Ground Handling

[EMBFA]

Just read that Northwest is taking over Northwest Airlink baggage handling from Mesaba in MSP and DTW. In the last year or two United has taken over ORD Express operations and Delta now handles ATL Connection flights instead of ASA. Would it help improve Express ops in places like PHL if mainline took over the operations from Piedmont in the hubs? Essentially it would probably just mean re-hiring PDT employees at the higher mainline wage and having a seamless single operation instead of two. Any thoughts?

 

[ALCARLOS]

Essentially it would probably just mean re-hiring PDT employees at the higher mainline wage and having a seamless single operation instead of two.

How does this impact the union of each work group?

 

[EMBFA]

As I understand, Piedmont is non-union (Allegheny was but lost it when merged with PDT). PSA is union but are much smaller- they only do PIT and some outstations. Piedmont is all the other hubs and most Express stations..

 

[Old PSA]

Way back when......1991.....if I remember right, all ramp functions and passenger service functions at mainline cities were handled by mainline employees. Pre-union. It really did work better then, everybody was on equal terms. Cooperation was much greater then then now. It was really interesting when someone complained, they could find themselves working in the area they complained about. Sort of made you see the bigger picture.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Wouldn't be better if US did all the Express Ops? From the Commuters all the way up, thus branding ONE product, and consistant product? If Mesa/Air Wiscosin or others are willing to fly a route, they are making money, and where does US' cut come from? First on hand I know US has to handle its own workforce first. Yes it means growing the company bigger, but it does give full control in house. Would it be worth it in the long run?

 

[EMBFA]

Well I doubt theres any US employee who doesnt wish US branded flights were only flown by US and WO employees. The difference in consistency, quality, morale, and qol/stability for employees would be so astounding it would be a good airline, therefore it would never even be considered. As for the ground handling US is always a late to the party copycat but maybe they might realize the efficiencies of a single operation per hub city.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Well I doubt theres any US employee who doesnt wish US branded flights were only flown by US and WO employees. The difference in consistency, quality, morale, and qol/stability for employees would be so astounding it would be a good airline, therefore it would never even be considered. As for the ground handling US is always a late to the party copycat but maybe they might realize the efficiencies of a single operation per hub city.

If my memory recalls, wasn't US the last major carrier to get RJ's on-line? I also remember a campaign about the same time, another airline boasted an "All-Jet" Fleet All Around. I want to say CO, but they flew props, not too long ago.

 

[EMBFA]

US scope only allowed 70 RJs, only at affiliates for some reason. Then they allowed unlimited. Then they allowed 70 seaters only flown by US employees. Then they allowed 70 seaters by anybody, and now 90 seaters by anyone. Bizarrely enough, an outside contractor can fly an 86 seat jet with the same flight deck as a mainline plane, but a wholly owned may not fly a 70 seat prop. Only US Airways ALPA.

It was Continental and ExpressJet when Dave Siegel ran it that were banging thier pots and pans about beng all-jet. We all remember that Siegel had a real hard-on for RJs, especially if a non US employee was sitting inside it. Now a few years later the 50 seat jet is going the way of the dodo bird, and CO is adding Q400s.

 

[BoeingBoy]

If my memory recalls, wasn't US the last major carrier to get RJ's on-line?

Depends on how you look at it....

US had 65-75 seat jets flying long before the other "bigger" airlines heard of RJ's - they were called F28's. Pay scales, if they'd been around long enough to go thru the BK adjustments, would make Mesa's look high.

But US choose to get rid of it's in house "RJ's", and by the time they got contracted ones they were indeed "late to the party".

Jim

 

[BuffaloJoe]

Depends on how you look at it....

US had 65-75 seat jets flying long before the other "bigger" airlines heard of RJ's - they were called F28's. Pay scales, if they'd been around long enough to go thru the BK adjustments, would make Mesa's look high.

But US choose to get rid of it's in house "RJ's", and by the time they got contracted ones they were indeed "late to the party".

Jim

Are you refering the F28 is the same as the F100? Or am I thinking about those old Bac-111's?

 

[BoeingBoy]

The F100 was a derivative of the F28 like the MD-80 was a derivative of the DC9 - longer, updated engines & cockpit, etc.

The F28 seated 65 or 75 in all coach (1000 & 4000 model respectively), or 63/73 with 2 rows of F/C (if I remember correctly).

Jim

 

[EMBFA]

The F28 and F100 were the earlier version of the E170 and E190. Except they weren't outsourced, hence the growth and lack of stagnation.

 

[freedom]

i thought i'd add to this topic as that it deals with my most favorite airline MESA .... Let me state for the record again ,that mesa is the WORST airline i have ever seen , here in PHX we spit on them , i HATE them , i hate them more than any company or personal issue , if i had to stay at my lowly america west payscale and in return i could see mesa air go out of bussiness i would ... Their work force is full of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX... they lose HALF their work force every year in the summer . Did you know here in PHX one of their ramp drivers ran down one of our MX people , i hear the guy who got run over is in the hospital with a broken leg and ankle , not to mention a week prior to that one of their runners ran over some of our equipment and got thrown from his tug , then his tug was on a collsion course with one of our planes engines , do they even DRUG test over there ?

if you want to know if things would be better if we did the work ourselves ,YES ... for years america west has had a bad rep just because of mesa , even after we cleaned up our opps mesa was STILL dragging us down ....

one word for them

WORTHLESS.....

 

[BuffaloJoe]

i thought i'd add to this topic as that it deals with my most favorite airline MESA .... Let me state for the record again ,that mesa is the WORST airline i have ever seen , here in PHX we spit on them , i HATE them , i hate them more than any company or personal issue , if i had to stay at my lowly america west payscale and in return i could see mesa air go out of bussiness i would ... Their work force is full of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX... they lose HALF their work force every year in the summer . Did you know here in PHX one of their ramp drivers ran down one of our MX people , i hear the guy who got run over is in the hospital with a broken leg and ankle , not to mention a week prior to that one of their runners ran over some of our equipment and got thrown from his tug , then his tug was on a collsion course with one of our planes engines , do they even DRUG test over there ?

if you want to know if things would be better if we did the work ourselves ,YES ... for years america west has had a bad rep just because of mesa , even after we cleaned up our opps mesa was STILL dragging us down ....

one word for them

WORTHLESS.....

Maybe the INS people ought to check out Mesa, maybe some illegals. Might be their "Crash Course" in driving.

I hope the Guy is getting better!

 

[Harry Callahan]

There is no question in my mind we would be much better off if mainline took over the express opns.