Eagle whipping APA into shape?

[siucavflight]

Sure seems like AMR is using AE to whip the APA pilots into line at the table. They threaten divesting AE, make the APA nervous because if AE is divested there is no more scope clause. Hope we like being used to whipsaw our mainline.
Many ask how will a divested AE be able to get around APAs scope. The answer is simple, they divest AE(meaning that they create a seperate company out of Eagle, give the new shares to the current AMR stock holders). Even though Eagle is its own seperate company, the owners are still the same owners that we currently have at AMR. Now AMR decides to shrink their domestic mainline flying, who is there to pick it up? A new company called American Eagle LLC, founded in 2008. We fly the same routes in EMB 170s, and 190s for half the pay as the APA pilots.
Does this sound far fetched? Seems that the APA is very nervous and is now pushing for one sonority list for all AMR pilots.

 

[catIIIc]

Again I ask the question why don't they already do this with RAH? If there was a loophole that big I think AMR would have already found it.

 

[siucavflight]

Again I ask the question why don't they already do this with RAH? If there was a loophole that big I think AMR would have already found it.

Because if they do it the way I described then the AMR stockholders benefit because they will own the new American Eagle. It is not a loophole, AA shrinks flying, furloughs airplanes parked. A new airline completely independent of AMR comes along and picks up the flying. Scope does not apply. This new airline has nothing to do with AMR other then the share holders own it.
This divesture will be used to whipsaw the AA pilots.
Here is what the APA is now saying about combining list. This is a very different tone then what they took just a few weeks ago before they heard about the divesture.
From the APA

From the APA News Digest...

Proposed American Eagle Sell-Off Benefits No One

Communications Committee: A week ago, we told you our initial analysis of AMR management's very public announcement of their stated intent to sell off American Eagle (AE) was an empty offer designed only to bolster the sagging stock price. In another indication that our analysis was right on target, we have yet to find anyone who would benefit from an AE divestiture. Even Wall Street has failed to embrace the idea and the stock continues to slide as investors begin to understand how much management has destroyed employee relations, customer service and operational reliability.

Today our brothers and sisters at AE-ALPA issued a press release highlighting how severely customer service would be further adversely affected by an AE sell-off. It also discusses how our scope provisions would further restrict AE operations if it were no longer a wholly owned subsidiary of AMR.

Speaking of scope, last week we also publicized our new scope proposal which simply states ALL flying done by or on behalf of AMR will be performed by pilots on the AA seniority list. To clarify, this proposal is meant to be inclusive, not exclusive. AA pilots, AE pilots, AMR, our customers and our shareholders would all benefit from being one airline. Breaking up the airline will create a more complex and restricted operation and cause further animosity and a more hostile work environment for employees. The benefits of one airline not only include operational and maintenance simplification and efficiency, it also creates happier and more productive employees. Once again, we can count on AMR management to take a path that is in the worst interest of all, so it should not surprise any of us that their proposed AE sell-off would benefit no one.

Like I said in the past, I dont want to be the whip. It is coming.

 

[catIIIc]

If AMR shareholders want value then why don't they just shrink Eagle and AA domestic and create a new airline with one of the many certificates AMR already owns and start flying 70-90 seat airplanes with that airline and start everyone at first year pay?

Again if AMR could do what you said above they would of tried it by now. They knew Reno was a Scope violation but they still tried it anyway.

And the idea of one list will never happen, to many Eagle guys want DOH and to many AA guys don't want their buddies to have to start in a RJ.

 

[siucavflight]

Cat I dont think that you understand what I am saying. They are using the threat of this to make the APA come to the table and accept a much lower offer then what they had originally taken.
The benefit to AMR to divesting Eagle would be that they would own a seperate airline who could do as much flying as they want.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Interesting choice of words that APA used to describe their proposed scope language.......

"inclusive, not exclusive"..... who coined that phrase first?..... The contest lines are open.....

 

[siucavflight]

Interesting choice of words that APA used to describe their proposed scope language.......

"inclusive, not exclusive"..... who coined that phrase first?..... The contest lines are open.....

Ha yes, but now they are a little nervous so they are being a little more friendly.

 

[siucavflight]

Think of it like this.
American Eagle is divested, they become their own stand alone company, American Eagle LLC. We have our own CEO, VP, all the way down the line, we are a company seperate from American. However when we became separate, we also go public, and who gets the stock in the company? Everyone who owns AMR stock. So still have technically the same owners.
Now American decides to shrink its flying domestically, what happens? Well fortunately for AMR they know of a new airline that would be happy to pick up all of the flying left behind by AA, they are American Eagle LLC, with brand new shiny EMB 170s, and 190s. APA shouts scope, but because Eagle LLC is not feeding AA, instead they are just a stand alone airline just flying their routes there is no scope to be had.

 

[PCL_128]

Where are you getting the idea that divesting AE would allow AMR to void the APA scope clause? The scope clause is still in effect, and all limitations on "commuter carriers" still apply. You mention EMB-190s, but those aircraft are prohibited by the APA scope clause. There are also limits on 70-seaters.

 

[PCL_128]

Now American decides to shrink its flying domestically, what happens? Well fortunately for AMR they know of a new airline that would be happy to pick up all of the flying left behind by AA, they are American Eagle LLC, with brand new shiny EMB 170s, and 190s. APA shouts scope, but because Eagle LLC is not feeding AA, instead they are just a stand alone airline just flying their routes there is no scope to be had.

What good would this possibly do AMR? If they tried your crazy scenario, they couldn't market the flights as American Airlines, the customers would be inconvenienced by having to check in again for their connecting flights from Eagle LLC to AMR, etc... Sorry, but a crazy scenario that doesn't have any basis in reality.

 

[siucavflight]

Where are you getting the idea that divesting AE would allow AMR to void the APA scope clause? The scope clause is still in effect, and all limitations on "commuter carriers" still apply. You mention EMB-190s, but those aircraft are prohibited by the APA scope clause. There are also limits on 70-seaters.

I dont think that you are following what I am suggesting. AA drops flying, American Eagle who is no longer owned by AMR picks it up, we dont fly it as feed for AA, rather just routes for our own company. Because we are not owned by AMR, and we are not feeding AA scope would not apply. It just so happens though that all of AMRs stock holders would also have shares of American Eagle LLC, so they would get the profits.
This is what AMR is trying to threaten APA with.

 

[siucavflight]

What good would this possibly do AMR? If they tried your crazy scenario, they couldn't market the flights as American Airlines, the customers would be inconvenienced by having to check in again for their connecting flights from Eagle LLC to AMR, etc... Sorry, but a crazy scenario that doesn't have any basis in reality.

No recheck ins, AA and AELLC would be codeshared. Crazy scenario? Yes, but one that is being put to APA right now to try and get them to bend in their contract talks. AMR started this divesture rumor to cause the APA to fall into line and agree to a contract much less then what they are asking for, this is what I meant by whipsawing, I dont think that it will happen, in the end APA and AMR will meet somewhere in the middle and AE will continue to be owned by AMR, maybe some tiny bit of scope relief. AMR does not want to sell Eagle, they want to scare the APA.

 

[PCL_128]

No recheck ins, AA and AELLC would be codeshared.

If they are codeshared, then the APA scope clause still applies.

 

[siucavflight]

If they are codeshared, then the APA scope clause still applies.

Really? So you are saying that everyone in the one world alliance is subject to scope? I would think then that they would have a problem with JALs 747, and Alaska airlines 737, and Iberias A-340, code share does not apply to scope.

 

[PCL_128]

Really? So you are saying that everyone in the one world alliance is subject to scope? I would think then that they would have a problem with JALs 747, and Alaska airlines 737, and Iberias A-340, code share does not apply to scope.

Yes, the One World Alliance is most certainly subject to scope. Any flight that carries the AA code is subject to APA scope. If you'd actually read the APA scope clause then you'd see that there are sections of the APA scope clause carved out to allow for these operations that you list. There is no such allowance for the doomsday scenario that you proposed at the beginning of the thread.

 

[siucavflight]

Yes, the One World Alliance is most certainly subject to scope. Any flight that carries the AA code is subject to APA scope. If you'd actually read the APA scope clause then you'd see that there are sections of the APA scope clause carved out to allow for these operations that you list. There is no such allowance for the doomsday scenario that you proposed at the beginning of the thread.

Thats where you are wrong, so what you are saying is that if someone where to book a flight on Eagle from say Denver to DFW, AA would be unable to put bags on the AA 757 going from DFW to London because of scope? And I have read the entire APA scope contract, it would allow for this.


Why is the APA suddenly so nervous, and so anxious to get us onto the same seniority list?

 

[catIIIc]

Yes, the One World Alliance is most certainly subject to scope. Any flight that carries the AA code is subject to APA scope. If you'd actually read the APA scope clause then you'd see that there are sections of the APA scope clause carved out to allow for these operations that you list. There is no such allowance for the doomsday scenario that you proposed at the beginning of the thread.

Exactly what I have been trying to say, if AA could have used this loophole they would instantly tried to exploit it starting in 2003 when this contract was signed. Heck they knew operating Reno as a seperate airline violated Scope but they did it anyway. All codeshare's are subject to APA Scope, the Domestic codeshare agreement with Alaska was negotiated with APA and any other domestic codeshare would have to be also.

 

[PCL_128]

You might want to talk with your dad again, because your understanding of code shares and scope clauses seems to be very limited. The APA scope clause contains separate sections for domestic code share, international code shares, commuter carrier codes shares, etc... Each section contains different restrictions and requirements. There is simply no section in the agreement that would allow AMR to do what you suggest.

 

[siucavflight]

You might want to talk with your dad again, because your understanding of code shares and scope clauses seems to be very limited. The APA scope clause contains separate sections for domestic code share, international code shares, commuter carrier codes shares, etc... Each section contains different restrictions and requirements. There is simply no section in the agreement that would allow AMR to do what you suggest.

But if Eagle was its own airline APA has no say what Eagle does, they can do whatever they want and pick up all of the flying that is left behind by an AA shrinkage of flying.
Dont get me wrong, I am not in favor of this in the least bit, I dont want to be any part of this.
I am not saying that it will happen, I am saying that this is what the company is using as leverage in the negotiations that are happening right now.
It is a serious threat to all of our profession. I want to fly 100 seaters around, but I want to do it at legacy carriers pay rates and not our regional pay rates.
And maybe I used the word code share wrong, I should have said partnered with, as in tickets transferable, and baggage being carried over.

The APA is worried about this threat, again this is why they want to combine list quickly.

 

[PCL_128]

But if Eagle was its own airline APA has no say what Eagle does, they can do whatever they want and pick up all of the flying that is left behind by an AA shrinkage of flying.

And again, they can't do this if Eagle were to codeshare with American. Anyone that codeshares with American is subject to the APA scope language. It really is that simple.