Jonathan Ornstein Expressed His Displeasure

[gso-crew]

Mesa Air Group CEO Jonathan Ornstein said his airline will not add 737s to its fleet, an idea it has been considering since last year. "We've shelved those plans for now," he said in a speech to the Aero Club of Washington yesterday. "We have had some difficulty negotiating rates that were acceptable to us." He said the company had considered the 737s for service out of Pittsburgh in conjunction with partner US Airways. He also expressed his displeasure with pilot scope clauses, which place limits on the operation of regional jets for mainline partners, describing them as "an old school concept that doesn’t serve the legacy carriers or the people it is supposed to protect." Additionally, he called for airline management and labor representatives to have an "open conversation" in addressing the issue of labor costs that are significantly higher at legacy carriers than at LCCs. "We need to change the manner in which contracts are negotiated," he declared.--Sandra Arnoult

Air transport world.

 

[700UW]

Where are you soldwholesale?

Guess you were wrong once again.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Where are you soldwholesale?

Guess you were wrong once again.

[post="250749"][/post]​

Guess you didn't pick up that playboy like he recommended.

 

[Winglet]

Those are code words for "The unions need to be disbanded and I should be permitted to do ANYTHING I WANT to employees."

 

[unit4clt]

Those are code words for "The unions need to be disbanded and I should be permitted to do ANYTHING I WANT to employees."

[post="250764"][/post]​

If JO was dealing with US unions and their leaders, he would be permitted to do ANYTHING HE WANTED to employees, with union assistance. :down:

 

[mweiss]

I'd imagine that it's much easier to ignore customer service when you have someone else driving your sales and you're using someone else's brand.

Perhaps if Mesa had to go the route of Independence, they'd be forced to change. In the meantime, there's no incentive. To all but a very small handful of passengers, the airline with the unprofessional FAs is called "US Airways (Express)," not "Mesa."

 

[funguy2]

Orenstein's "expertise" isn't really operational. If I recall correctly, he was a Wall Street type wheeler-dealer prior to the airline biz... Mesa's growth by acquisition certainly supports this theory, as Mesa was cobbled together from the original Mesa Air Shuttle, Westair, CCAir, Air Midwest (and probably others)... His/Mesa's acquisition attempt at ACA and is pre-BK investment in US Airways are examples that he is still trying to wheel and deal...

 

[USA320Pilot]

Mesa is lowest cost US Airways Express operator who has the worst service record. US Airways has not yet affirmed any RJ affiliate carrier contract and is attempting to renegotiate air service contracts to obtain cheaper rates. Ornstein's comments above are likely due to his own problems trying to obtain as muc hrevenue for Mesa as possible laying the cost blame on mainine labor, versus looking at his own problems. motivation in his comments above. I agree with PineyBob when he said, "Well his remarks were IMO self serving to say the least."

Meanwhile, the Air Wisconsin agreement provides US Airways with leverage to extract concessions from its current RJ partners or the bankrupt carrier could reject existing agreements and replace them with regional flying flown by Air Wisconsin.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[Hello Newman]

Well his remarks were IMO self serving to say the least.

IMO Mr. Ornstein's time would be better spent improving the operational performance of his airline instead of pontificating on how everyone should work for free or next to free.

His time would also be better spent in more professional development of his F/A"s who leave much to be desired when it comes to people skills.

IMO his airline is the lowest common denominator when it comes to performance and customer satisfaction of all the regional carriers that fly jets. I attempt to book around them whenever I can.

In other words, Johnny fix your own house before you try to tell others how to fix theirs

[post="250766"][/post]​

MY SENTIMENTS EXACTLY. JOHNNY, CLEAN YOUR OWN HOUSE FIRST WHICH, BY THE WAY IS RESPONSIBLE PARTLY FOR USAIRWAYS CONTINOUSLY SLOPPY SERVICE AND INCREASING CUSTOMER DISSATISFACTION. AND HERE'S A RADICAL IDEA.......HOW ABOUT ACTUALLY OPERATING A PUBLISHED FLIGHT SHEDULE? I MEAN AN AIRPLANE THATS NOT BROKEN, THAT ACTUALLY HAS CREW
TO WORK IT AND THE DISPATCHERS KNOW WHERE THEIR PLANES ARE. YES, I KNOW ITS BOLD AND DARING BUT DO YOU THINK MAYBE IT COULD WORK? BY THE WAY JOHNNY, GIVE THE AWARD BACK TO ATW. ACCCEPTING IT IS FRAUDULENT AND DECEITFUL.

 

[funguy2]

Unfortunately, 9 times out of 10, you get what you pay for... I find it interesting that nobody seems to correlate that Mesa is "the worst" (anecdotally) Express provider and the lowest cost provider. I am certain those things are related. If US Airways wanted better service... All they have to do is pay for it!

You folks act like Orenstein's motivation is evil... He's just trying to make profit... Not wholly unlike US Airways.

And why shouldn't Orenstein's comments be self-serving. Almost all people are self-preservationists, and put their own interests first... Just look at drivers on the freeway... How often do people speed up instead of allowing you to merge? They put their own interests ahead of yours... Even if traffic flows smoother for everyone if they don't...

USA320Pilot, you are self-serving too... You take every argument to ensure that you are employed, rather than take any argument which might help the industry overall or the profession of piloting aircraft, perhaps at the expense of the next few years of your career.

Now, I don't disagree that Mesa needs to get its house in order. It probably does. But Orenstein seems to have one thing right... his company has more revenue than expense. Something US Airways should take a look at...

 

[SoldWholeSale]

Like I said, they had everything put together to start service out of PIT and were planning to go forward with it. The decision not to doesn't prove me wrong, when I was involved, the mechanism was in place to start flying 737's....

Is the March issue out yet??? 🙄

 

[linemech]

Mesa Air Group CEO Jonathan Ornstein said   "We have had some difficulty negotiating rates that were acceptable to us."
Air transport world.

[post="250748"][/post]​

It would seem that JO has finally been hit with the realization that the airline business is not as lucrative as it was when his good friend Dave Siegel was handing him US Airways routes faster than he could find crews to fly them.

I bet JO cried when Siegel bailed.
And from the sound of this article, he has not stopped ! :down:


linemech

 

[700UW]

No you said the planes were purchased last summer, you said the FSDO was approving manuals.

To this date nothing you have stated has come to fruition.

Do you want me to repost all your 737 diatribe to refresh how wrong you are?

 

[luvn737s]

Now, I don't disagree that Mesa needs to get its house in order. It probably does. But Orenstein seems to have one thing right... his company has more revenue than expense. Something US Airways should take a look at...

[post="250835"][/post]​

Who do you suppose is going to guarantee USAir a profit regardless of how much fuel goes up? Tell Jonnie O he's welcome to come out and fly RJ's at his own risk under Mesa colors to current express cities on a schedule that might connect with USAir and see if he returns your calls.

That the ATSB allows recipients of government guaranteed loans to enter into cost-plus contracts is corrupt to say the least. Did the government grant Mesa guaranteed loans? No, but they sure took the cheese when USAir grabbed them a pound.

 

[funguy2]

Umm... My point was that currently, Mesa's business model is one that produces profits... Even in the bad times.

If Mesa believed that creating an independent LCC or legacy-style business model would be profitable, I think Mesa would have done it.

Its not about who is going to guarntee who what... Its about Mesa has identified a service, for which it can (or at least could) provide at a profit to some customer. US Airways, provides a service, but not at a profit. And this is not Mesa's problem, in the short-term at least. It is a problem for Mesa in the long-term, as one or more of their customers may cease to exist. When you only have 3 customers out of a potential pool of 10 or less... that's the danger in Mesa's business model.

Different businesses. Different ways to operate. And currently, different results.