Republic

St. Leibowitz

Member
Aug 19, 2002
60
0
Question for Chip:

It is my understanding that the U-MEC sent a letter to Dave Siegel in late March stating that in accordance with LOA 83, the Association declined to endorse Republic as a j4j carrier. Republic, if anything, is accelerating its preparations to launch as just that. Can you shed some light on this apparent contradiction?

Thanks
 

Kpilot

Newbie
Aug 22, 2002
4
0
Republic is a alter-ego airline created by Chautauquas'' holding company, Republic Airways Holdings. It will take jobs from Chautauqua. Chautauqua has agreed to J4J''s and that is why ALPA has not acknowledged Republic Airways as a J4J''s airline as it is supporting the CHQ pilots and feels the jobs should go there. This is why there is a strike vote going out at Chautauqua.
 

nyboilermaker

Member
Feb 11, 2003
33
0
Visit site
That''s funny. ALPA didn''t support the WO''s when MDA came into the picture. Wonder why that is.

There''s no difference between Mid-Atlantic and the WO''s, and Republic and Chautauqua, except CHQ is Teamsters.

Sounds like ALPA wants CHQ to join the union.

Ahh, more dues paying suckers...What a business.
 

USA320Pilot

Veteran
May 18, 2003
8,175
1,539
www.usaviation.com
US Senior vice president of corporate development Bruce Ashby and director of labor relations - flight Tony Bralich addressed the ALPA MEC on Wednesday, June 26 regarding Republic Airlines.

According to ALPA communications committee chairman Roy Freundlich, "management asked the MEC to consider approving Republic Airlines as a Jets For Jobs carrier. Republic Airlines and Chautauqua Airlines are operated by the same parent company. The Chautauqua pilots, who are represented by IBT, conditionally approved a Jets For Jobs agreement, but it was not accepted by Chautauqua or US Airways management. MEC members responded to management’s request by stating that until management begins to properly administer the Contract in good faith and begins to engage in sincere efforts to repair the financial and labor relations damage that has resulted from their many insincere actions, MEC members will not consider additional requests for contractual flexibility."
Best regards,
Chip
 

Kpilot

Newbie
Aug 22, 2002
4
0
Letter from General Counsel E.E. Sowell to Chautauqua CEO Bryan Bedford Concerning Negotiations

June 27, 2003

Dear Mr. Bedford:

Your letter of June 26, 2003 was non-responsive to the Union’s demand that we wanted a firm contractual commitment from you, as the CEO of Republic Airways Holdings, Inc., that Republic Airlines would not operate if we reach an agreement on the Chautauqua contract. As you know, that is the single most important obstacle preventing the parties from reaching a deal. It must be resolved if we are to reach an agreement.

Your letter was also a bit premature in your assessment of the parties’ lack of progress at the table. Both negotiating teams worked hard this week and we closed out the Training section and made considerable progress on the Scheduling section. Save for the Republic issue, progress this week has been at an acceptable pace but we simply ran out of time. As I informed you on the telephone several weeks ago and as your negotiating team is well aware, I will be out of the Country from Sunday, June 29th until July 17, 2003. Therefore, it will be impossible to meet over the weekend.

Bryan, US Airways is certainly an interested party in what airline operates under a J4J agreement, however, we have been informed that US Airways could care less about Republic Airlines. Their only interest is to start the code sharing operation as soon as possible and they are agreeable to Chautauqua flying under the J4J code sharing agreement. The Chautauqua pilot group ratified the J4J agreement in March 2003. The J4J agreement that was ratified contained the same economic terms that you had agreed to in June of last year. From the Union’s perspective, it is Chautauqua that is delaying the US Airways J4J flying. We could have been operating now under the agreement, rather than being leveraged at the bargaining table with the formation of the alter ego, Republic Airlines.

Contrary to your past assurances that Republic Airlines would only operate under the J4J US Airways code sharing agreement, we have read numerous DOT filings that Republic Airlines intends to operate under code sharing agreements with numerous mainline carriers. Most troubling is the latest DOT filing by Republic that Republic Airlines will be flying current Chautauqua Airline US Airways code sharing routes out of SDF as its first two lines of flying targeted for October 1, 2003. I am sure you understand our concerns and position that Republic Airlines’ operation poses a direct job threat to our pilots and therefore it must not operate. As the CEO of Republic Airways Holdings, Inc., you certainly have the authority to stop Republic Airlines from operating.

The next negotiation session is scheduled for July 29th through July 31, 2003 in Indianapolis, Indiana. We would encourage your attendance at that session. The issues have been narrowed to economics. The ball is in your court.

Very truly yours,

E.E. Sowell
General Counsel

cc: Chautauqua Executive Council
US Airways MEC
 

USA320Pilot

Veteran
May 18, 2003
8,175
1,539
www.usaviation.com

Teamsters Claim Chautauqua Will Lose Flights At Louisville

WASHINGTON (Aviation Daily) - The union representing pilots at Chautauqua Airlines is accusing management of deploying aircraft under the Republic Airlines banner on Chautauqua routes from Louisville, starting in October, a move the union says contradicts assurances that Republic would be limited to Jets for Jobs code-share flights within US Airways’ network.
The International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) said Republic filed a notice with the U.S. Dept. of Transportation of plans to start flights from Louisville to New York LaGuardia and Washington National, using Embraer ERJ145s. Chautauqua flies about three US Airways Express daily roundtrip ERJ flights between Louisville and both airports, based on data from the Official Airline Guides.
"If Republic starts those routes, it in essence takes flying away from Chautauqua," an IBT spokesman said. Officials from Chautauqua’s and Republic’s parent company, Republic Airways Holdings, were not available to comment.
"Alter Ego" Airline
Republic Airways Holdings formed Republic Airlines after Chautauqua’s pilots rejected Jets For Jobs, which links flying for furloughed US Airways pilots and regional jets added to the airline’s Express network.
IBT contends Republic is an "alter ego" airline that threatens Chautauqua’s pilot jobs. Republic’s formation has been a contentious issue in contract negotiations between Chautauqua’s pilots and management. Pilots at Chautauqua reversed their rejection of Jets For Jobs and approved the program in March. Officials from Republic Airways Holdings told The DAILY then that approval of Jets For Jobs by Chautauqua’s pilots wouldn’t stop Republic from launching operations.
IBT’s general counsel, in a letter to Republic Airways Holdings CEO Bryan Bedford last week, stressed the union wanted a commitment that Republic Airlines wouldn’t start operations if management and the union reached a contract agreement. "That is the single most important obstacle preventing the parties from reaching a deal. It must be resolved if we are to reach an agreement," IBT said. Pilots at Chautauqua voted in favor of a strike authorization last month.
The union noted that an agreement was reached on the training section of the contract during negotiations last week, and the two sides made progress in scheduling.

Best regards,

Chip