Adios MESA at IAD - UAL Axes MoU

[Heavy Set]

Looks like UAL is caving to Gov't pressure and cancelling its non-binding MoU with MESA for services out of IAD (related to proposed ACA buyout). Everyone knows UAL was GUILTY of manipulating its puppet MESA. I am sure Orenstein is crestfallen!!!! Hopefully this will improve the chances of Independence Air starting up on time.

Check out article below:


UAL Ends Non-Binding MoU With Mesa Related to Mesa's Proposed Acquisition Of ACA

Monday December 22, 5:16 pm ET
United Remains Committed to Dulles Hub and Providing Competitive Fares And Full Schedule of Flights for Washington Area Customers and Spoke Cities
Plans Developed to Maintain UAX Service at Dulles


CHICAGO, Dec. 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- UAL Corporation (OTC Bulletin Board: UALAQ - News), the holding company whose primary subsidiary is United Airlines, today notified Mesa Airlines of United's decision to end the non-binding memorandum of understanding between the two companies regarding Mesa's proposed acquisition of Atlantic Coast Airlines Holdings, Inc. (ACA), United's current United Express contract carrier at Dulles International Airport, Washington, D.C.
ADVERTISEMENT


Doug Hacker, United's Executive Vice President - Strategy, said, "Given the uncertainty surrounding Mesa's consent solicitation created by the preliminary injunction issued in federal court on December 18, the Memorandum of Understanding no longer provides a good basis for the purposes of United's ongoing business planning. United remains committed to our Dulles hub and to continuing to provide reliable, high-quality service to United Express customers at Dulles and the spoke cities served. United now will focus only on our other alternatives and continue to move steadily forward in the best interests of our customers, our employees and our creditors."

ACA has made clear that it no longer wants to serve as United's contract United Express carrier at Dulles. United has developed a comprehensive plan to ensure that a full schedule of flights at competitive fares will continue to be available to United's customers at Dulles.

Hacker added, "Our discussions with the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority concerning our facilities plan have been very positive and are continuing. As a prudent business matter, we also have completed planning for the appropriate aircraft and baggage handling capabilities to maintain United Express service intact at Dulles, should it become necessary."

United and United Express operate more than 3,300 flights a day on a route network that spans the globe. News releases and other information about United can be found at the company's web site at www.united.com .

 

[General Lee]

That is one less Harley that Whorenstein can buy now. Hahahahahahahaha. They were caught red handed!!! No collusion for you. Now Skywest will expand in ORD (with 50 seat rates for 70 seaters), and Airwisc and Transtates in IAD. Good for them.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[inthepool]

STICK IT IN YOUR A$$ JO!!!!!!!!

 

[strega7]

General, you can give the SkyWest payrate thing a rest now. Six months of harping is a bit too long don't ya think? If not, should we still be discussing the PFT that occured at other regional carriers? Lets give it a rest.

Fly Safe.

 

[General Lee]

Strega7,

Ah, so you did see that.....I would like to forget that, and it really doesn't even hurt me whatsoever, but it will hurt my friends still at regionals. That decision really affected the whole regional industry. It was HUGE. It was almost as bad as the AA guys folding like a deck of cards with Chap 11 "looming". That also set our industry back 20 years. (I don't really fault them, but the damage is done) Yeah, I know we too will probably take some cuts soon to help our own airline, but we will not fly 777s for MD-88 wages----you can bet on that! (No Chap 11 looming here right now---and look the economy is coming back!!!) Good luck.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[EOpilot]

No disrespect to those at Mesa, but man did that news make me happy.

If this isn't one of the best examples of Schadenfreude, I don't know what is. I smile just thinking about how pissed off Ornstein must be right now.

Best of luck to my former coworkers at ACA. Maybe someday they'll rename it Dulles-Skeen International.

 

[wscrj]

Not everyone unhappy...

Remember, there are some here who are also happy to see the writing on the wall. Like many an ACA'er has said, a merge would have hurt everybody. Good luck to Indy...

Happy Holidays, all.....

 

[PadFull'oTrim]

HA HA screw MESA management, ba$tards. I gotta feeling that 170's for YO-Nited might be in CHQ's future.... any takers??

 

[Sioux115]

Mesa in IAD

Ornstein said at a lunceon last friday that if the aquistion does not go through that we will probably move our whole operation out of Denver to Chicago and IAD to fill the united flying ACA will give up. East coast here we come. Bad news for a new hire moving to Denver.

 

[GuppyPuppy]

Now Skywest will expand in ORD (with 50 seat rates for 70 seaters), and Airwisc and Transtates in IAD. Good for them.

Bye Bye--General Lee

Pardon my ignorance...

How is this any different from airlines who fly the 767-300 and 757-200 for the same rates?

What about the folks at jetBlue? Are they screwing the industry too? And how about the pilots at UA, US, AA, ATA, Airtran, Frontier, North American, Kitty Hawk, Allegiant, etc...? Just because they get paid dramatically less than you at Delta...does that mean they're screwing the industry, or screwing your contract?

I know first hand that this whole mess suck$. Unfortunately, I think this is a reality that we have to deal with now.

GP

 

[79%N1]

Bad news for DCI, Comair/ASA. Now Mesa is able to free up its resources and poke its ugly nose into the Delta "family". If I'm a betting man, I bet Mesa invades DCI, and steals much, if not ALL of the future DCI growth. Just the next conquest for Ornstein! Now, we have no chance of making a decent living on the DCI side!

 

[GuppyPuppy]

Well....?

 

[General Lee]

Guppypuppy,

We don't think of it as "lowering" the rates to the 757, but "increasing" the rates up to the 767. In our last contract, 757 pay was about $10 an hour less than the 767 (200, 300, and 300ER). So, we increased the 757, and added $10 an hour for "INTL" pay going overseas. We didn't pull a "Skywest" and start flying a 777 for MD-88 wages. We actually INCREASED our 757 UPWARDS, to equal a 767, and then added more money ontop of that to fly INTL and allnighters....


Now INTL pay and allnighter pay may be cut, along with a 15% straight paycut, and the 4.5% raise we are due in May on top of that (so 19.5% total including the May raise). That is what "popular opinion" is in the crew lounge these days....Which is fine with me----But I would like to see some furloughs come back as a result....

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[reno]

G. Lee,

I've said it before and I'm saying it again...

We gave management 18 months, 6 of which are now gone. you will see a wedge between 50 and 70 seaters at SkyWest, and that will not include lowering pay for the 50's.

With all of the concessions by other airlines over the last 2 years and more to come... agreeing to fly what will amount to an average of five 70 seaters for 10 months at 50 seat rates, but not taking a pay cut as many others have (or will) , and seeing a wedge thereafter, it just doesn't seem as if we changed the industry for ever to me.

 

[General Lee]

Reno,

Yes you did--because you were one of the first to say, "Hey, we'll take expansion over pay." After your agreement, others followed or will follow, and the next thing you know your managment will NOT be able to give you that raise because it will not allow them to be competitive. They will blame it on the Majors who are "demanding lower costs per flight segment"---but in reality they are "high fiving" your management at the same time. It is true, and your junior guys and junior Capts voted for it. But, you will get that much needed expansion, and everyone else will pay for it because you were the ones to start it. You should have atleast gotten some sort of raise for that 70 seater---even $5 an hour more...But hey, what's done is done. Enjoy that 70 seater.(didn't your guy Ron Reber say they still needed to cut costs???)

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[WmuBronco]

I don't think that the SkyWest agreement was necessarily a bad thing. The economy was still at a low when this deal was signed. Skywest management and the pilots both knew this, and figured that in 18 months if things got better will change the rates. From the little time that I spent over there working for Skywest, I got the impression from a bunch of senior captians, that if management doesn't sit down and raise these rates at the end of 18 months. Say "hello" ALPA. Management there, will play ball before this happens. At least they didn't sign anything long term, like those guys/gals at MESA (hey they wanted their fearless leader to have a dozen more Harley's)

 

[reno]

G. Lee,

We gave management a temporary bone. We'll see in the next few months what they give back. In the mean time we still kept 100% of our pay and we secured a deal with UAL while our current pay is higher than our competitors and will be even better before '05.

I guess time will tell. Until then we can respectfully disagree, which is rare these days on these boards.

Regards,

Reno

 

[Morgoth]

General,

With nearly one third of the pay agreement's duration already over, and the economy turning around, I think history will show that the SkyWest pilots made a very shrewd business decision to vote for that pay agreement -- especially by insisting on a very short time-frame for the agreement. With the economy down and United looking like it was going to tank, they got the additional flying for a very few 70-seaters during this agreement's duration. You can bet that when this agreement is re-negotiated, with all the additional 70-seaters on order and the economy on the upswing, the SkyWest pilots will stick to their guns and insist on separate pay scales for the 50 and 70-seaters. If not, UPA (the in-house union a group of some senior RJ guys are trying to ram down their throats) will be on the property pronto.

Time will tell.....

 

[sf3boy]

General,
I like your explanation of the 757-767 situation. Mesaba management and ALPA thought the same way in 1997 with regards to first officers. We were told, "Don't think of it as lowering a 90K+ pound jet payscale, but think of it as really raising Saab 340 pay."

 

[Russ]

UPA isn't being rammed down anyones throat. It's an intelligent alternative to the questionable representation we have now. I am not a senior RJ captain, I am a mid range guy on the RJ who see's fundemental changes for the worse in the relationship we have with management. If you had asked me prior to the initial UA contract I would have said no to a union. Now I pray the younger pilots have come to the realization that SkyWest may be the airline they retire from. Despite what yahoos like gen lee say that isn't such a bad thing if there are improvements made. IMHO the greatest improvements need to come in the work rules. I can make it on the pay alright, even living right here in the middle of SOCAL.

I and some of those senior pilots alluded to are not so sure about seeing a raise for the 700. I really hope you can tell me in a year "see I told you so"

 

[Morgoth]

Russ,

I hope so too. Like I said, time will tell. I think SkyWest management would be very foolish to not give the pilots a well-deserved raise for giving them the "ace" I believe they requested during the last negotiations.

However, I find it interesting that most of the guys who seem to be in favor of UPA are a relatively small minority of very vocal RJ guys, mostly in SLC it seems. I have yet to hear of many EMB pilots at SkyWest in favor of UPA. In fact, no offense but there seems to be a vast gap in attitude between most RJ guys and most EMB guys. Some of my good EMB friends even refer to SkyWest RJ guys as "mainline SkyWest."

It just seems that a lot of UPA proponents have an axe to grind with SkyWest management. I recently heard one SkyWest EMB captain say that a lot of their EMB guys transitioned to the jet because their egos would no longer fit in the Brasilia. Makes you wonder.

 

[Gobi Gred]

I'd be willing to bet that when the time comes, management will tell us that they can't separate the pay scales for the fifty and seventy seater since we could feasibly fly both on a given trip. It would be too difficult and besides you are actually overpaid for the fifty seater is what they'll say. I'm also sick and tired of this pilot group talking like we negotiate a "contract". We don't have a contract! Without legal representation, management can do whatever they please.

 

[Morgoth]

Gobi,

I think management would be signing their death warrant if they did that. The pilots would unionize immediately and the amicable relationship management now enjoys would be over forever.

However, don't fall into the trap of thinking a contract will prevent management from doing whatever they want. It won't. Ask any UAL pilot. It's called "force majeur" (among other things). Contracts are violated all the time, and companies just say "grieve it." That takes time and money, and sometimes years to resolve.

In any event, I think SkyWest management is smarter than that. It would actually be fairly simple to differentiate between 50- and 70-seat pay on a single trip. It could be as simply as a software change to payroll's software. In any event, I don't think that's an argument that management could win.

 

[Russ]

There is a gulf between the EMB and RJ pilots for sure. That gulf cost us a union vote a few years back. Now as the RJ is the larger of the two fleets hopefully that can be overcome. The backing is no longer confined to SLC as it once was, a large percentage of RJ captains and a growing number of RJ FOs are in favor, at most domociles. My belief for the differences between the two fleets is seniority. The Brasilia crews tend to be fairly new to the company (SAN aside) and have not had opportunity to see the steady degradation of the relationship with SGU along with many givebacks in the form of bennies and now pay. The Bro guys are seeing reasonably quick upgrades, especially if in IAH and are content with the process.

 

[Morgoth]

Now as the RJ is the larger of the two fleets hopefully that can be overcome.

Does that mean forcing the will of the RJ guys on the EMB guys who do not want a union? It seems that will only serve to deepen the resentment and divisiveness already at work. RJ pilots at SkyWest are already seen as arrogant and self-important by their EMB counterparts. My question is this: If UPA does become the collective bargaining agent for SkyWest (and as you said, the RJ is now the larger of the two fleets on the property), what's to keep them from shafting the EMB guys in favor of the RJ?

And, by the way, there are quite a few senior EMB guys on the west coast in FAT, PDX, and SMF to name a few. They choose to stay in the EMB for QOL purposes and to avoid commuting, among others.

 

[Russ]

The pilot population as a whole will elect or reject UPA, not RJ pilots. If UPA is voted in, it will represent you as it will me. It is not a matter of shafting EMB pilots if the majority of pilots desire UPA versus SAPA. If you feel UPA is not for you, then vote no. I am sorry if you feel disenfranchised but the majority of pilots at SkyWest are RJ pilots. Not bragging, far from it, the EMB is more of a mans aircraft than the CRJ will ever be.

I am very aware of the demographics of the Bro fleet as I was on the aircraft till just a few years ago, based on the coast doing UA flying. I have friends in most if not all of the EMB domociles.

 

[Morgoth]

I think it would be interesting to know the breakdown percentage of pro/con UPA opinion based on equipment type. Specifically, I'm curious why so many RJ pilots (senior and junior) are pro-UPA, and so many EMB pilots (again both senior and junior) are reluctant to say the least. I truly don't think it has much if anything to do with experience or lack thereof.

 

[jayme]

I'm curious why so many RJ pilots (senior and junior) are pro-UPA, and so many EMB pilots (again both senior and junior) are reluctant to say the least.

Please state your sources. If you talk to 10 RJ pilots and 10 Brazilia pilots, that doesn't amount to anything. I'm on the 120 and I'd like to see upa voted in. Over half of the EMB pilots I talk to like the idea of UPA. But I'm not about to state that MOST brazilia pilots want to see a union at SkyWest, because HOW THE HELL WOULD I KNOW! THERE ARE ABOUT 650 OF THEM!

 

[Morgoth]

Please state your sources. If you talk to 10 RJ pilots and 10 Brazilia pilots, that doesn't amount to anything. I'm on the 120 and I'd like to see upa voted in. Over half of the EMB pilots I talk to like the idea of UPA. But I'm not about to state that MOST brazilia pilots want to see a union at SkyWest, because HOW THE HELL WOULD I KNOW! THERE ARE ABOUT 650 OF THEM!

My sources are the pilots I talk to on a daily basis, not to mention the ones I fly with. Also, my observations of attitudes and discussions of different RJ and EMB pilots in various crew lounges.

But, as you'll notice, I never once said that most Brasilia pilots are against a union. I'm just stating my personal observations and the opinions of those I work with.

 

[surplus1]

Strega7,

Ah, so you did see that.....I would like to forget that, and it really doesn't even hurt me whatsoever, but it will hurt my friends still at regionals. That decision really affected the whole regional industry. It was HUGE.

[emphasis supplied]

General,

You're dead right on that one. Glad you have the courage to tell it like it is.

originally posted by reno....We gave management a temporary bone. We'll see in the next few months what they give back. In the mean time we still kept 100% of our pay and we secured a deal with UAL while our current pay is higher than our competitors and will be even better before '05.

I guess time will tell.

You're right, time will tell. It will tell that you didn't "give them a bone", what you really did was let them take you to the cleaners.
You seem to think that you "secured a deal with UAL" because of what you did to yourselves and to the rest of us.

The truth is you did not secure anything except lower wages for yourselves, and opened the door to the concept of "bidding for growth". Your actions led the way, forced AirWiskey to take a hit on their contract, and caused ACA do essentially they same (it was their management that saved them by saying no to UAL). You started the "low bid process" on carriers like Comair, put pressure on the Horizon contract, undercut the ASA, Mesaba and XJT negotiations, helped CHQ to take less than they might otherwise have been able to get, etc., etc., ..... all with the idea that you could "get something" that your management obviously already had ... a deal with UAL. [Maybe you didn't notice how long (after your decision) it took them to announce the "success" generated by your "vote". [The miraculous hour or two.] You can believe all the fiction you want to, but the actual events are there for all to see.... you paid for something they already had, and you hurt ALL the rest by doing it.

I won't be surprised if you rejoice again should you wind up getting the 700's from CMR and ASA, or forcing them to accept your low ball bid in an effort to keep their equipment.

The General is right.

originally posted by The GeneralYes you did--because you were one of the first to say, "Hey, we'll take expansion over pay." After your agreement, others followed or will follow, and the next thing you know your managment will NOT be able to give you that raise because it will not allow them to be competitive. >>>>>> you will get that much needed expansion, and everyone else will pay for it because you were the ones to start it. You should have atleast gotten some sort of raise for that 70 seater---even $5 an hour more..

The General is right again, Reno. You believe you will get better 70-seat rates in 18 months. Sure, by the time everyone else has been forced to "match" what you "achieved", you will learn the fiction of your 18-month dream. By the way, I believe the moon is made of green cheese too.

What you're far more likely to "get" is the lower 50-seat rates the others all may have to "negotiate" (with few exceptions) by then. Then you'll be able to claim that you got a "raise" for the 700s, because they pay more than the 50's (and less than everyone else got before your "deal".

Like it or not, reality is that your actions as a group substantially lowered the bar for everyone operating small jets with 70-seats and gave birth to the concept of "bidding for growth". The trickle-down effects are still coming.

What's ironic is that Mesa gets all of the flack. The truth is that while the Mesa agreement makes no one proud, they at least have the excuse of being under intense pressure from an alter ego. You were not under any "pressure" at all, you just let your beloved management pull the wool over your eyes. Too bad we can't both be the "fly on the wall" at their private cocktail parties.

If you could just say that you did what you felt was in your best interest and you didn't consider or care how it would affect others, I could maybe deal with that. Pretending that you didn't hurt anyone and you didn't take, in effect, a pay cut, is just plain baloney and it sticks in the craw.

Like you said Reno, time will tell. Meanwhile this pilot has no empathy with your groups' position and nothing to thank you for.