XJT to fly UAL

[drinksonme]

So where is this announcement for XJT?

See the other thread about TSA recalling. A lot of people at XJT now believe this was the announcement and their fate has been decided. It is now 1500 central time. The markets are closed for the week. XJT would have probably announced something good before close to raise the stock that took a pounding on Wednesday after the earning report.

 

[rumorhasit]

It's a good place to work. If you're going to say that in order to be a "great" place to work you have to have 70-90 seaters with 2 year upgrades then go work somewhere else where you can find that.

Most people begged Ream to get those planes? I personally don't know anyone. You argument is flawed until you start analyzing the xjt/cal situation back then as well.

I never said 70-90 seaters equal great place to work but every "open house" for employees we asked when xjt was going to get 70-90 seaters. We were told 50 seaters were more viable than 70-90 and would cost more for operations. CAL and XJT relationship was rocky to say the least, I personally saw Mesa, Skywest, and Rep. in the Cal headquarters building during this time in question. XJT had an opprotunity to fly the 70-90 seaters and would not persue it. At the time XJT was an awsome company regarding 50 seaters and most other carriers wanted them to do the same with 70-90 seaters. The mx was second to none and actually had other companies a/c mx. XJT had millions in the bank and a very strong balance sheet and the Reamster had everything going great. XJT and Cal have been on rocky ground since the IPO, and Cal had planned to deversify their regional options. And I know Weaver asked to go 70-90 seaters as well as most of the ground folks. If you want documentation for my "arguement" your are going to be waiting but if you had been on site back then you would know. I even heard (second hand) the 70-90 seaters question was asked and even the new contract had/has provisions for higher capacity aircraft. But what do I know I was only there for 10 years......

 

[rumorhasit]

You're a freaking moron who has absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Spend a few seconds to do some research before spewing out garbage. You have any sources to back up your argument?

yea ten years worth, where would you like me to start....

 

[dojetdriver]

I never said 70-90 seaters equal great place to work but every "open house" for employees we asked when xjt was going to get 70-90 seaters. We were told 50 seaters were more viable than 70-90 and would cost more for operations. CAL and XJT relationship was rocky to say the least, I personally saw Mesa, Skywest, and Rep. in the Cal headquarters building during this time in question. XJT had an opprotunity to fly the 70-90 seaters and would not persue it. At the time XJT was an awsome company regarding 50 seaters and most other carriers wanted them to do the same with 70-90 seaters. The mx was second to none and actually had other companies a/c mx. XJT had millions in the bank and a very strong balance sheet and the Reamster had everything going great.

As far as running an efficient operation, true. Sadly, efficiency and securing flying don't always go hand and hand. The management at XJT is very good at efficiency. But under the old CPA, they were also very insulated/protected from many of the issues that affect other management teams. It wasn't till the 69 airplane announcement that any real tough decisions had to be made by them.

As much disgust and disdain we in this career have for the managements at various regionals, they are way more skilled and experienced at securing CPAs, FPD's, whatever than the XJT management is/was since they've had to go though time and time again. Like I said, we can all despise the management teams, but rarely in aviation do running a good business and labor relations go hand in had. Like I said, rarely. SW would be an exception.

As far as the XJT DelCon flying goes, that's been covered. It was very coincidental. DAL wanted an operation that was had good performance numbers, was cheap, and had capable airframes to spare. XJT fit that bill at the time.

 

[79%N1]

As far as the XJT DelCon flying goes, that's been covered. It was very coincidental. DAL wanted an operation that was had good performance numbers, was cheap, and had capable airframes to spare. XJT fit that bill at the time.

Plain and simple, XJT undercut ASA/Skywest for that flying.

 

[dojetdriver]

Plain and simple, XJT undercut ASA/Skywest for that flying.

Did Skywest bid on that flying?

I've never doubted that they undercut ASA, but do you have actual, credible proof to back that statement up? As far as the 10 CPA aircraft go, yep, it wasn't a profit center.

The 13 pro rate aircraft bled money like crazy.

 

[79%N1]

My proof is that when the ASA base was closed and the flying went to XJT, the reason given was that Skywest would not fly the LA flying at a low, or nearly zero profit margin, and that XJT elected to do just that in order to get the flying.

 

[dojetdriver]

My proof is that when the ASA base was closed and the flying went to XJT, the reason given was that Skywest would not fly the LA flying at a low, or nearly zero profit margin, and that XJT elected to do just that in order to get the flying.

I think your overlooking that at that time, it was forbidden per the agreement with UAL that SkyWest fly Delcon out of LAX. Like I said, at that time. That stipulation was later dropped with UAL.

So I'll ask you again, do you have ACTUAL proof? IF the flying was done at zero profit or at a narrow profit margin, it's not like XJT had to adjust labor contracts, take pay cuts, undercut other labor groups at other airlines, and basically whore themselves out like a certain company did with 70/90 seat rates to secure some UAL flying a while ago, is it?

 

[79%N1]

That is why ASA was doing the Skywest flying out of LAX. One company. I think that is what you are overlooking. Company memo stated that SKYW would not fly the LAX flying for the slim profit margin, and XJT was doing it to get their planes in the air. If you want some secret company documents faxed to you for your proof, I can't produce them.

 

[dojetdriver]

That is why ASA was doing the Skywest flying out of LAX. One company. I think that is what you are overlooking.

Not overlooking anything. One company, but two different operating certificates. One with restrictions with UAL, the other, not.

Company memo stated that SKYW would not fly the LAX flying for the slim profit margin, and XJT was doing it to get their planes in the air.

Not sure what you're getting at here. You're kinda talking in circles. Your saying that ASA did it because they got around UAL's restrictions that way, but SkyWest wouldn't do it because of the narrow profit margin. Are you really denying that there was a stipulation with UAL, at that time, that SkyWest COULDN'T operate out of LAX under any other paint job? Again, it's one company, as you say.

Funny, SkyWest has no problem operating some CRJ's for Airtran with a yet to be determined profit margin. That flying is "at risk", is it not?

If you want some secret company documents faxed to you for your proof, I can't produce them.

And I'm sure you've seen these "secret company documents", right?

Won't even bother bringing up the other issues you dodged.