W/o Vs Contract Carrier

[700UW]

Can someone explain to me, why a company would want to outsource all RJ flying to for example MESA and pay them a guaranteed rate per flight?

Why would they pay them the same rate which has a profit built in to it if the plane flies with 0, 1 or 50 passengers?

Seems like it is a money losing operation to pay a company a profitable rate for 1 passenger on a flight versus 50 passengers on a flight.

Seems like another way to show a loss to me.

And I know the maintenance and ownership aspects all ready.

But look at who gets the bad press when something goes wrong, not the contract carrier but US Airways.

 

[BoeingBoy]

700UW,

You mentioned the obvious economic justifications when you said "And I know the maintenance and ownership aspects all ready". Presumably it is cheaper in the long run.

Having said that, I'd love to see a true accounting of the cost of the "contract" feed. Mesa gets fuel and insurance reimbursed by U and pays no gate leases. Seems like there might be another item or two, in addition.

It couldn't be that it might cost more but gives the company a "club" to browbeat the W/O employees, could it? Naa, they wouldn't do that!!!

Jim

 

[700UW]

And at a lot of stations where they fly they get ramp and customer service functions from PI or other carriers, wonder if they pay for that? At CLT PI works Mesa's flight from the ramp and csa function.

 

[wings396]

There were always complaints about the Wo's, but the contract operators make them look great in comparison. At least the company has some say so with the WO carriers. Mesa, Shuttle America and Trans States are operated more like a
Bus line than an Airline. None of them have a Standard for Passenger or baggage weights. One counts the carry on, the others don't, but some use child weights while others don't. Many of their dispatchers are clueless and often don't even know what Airline they are contract flying for.

 

[diogenes]

This thread contains a horse I've tried to flog a few times, namely, a correct allocation of costs.

For example, Mesa doesn't provide a single thing, save one set of steps, in a station I'm familiar with. Airstarts, deicing, station personnel are all mainline. Who pays for the landing fees? Costs of delivered baggage? etc, etc?

I'd bet huge mainline absorbs all those costs.

This has the effect of increasing mainline CASM, which is dave's favorite whip, and disguising an affiliate's true costs.

If these costs were factored out, as anyone who passed ACC101 could do (if they knew them), how would U truly compare to the LCC's?

Note to union leadership: Put some dues money into answering this, instead of endorsing loser candidates. :angry:

 

[wings396]

You are correct on all of the above items plus cleaning and catering. I am not sure who pays the landing fees, but I would hope that it would be Mesa. On another note, don't forget the bags lef behind due to W/B. That I am certain is paid by Mainline and not Mesa or any other contract operator, not to mention who looks bad to the passenger....the airplane has who's name on it?????

 

[700UW]

According to today's data, all the agreements with RJ providers are revenue guaranteed for the Mesa, Trans States and Chautauqua's and the payment was hidden in the "other" category.

I would love to see how much we pay them on a per flight basis and what other fees are included in those revenue-guaranteed agreements.