APA, CHQ, and the EMB-170

[Be200pilot]

AMCND,

where are you getting your info? you obviously know nothing about CHQ and the planes that are operated under AA connnection. Were you just guessing? We have a total of 15 A/C, thats it, they are all 140's. They also only have the universal FMS, not honeywell, and I'm not sure what Embraer comes with colins.

 

[Dangerkitty]

If AMR terminates its contract with CHQ for this reason, it would be nice to see Republic Holidings sue the Allied Pilots Association and file a complaint for violation of the anti-trust laws (restraing of trade) against AMR.

It's one thing when you have scope that controls y our own code share, but it's another thing whey you try to prevent a Company from doing business with somebody else. Hopefully Bedford won't be a wuss and roll over.

Dude, re-read the statement from the APA. It only says that if CHQ is going to operate the EMB-170 for UAL then it can't be considered a Commuter air carrier for AMR.

IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT CHQ OPERATING THE EMB-170 FOR OTHER CARRIERS. Only if it does it then it can't be a Commuter Carrier for AMR.

I love how some of you wanna-be labor lawyers seem to know the APA/AA contract better than the President of the APA.

Go back to class junior, you have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[jtf]

I'm curious then why can Trans States still be a "commuter air carrier" since Trans States has been operating at least one ATR 72 with more than 50 seats as American Connection ever since American bought out TWA. I'm guessing there are some loopholes that are being used already and will probably be used to fit the CHQ 170s in for United with out losing the American flying. AMR is pretty good at getting what it wants and for now AMR wants CHQ and TSA flying as American Connection. I'm not saying any of this is right or wrong and I do think that the Eagle contract was pissed on by AMR to keep CHQ, TSA, and Corporate flying out of STL. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens.

 

[BigMotorToter]

"I'm curious then why can Trans States still be a "commuter air carrier" since Trans States has been operating at least one ATR 72 with more than 50 seats as American Connection ever since American bought out TWA."

The ATR's were grandfathered in.

 

[surplus1]

Dude, re-read the statement from the APA. It only says that if CHQ is going to operate the EMB-170 for UAL then it can't be considered a Commuter air carrier for AMR.

IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT CHQ OPERATING THE EMB-170 FOR OTHER CARRIERS. Only if it does it then it can't be a Commuter Carrier for AMR.

I love how some of you wanna-be labor lawyers seem to know the APA/AA contract better than the President of the APA.

Go back to class junior, you have no clue what you are talking about.

I admit I'm not a lawyer, but I do know what the APA wrote and I understand what it means. As for the President of the APA, he's just a pilot like me. We can both read a contract, we each have available legal advice and I am no more impressed by his presidency of APA that he would be impressed by me.

The President of APA will interpret the contract in favor of the APA, the Company will read it in favor of AMR, you will read it with a prespective of your interests and I will do likewise.

As to who has a "clue" that's one more matter of opinion. I'll spare you mine.

Y'all come back now, y'heah.

 

[Dangerkitty]

I admit I'm not a lawyer, but I do know what the APA wrote and I understand what it means. As for the President of the APA, he's just a pilot like me. We can both read a contract, we each have available legal advice and I am no more impressed by his presidency of APA that he would be impressed by me.

The President of APA will interpret the contract in favor of the APA, the Company will read it in favor of AMR, you will read it with a prespective of your interests and I will do likewise.

As to who has a "clue" that's one more matter of opinion. I'll spare you mine.

Y'all come back now, y'heah.

Sorry for the harsh statements. Had a long day and even a longer night. However, I really dont see how CHQ is going to get out of this one. With EMB-170's on property I really see no way in them being a commuter affiliate with AMR. I realize AMR is as sneaky as they come, however if this happens there will be a total uproar within the APA ranks. After what we gave them last year I really dont think AMR will be ballsy enough to attack what we got in return for our SCOPE concessions. All planes over 50 seats are for the APA pilots. (Not including the 25 CRJ-700's already bought or the 25 options that they are not going to exercise.)

 

[Draginass]

AMR's stepping in quicksand with CHQ/Republic operating 170s. I don't think Arpey wants to take a chance on losing another ugly scope arbitration and/or further inflaming the AA pilots.

 

[storminpilot]

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040729/295852_1.html

LOOKS LIKE CHAUTAUQUA ISN'T NEEDED NOW



Press ReleaseSource: Republic Airways Holdings


Republic Airlines Receives Amended Department of Transportation Authorization
Thursday July 29, 4:32 pm ET

INDIANAPOLIS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 29, 2004--Republic Airways Holdings Inc. (Nasdaq:RJET - News) today reported that its Republic Airlines subsidiary has received authorization from the U.S. Department of Transportation to engage in air transportation using the Embraer 170 aircraft as a member of the United Express family under a code share agreement with United Airlines. This authorization is subject to the airline meeting the specific requirements of the FAA in order to receive its Air Carrier Certificate. Nonetheless, this is a critical step in the airlines efforts to begin commercial passenger operations.

"We are pleased that the Department of Transportation found both Republic Airlines managerially and financially fit to provide scheduled passenger air service. We look forward to completing the FAA certification process for Republic Airlines in a timely manner," said Bryan Bedford, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Republic Airways Holdings.

Republic Airways Holdings, based in Indianapolis, Indiana is an airline holding company which owns two regional airlines, Chautauqua Airlines and Republic Airlines. Chautauqua Airlines was recently named this year's Regional Airline of the Year by Air Transport World and Regional Airline World. The airline is celebrating its thirtieth anniversary of scheduled commercial passenger service. Chautauqua Airlines offers scheduled passenger service on more than 580 flights daily to 68 cities in 31 states, District of Columbia, Canada and the Bahamas through code sharing agreements with four major U.S. airlines. The all-jet airline currently operates a fleet of 88 Embraer regional jets, including 58 ERJ-145s, 15 ERJ-140s and 15 ERJ-135's. All of its flights are operated under its major airline partner brand, such as AmericanConnection, Delta Connection, United Express and US Airways Express. The airline employs more than 2,100 aviation professionals. Republic Airlines is currently in the process of completing its FAA air carrier certification. Once completed the airline will operate up to 23 seventy passenger Embraer 170 aircraft under a code share agreement with United Airlines.

Additional Information

In addition to historical information, this release contains forward-looking statements. Republic Airways may, from time-to-time, make written or oral forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements encompass Republic Airways' beliefs, expectations, hopes or intentions regarding future events. Words such as "expects," "intends," "believes," "anticipates," "should," "likely" and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements included in this release are made as of the date hereof and are based on information available to Republic Airways as of such date. Republic Airways assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement.

Actual results may vary, and may vary materially, from those anticipated, estimated, projected or expected for a number of reasons, including, among others, that: Republic Airways is dependent on its code-share relationships with its major partners; terrorist attacks have harmed Republic Airways' business and may harm its business in the future; Republic Airways' code-share agreements with United will be terminated if United does not emerge from bankruptcy; Republic Airline requires an operating certificate before it can commence flying operations; if the financial strength of any of Republic Airways' code-share partners decreases, Republic Airways' financial strength is at risk; Republic Airways' code-share partners may expand their direct operation of regional jets thus limiting the expansion of Republic Airways' relationship with them; any labor disruption or labor strikes would adversely affect Republic Airways' ability to conduct its business; Republic Airways' current growth plans may be materially affected by substantial risks, some of which are outside of Republic Airways' control; Republic Airways' code-share partners may be restricted in increasing the level of business that they conduct with Republic Airways, thereby limiting its growth; Republic Airways' fleet expansion program will require a significant increase in Republic Airways' leverage and the financing it requires may not be available on favorable terms or at all; Republic Airways may be subject to additional liability in connection with its decision to phase out of revenue service its Saab 340 aircraft; Republic Airways depends on Embraer to supply Republic Airways with the aircraft it requires to expand; reduced utilization levels of Republic Airways' aircraft under the fixed-fee agreements would adversely impact its revenues and earnings; increases in Republic Airways' labor costs, which constitute a substantial portion of Republic Airways' total operating costs, will directly impact Republic Airways' earnings; Republic Airways' business could be harmed if Republic Airways loses the services of its key personnel; Republic Airways may experience difficulty finding, training and retaining employees; Republic Airways flies and depends upon Embraer regional jets and Republic Airways' business is at risk if it does not receive timely deliveries of aircraft or if the public negatively perceives Republic Airways' aircraft; Republic Airways is at risk of losses stemming from an accident involving any of its aircraft; Republic Airways will be controlled by Wexford Capital as long as they own or control a majority of its common stock, and they may make decisions with which other stockholders disagree; Republic Airways may have conflicts of interest with Wexford Capital, and because of their controlling ownership, Republic Airways may not be able to resolve these conflicts on an arm's length basis; the airline industry has been subject to a number of strikes which could affect Republic Airways' business; the airline industry is highly competitive; airlines are often affected by certain factors beyond their control, including weather conditions which can affect their operations; the airline industry has recently gone through a period of consolidation and transition; consequently, Republic Airways has fewer potential partners; and the airline industry is heavily regulated.
Contact: Republic Airways Holdings Warren R. Wilkinson, 317-484-6042

 

[Indypilot]

This is DOT authorization, not an FAA certificate. CHQ is still needed as republic still doesn't have a certificate.

 

[surplus1]

Sorry for the harsh statements. Had a long day and even a longer night. However, I really dont see how CHQ is going to get out of this one. With EMB-170's on property I really see no way in them being a commuter affiliate with AMR. I realize AMR is as sneaky as they come, however if this happens there will be a total uproar within the APA ranks. After what we gave them last year I really dont think AMR will be ballsy enough to attack what we got in return for our SCOPE concessions. All planes over 50 seats are for the APA pilots. (Not including the 25 CRJ-700's already bought or the 25 options that they are not going to exercise.)

No need to apologize there are no hard feelings on my part. These are tough issues and from time-to-time the rhetoric gets heated.

How CHQ will get around it? Well, two ways. 1) Either they fight its legality, which the could, IMO, eventually win in a courtroom (while the APA grieves it and waits for arbitration) or 2) They take the easy out, get a certificate for Republic and operate under that name.

That is why this type of scope restriction is so stupid. It doesn't work because there is always a legal way around it. You cannot stop market forces with an impractical clause in a collective bargaining agreement. Never have, never will. The entire premise on which this type of scope is based is flawed.

Once scope was originally altered to permit subcontracting, the Genie was out of the bottle and there is no putting it back. All the major airline pilot groups are spending tons of negotiating capital without cause or significant benefit. They gave up that segment of their flying and the Company(s) have no reason to give it back. Besides, it is not economically feasible in the mainline infrastructure. That type of work (what the regionals do) needs to be done and is going to be done. It just isn't going to be done by mainline pilots in the mainline structure.

So Hunter wrote a nastygram to Burdette. It will change nothing. Those airplanes will be flown by Republic Holdings for United Airlines, whether the APA likes it or not. They will find a way or create one. He could have saved the stamp. But, I guess, in the jungle the apes have to beat their chests every now and then. It's their symbol of agression designed to intimidate the weak. Too bad the weak are often unwilling to see it for what it is or afraid to take up the challenge and show they really aren't as weak as imagined. Too bad for the meek for unlike the Biblical myth, they will not inherit the flying. Sometimes the 800 pound gorrilla just needs to be told to ..... shove it.

Happy days.

 

[Price]

To tell you the truth I can't wait to see the day CHQ terminates with AA. I have never seen more miserable people in my life. Do any of you guys that fly for AA or Eagle even like your employer? I've never been surrounded by more negative energy in my life in STL. CHQ is an awesome company and honestly I feel the American affiliation just brings us down. For all I care ya'll, please take your flying back, our company is better off with someone else. It's only 15 EMB-140's. You guys can have them. Have Fun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!P.S. I miss TWA

 

[bvt1151]

Its quite obvious what will happen if you've taken the time to read CHQ's application for a certificate of public necessity. In the application CHQ states that they intend on operating the 170's only until Repubic receives its authorization. By the time anything comes to fruition with the APA dispute, CHQ will have already transfered the aircraft over to Repubic (I expect the transition to take all but a few months once Repubic gets their certificate). They'll say "We're sorry and we fixed it!" when the aircraft are finally at Repubic and then APA will not have much of a case (or more specifically a desire to pursue a case).
Its a shady tactic by CHQ that I would take note of if I were employed there. Sounds a lot like firing the Saab drivers only to say "sorry" after the firings had already served their purpose.

APA knows full well what they're going to do, and they're going to let them get away with it. Just another example of CHQ's shady way of doing business. I think Lorenzo and Johnny O. are the only execs who can brag of worse.

 

[Draginass]

I think APA will fight and win this one. I don't think it contracturally makes a rat's butt if it's CHQ or Republic . . . . they're controlled by the same entity.

 

[bvt1151]

I think APA will fight and win this one. I don't think it contracturally makes a rat's butt if it's CHQ or Republic . . . . they're controlled by the same entity.

Legally they wouldn't have a case. In the eyes of the government CHQ and Repubic are different airlines.

 

[FUCHQCK]

Yes, we fly the -140 for AA.


I have to disagree about us getting the boot from AA. They are pleased with our product, and we do a great job with the resources given. i.e. incompetent ground crews!

Really, when those piece of sh!t 140s dump people left and right all the time???? And on top of that your performance is worst that Trans States and Eagle????Wow...

 

[80drvr]

Legally they wouldn't have a case. In the eyes of the government CHQ and Repubic are different airlines.

Whose ticket are the E-170s on?

 

[P38JLightning]

here we go again

>>>>Legally they wouldn't have a case. In the eyes of the government CHQ and Repubic are different airlines.<<<<

Once again here we go with the same old bulletproof seperate certificate trick circle of logic.

And once again it depends on APA's exact scope language. If the APA's language only applies to a certificate carrier, then fine, CHQ could do it. If, however, the APA's scope language applies to holding company (which I suspect is the case) then they may not do the flying once they violate the APA's scope.

Case in point, the CHQ pilots signed the contract they did (as did the Mesa pilots) in exchange for holding company scope. That means no matter how many certificates Republic Holdings (or MAG for that matter) choses to operate, they have to use its pilots.

So why couldn't management simply use the infamous seperate certificate trick to get around that? Because CHQ and MAG pilots have holding company scope. I suspect the APA writes their language as well as the teamsters and ALPA for sure.

By the way, Surplus, you mentioned you hoped CHQ would sue and win and get to keep the AA flying if AA decided to try to enforce the language. Restraint of trade you called it I believe. You also said you thought that would be in your best interest. What possible interest could you have in not cutting out the Chautauqua cancer, even if its only 15 jets? Do you think that would set a precident whereby Delta's 57 70 seat limit and zero 71+ seat limits would be thrown out of court, letting us "bid" on that flying, as if any would go to us? Please. You've got to know beter than that. Stopping this cancer now is our top priority, not tearing down the walls of scope or trying to get a judge to mandate an arbitrated revisit to the seniority grabbing PID.

And its time we all get together in our holding company and work together to cut the cancer out ASAP. If we wait for a judge's toothless ruling that might harm ALPA but will never fix our outsourcing problems, we're going to have a heck of a lot worse to look forward to than J4J I can promise you that (like noJ/noJ).

 

[bvt1151]

Whose ticket are the E-170s on?

Right now they are trying to get them onto the CHQ certificate due to the problems with Republic actually getting a certificate. Once they do get the certificate, the aircraft will be transferred quickly.



P38,

Lets assume you're correct, for the sake of argument. Since the 50-seat limitation is employed by APA, and not AMR, AMR doesn't really care whether or not CHQ has 70-seaters or not. So the pressure has to ultimately originate from APA. With AA furloughs and almost ongoing negotiations with AMR, in order to receive pressure from AMR, APA is going to have to expend negotiation capital. While they would have a case, it would take years to enforce, giving CHQ more than enough time to find other places for those 140's (Delta or United most likely). Regardless, the fact that they are transferring the aircraft to a different certificate does provide a boost to their defense, which will at least provide the extra time required to move the aircraft.

I don't have access to the AMR scope clause, but I find it interesting that no protest was made when the aircraft were announced to be on the Republic certificate months ago. Only when CHQ decided to operate the aircraft did APA complain. Does that mean they'll stop once the aircraft are at Republic? I don't know, but it will be a harder sell to an arbitrator, should it come to that.

 

[chickenpilot]

I guess this ends the scope arguement for now


Republic gets DOT approval for Embraers

Star report
July 30, 2004



Republic Airways Holdings Inc. said Thursday that its new Republic Airlines unit has gained U.S. Department of Transportation approval to fly its Embraer 170 aircraft, which is a step in the airline's efforts to begin offering commercial passenger flights.

The federal agency gave the OK to the Louisville, Ky.-based airline to operate, but the unit is still waiting for Federal Aviation Administration approval to complete the authorization process.

Once the air carrier certification is complete, the airline will operate up to 23 70-passenger Embraer 170 aircraft under a code-share agreement with United Airlines.

The Indianapolis-based Republic Airways Holdings also owns Chautauqua Airlines, which offers more than 580 flights daily to 68 cities in 31 states. The regional airline provides short-trip air service on small jets under the brands of major carriers, including United, Delta, American and US Airways.

Republic Airways Holdings debuted as a publicly traded company in May and recently reported an earnings increase of about 9 percent for the second quarter.

var pageName="Republic gets DOT approval for Embraers"var server=""var channel="In Business"var pageType="article"var pageValue=""var prop1=""var prop2=""var prop3="homepage/business"var prop4=""var prop5=""var prop6="news"var prop7="local_news"var prop8=""var prop9=""var prop10=""var s_code=' 'if(s_code!=' '){s_it('gpaper138')if(s_code=s_dc('gpaper138'))document.write(s_code)}elsedocument.write('')

 

[bvt1151]

I guess this ends the scope arguement for now

Just a step. Still have to get the FAA approval.