Management Shuttle Road Shows

In lieu of BOS/Florida nonstops, LGA/Florida nonstops (like they used to have)would make sense, both to help fill shuttle seats and for the NY market. But I suppose it won''t happen...they''ll let Delta/Song and JetBlue have it all..
 
----------------
On 6/16/2003 7:06:56 PM LavMan wrote:


Have you all not heard the delay in the 170 delivery?

http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/030616/airshow_embraer_3.html

----------------​
This is software only, it will not slow down the actual production of the aircraft. The biggest issue is whether the software changes will slow down crew training. Since the 170 was not really slated to be in service until the first quarter of 2004 anyway, this is not as big an issue as some maay suspect. If updating the software now eliminates a problem like we had in the FMGC software on the A330, it is a bonus in the long run.
 
For what it''s worth, the Shuttle A320s are looking VERY used as of late. I flew on one PHL-DCA last week and was stunned at how much they''ve aged. I used to fly the Shuttle every week DCA-LGA and remember how new and clean they used to be. Now, they aren''t much better than the 733s out there in some cases.
 
I understand that US Airways wants to make changes with the shuttle. With all the media hype that they did with our Airbus for our shuttle customers it would be a slap in the face to offer them the old 737 in place of the airbus. It is like going back in time and bringing the 727 out of retirement.

I think the airbus should stay where it is at in LGA.
 
----------------
On 6/17/2003 12:09:26 PM PepsiFlyBoy wrote:

I understand that US Airways wants to make changes with the shuttle. With all the media hype that they did with our Airbus for our shuttle customers it would be a slap in the face to offer them the old 737 in place of the airbus. It is like going back in time and bringing the 727 out of retirement.

I think the airbus should stay where it is at in LGA.

----------------​
A slap in the face is the new trend here...How about all those folks being packed into the RJ''s for a few hour haul..Impressive, you bet. We are going backwards in a hurry. Look for DH-8''s on the Shuttle next. There are a lot of markets out there that haul more than the Shuttle that have already been " Slapped"
 
Its looking more and more like a Dog and Pony Show.

CHP Psgrs have noticed alot of details,and let me tell you tis not good!

They are ticked off, so Consumer Affairs will be hearing their voices...

hellooooooo....
 
Lavman:

I fully recognize the issue of outsourcing, which is a marketplace movement and is one being faced throughout the industry. Kiosks and furloughed pilots performing simulator training (as an on-call contractor) are two examples facing two other US work groups.

The issue is not whether or not there will be a fight, the issue is whether or not Airbus subcontractor maintenance is contractually permitted. As far as a historical perspective, you're right in regard to previous aircraft, but today we have different economics and new CBA's.

Siegel understands that the U.S. airline industry has become a commodity based business and those who will be successful are those who can transport a passenger from point "A" to point "B" at the lowest CASM and highest yield RPM.

I believe the US restructuring has just begun, there will be enormous US internal pressure to reduce costs going forward, and Siegel is "bottom line" CEO, which is likely required to successfully compete with the low cost and network carriers.

Do I like it? No, but, I believe it's the reality of today's marketplace. From a business perspective, I believe US is much further along than other legacy airlines who are just now witnessing this secular shift and trying to figure out how to deal with it.

Best regards,

Chip
 
Chip can you not comprehend that the scope language has not changed in regards to overhauling of aircraft? The language is still the same as it was since 1949.
 
Lavman:

Lavman said: "Chip can you not comprehend that the scope language has not changed in regards to overhauling of aircraft? The language is still the same as it was since 1949."

Chip answers: Lav, I fully understand the issue at hand. Every airline employee at every network carrier has the same problem. In reality, the issue is low-cost carriers with CASM’s between 7 and 8 cents, with network carriers much higher. According to news media reports, the IAM does not specifically state A320 work and the company believes it has the contractual right to outsource this maintenance. That’s their position and with a 6-year contract, I believe this issue will go to an expedited grievance.

Best regards,

Chip
 
Yesterday Steve Usery and Andrew Norcella provided a Power Point presentation on the Shuttle. Management has indicated and Dave Siegel personally told me in May the company would change Shuttle aircraft, but that the move would not occur for about one year.

Some of the issues are the A319/B737 cabin reconfiguration expense, flight crew over night hotel expense, and CRS direct routings to the West Coast.

Yesterdays meeting primarily talked about Shuttle performance, the operation continues to lose money, there is to much capacity in the system, and some people believe the meeting’s real agenda was to lower the expectations of the employees as to what to expect in the future.

I understand the real message was something has to change, the company may drop the Shuttle name, and US Airways made some money in April and May with the schedule reduction. Management was disappointed DL put the flights back in; however, to be competitive US had to match. All three Shuttle carriers continue to lose money due to over capacity and the standby aircraft may be redeployed to other opportunities.

In my opinion, DL’s move was to hurt US, not to make money. Therefore, it would not surprise me to see the EMB-170 in a single-class configuration with 78-seats operate the Shuttle in the future, permitting A319 redeployment in long-range markets.

There will be additional information forthcoming from today’s meetings.

Best regards,

Chip
 
----------------
On 6/18/2003 9:57:20 AM Chip Munn wrote:



Lavman:

Lavman said: "Chip can you not comprehend that the scope language has not changed in regards to overhauling of aircraft? The language is still the same as it was since 1949."

Chip answers: Lav, I fully understand the issue at hand. Every airline employee at every network carrier has the same problem. In reality, the issue is low-cost carriers with CASM’s between 7 and 8 cents, with network carriers much higher. According to news media reports, the IAM does not specifically state A320 work and the company believes it has the contractual right to outsource this maintenance. That’s their position and with a 6-year contract, I believe this issue will go to an expedited grievance.

Best regards,

Chip




----------------​
Chip the contract language does not specify any type of airplane, it has been IAM covered work since 1949 and it will remain IAM covered work at US Airways, once again I ask you the same question:

"Can you comprehend that the US Airways/IAMAW Mechanic and Related contract gives us the exclustivity of overhauling ANY airplane that US Airways flies on the mainline?"

We have overhauled every mainline fleet type since 1949, when the DC-9, MD-80, 737-200/300/400, 757 and 767 were once new equipment introduced into the fleet and they have never been vendored out, we all ready do the overnight and three day check on the narrowbody airbii and we do the heavy maintenance on the A330 all ready, nothing has changed, the contract language in regards to scope of overhauling mainline airplanes has not changed!

It would be the same as US Airways telling ALPA that Mesa pilots at Mesa wages are now going to fly all the mainline jets, your scope gives you the exclustivity to that work as our''s does. Except that we get paid the same no matter what kind of airplane we work on, unlike ALPA that gets paid by fleet type.
 
Lavman:

I understand your point, but the Company has told the news media they believe the IAM contract does not cover A320 overhaul, which could really be directed at Allegheny County to prevent this issue to come up in upcoming negotiations, or the airline will attempt to subcontract overhaul work like at UA.

I fully expect the IAM to fight for IAM work, but the issue is the parties have been quoted in the press with different viewpoints on this issue. If you would like to view the articles, go to www.chipsplace.com if you do not believe me.

Best regards,

Chip