New competition for AA at DFW

I know that it''s not going to happen anytime in the very near future, but management at Alaska Airlines is trying to convince the employees to take pay/work rule concessions. In exchange for this they say that they will be able to grow the airline to double it''s size over the next 5 years or so. The news article in the company paper mentioned several cities that they thought we would be serving, providing everything goes according to their plan. DFW was one of them, MEX, MCI, MSY, ATL, PHL, SJO, BZE and HNL were several others. So far it doesn''t sound encouraging as far as the employees sounding like they are in a very giving mood, but who knows what the future holds.
 
----------------
On 7/9/2003 10:43:42 PM Cart Pusher wrote:

I know that it''s not going to happen anytime in the very near future, but management at Alaska Airlines is trying to convince the employees to take pay/work rule concessions. In exchange for this they say that they will be able to grow the airline to double it''s size over the next 5 years or so. The news article in the company paper mentioned several cities that they thought we would be serving, providing everything goes according to their plan. DFW was one of them, MEX, MCI, MSY, ATL, PHL, SJO, BZE and HNL were several others. So far it doesn''t sound encouraging as far as the employees sounding like they are in a very giving mood, but who knows what the future holds.

----------------​

Sounds like Crandall''s growths plan. Except the employees were not asked for concessions, new-hires were given the opportunity to grow with an expanding company.
 
That DMN article is a bit misleading. Continental does use 4 gates in the B terminal, however they have been doing complete ground handling for America West and Frontier at those gates as well. Neither of those two airlines are following CO over to E, and are currently in the process of hiring some people to start doing some of their own handling at DFW. HP will takeover two of the ex-CO gates, and F9 is moving down to B33. However Airtran is moving over to B and may end up with a ex-CO gate as well. That really leaves only one extra gate open for grabs. The DMN article makes it sound that there will be 4 empty gates not being used at all. When construction is complete on the new train tracks, another gate or two may become avaiable.
 
----------------
On 7/10/2003 12:57:43 AM FA Mikey wrote:

It got me a job.

----------------​

It got me recalled sooner, if at all.
 
----------------
On 7/9/2003 8:28:36 PM FA Mikey wrote:

a guess as to whos'' coming to town, or looking to grow? Airtran, Frontier, Jetblue, or maybe southwest. Never say never in this industry.

Airtran and Frontier already serve DFW. Jetblue might come in after they take delivery on their new 100-seat Embraers, but that is a year or two down the road. Southwest has no interest whatsoever in flying into DFW. Remember they are the airline who successfully sued to re-open Love Field in Dallas. It''s like their private airport in Dallas.

Southwest avoids high-ticket airports with expensive landing fees and gate rentals. That''s why they fly into MDW in Chicago rather than ORD. Note that they also do not serve DEN or COS even though passengers have requested such service for years--particularly during ski season.

Southwest knows what they can and can not do well, and they stick to what they can do well. Result: the only profitable US airline.
 
----------------
On 7/11/2003 1:21:14 PM jimntx wrote:

----------------
On 7/9/2003 8:28:36 PM FA Mikey wrote:

Result: the only profitable US airline.

----------------​

jetBlue, airTran, and Spirit rack in the money as well.
 
----------------
On 7/11/2003 1:21:14 PM jimntx wrote:

----------------
On 7/9/2003 8:28:36 PM FA Mikey wrote:

Result: the only profitable US airline.

----------------​

jetBlue, airTran, and Spirit rack in the money as well.
 
----------------
On 7/10/2003 12:29:07 AM j7915 wrote:


----------------

Sounds like Crandall's growths plan. Except the employees were not asked for concessions, new-hires were given the opportunity to grow with an expanding company.


----------------

No Concessions eh?

What about the loss of push backs, deicing, company paid medical, and the fact that top pay lagged inflation for over twenty years in part thanks to B-scale and long progressions?

What kind of a union man would promote lower pay and other concessions to "provide opportunity to grow in an expanding company"?

Why do so called "union men" use RTW propaganda to sell concessions to their members?

You criticize union members for voting Republican yet you use the same arguement that those Republicans who are against raising the minimum wage and for RTW use?


Is the "opportunity" to work for less at AA/TWU a better alternative? Should union members be glad that their union offers employers a "competative" advantage over other workers, in other words gets their members to work for less?

Why did the TWU fight against RTW? Didnt proponents of the bill argue that it would increase job growth while the unions argued that it would just lower wages?

Are you so hung up in your own propaganda that you do not see the inconsistancy of your position?Or, did you find their(the Republicans and RTW) arguements so compelling that you have adopted them as your own?

Come clean. You listen to Rush, O'Reilly and the rest of the FOX gang dont you? Although you will never admit it, now that you got yours that is.​
 

Latest posts