Air Wisconsin, we hardly knew ye

[Mel Sharples]

John -

I started a new thread so we can all stay on topic. Please see my response to your earlier post here.

Thanks...

Mel


.

 

[Crossky]

Until ALPA begins to faithfully represent its regional members, this could happen to any regional airline. This time, United is playing one against the rest in an attempt to compensate for incompetent management. What's next?

The economy is doing fine; passenger load factors keep going up, and yet once again the management at United can't seem to manage to make money. So, they split up Air Wisconsin to the lowest bidder, and the race to the bottom continues.

This latest news is the beginning of the end for Air Wisconsin. Pilots, mechanics, and customer service personnel have given all they can reasonably give. Air Wisconsin abided by whatever United asks of them; open bases, close bases, and take wage concessions. But with no chance for the larger airplane United wants, Air Wisconsin can no longer compete with the lower cost airlines that provide only meager wages, no benefits, and horrible work rules.

The only hope is for ALPA to represent those members who fly for regional airlines; and that, I fear is no hope at all.

Goodbye Air Wisconsin; it's been nice knowing you.

STEP DOWN, STEP DOWN!

AWAC has 87 planes in service, 70 CRJ's and 17 Bae-146's. The CRJ flying is up for rebid, not the BAC jets. For the pilots at least there isn't much room left in the "race to the bottom": 6th yr CA $/hr : AWAC 62, Skywest 65, Mesa 61, 3rd yr FO $/hr : AWAC 34, Skywest 36, AWAC 34. Our mechanics DID NOT take any concessions last time and they will be first up to bat DEFINITELY. Even IF the CRJ's go away the BAC jet flying should still continue.

And what's this "we hardly knew ye" crap? Since 1965 how ORD knew ye, how about that? AWAC was the first United Express partner, and the first regional partner of any doemstic major airline.

Don't be saying goodbye hoser, be saying good luck. I do appreciate your sympathy though, sincerely. Just in a rotten mood right now.

Peace anyway.

 

[rptrain]

AWAC has 87 planes in service, 70 CRJ's and 17 Bae-146's. The CRJ flying is up for rebid, not the BAC jets.

And what's this "we hardly knew ye" crap? Since 1965 how ORD knew ye, how about that? AWAC was the first United Express partner, and the first regional partner of any doemstic major airline.

I think you joined the debate a bit late, but welcome aboard.

My point to the thread title was in fact what you picked up on: that the the oldest UAX partner is having the lion's share of its flying put up for bid. i.e Thanks for all your help over the years; good luck in the future.

Even with "only" the 70 CRJs worth of flying up for bid, that's more than enough to cast a pall over AWAC. There's at least 700 of my brothers who could potentially hit the streets. With my qualifications, I don't need the competition. Good luck to us all.

 

[WhiteCloud]

And what's this "we hardly knew ye" crap? Since 1965 how ORD knew ye, how about that? AWAC was the first United Express partner, and the first regional partner of any doemstic major airline.

I took the "hardly knew ye" line to reference AWAC's larger presence at IAD that started in August. AWAC reorganizes and uproots most of their pilots in one way or another to make United Express out of IAD happen and then get the rug pulled out. That's how UAL does business with their long time United Express partner? I don't care what some analyists say....with business practices like that they are NOT going to make it. You can't trust them.

 

[ILLINI]

Unfortunately guys, ALL of AWACs flying is up for bid. The 70 CRJs AND the 17 146s. In a Q&A newsletter it was asked what would happen to the 146s because they weren't mentioned in United's press release. The answer was that some things were up to speculation, but that United HAD put the 146 flying up for bid in addition to the CRJ flying.

 

[TWAER]

Well, looks like Chautauqua and Mesa will strike again....this is the price Air Wisconsin will probably pay because others are willing to whore themselves out.......last time it was Chautauqua accepting a lesser contract to get flying ( and yes I know this as fact from an employee who was at the roadshows during your negotiations)...its a sad state when these types keep pushing the industry down...I know not all of them voted yes and some are strong but it still took a majority to get it to pass.

Sorry to tell you that our CEO came out today and said that we will NOT be bidding on any more 50 seat RJ flying including the Air Wiskey United flying.

And I was at the road show and was NEVER promised flying for growth. Just stating the fact. It came from this employee right here.

 

[rightrudder]

But will your Company be bidding on 70 seat aircraft to replace our 50 seaters? I hope the answer is no.

I don't know who would want to bid on this flying, UAL is in dire straits. If I were a CEO or Owner of a regional airline, I wouldn't want to roll the dice on investing a bunch of money on new aircraft and training costs, only to have UAL go tango uniform. Or have UAL change their mind about the "agreement" and rebid what had previously awarded. Being a UEX carrier is no prize these days.

 

[TWAER]

I wouldn't say that 70 seaters are not a possibility, but I don't think that you can replace all of AW 50 seaters with 70 seaters. Tell me this though, what legacy carrier is a sure bet to sign a deal with these days? Every major is either in BK or right on the edge. Unted may not be a prize these days, but who is??? I for one hope we don't even touch flying that is being done by AW. But you know, I am just a pilot. Management has their own priorities to deal with. Don't be suprised to see Fly I bid on some of this flying. WinK Wink.......................

 

[248to2.8]

How about starting our own Regional Union. Maybe, Regional Airline Pilots Enhancment Daily? (RAPED) Sounds like a pill.

 

[surplus1]

That's how UAL does business with their long time United Express partner?

That is the basic flaw in your (and most of the rest of our) thinking. You are not and have never been UAL's "partner". What you do (just like what we do) is a commodity. You are not an "ariline" in the true sense (and neither are we). For AWAC being an "airline" ended back when UAL first bought the company and then destroyed it. For my company (CMR) being an "ariline" ended on the day that Delta bought my company.

We are service providers and we sell seats to an airline. Selling seats "seats" to airline X, is not different than selling softdrink cups to MacDonald's. The softdring cup vendor is not in the "restaurant" business and the seat vendor is not in the "airline" business. The buyer can choose where he buys the "seats" and that will always be where they are the cheapest. It doesen't matter whether or not you are a subcontractor or a wholly owned subsidiary. What our companies do is not exclusive and it is not contractually protected. The buyer (airline) will always go to the lowest bidder for its supplies whenever it can. We are not "partners". The change from revenue sharing to fee for departure ended the partner relationships.

Unless your company has a long-term contract you are "providers at will" and you can be replaced at any time, with or without cause. Even when you have a long-term contract, at some point in time it becomes renewable and the terms can change or the contract can end. Whey your "buyer" is a bankrupt company your "contract" is subject to the will of a court and can be terminated with the stroke of a pen. That's just the way it is and that is the case with all "fee-for-departure" regionals. There's a little more security when your company is a subsidiary, but a subsidiary can still be sold at any time.

Management's acceptance of the "fee-for-departure" concept sealed the fate and the future of the so-called "regional airline". It was a brilliant move on the part of the legacy carriers and a stupid move on the part of the once independent regional carriers. The regionals sold their ability to control and manage their businesses for a "few pieces of eight" and are now reaping the "rewards" of their decision.

My company refused to buy-in to the "fee-for-departure" concept and the consequence was a buy-out of our company by the big guy. Our management walked away with the big bucks, the shareholders got their money back, and the employees (as usual) got the shaft. My "Company" ceased to exist on the day the transaction closed.

What United left of your company after the first rape accepted the fee for departure. From that day forward it has existed at the will of UAL. Yes, you can reject UAL's RFP. However, if you do that you must then find somebody else to buy what you produce (seats) for you no longer possess the ability or the structure to sell them in your own right. The only other option is to do what ACA did and launch an "airline" in your own right. In today's market the risk of doing that is very high and may not be a viable option for AWAC. You sure can't do it with the equipment you operated at present. Indy's bold move is dependent on their ability to get the AirBus up and running before they run out of money. Personally, I hope they succeed but it's a rough road and all the big dudes are working overtime to ensure their failure.

As pilots we need to get over the illusions of "partnership" with the mainline. They are not realistic. The best we can do is try to protect our job security. None of us has done a good job of that. Instead, we have all chosen to get a few dollars and focus on moving on to a "major". Now that there are no "majors" to move on to, our failure to protect our own interests is back to haunt us.

We all suffer from the illusion that we belong to a union of brotherhood. That is but another stupid idea. The people who run the "union" have the same mindset as the management of the legacy carriers, i.e., control and use the idiots; abuse them when you can; discard them when you can't. There is no "brotherhood" and there never was. We have allowed ourselves to be suckered into that idea and played like fiddles at the hands of our so-called brothers. It's been going on for well over a decade, but we still can't figure it out and we still won't protect ourselves. Once again we think we are "partners"; once again we are not.

Smell the coffee!

 

[HockleyPilot]

Thinking isn't good, it hurts

I am excited, this is my first post to this site after reading it for over a year. First I must say Kudos to viewers and writers involved on this site. Most, and I use term sincerely, people's opinions are valid and have bright points. I really enjoy them and others, even if I disagree.

After reading this post, and the last poster's reply I was thinking something. Most of us are hypocrites. (myself included.)

Yes, the regionals have become a lowest bidder-all-out-war. Do I like it? Negative. Is it reality. Yes. Just like the high executives running legacy carriers into the ground and still getting their millions in incentive pay for a job well done. NO ONE in management today is willing to accept responsibility for their actions. But this post isn't about mainline carriers.

We gripe at regionals for being whores, no? But I was thinking about it and when our schools are being built for our little ones, how is that process conducted? There is an add for sealed bids and it is given to the lowest bidder. I, as a taxpayer, am happy, for I do not want my taxes to go up because I want a "less cost efficient airline, eh contractor". And yes, in some cases with cheaper, you do get what you pay for. (Some school's are evidence).
But we see it all around. Bridges, Federal buildings, roads, freeways, shipping, cell phones, cars...heck why do I buy groceries at Walmart? It sure isn't cause I like the Great Value peas and green beans, it's cause Walton had a vision of winning in a capitalist society. Winning meant lowering costs. Did the competition like it? Ask them if you can still find some around.

We gripe at companies for lowing their costs, but we do the same thing individually at home. So is what is good for the goose, good for the gander? Hmmm...

My point is the occurings in this day in time are unfortunaly becoming "standard". While we get all upset (some of us) over things happening in our industry when it hits home or our job, think about all the other situations where the role is reversed. Or we could just blame management. And that is much, much easier.

Not trying to start a fight.

 

[WhiteCloud]

Surplus and Hockey....... I don't really disagree with anything you guys said. The bottom line is that the airline business is not really a good business to be in. We can mix words by nitpicking my use of "partner" but maybe I should have used other words like "associate" or "contractor" in describing the relationship of UAL to AWAC. (While I don't recall the actual source I think UAL and ACA did use the word "partners" in their promotional stuff, but thats beside the point). UAL word isn't worth a whole lot either way.

 

[surplus1]

Surplus and Hockey....... I don't really disagree with anything you guys said. The bottom line is that the airline business is not really a good business to be in. We can mix words by nitpicking my use of "partner" but maybe I should have used other words like "associate" or "contractor" in describing the relationship of UAL to AWAC. (While I don't recall the actual source I think UAL and ACA did use the word "partners" in their promotional stuff, but thats beside the point). UAL word isn't worth a whole lot either way.

I wasn't really picking on you or your choice of words White Cloud, I was picking on regional pilot groups in general. We have a view of the relationship that is unrealistic and therefore we are often dissapointed. The managements of regional carriers are dissapointed as well and they should know better for they don't have any "word" either.

I'm probably a super cynic but there aren't any business enterprises whose "word" is worth anything. Ethics is not really a part of the American business model. Money takes precedence over everything, especially ethics. The so-called corporate scandals that have been made public to date are just the tip of the iceberg. If the truth were ever revealed you would undoubtedly find they are all cut from the same cloth. The only thing you can believe is what you have in a binding contract and the corporate lawyers will do their best to get around that whenever they can.

So, I'm not blaming you for anything. I'm just asking you to accept reality. The days when anything could be done on a man's "word" are long gone and have no place in today's American business practices.

That's sad, but it's true. Caveat emptor.

 

[BE99chick]

So why are you flying...

surplus1, you are obviously educated.

I can tell because your grammar and spelling are flawless, and I see that you have edited your posts, probably for spelling, grammer and content.

So...what career did you leave to become a pilot? Law, accounting, medicine, management, education, or something else?

And why do you stay? I suppose it's for the same reason I do...days off and an easier time than the 9-5 grind, and a few other reasons. I suspect you and I both have some alternative career to fall back on, when the furlough notice comes.

I also won't fly for dirt wages. And, I will NOT under any circumstances fly 70 seaters for 50 seat wages. I'm lucky, because I do have another career to fall back on, and even though I may be the only one to vote no on the 70-for-50 compromise, at least I will know I did the right thing.

I wish everybody else had the same options I have. It would make this nasty fight go away.

Thank you for your posts...they are realistic and enlightend.

 

[Mel Sharples]

We all suffer from the illusion that we belong to a union of brotherhood. That is but another stupid idea. The people who run the "union" have the same mindset as the management of the legacy carriers, i.e., control and use the idiots; abuse them when you can; discard them when you can't. There is no "brotherhood" and there never was. We have allowed ourselves to be suckered into that idea and played like fiddles at the hands of our so-called brothers. It's been going on for well over a decade, but we still can't figure it out and we still won't protect ourselves. Once again we think we are "partners"; once again we are not.

Smell the coffee!

As much as I hate to admit this, you are right. It is hard to accept, but you are right. (Although you do come on a little strong, but maybe that's what it will take.)

God, admitting that is like admitting I did something dumb to my dad. I am smarter for it yet I still feel so stupid.

Thanks for sharing your insight.

 

[rightrudder]

And, I will NOT under any circumstances fly 70 seaters for 50 seat wages. I'm lucky, because I do have another career to fall back on, and even though I may be the only one to vote no on the 70-for-50 compromise, at least I will know I did the right thing.

So, If AWAC gets 70 seat aircraft and you would have to fly them, you will quit?

 

[BE99chick]

Exactly. I have other options and I'll exercise them. I will fly them for 70 seat pay, but not 50.

I'm even willing to PM you with my name.

I may be the only one...oh well, easy come easy go.

 

[surplus1]

surplus1, you are obviously educated.

I can tell because your grammar and spelling are flawless, and I see that you have edited your posts, probably for spelling, grammer and content.

So...what career did you leave to become a pilot? Law, accounting, medicine, management, education, or something else?

Thank you for the kind words. Yes, I'm educated; I also have an undergraduate degree but nothing special. I'm just not as chronologically "young" as many of you and am very close to the end of professional flying. I did not leave another career to become a pilot. In fact I've been earning my living in an airplane ever since I joined the USAF a long time ago, and as an airline pilot (I did not retire from the military) for most of my adult life. It just wasn't all with the same airline. I've done my share of managing and educating over the years but always in the field of aviation. I'm just a pilot who does other things, as opposed to someone else who also flies.

And why do you stay? I suppose it's for the same reason I do...days off and an easier time than the 9-5 grind, and a few other reasons.

Well, I'm sure it won't impress you but it isn't the days off nor is it an objection to the grind. Simply put, I have stayed because I love what I do. The "people", the places and the way of life, and then of course the aluminium tubes, the clouds, the sky. In spite of the furloughs, the failed companys, the politics and the often intransigent "union", I like what I've done and have no regrets. My present airline is not my first but it will be my last.

When this is "over" I will move on to something else but I'll not forget and will try to stay involved in some way.

Thank you for your posts...they are realistic and enlightend.

Again you're too generous. Realistic I'll give you but enlightened .... that's a bit of a stretch.

Regards.

 

[nimtz]

So, If AWAC gets 70 seat aircraft and you would have to fly them, you will quit?

I wish they had her type at CHQ, Mesa, and Skywest back in '03. It's called RESPECT for the profession and being able to see the forest through the trees. I loathe the day my company joins the list of sellouts for growth.

 

[WhiteCloud]

So, I'm not blaming you for anything. I'm just asking you to accept reality. The days when anything could be done on a man's "word" are long gone and have no place in today's American business practices.

It depends on who you choose to associate with. You're speaking to someone that has a wide variety of business interests inside and outside of aviation and has associated with many of the same people for decades. Perhaps UAL and some big corporations can muscle the people they have financial releationships with, but, in my little world, a persons word makes a huge difference. All it takes is one twisting of the facts (notice I didn't say "lie") to get you put out of some circles. I'm quite sure that the lawyers at UAL and similar companies make much more money than I do, but I question their "success" in life.