Airtran Fleet Update

[jetdawg]

On my last trip a good friend of mine called and told me the update. Supposedly 2 73's in May, 6 in June and one a month to the end of the year. 2005 2 73's a month and 2006 1 73 a month.

The 717, we are getting a total of 10 this year and I was not told the extent of the deliveries for 2005.

Good luck on all who are trying to get on here. It does seem to be a pain in the a$$ at times but trust me when you get here it is all worth it. A hell of a bunch good guys here. There was a post saying "when you go to the cockpit and you smell something do not look at the cpt. first not proper etiquitte" I do not mind I am not that thin skinned.

 

[jetdawg]

forgot to add the first 35 of the 73's for now will be the 700's.

someone did post that the 73's carry more peep's than the 717 (no really) so we should get more money. I agree, but 18 more people will not make that much $ in the long run and I would rather see this airline continue to make money and be copied then to get an hourly increase then a year down the road be asked for concessions

 

[FL717]

On my last trip a good friend of mine called and told me the update. Supposedly 2 73's in May, 6 in June and one a month to the end of the year. 2005 2 73's a month and 2006 1 73 a month.

The 717, we are getting a total of 10 this year and I was not told the extent of the deliveries for 2005.

Good luck on all who are trying to get on here. It does seem to be a pain in the a$$ at times but trust me when you get here it is all worth it. A hell of a bunch good guys here. There was a post saying "when you go to the cockpit and you smell something do not look at the cpt. first not proper etiquitte" I do not mind I am not that thin skinned.

Then you won't mind me correcting you and everyone that is reading this. We will NOT be receiving the 737's on the delivery schedule that you have been told.

According to your source, that would mean we will receive 14 737's and 10 717's for a total of 24 new aircraft the remainder of this year (that is with only 9 bidding months left in 2004). Impossible.

Your source is wrong. That schedule you have posted is impossible for this company to absorb. It just won't happen, and as far as I have seen, the original schedule is still on track, 6 737's and approx 6 717's this year (for a total of 12). I do not have the 2005-2008 schedule commited to memory, and it doesn't matter for it will change 10 times by then.

I don't want to see the people on this forum who are trying to get on with AirTran to get their hopes up. This company does nothing on that scale on that timeline in the period as described... trust me.

 

[jetdawg]

In that case I stand to be corrected and I am glad to see that you know. That is why I stated that in my post about being thin skinned. Thanks for the input.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

forgot to add the first 35 of the 73's for now will be the 700's.

someone did post that the 73's carry more peep's than the 717 (no really) so we should get more money. I agree, but 18 more people will not make that much $ in the long run and I would rather see this airline continue to make money and be copied then to get an hourly increase then a year down the road be asked for concessions

That may be your thought process but the result is you will work the 737 below industry standard just to get the jets on the property.

You Airtran folks are brutal competitors. Maybe I should buy Airtran stock.

 

[FL717]

That may be your thought process but the result is you will work the 737 below industry standard just to get the jets on the property.

You Airtran folks are brutal competitors. Maybe I should buy Airtran stock.

Actually what we all think won't get the aircraft on the property or not. They ARE coming regardless.

We already have the 737 rates in our contract. They were negotiated in 2001 when we still had 737's on the property. I do not have my contract handy but I believe I am accurate in the following:

Our contract includes payrates for SNB (small narrowbody) which includes the 717 and 737-700.

Our contract includes payrate language for LNB (large narrow body) which includes the 757 and 737-800.

Our contract even has payrates for WB (wide bodies) which includes 747's.

I happen to agree with jetdawg in his post regarding our continued profitability. And as I have stated before, if anyone thinks that AirTran is dragging down the profession, then they really haven't looked at our contract closely or figured out the management and economics of it all, and I certainly won't bother trying to change their minds.


Our payscales end this year and our new contract will be negotiated, and I think it will include some real positive improvements. We will vote in what we feel is fair and balanced, regardless of whatever the public court of opinion decides.

Judging the opinions of the non AirTran people around here on these forums, I'll tell you right now, it won't be enough for you all around here. Its never enough..... until you're bankrupt and furloughed ... then all they can say is "oh poor you....too bad".

 

[FLB717]

Hey FBJ,
What did your widebody Capt's make on the old contract. I believe it toped out at 115 Hr? I may be wrong but I think that is close. Your 727 FO's topped at 63hr, agian I could be wrong. Our old rates at the same time on the DC9/B737-2 were nearly the same. Our new rates top the 717/737-7 at 152,hr. the 800 at 172hr. Now you got a great raise and you guys deserved it and so now you make more, flying a much larger aircraft. But contracts come and they go. So I'm not sure what you mean by below industry standard, care to educate me?

 

[Ty Webb]

I have to agree. . . . seems a little ridiculous for an ATA guy to try to slam AirTran guys for pay rates, considering that ATA is a major (and has been for several years), but their previous contract's pay rates were less than little ol' AirTran's.

Now that our contract talks are starting up, we will be using ATA's new pay rates as a "peer group". So, if we get ATA plus a point or two, should we start slamming them for working for less than us? Hmmmm.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

All good points.

I wasn't around under the old contract, but I heard it stunk as you say. Our "wide" bodies now only fly contract. The union is trying to get a better rate for the 767.

I wish you well negotiating a better contract. It's tough being #2 in ATL, I'm sure. And you're right, a growth spurt is an uncertain time and is best approached with caution. I must have been drinking to much ATA Koolaid the other day. Our RASM's are down and I wonder when they will go back up. I do think Airtran stock is a good bet.

Congrats on the new training center.

 

[FLB717]

FBJ,

ATA is a great bunch of guys, it’s ok to drink a little kool-aid. Why would anyone not want to be a proponent of their career and home, no big deal with me. Your brothers I know worked hard for the contract you have now. I remember talking to a few prior to the TA and they had that “I WILL WALK” look in the eye. Thanks for the integrity to be honest, it shows stones. Good luck and we’ll try to help you with our bar in 05.

 

[Fly-By-Cable]

FLB, did you get that truck?

 

[Ty Webb]

I hear he's driving a minivan . . .

To the tune of "Spider Man":

"Married Man, Married Man
Drives around in a minivan
Buys his pants at the Gap
He's getting tired of all the crap

Look out,
Look Out for the Married Man!"

 

[FLB717]

NOW THATS FUNNY.

Naw not yet, the dealer tried the bait and switch. Fricken vultures.

 

[-9Capt]

I just had my yearly line check 3 days ago, I picked the check airmans brain a little. He's active in the union. Here is what I was told:

16 airplanes this year, 8 717's and 8 737's.
No new crew bases any time soon, years away.
1 737 per month for '05, subject to almost certian change.
17 pilots (all in the training dept) made over $275K in '03.
67 pilots made over 250K (they have no life)

And yeah, I passed.

 

[atl01]

Quick question TRS drivers, where are you going to park all of the new airframes. ATL is hurting as far as gate space goes for citrus and the new terminal is at least a couple of years out. Are there plans on expanding MCO or any other stn? When I worked ramp control in ATL hold outs were common place.

 

[Fly-By-Cable]

AirTran is planning to connect a lot of dots in the next few years.
So while ATL will grow, most of expansion will happen through out the system.
The Mayor repeatedly stated that she is hopping to see AirTran relocate to Atlanta one day. I'm sure that could be negotiated for some gates as new terminals are built.

 

[P38JLightning]

FL scope?

>>AirTran is planning to connect a lot of dots in the next few years.
So while ATL will grow, most of expansion will happen through out the system.
The Mayor repeatedly stated that she is hopping to see AirTran relocate to Atlanta one day. I'm sure that could be negotiated for some gates as new terminals are built.<<

FBC,

I wouldn't read a lot into that. Mayors of course always vie for more business. But when you look at AT now; 100% crews based in ATL, large training center in ATL, large call center in ATL...there's not much more left in MCO is there? I'm sure any mayor would love some AT growth in their city, but I wouldn't count on having any more leverage in ATL because of it, unless there isn't much other competition for those (or new) gates.

What do you guy's have for scope at FL? It would seem a tough time to go into negotiations with management (despite their good track record of dealing with NPA the last few years) with them having unlimited 50's, unlimited 70's, (unlimited 90's?) and unlimited use of Ryan.

I have heard they are shopping 70 seat providers outside the AT seniority list. What is NPA's view on this? A Mesa, SKYW, Chautauqua or others' CRJ700s being operated at or below Comair's 50 seat cost structure (in many cases WAY below) would seem to be dammaging to NPA's negotiating leverage.

Would NPA even consider outsourcing unlimited 70's? ANY 70's? How about 90's? That's a scary thought. A Mesa 90 doing AT JetConnect. Good luck getting good 717 rates with that going on. What is NPA's stance on Ryan? I know its supposed to be a temporary thing. But is this a handshake agreement with management, or is there a firm, contractual drop dead date for ALL Ryan flying?

Again, Joe Leonard is running a good ship right now, and seems to have a great relationship with its pilots. But he is a manager, and unlimited outsourcing flexibility is NOT something he or any other manager truly needs, especialy during upcoming pilot talks. I hope NPA tells him 51 and up is AT seniority list, and you can have as many as you want, ZERO outsourced 70's and 90's and Ryan leaves for good by xx-xx-05 or something like that.

I've heard different things as to AT's current contract on these issues as well as the goals for next contract (besides ATA or ATA plus on pay rates) and what (exactly) kind of scope you actually have.

 

[Fly-By-Cable]

True, most of AirTran is in ATL, however, as far as Mayor is concerned the most important part is still in MCO. That's where AirTran pays taxes.

As far as scope. We have pages on that in our contract, but in short:

70 seat a/c are the limit, and the procentage of flying they can do is based on amount of aircraft that AirTran operates. Current contract allows for 20% flying at 100 AirTran aircraft, which obviously will be renegotiated due to new 737 order.

Ryan will be replaced as soon as possible according to Joe. They are not pleased with that subservice from what I keep hearing. In his last presentation at investment firm he said, that they can't wait to increase our proffits on those routs flown by Ryan, and that it can only be done with our aircraft.

 

[DCitrus9]

There is also a drop dead date for Ryan flying, I believe April 05. The Ryan sub must also be finished if we get a certain number of the 737 on property, I believe 25. April 05 will come first.

 

[-9Capt]

P38,

Believe it or not, AirTran has more restrictive scope language than most majors.

The Ryan flying goes away when AirTran obtains aircraft capable of flying those routes, or 4/05, whichever happens first. It's my understanding Leonard hinted that he is not real happy with the Ryan service.

It is the opinion of many pilots that the only reason management wanted the Ryan deal so they would have the upper hand when negotiating with Airbus and Boeing.

As for RJ service, basicly they are limited to 20% of mainline ASM's, 70 seat max.

As far as I've been told, the reason the company is still HQ in MCO is beacuse of a good relationship with the local FSDO.