000][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]Chip comments: [/STRONG]Last summer airline industry revenues were improving month-over-month; however, in September the revenue recovery stalled. At the time airline executives believed the September fall-off was due to fear of flying and the September 11 terrorist attack anniversary; however, revenue did not recover in October, November, and December.[BR][/FONT][/FONT][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][BR]This across-the-board industry problem has caused US Airways to not meet the revenue targets required in its RSA credit facility or the federal loan guarantee. Thus, to prevent the Arlington-based carrier from liquidating senior management reached TA's with its unions to cut costs another $200 million per year, imposed management concessions, obtained further other stakeholder cuts, and implemented additional operational savings for a grand total cost reduction of about an additional $500 million per year.[BR][/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#000000 size=3][SPAN class=t][STRONG][BR]United Files to End Labor Pacts, obtains interim pay cut TA's, mechanics hold out[/STRONG][/SPAN][/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#000000 size=3][SPAN class=t]CHICAGO (Reuters) - UAL Corp.'s United Airlines filed a motion in U.S. bankruptcy court on Friday seeking to scrap labor agreements as it aims to slash costs, but said that leaders of four of its six unions had agreed to pay cut deals.[/SPAN][/FONT][BR][BR][FONT color=#000000][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Complete Story: [/FONT][A href=http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/021227/airlines_united_11.html][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#0000ff size=3]http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/021227/airlines_united_11.html[/FONT][/A][/SPAN][/FONT][BR][BR][FONT color=#000000][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]United Says Most Unions Agree to Wage Cuts, company asks court to impose cuts on [/STRONG][STRONG]Machinists[/STRONG] [/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#000000 size=3][SPAN class=t]WASHINGTON (Washington Post) - United Airlines has tentative cost-cutting agreements with most of its unions, which could give the airline more time to reorganize, the company said yesterday in a filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Chicago.[/SPAN][/FONT][BR][BR][FONT color=#000000][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Complete Story: [/FONT][A href=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45840-2002Dec27.html][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#0000ff size=3]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45840-2002Dec27.html[/FONT][/A][/SPAN][/FONT][BR][BR][FONT color=#000000][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][STRONG]United Airlines Bankruptcy Update [BR][/STRONG][/FONT][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][BR]To District 141-M Represented Employees at United Airlines:[BR][BR]Dear Sisters and Brothers,[BR][/FONT][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][BR]In an expected development, United Airlines filed an application today in U.S. Bankruptcy court for rulings that can lead to changes in wages, work rules and benefits for IAM members and all unionized employees at United Airlines.[BR][BR]United petitioned the court for two rulings under Section 1113 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code: one, (an 1113© motion) begins a process that can lead to abrogation of collective bargaining agreements, the other, (an 1113(e) motion) seeks immediate financial relief, including a 13 percent pay cut, effective January 1, 2003, for IAM members at United.[BR][BR]United stated the proposed immediate wage cuts are necessary to achieve cost reductions targets required by its Debtor in Possession (DIP) financing terms through May 1, 2003. United’s complete 1113 application is available at [/FONT][A href=http://www.iam141m.org/ual1227Sec1113.pdf][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][A href=http://www.iam141m.org/ual1227Sec1113.pdfNon-negotiable]http://www.iam141m.org/ual1227Sec1113.pdf[/FONT][/A][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][BR][/A]Non-negotiable pay cuts proposed by United for IAM members as 'take it or leave it' measures was rejected by the district leadership and will not be presented to IAM membership for ratification. The IAM will object in court to United’s application for emergency wage reductions. We have taken this position in full knowledge that the proposed 13 percent pay reduction is just the first step in United’s cost reduction plan. United has made clear their intention to seek major scope changes in our agreement which would necessitate a second ratification.[BR][BR]Representatives of other Unions at United are presenting the company’s 1113(e) pay cut proposals for a ratification vote. United has applied to the bankruptcy court to impose their 1113(e) terms on IAM members in the event all the other unions ratify the terms proposed by United. [BR][BR]Also in today’s court filing, United stated that if temporary modifications are achieved, it would delay its application to seek total rejection of labor agreements until March 15, 2003. If the temporary terms are not in place either due to rejection by the membership of any other Union or the refusal of the judge to impose terms on IAM members, the application to reject the agreements that was filed today will go forward as scheduled.[BR][BR]The IAM believes United’s financial problems can best be resolved with a business plan that emphasizes negotiations and partnership with its union-represented employees for the long-term health of the airline, its employees and shareholders. The “13 percent solution†represents an approach using the court to impose temporary measures, but should not negate the need for a long-term resolution that would provide adequate opportunity for employee involvement and consent.[BR][BR]Judge Eugene R. Wedoff has scheduled a status conference on United’s application for December 30, 2002. The Machinists Union will be represented by attorney Sharon Levine from the firm Lowenstein Sandler.[BR][BR]We remain convinced that a comprehensive recovery plan can be a success for United’s employees, passengers and investors alike. [BR][BR]Sincerely and fraternally,[BR][BR]Scotty Ford[BR]President and General Chairman[BR]IAM District 141-M[BR][/FONT][/SPAN][/FONT][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#000000 size=3][STRONG][BR]Delta readies for more layoffs[/STRONG][/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#000000 size=3]ATLANTA (AP) - [FONT color=#000000]Nearly 4,000 employees at Delta Air Lines signed up for the latest round of early retirement or buyout offers, a Delta official said.[/FONT] [BR][/FONT][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][BR]Complete Story: [/FONT][A href=http://www.msnbc.com/news/851821.asp?0si][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]http://www.msnbc.com/news/851821.asp?0si[/FONT][/A][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]=-[/FONT][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][STRONG][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Continental Air/Mechanics: Co. To Pay Higher Wages[/FONT][/STRONG][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]HOUSTON (Dow Jones) - Continental Airlines Inc. said its mechanics and related employee groups represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters ratified a contract that provides for higher wages, improved work rules, increased retirement benefits and better job protection.[/FONT][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Complete Story: [/FONT][A href=http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/021227/2043000313_1.html][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#0000ff size=3]http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/021227/2043000313_1.html[/FONT][/A][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]Discount airline eyes daily route from Pittsburgh to Las Vegas[/STRONG][BR][BR]PITTSBURGH (Tribune-Review) - Calling its first two months at Pittsburgh International Airport a success, America West Airlines is en route to adding daily service to Las Vegas. [BR][BR]Seats have sold well on the discount carrier's two daily flights to its Phoenix hub and headquarters, piquing the carrier's interest in expanding at Pittsburgh International, which long has been dominated by hub airline US Airways. [/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Complete Story: [/FONT][A href=http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/news/s_110008.html][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#0000ff size=3]http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/news/s_110008.html[/FONT][/A][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][STRONG][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Judge: GE Can Advance Money to US Airways[/FONT][/STRONG][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A federal bankruptcy judge on Friday said he would allow General Electric Co. to provide $36.6 million to US Airways Group Inc. in a modification of a 2001 credit agreement.[/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Complete Story: [/FONT][A href=http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/021227/airlines_usairways_2.html][FONT face=Times New Roman color=#0000ff size=3]http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/021227/airlines_usairways_2.html[/FONT][/A][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]Chip comments:[/STRONG] [SPAN class=BodyFont]Reports indicate US Airways has reached a definitive agreement with Embraer for a large RJ order consisting of the EMB-170 and EMB-175 aircraft. US Airways has obtained delivery positions for later this year, the aircraft will be assigned to the new mainline MidAtlantic Airways division and will be financed by GECAS.[/SPAN][/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]In a December 21 Special Bulletin US Airways said, The planned emergence of some or all of the company's subsidiaries is not necessarily tied to the planned March 2003 emergence of US Airways. Prior to emerging, the wholly-owned regional air carriers must reach agreements with their respective labor unions on competitive contracts that will allow for the transition to an all-regional jet fleet at each of the subsidiaries. [BR][BR]Mainline ALPA's new restructuring agreement provides for the wholly-owneds to operate 25 CRJ-700 aircraft, solely flown by furloughed US Airways pilots. In addition, the first 25 wholly-owned Medium and Small RJs (50-seats and below) will be flown by wholly-owned pilots. [BR][BR]Upon completion of staffing of these aircraft, the 50/50 balance of hiring pursuant to the Jets for Jobs Protocol will be followed.[BR][BR]Also noteworthy, GECAS has agreed to not only fund Embraer deliveries, but CRJ-700 and other Medium and Small SJ aircraft.[/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]A formal announcement is expected if the company emerges from bankruptcy which is dependent upon reaching new labor accords, solving the pension problem, and qualifying for the federal loan guarantee.[/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][STRONG][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]US Airways Tidbits[/FONT][/STRONG][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]ALPA MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE - December 26, 2002[/STRONG][BR][BR]This is Roy Freundlich with the US Airways MEC update for Thursday, December 26, with two new items:[BR][BR]Item 1. ALPA discussed the processing of the Affected Pilots List (APL) today with Flight Operations management. The Company will begin calling pilots on the APL in seniority order for the Jets for Jobs vacancies at Midway Airlines. Considering the very short timeframe to fill the January 10, 2003, training class, ALPA and management have agreed that APL pilots who are unable to commit to a class date will not forfeit subsequent job opportunities at Midway Airlines.[BR][BR]If junior pilots fill such vacancies, senior pilots will be able to displace these pilots to achieve relative APL seniority at Midway, but will not be able to displace a more junior APL pilot out of a job at Midway Airlines. An updated Fact Sheet that includes this limited bypass exclusion and other added information is being posted on the MEC website at usairwayspilots.org[BR][BR]Separately, other than filling vacancies at Midway Airlines, the Company has not begun processing APL pilots’ preferences or made available to pilots a preference form to list preferences for employment with MDA, Participating Wholly-Owned Carriers, or Participating Affiliate Carriers as specified in the RA. APL pilots have not been given the opportunity to specify such preferences in accordance with the RA. We will announce the commencement of this process once it becomes available.[BR][BR]Item 2. Informational road shows explaining LOA 83-- Accelerated Small Jets, and LOA – 84 Supplementary Cost Reductions have been scheduled as follows:[BR][BR]Wednesday, January 8, CLT, at the Hilton Executive Park at 12:00 noon.[BR]Thursday, January 9, PIT, at the Embassy Suites at 10:00 a.m.[BR]Friday, January 10, SAN, at the Sheraton Hotel and Marina at 10:00 a.m.[BR]Monday, January 13, DCA, at the Crystal Gateway Marriott at 2:00 p.m.[BR]Tuesday, January 14, BOS, at the Hyatt Harborside at 10:00 a.m.[BR]Wednesday, January 15, LGA, at the Airport Marriott at 10:00 a.m.[BR]Thursday, January 16, PHL, at the Airport Marriott at 10:00 a.m.[BR][BR]The Negotiating Committee will present details of the Supplementary Cost Reductions Agreement, including explanations of the changes in pilot retirement and benefit programs. All US Airways pilots are encouraged to attend.[BR][BR]Please remember we have 1,356 pilots on furlough, with 392 pilot furloughs scheduled for January 7, and 79 pilot furloughs scheduled for February 4.[/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]ALPA MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE - December 27, 2002[BR][/STRONG][BR]This is Roy Freundlich with the US Airways MEC update for Friday, December 27, with four new items: [BR][BR]Item 1. The Company posted a CBS message [ATTACHED]today stating it is sending preference [BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]December 20, 2002[/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Dear US Airways Flight Attendant,[/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Your AFA Master Executive Council is bringing you this final proposal for ratification after difficult discussions between your negotiators and advisors, and US Airways management. [/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]The talks were conducted after management threatened that it will shut down the airline and liquidate under Chapter 7 of the bankruptcy code unless all of the labor groups agree to additional cuts in our contract. All of the other labor groups have had talks with management and are voting on additional cuts (the pilots and flight dispatchers have already ratified additional cuts).[/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN style=COLOR: windowtext][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3]After repeated attempts to negotiate a fair and just agreement, management insisted that its final proposal be presented to you for a vote. Faced with the threat of the loss of all flight attendant jobs if management were to shut down and liquidate, your MEC voted to send this proposal to the membership for a vote, with a recommendation by a majority of the MEC that flight attendants vote “FOR†this agreement. [/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN style=COLOR: windowtext][/SPAN][SPAN style=COLOR: windowtext][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]In Solidarity, [/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN style=COLOR: windowtext][/SPAN][SPAN style=COLOR: windowtext][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]The US Airways MEC [/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]HIGHLIGHTS OF THE TENTATIVE AGREEMENT[/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]2% lump sum payment on 3/1/2007 and 2% lump sum payment on 3/1/2008; [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Modify Variable Minimum Day to 5+00 hours with no floor and no
ceiling and change day and night rigs (Me-Too with ALPA) [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Modification to claiming sick leave; [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Minor change to rescheduling; [/FONT][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][BR]Major changes to Reserve system; [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Increase in Reserve Inviolable Days to 8 days; [/FONT][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][BR]Automatic release after trip assignment for Reserves (with exceptions); [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Preferential Bid System; [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Maintain the Bid Sheet; [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]AA Eagle wages, work rules and benefits for Mid-Atlantic; US Airways seniority and longevity for pay purposes; [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Changes in Medical/Dental (same as all other employee groups with the exception of ALPA and senior management - higher costs for ALPA and senior management); [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]Enhanced profit sharing; [/FONT][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][BR]Additional equity participation; [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]War Contingency -- 5% salary deferral (also applies to management); [/FONT][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3][BR]Changes to LTD and Workers' Compensation; [/FONT][BR][BR][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]NO CHANGES TO FLIGHT ATTENDANT PENSION PLAN.[BR][BR][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][STRONG][FONT face=Times New Roman size=3]US Airways Union TA ratification dates[/FONT][/STRONG][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]AFA -[/STRONG] The F/A's will use the Ballot Point voting system, which will close at 5:00 p.m. January 10 via the telephone or internet.[/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]IAM District 141 and 141-M -[/STRONG] Ratification voting will be held Friday, January 10, 2003 at local union halls.[/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][BR][BR][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][STRONG]CWA -[/STRONG] Ratification voting will occur between December 27 through January 10 at 5:00 p.m. via the telephone or internet. [/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][BR][BR][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][FONT face=Times New Roman][FONT size=3][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont][STRONG]US Airways airport facility relocations[/STRONG] - [/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=t][SPAN class=BodyFont][SPAN class=BodyFont]SEA personnel report US Airways has reached agreement with United Airlines to move its operations from the South Terminal to the North Terminal in May 2003. US Airways will take over two gates from United, have dedicated facilities, and its own IT system. In addition, reports circulating throughout the LAX station indicate US Airways will move from Terminal One on the north side of the field near United operations on the south complex.[/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/FONT][/FONT][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN][/SPAN]
 

Biffeman

Senior
Nov 25, 2002
447
0
www.usaviation.com
The shuttle aircraft will be redone to mainline configuration in July of 2003, and will compete for Airbus Aircraft on the routes. This is being done we are told to keep the fleet streamlined and the same configuration.[BR][BR]Also next August the 757 with 24/158 configuration will be converted over to 8/193 and run on high density low yield routes, ie. northeast to FL markets. Reconfiguration will take place from 8/03-9/03 at CLT base.
 

A320 Driver

Veteran
Aug 24, 2002
3,358
2,319
www.usaviation.com
Chip,
I heard that we are going to abandon the USAiways Shuttle brand name and take the Airbus off of the shuttle and replace it with the 737. What will this do to our competitve advantage and are we handing the shuttle over to DL and AA? Wasn't this one of our "Crown Jewels"?

A320 Driver
 

Biffeman

Senior
Nov 25, 2002
447
0
www.usaviation.com
The A321 will be transcon on the routes that will support it, but they said the 757s will be used high density, low yield markets and they said mostly in FL markets.
 

Art at ISP

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
2,457
418
Dix Hills NY
www.ffocus.org
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/28/2002 7:55:20 AM Biffeman wrote:

The shuttle aircraft will be redone to mainline configuration in July of 2003, and will compete for Airbus Aircraft on the routes. This is being done we are told to keep the fleet streamlined and the same configuration.

Also next August the 757 with 24/158 configuration will be converted over to 8/193 and run on high density low yield routes, ie. northeast to FL markets. Reconfiguration will take place from 8/03-9/03 at CLT base.
----------------
[/blockquote]

OK so-the shuttle is going mainline, and we lose the legroom. 757's will only have 8 FC seats. Seems more like a WN to me--and they will lose whatever shuttle passengers they had. Seems like a mistake to me unless DL reconfigs the 738 as well.

Say goodbye to upgrades on the 757. (I usually pay M or higher fares anyway). How about 321's? Will 757's do the high density routes exclusively, leaving transcon to the 321?

Just my 2C
 
OP
C

chipmunn

Guest
Biff's information is correct and both of these strategic moves have been previously discussed by the company in different employee forums. In my opinion, the transition to the B-737 in Shuttle markets will reduce loses and better match capacity with demand.

US Airways currently operates eight A320 Shuttle aircraft with 150 seats and seven A319 Shuttle aircraft. These markets have to much capacity with DL & AA Eagle and the transition to the B737 will help US bottom line.

The current Airbus Shuttle aircraft are Extended Over Water (EOW) aircraft and could provide greater Caribbean lift with their re-deployment.

The B757 cabin reconfiguration will add 19 seats and be used on routes that are primarily for leisure traffic, including Las Vegas and Florida. This transition to a higher seating capacity will provide greater revenue and improve profitability in these low yield markets.

Chip
 

cavalier

Veteran
Aug 28, 2002
2,409
1
www.usaviation.com
What you ought to be doing is increasing service on those routes and making the experience so pleasurable that customers will spend more time on your airline with the rest of their business building miles or choosing to pay more to take those flights because they are clearly better than a SWA flight even though they may cost a bit more.[BR]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[BR][BR] Well I believe they reason that revenue is absolutely critical, hence the cattle cars.[BR][FONT size=2][/FONT]
 

TomBascom

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
660
0
3A
www.greenfieldtech.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/29/2002 6:16:44 AM chipmunn wrote:
The B757 cabin reconfiguration will add 19 seats and be used on routes that are primarily for leisure traffic, including Las Vegas and Florida. This transition to a higher seating capacity will provide greater revenue and improve profitability in these low yield markets.

Chip
----------------
[/blockquote]

The death spiral accelerates.

This is the same fundamental misunderstanding of the customer base that Mr Baldanza made with his ill fated Dividend Miles changes. These routes may be "low yield" or "leisure" routes but just exactly who do you think is flying on them? People who take one trip per lifetime and who will never ever be back on a US Airways plane? They better be because that's what you're setting yourself up for...

If, on the other hand, the customers on those planes consist of your core customers their families and friends who just happen to be taking advantage of one of the very few differentiating factors left to a network airline -- namely that it flies to interesting places -- to take a vacation then you really don't want to be decreasing service and turning the experience into even more of a hell than it already is.

What you ought to be doing is increasing service on those routes and making the experience so pleasurable that customers will spend more time on your airline with the rest of their business building miles or choosing to pay more to take those flights because they are clearly better than a SWA flight even though they may cost a bit more.
 

oldiebutgoody

Veteran
Aug 23, 2002
2,627
945
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/29/2002 9:29:15 AM TomBascom wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/29/2002 6:16:44 AM chipmunn wrote:
The B757 cabin reconfiguration will add 19 seats and be used on routes that are primarily for leisure traffic, including Las Vegas and Florida. This transition to a higher seating capacity will provide greater revenue and improve profitability in these low yield markets.

Chip
----------------
[/blockquote]

The death spiral accelerates.

This is the same fundamental misunderstanding of the customer base that Mr Baldanza made with his ill fated Dividend Miles changes. These routes may be "low yield" or "leisure" routes but just exactly who do you think is flying on them? People who take one trip per lifetime and who will never ever be back on a US Airways plane? They better be because that's what you're setting yourself up for...

If, on the other hand, the customers on those planes consist of your core customers their families and friends who just happen to be taking advantage of one of the very few differentiating factors left to a network airline -- namely that it flies to interesting places -- to take a vacation then you really don't want to be decreasing service and turning the experience into even more of a hell than it already is.

What you ought to be doing is increasing service on those routes and making the experience so pleasurable that customers will spend more time on your airline with the rest of their business building miles or choosing to pay more to take those flights because they are clearly better than a SWA flight even though they may cost a bit more.

----------------
[/blockquote]
The fact is that it is the "cattle car" airlines that make money. The business traveller does not want to pay the high fares which allow higher levels of service. This move by U makes great sense and SHOULD help to compensate for the lower yields of today's market. I, as a traveller, care little about my ride to/from destinations. I am much more concerned with safety, value, and schedules. If this new system allows that, it will be HUGE! As a business person, I understand that you have got to give the customers what they want. It's all about VALUE, NOT PRICE!
 

mbmbbost

Advanced
Dec 13, 2002
213
0
The cattle car might be ok for quick non-stops, but will surely not create any loyalty with the connections required today in any of those markets it appears destined for. As far as I'm concerned, connections between the northeast and Florida will never work, just way too much opportunity to create delays, when most people have other more convenient options. The other night I saw probably 400 bags sitting on the floor in MHT, that apparently had misconnected. I wonder how much it will cost to deliver all those? (I suppose MHT will always require a connection on US, but you get the idea. I'd have been in BOS if there were a nonstop, even at a higher price).
 

DLFlyer31

Senior
Aug 20, 2002
444
0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/29/2002 9:29:15 AM TomBascom wrote:

What you ought to be doing is increasing service on those routes and making the experience so pleasurable that customers will spend more time on your airline with the rest of their business building miles or choosing to pay more to take those flights because they are clearly better than a SWA flight even though they may cost a bit more.

----------------
[/blockquote]

You seem to be mis-characterizing these routes as having this amazing amount of pent-up demand for premium service. The NE-Florida route is driven almost entirely by price and nothing more. Sure, U could offer more services, but I can guarantee you that few people would be willing to pay more. That's just not the nature of these routes and it's been proven over and over again. I'm sure most of U's loyal flyers would welcome a nonstop 757 from BOS to Florida regardless of the configuration since currently U offers no nonstop service.

These changes seem pretty consistent with what DL is doing. DL is getting ready to put the high density 757's on the NE-Florida corridor.

As for the Shuttle, DL is considering pulling the 738's and sending them back to mainline. In their place, DL will take the 733 and put it in Shuttle config. The 733 is such a small part of DL's fleet it will be more cost effective to isolate them in the Shuttle market and the 733 will do a better job matching capacity with demand. All of DL's 738's will be in mainline configuration and able to provide a little more lift in place of the 757's that are heading to the new LCC.
 

TomBascom

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
660
0
3A
www.greenfieldtech.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/29/2002 10:37:16 AM DLFlyer31 wrote:
You seem to be mis-characterizing these routes as having this amazing amount of pent-up demand for premium service. The NE-Florida route is driven almost entirely by price and nothing more...
[/blockquote]

I don't believe the US Airway's knows squat about who its customers are or why they fly the airline. As evidence one need only look at any press release from Mr. Baldanza.

If you don't know who your customers are and why they're using your service you cannot possibly make good decisions about running the business.

If, in fact, price is all that matters then this strategy makes perfect sense. But if that is true then you are producing an undifferentiated commodity and you don't stand a chance. Get it over with and go to chapter 7.

I am not saying that there is an amazing pent up demand for premium service. I am saying that I believe that it is very likely that a significant portion of the customers flying from the Northeast to Florida are repeat customers. Many of them are frequent fliers. Many of them spend large sums of money with the airline on their other trips. They like things like upgrades, warm meals and preferred boarding. It seems likely to me that they wish to enjoy those things, such as they are, on these routes as well. I know that when I head down there with the family I certainly desire them.

If you take these routes, pack the cattle cars, reduce service levels and otherwise make it so that the only difference between US Airways and SWA from the Northeast to Florida is that SWA will treat you like a valued customer then guess what's going to happen?

[blockquote]
Sure, U could offer more services, but I can guarantee you that few people would be willing to pay more.
[/blockquote]

You cannot run a network airline route by route.

[blockquote]
That's just not the nature of these routes and it's been proven over and over again.
[/blockquote]

I doubt the "proof". I think that you're repeating management provided kool-aid. Management can't get anything else right -- why should they suddenly have their heads screwed on right on this issue? If nothing else AOG-N-IT ought to be muttering about the foolishness of introducing yet more variation in the aircraft. (I know it's "just" the cabin and that's relatively minor -- but the same principle applies.)

[blockquote]
I'm sure most of U's loyal flyers would welcome a nonstop 757 from BOS to Florida regardless of the configuration since currently U offers no nonstop service.
[/blockquote]

Just like they flocked to MetroJet? There's more to it than price and schedule. People are loyal for a set of reasons -- and the livery isn't generally one of those reasons.

[blockquote]
These changes seem pretty consistent with what DL is doing. DL is getting ready to put the high density 757's on the NE-Florida corridor.
[/blockquote]

Follow the leader right off the cliff. Good idea. How about thinking for yourselves once in a while? I thought the idea of having a management team was so that they could innovate -- if all you need to do is to follow the leader then save some money and outsource the CEO position...

[blockquote]
As for the Shuttle, DL is considering pulling the 738's and sending them back to mainline. In their place, DL will take the 733 and put it in Shuttle config. The 733 is such a small part of DL's fleet it will be more cost effective to isolate them in the Shuttle market and the 733 will do a better job matching capacity with demand. All of DL's 738's will be in mainline configuration and able to provide a little more lift in place of the 757's that are heading to the new LCC.
----------------
[/blockquote]

You'll note that I've no issues with the shuttle move.
 

autofixer

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
1,804
241
www.usaviation.com
I have learned at the business school of "hard knocks", it is not about cash flow; it is about profits. U does not understand this basic rule. I know they are in ch 11 and need the cash, however, it is the wrong way to do business...what is new about U and not knowing how to "run an airline?"
 

trvlr64

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
725
10
FLL
www.usaviation.com
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/29/2002 5:08:59 PM PineyBob wrote:

As always Tom you are on point! I have been on the Sales/marketing side of my business which ia also a "MATURE" industry. We have a saying "If you can't be better, be different". I think in US Airways case that quote applies. Since to me at least it is quite clear that the company can NEVER hope to compete with the likes of SWA, ATA, etc. strictly on price. The question then becomes how to differentiate what is essentially a commodity product? Customer service is one way. Simplified fare & associated rules is another. RJ's with a F/C Cabin on the 70-75 seaters is another. These could be part of a marketing concept that could be easity articulated and promoted aggressively.


Would US Airways consider a Customer Advisory Council, consisting of say 15 PAX who fly regularly to participate in quarterly roundtables to improve response to customer requirements? That is something else that would be unique and could be marketed?
----------------
[/blockquote]


Why not look at America West to see what they have done with the fare structure. They made a change that results in higher yields and more money for them. Plus the business traveler is liking this. But this pissed off Continental and now they don't partner with them anymore.

Plus the use of FOCUS GROUPS is something that my company uses to improve it's product lines. This is definitely something that USAirways NEEDS to do. Simply listening to your customers helps. What a novel idea, huh?!
 

sdavis29

Advanced
Nov 13, 2002
222
0
www.usaviation.com
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 12/29/2002 6:20:48 PM Busdrvr wrote:
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 12/28/2002 7:55:20 AM Biffeman wrote: [BR][BR]Also next August the 757 with 24/158 configuration will be converted over to 8/193 and run on high density low yield routes, ie. northeast to FL markets. [BR]----------------[BR][/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]Hmmm.... 8+193=201.... Did any thought go into the implication of the revenue generated by the two additional seats vs the cost of the additional staffing (5 F/A's instead of 4)?[BR]
[P][/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]could it possibly be 8/182....taking out 16 f/c adding 35 coach does not seem right....16 to 24 maybe
 

Latest posts