Am. Airlines Scope forces Eagle Furlough

[80drvr]

Re: correct

When labor contracts restrict the ability to adjust to the market that exists for the company to participate in, you are on a very bad course.

APA's contract doesn't restrict the ability to adjust....it restricts the ability to outsource. AA could by J-3 cubs for all I care as long as the flying isn't outsourced. APA has made a viable effort to "adjust" to the current market and preserve jobs both at AA and AE. But apparently AMR doesn't want to "adjust", they want to pursue a path that's in no one's best interest. It's kind of sad that our industry is run this way.

 

[SF3CAP]

"To be brutally honest I think it would be better for everyone under the AMR umbrella right now to let Eagle grow a little bit -- but once you've given in a little they'll take a lot and keep on taking."

Hey TWA: When you say "they'll take alot and keep on taking", you mean AMR management, right? Don't make us Eagle guys feel like the enemy, here. Remember - we're all in this thing together. Welcome to the AMR "happy family!"

 

[TWA Dude]

[/b]Hey TWA: When you say "they'll take alot and keep on taking", you mean AMR management, right? Don't make us Eagle guys feel like the enemy, here. Remember - we're all in this thing together. Welcome to the AMR "happy family!" [/B]

Yes, you interpreted me correctly. I am very empathetic to the plight of the Eagle guys. You're all too familiar with AMR's whipsawing.

 

[publisher]

adjust

80drvr

If you restrict my ability to outsource, that is a pretty big restricition....

Let's say I can get a provider to fly an RJ or Turbo prop in a market for 1/2 what it would cost me to do it myself plus I have no commitment past 90 days..

Second, when Eagle buys those cubs let's see how many mainliners want to come down and fly them.

As was just shown by Continental, the cost just to bring the flow down was prohibitive to COEX.

 

[80drvr]

Re: adjust

80drvr

If you restrict my ability to outsource, that is a pretty big restricition....

Let's say I can get a provider to fly an RJ or Turbo prop in a market for 1/2 what it would cost me to do it myself plus I have no commitment past 90 days..

Second, when Eagle buys those cubs let's see how many mainliners want to come down and fly them.

As was just shown by Continental, the cost just to bring the flow down was prohibitive to COEX.

If it's that unreasonable to restrict outsourcing, then management shouldn't have agreed to it contractually.

The mainliners DO want to fly the RJ's. They wanted them in 97, they wanted them in 00, and they want them now. Have you seen APA's proposal regarding such?

The cost to the flowback is significant but it's no different really than the cost to furlough. In the case of the flowback the training accordion just gets longer by another airframe before someone is displaced to the street.

 

[Tim47SIP]

Publisher, there is a winner, you named it, SWA. I'm with you on these state of affairs.

80dvr - A cap is a cap, period. If it restricts in total numbers, that is it. Just because AMR is outsourcing and not utilizeing eagle does not hinder the fact that the cap is restricting growth when AMR needs the capital. If it looks like an onion, smells like an onion, then it is probably an onion. Look at Delta, DALPA and DCI right now. Delta management is ignoring the caps and growing DCI like crazy and is staying partially afloat because of it.

US Air's scope has put that company into a tail spin. The WO's contractually are not allowed to have RJ's, so the company has used outsourced equipement. Now the mainline pilots are saying it is OK to get more RJ's while they watched their company go down the drain, but the company has to still outsource because they dont have the capital to finance themselves. And now the mainline pilot group (because of their own contract with US Air) cant fly them on their own property so they are going to fly them at Mesa, TSA, Chat, etc. Now tell me that is not a screwed up situation.
I understand why mainline scopes are put in place, and why the mainline groups are afraid to give concesions (because they might no get them back), but at some point, there has to be some flexibility to let the company build and make a profit. Last time I looked, these airlines were not a non profit organization to pay the employees.
I know there will be some cannon balls lobbed this way for this one!

 

[80drvr]

Publisher, there is a winner, you named it, SWA. I'm with you on these state of affairs.

80dvr - A cap is a cap, period. If it restricts in total numbers, that is it. Just because AMR is outsourcing and not utilizeing eagle does not hinder the fact that the cap is restricting growth when AMR needs the capital. If it looks like an onion, smells like an onion, then it is probably an onion. Look at Delta, DALPA and DCI right now. Delta management is ignoring the caps and growing DCI like crazy and is staying partially afloat because of it.

US Air's scope has put that company into a tail spin. The WO's contractually are not allowed to have RJ's, so the company has used outsourced equipement. Now the mainline pilots are saying it is OK to get more RJ's while they watched their company go down the drain, but the company has to still outsource because they dont have the capital to finance themselves. And now the mainline pilot group (because of their own contract with US Air) cant fly them on their own property so they are going to fly them at Mesa, TSA, Chat, etc. Now tell me that is not a screwed up situation.
I understand why mainline scopes are put in place, and why the mainline groups are afraid to give concesions (because they might no get them back), but at some point, there has to be some flexibility to let the company build and make a profit. Last time I looked, these airlines were not a non profit organization to pay the employees.
I know there will be some cannon balls lobbed this way for this one!

Well lob away. Not really sure what I said or implied that would require me to don nomex.

What you seem to be implying is that the only way for air carriers to recover is by transfering mainline flying to commuter affiliates. My contention is straightforward. AMR agreed to certain limits. APA recognizes that the company would like more flexibility in terms of capacity and has developed a proposal that would meet the company's needs at a competitive cost.

Obviously, it isn't that important to the AMR's recovery, because they're not very concerned with negotiating a solution. AMR has no problem shooting first and asking questions later if something in the contract is an obastacle to their plans. Post 9/11, they invoked force majeure to blow holes through our contract, and I'd bet AE's as well. Why stop now.

 

[Draginass]

US Airway's problems go WAY deeper than RJs. That's a side show. U's been so badly led and managed that any scope relief is probably a temp reprieve. RJ's in themselves are not the long term future of aviation. Maybe regional guys like working for $30 an hour, but I doubt it. If management had it's way, "regionals" would be flying 777s with 500 hour TT/$25 per hour F/Os and $60/ hour Captains.

 

[Tim47SIP]

80drvr
No you didn't say anything bad, my lob comment was general in nature because this is a touchy subject. Keep up the good posts!

I am not saying that mainline flying should be transferred to the rejionals. What I am saying is that some of these contracts out there need to be designed is such a way that the company can manipulate assets when needed. I know mainline guys think that the regionals will suck up all of their flying due to lower costs, but I think that is a little unrealistic. Management will use mainline aircraft on routes that require mainline aircraft. It is assenine to say that because a market will not support the amount of mainline aircraft we have at a large carrier, that management is stuck flying those assets half full because of a contract. Bleeding a company continuously to preserve the current state of jobs isn't good for anyone. There has to be a company in order to pay the employees. As was posted earlier, there is no real winner when it comes to restrictions. Management cant make the gains it needs by rightsizing, mainline guys are getting furloughed and are trying to take the regionals jets which they didn't want earlier, and the WO's get screwed by flushdowns or additional furloughs due to caps. Some or all of this is happening in every major carrier with caps. So what do we do now, stick to the status quo, put our hands over our eyes, scream LA, LA, LA, LA so that we cant hear the industry changing around us as in ALPA's case, or do we try to restucture (like APA tried) to make the companies money, and preserve the industry. Will some of those great mainline jobs deminish because the industry and economy cant support them, probably, but they will return when things turn around.

Drag
I am sorry if I implied that the mainline contract caused US Air's demise. That is not the case as you stated. You are 100% correct in that they have been in deep trouble for years. But the point I was trying to make is that mainlines contract that will not allow the WO's to fly RJ's at all has greatly hindered US Air's abillity to rebound and compete in the RJ industry. Mangement has to rely on outsourcing in order to gain feed. It has also caused their own furloughed pilots to have to go off property to fly them. I cant for the life of me think of a good reason that the US Air pilots had for totally restricting the use of RJ's at their WO's. US Air management has been trying to get more RJ's for some time and the mainline guys would not budge. Now all of the sudden they have a great number of guys on furlough so it is OK to get more RJ's if they get to fly them. So what was the original reason for not having the additional ones prior to the furloughs? You got me on that one.

 

[bigD]

Heh - this has been a really good thread for getting me up to speed. I think I'm slowly beginning to see the whole picture here.

But one small thing, what's a WO?

 

[Tim47SIP]

WO = Wholey Owned, just like on all of the other threads. You know, the regionals that the mainlines own that they dont recognize. Hope that helps.

 

[bigD]

Aha! Thank you Tim. I see it used all the time, and through context kind of figured it was a term applied to the regionals, but now I know for sure! Sigh...slowly but surely...I'm getting there.

 

[publisher]

typically

In a growing market and economy, these are things that are not really big problems..... They become such in shrinking companies or economies and everyone tends to feed on their young.

In the case of United Airlines, they signed a contract that most business people, most airline people, and even some of the pilots who would benefit thought was cost prohibitive. To say that management agreed to it would be amisnomer. It was simply better than watching their business travelers totally abandon them doing irrepairable damage.

As I have said on these boards in the areas that have dealt with scope, I think that recent history will make it less likely not more likely that mainline pilots will fly the RJ's or that the regionals will remain wholly owned or maybe even partially owned.

I think that there will be significant changes in the way majors do business or even exist as a result of 2001.

 

[Draginass]

The circumstances around United's contract were really pretty simple. The year before the summer of discontent, the pilot's union TOLD United management that they couldn't fly the schedule without mandatory overtime. SO, when it comes to the summer in question, what does Goodwin do??? He stonewalls the contract negotiations. Brilliant. What did he THINK was going to happen??? At the end of the summer GOODWIN had managed to piss off his customers and pilots, make everybody in Denver mad, and THEN settled for a more expensive contract than he could have had at the beginning of the summer. Buffonery, plain and simple.

The economy is going to pick up. The future is not SWA and Jet Blue, nor the skys darkened with RJs flown by $50 an hour captains. The SWAs and Jet Blues have their nitch, but they don't have a worldwide network or a rational and flexible fleet variety. Also, how long do you think SWA pilots and Jet Blue pilots are going to settle for sub-par compensation and narrow retirement schemes. The industry is in a natural change process. For those regional guys who think that the future is an RJ flown by a at-will contract company, please stay there when American, Delta, Continental, and United start hiring again. After all, there's no future in major airlines, right?

 

[Tim47SIP]

Draginbutt, just keep saying that over and over again. And while you are on the yellowbrick road, in your own mind it may come true some day! Only time will tell. P.S. not to be an insult at all, just a difference of oppinion on the future concerning SW, JB, ATA, Etc.

 

[airjackson]

amen

Thanks for pointing out the same old, same old from the previous post

 

[~~~^~~~]

The SWAs and Jet Blues have their nitch, but they don't have a worldwide network or a rational and flexible fleet variety.

Actually one type has worked rather well for both airlines and your airline is trying to reduce the number of types on the property.

Also, how long do you think SWA pilots are going to settle for sub-par compensation and narrow retirement schemes.

Lets see, Southwest pilots have been at it for 29 years now.

The industry is in a natural change process. For those regional guys who think that the future is an RJ flown by a at-will contract company, please stay there when American, Delta, Continental, and United start hiring again. After all, there's no future in major airlines, right?

Which is it, Sagginbutt? Is the industry changing, or must we all fly at majors? How do you know Southwest, Airtran and Jet Blue are not the future majors?

Back in 1970 who would have taken a job at that little southern cropdusting outfit Delta when a job could be had at Braniff, Continental, Eastern, or the best job ever, Pan Am?

Most of us will be in this business another 25 years, or more. Don't insult those who have hitched their wagons to other airlines - after all each of the airlines you insulted is making a profit, YOUR'S isn't.

 

[ifly4food]

Re: typically

In the case of United Airlines, they signed a contract that most business people, most airline people, and even some of the pilots who would benefit thought was cost prohibitive. To say that management agreed to it would be amisnomer. It was simply better than watching their business travelers totally abandon them doing irrepairable damage.

While your management-centric viewpoint is sometimes enlightening, I think you're falling into the usual management funk here.

It doesn't matter one bit if UAL management had a gun to their heads when they signed. They signed. They could have said no, and opened up other avenues. They signed.
Once you sign, a contract is a contract. Tough luck. You either mutually agree to ammend the contract of you live with it. You don't cry sour grapes after you sign and something unexpected happens. No one could have predicted 9/11, but let's be honest here... the economy was going down the toilet long before that. The signs were there when UAL signed.
A contract is a contract.

 

[~~~^~~~]

It doesn't matter one bit if UAL management had a gun to their heads when they signed. They signed. They could have said no, and opened up other avenues.

What other avenues? Would that be Bankruptcy Avenue, or Insolvency Street?

Some pilots seem to think that no matter what they negotiate - it is up to management to somehow make it profitable.

United was bleeding due to the "summer of discontent." United management banked on increased costs in the rest of the industry as each pilot group matched the United contract - which did not happen. Delta increased costs, but American probably will not. Continental will not, and US Air is no longer relevant.

Of course the management of the company I fly for signed an even dumber deal with only a cork gun to their head. At least they had the good sense to leave provisions that would allow the company to survive if the economy tanked, which it has.

IFF - have you run the numbers to see if ALPA's grievance will result in your furlough?

 

[ifly4food]

~^~,
They didn't havbe to sign. They could have let it go to arbitration, rolled the dice with a strike vote, whatever. They chose to sign. Now a contract is a contract.

IFF - have you run the numbers to see if ALPA's grievance will result in your furlough?

Do you know something we don't? Care to enlighten us?
Last I checked, DALPA hadn't won anything and didn't have a shot in He!l of forcing a flow down to DCI. That is a pie in the sky RJDC propaganda slogan you bring up. They can't force a flow down. They might be able to get an Eagle style furlough IF the caps are indeed hit, which would only result in quicker E120 retirement.
You are always screaming that the sky is falling. We're still waiting.