You are right concerning operational control per far 121 is concerend. But AA does control every other aspect to the operation. When,were,how.what airplane, Read the agreement. AA might as well just own the company. I now know why they did'nt want us to see these contracts. Say tuned......
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
AA to drop Part of AmericanConnection
- Thread starter exeagle
- Start date
- Watchers 15
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
Saluki Dawg
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2002
- Posts
- 395
IP Freley,
I didn't really mean to come off sounding so harsh. Especially to you guys over at Commutair. I have a lot of respect and sympathy for your airline. What you may not know is that Expressjet/COEX management are not only transferring 1900's to Gulfstream, they are now going to give them some of our retiring ATR's. So where do you draw the line in the sand? Today 1900's, tomorrow ATR's, after that ERJ's? We have to have scope to protect ourselves from other carriers coming in and Flying our current or former equipment in direct competition, and at a much LOWER cost. (I never thought I would hear myself say that while still flying here at COEX).
TSA Pilot,
I fully respect your position and wouldn't expect you to feel any different. You guys and gals at TSA, Chatauqua, and Corpex have to look out for your own careers as well. All I ask is that you try to see it from the other side of the fence. If the situation was reversed and TWA bought AA, and TSA furloughed hundreds of your pilots (I know they did that anyway), because they said that they were going to use Eagle to operate out of the DFW, ORD, and MIA hubs. You all would probably be screaming foul also. There isn't an easy answer for solving this problem, but considering that both TSA and Chatauqua both have multiple codeshares, I think that they should seek opportunities with those carriers and let Eagle into STL.
I didn't really mean to come off sounding so harsh. Especially to you guys over at Commutair. I have a lot of respect and sympathy for your airline. What you may not know is that Expressjet/COEX management are not only transferring 1900's to Gulfstream, they are now going to give them some of our retiring ATR's. So where do you draw the line in the sand? Today 1900's, tomorrow ATR's, after that ERJ's? We have to have scope to protect ourselves from other carriers coming in and Flying our current or former equipment in direct competition, and at a much LOWER cost. (I never thought I would hear myself say that while still flying here at COEX).
TSA Pilot,
I fully respect your position and wouldn't expect you to feel any different. You guys and gals at TSA, Chatauqua, and Corpex have to look out for your own careers as well. All I ask is that you try to see it from the other side of the fence. If the situation was reversed and TWA bought AA, and TSA furloughed hundreds of your pilots (I know they did that anyway), because they said that they were going to use Eagle to operate out of the DFW, ORD, and MIA hubs. You all would probably be screaming foul also. There isn't an easy answer for solving this problem, but considering that both TSA and Chatauqua both have multiple codeshares, I think that they should seek opportunities with those carriers and let Eagle into STL.
MartinFierro
Flyin' Gaucho
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Posts
- 89
Right now, I'd be happy if TSA/CHQ and Corp Air just stop flying as American Connection. I don't really care about starting a new base in STL. Just as long as no other airlines operate as official feed to AA and eat up OUR ASMs.
For all you American Connection pilots, I have no problem with you guys continuing to fly the same flights you've always flown. Fine, no problem, you have a right to continue to operate as before. But there is a problem when you do it as American Connection, of which you have no business doing. And it is, BTW, the principle reason why Eagle has not been able to recall anyone to this date. You guys hitched your wagon to a dying horse (TWA). OK, it once was strong, but now it is dead. That is too bad. AA is a different company, hence you don't have the right to claim feed to AA, just because AA bought TWA. As for those of you who think we have no chance in arbitration...I guess we will all just have to wait and see, no?
For all you American Connection pilots, I have no problem with you guys continuing to fly the same flights you've always flown. Fine, no problem, you have a right to continue to operate as before. But there is a problem when you do it as American Connection, of which you have no business doing. And it is, BTW, the principle reason why Eagle has not been able to recall anyone to this date. You guys hitched your wagon to a dying horse (TWA). OK, it once was strong, but now it is dead. That is too bad. AA is a different company, hence you don't have the right to claim feed to AA, just because AA bought TWA. As for those of you who think we have no chance in arbitration...I guess we will all just have to wait and see, no?
His flying, their flying, our routes, their routes, AA, TWA, who cares. Some of you guys sound like a bunch of dogs running around marking their territory. Most majors use additional regional airlines to supplement their wholey owned carriers. American Connection may well be in violation of the Eagle contract, but the grievance has been filed and that will settle this once and for all.
NEDude
yada yada yada
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2001
- Posts
- 1,611
Saluki Dawg,
A question for you, now that Continental has announced that they still intend to sell off ExpressJet/Coex, does that mean all Continental code share flying should still be done by you guys?
Also remember that part of the reason that Commutair and Gulfstream do not fly into any Continental Hub is (at least from my understanding) because of that scope clause which allows only ExpressJet/Coex to provide feeder service for Continental. If you look at the Gulfstream and Commutair route structures you will see that in now way do they feed any part of the Continental system. In all but two of Commutair's destinations you can connect directly to a Continental Hub on Coex. The only two that do not are SLK, which would not support anything but a 1900, and PLB, which happens to be our base. And in both cases in order to fit into the Continental system passengers would have to connect to Coex. When Commutair used to fly from PLB to BOS (through BTV) you could get right onto mainline from one of these two outstations without using Coex, but that has now changed. So at least in the case of Commutair, not only are they not a threat, but in fact provide some feeder service to Coex.
BTW when I was at Commutair, I had nothing but good experiences when I came across Coex crews. So if there is any animosity there from Coex, it certainly wasn't shown by the crews.
A question for you, now that Continental has announced that they still intend to sell off ExpressJet/Coex, does that mean all Continental code share flying should still be done by you guys?
Also remember that part of the reason that Commutair and Gulfstream do not fly into any Continental Hub is (at least from my understanding) because of that scope clause which allows only ExpressJet/Coex to provide feeder service for Continental. If you look at the Gulfstream and Commutair route structures you will see that in now way do they feed any part of the Continental system. In all but two of Commutair's destinations you can connect directly to a Continental Hub on Coex. The only two that do not are SLK, which would not support anything but a 1900, and PLB, which happens to be our base. And in both cases in order to fit into the Continental system passengers would have to connect to Coex. When Commutair used to fly from PLB to BOS (through BTV) you could get right onto mainline from one of these two outstations without using Coex, but that has now changed. So at least in the case of Commutair, not only are they not a threat, but in fact provide some feeder service to Coex.
BTW when I was at Commutair, I had nothing but good experiences when I came across Coex crews. So if there is any animosity there from Coex, it certainly wasn't shown by the crews.
airjackson
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2002
- Posts
- 226
The volume of whining here would embarass a kindergarten class. If not for 9/11, all of us would be fat, dumb and happy flying for Eagle, TSA, CHQ, Etc. None of the eaglets were howling about the St Louis flying back then.
It has astonished me how quickly pilots will turn on each other- even fellow ALPA pilots- when the tough times hit. Take a look around fellas, you're not the only company with a LOT of pilots on furlough. And if one more moron uses that tired old "..you hitched your wagon to a dying horse.." mantra, I'm going to lose my mind. Hitch this.
It has astonished me how quickly pilots will turn on each other- even fellow ALPA pilots- when the tough times hit. Take a look around fellas, you're not the only company with a LOT of pilots on furlough. And if one more moron uses that tired old "..you hitched your wagon to a dying horse.." mantra, I'm going to lose my mind. Hitch this.
I.P. Freley
I like people food
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2001
- Posts
- 2,038
airjackson...
I wouldn't have used quite the same language, but I can't say that I necessarily disagree with you.
Don't worry, a Eaglet will come along shortly and swear that they were filing greivances left and right PRIOR to 9/11. Doesn't sound to ME like they really cared at all before they figured out that their own people were on furlough. NOW they care. A lot.
I wouldn't have used quite the same language, but I can't say that I necessarily disagree with you.
Don't worry, a Eaglet will come along shortly and swear that they were filing greivances left and right PRIOR to 9/11. Doesn't sound to ME like they really cared at all before they figured out that their own people were on furlough. NOW they care. A lot.
bluesideup1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2002
- Posts
- 179
That is because you I.P. are naive to a much bigger situation that is going on than your little "we started these runs they are ours." Yes long before 9/11 this was our MEC top priority and it has been throughout the entire time and if you remember there were long message board posts on this subject well before 9/11 they just died down because everything that had to be said was. So, since you have forgotten or just haven't been here long enough let me bring you up to speed. This is not just a case of whose flying is what but a case of whipsawing at its very heart. You are the companies way of keeping the leverage for management growing. This is something AMR speciallizes in they did it with the four Eagles before we all became one. Just to illustrate this to you AMR would actually fourlough from one Eagle and grow the other anytime a contract would come up. Then they would say how can you ask for raises when you have people on the street just wanting to work. This went on for over 8 years until we signed our lives away on a horrible 16 year contract to get all the Eagle merged together and stop the whipsawing. History lesson over, do you get the idea of what is going on here management is once again trying to fraction out the flying so as to have leverage over both groups. Not to metion the fact that your house was sold and now it is time to move out. We have the contracts that have been signed between AMR and Trans/CHQ (which took a court order) and we now see why it took us over 9 months to pry them from AMRs hand. We also had a very successful arbitration that will be ultimatly decided on in July and that is why the code share was most likely dropped from your end of the table vs. selling off a piece of Eagle. I wish no ill will towards any other pilot out there but Eagle has given up way to much to be put back in a situation it thought it had taken care of 6 years ago.
All I ask is that you try to see it from the other side of the fence. If the situation was reversed and TWA bought AA, and TSA furloughed hundreds of your pilots (I know they did that anyway), because they said that they were going to use Eagle to operate out of the DFW, ORD, and MIA hubs. You all would probably be screaming foul also.
Ya know I took you up on your offer and I seriously pondered how I would feel in that situation, that is if it were reversed, and the truth is I don't think you would have found one TSA, CHQ, or CorpEx pilot who would have given a hill of beans about Eagle flying in DFW, ORD, or MIA. Most of them would just be happy that their code share partner is doing well and that they will still have a job next year. Eagle is a large regional with a completely different history, culture, and mentality than the pilots of TSA, CHQ, and CorpEx. People commonly declare that we are all alike because we are pilots, that's true to a point but there are differences in how we view ourselves, our place in the industry, attitude torwards working at a regional, relationship with management, etc. Think of any airline and I'm sure you've heard the stereotypes, Eagle the junior skynazis, Comair the old RJDC codgers , Piedmont's a bunch of Bubbas, TSAers are slackers, etc. etc. Exaggerartions yes, but there's a grain of thruth to every sterotype. So to answer your question, no, I don't think it is fair to assume that if roles would reversed a pilot group would ALWAYS react the same way that your pilot group has.
Ya know I took you up on your offer and I seriously pondered how I would feel in that situation, that is if it were reversed, and the truth is I don't think you would have found one TSA, CHQ, or CorpEx pilot who would have given a hill of beans about Eagle flying in DFW, ORD, or MIA. Most of them would just be happy that their code share partner is doing well and that they will still have a job next year. Eagle is a large regional with a completely different history, culture, and mentality than the pilots of TSA, CHQ, and CorpEx. People commonly declare that we are all alike because we are pilots, that's true to a point but there are differences in how we view ourselves, our place in the industry, attitude torwards working at a regional, relationship with management, etc. Think of any airline and I'm sure you've heard the stereotypes, Eagle the junior skynazis, Comair the old RJDC codgers , Piedmont's a bunch of Bubbas, TSAers are slackers, etc. etc. Exaggerartions yes, but there's a grain of thruth to every sterotype. So to answer your question, no, I don't think it is fair to assume that if roles would reversed a pilot group would ALWAYS react the same way that your pilot group has.
I.P. Freley
I like people food
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2001
- Posts
- 2,038
Thanks for the history lesson...
...but you can stow the language about "you," "your little 'we started these runs and they are ours'" and "your side," et al, because I don't work for an AmConn carrier. Thank GOD. And to someone that DOES work there, American backing out on a deal they made is sure as shootin' much more than a "little problem."
What it REALLY sounds like is that American takes perverse pleasure in screwing around with EVERYONE that either works for them, MIGHT work for them, HAS worked for them, code-shares with them, or might ever in any possible way or alternate dimension have an affiliation with them.
Is THAT accurate? Sure seems that way.
...but you can stow the language about "you," "your little 'we started these runs and they are ours'" and "your side," et al, because I don't work for an AmConn carrier. Thank GOD. And to someone that DOES work there, American backing out on a deal they made is sure as shootin' much more than a "little problem."
What it REALLY sounds like is that American takes perverse pleasure in screwing around with EVERYONE that either works for them, MIGHT work for them, HAS worked for them, code-shares with them, or might ever in any possible way or alternate dimension have an affiliation with them.
Is THAT accurate? Sure seems that way.
Airline Pilot27
High Speed... Aww shut up
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2001
- Posts
- 82
History Lesson #2
BlueStreak is right on. Our MEC has fought for our own scope protection as soon as it was announced that TSA and CHQ would be flying as American Connection. The issue is not only recalling our furloughed people but whipsawing. Whipsawing is the reason we have 12 more years of our infamous contract. Shortly after the announcement of American Connection one of our V.P.'s changed Eagle's status to that of the "preferred provider of feed to American Airlines". This was communicated to us over and over in memos, emails, etc.
Although it is sickening to see an RJ, Jetstream, or ATR with Eagle paint colors being flown by these carrier, none of us harbor any ill will towards CHQ and TSA pilots. After this latest anouncement that V.P. can take his "prefered provider" and stick it.
BlueStreak is right on. Our MEC has fought for our own scope protection as soon as it was announced that TSA and CHQ would be flying as American Connection. The issue is not only recalling our furloughed people but whipsawing. Whipsawing is the reason we have 12 more years of our infamous contract. Shortly after the announcement of American Connection one of our V.P.'s changed Eagle's status to that of the "preferred provider of feed to American Airlines". This was communicated to us over and over in memos, emails, etc.
Although it is sickening to see an RJ, Jetstream, or ATR with Eagle paint colors being flown by these carrier, none of us harbor any ill will towards CHQ and TSA pilots. After this latest anouncement that V.P. can take his "prefered provider" and stick it.
FlyinBrian
Office Slut
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2001
- Posts
- 355
Bluestreak
Fitty-Six F100's rock
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 375
publisher
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2001
- Posts
- 592
The fact is that things will be changing. One of the first rules of negotiating is understanding thosee issues that are absolutely untouchable and realize that if you take a firm stance on them it is for not. Nothing will be accomp[lished.
What is going to happen here is the end of wholly owned subs, divestion of these other parts, and new agreements.
Trying to restrict Eagle on one hand and then bitching when they find ways to stay within the restriction is a certainty because they are not now or never going to give in to what you want.
What is going to happen here is the end of wholly owned subs, divestion of these other parts, and new agreements.
Trying to restrict Eagle on one hand and then bitching when they find ways to stay within the restriction is a certainty because they are not now or never going to give in to what you want.
Hey Guys!!
Eagle did give up alot to keep this outsourceing from ever happening again!
Wouldn't all of you be pissed if the this was happening to you?
Ironically, the ASM cap is working as a sick and twisted meager means of protection for Eagle. If not for the ASM cap further proliferation of Eagle's Alter-Ego carriers would destroy Eagle at an even faster rate. The Alter-Ego growth rates (132% for CHA and 15% for TSA versus -3% for Eagle) appear to have stopped due to the cap. However, you can see that given the growth rates at CHA and TSA versus Eagle's rate of shrinkage, just why AMR wants the ASM cap lifted. It is not because they want to grow Eagle!
Time, arbitration and Section 6 talks will tell!?!?
Eagle did give up alot to keep this outsourceing from ever happening again!
Wouldn't all of you be pissed if the this was happening to you?
Ironically, the ASM cap is working as a sick and twisted meager means of protection for Eagle. If not for the ASM cap further proliferation of Eagle's Alter-Ego carriers would destroy Eagle at an even faster rate. The Alter-Ego growth rates (132% for CHA and 15% for TSA versus -3% for Eagle) appear to have stopped due to the cap. However, you can see that given the growth rates at CHA and TSA versus Eagle's rate of shrinkage, just why AMR wants the ASM cap lifted. It is not because they want to grow Eagle!
Time, arbitration and Section 6 talks will tell!?!?
airjackson
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2002
- Posts
- 226
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
