If I wanted to phase out ASA....

[USCtrojan]

Just like Mesa did after it bought Westair. Westair was once one of the "best" regionals out there. They were Part 121 when others were 135. Flew 90 PAX 146's, E120's, etc. Then they were purchased by Mesa. From there it was all down hill. The important part is that Mesa planes and crews were flying the former "Westair only" routes because Mesa didn't keep Westair at it's "normal" staffing level. Soon the routes were intermixed and they were "Mesa" routes. Two different pilot groups doing the same routes in the same planes. What was the size of Westair at the purchase and then when they lost the UEX contract? Ultimately it was Mesa's subpar performance that lost it the UEX flying but the same could be done here with attrition. And yes, both groups had ALPA contracts.

And who's contract has the 80% provision in it? Is it DAL's because it likes ASA so much? Or is it SkyWest Inc. protecting its investment in ASA from Republic, Mesa, Comair, etc. in ATL? If ASA's amount dropped below 80% who is going to cry foul? DAL or SkyWest Inc. Why would DAL? Would SkyWest Inc.?

ASA is 1700 pilots strong. ASA's profit margin is 13.2% last I checked. Westair was a shoddy operation, as Mesa's airlines are. Completely different dynamic. That's not even close to comparing Apples to Oranges. That's comparing Apples to Doorknobs.

Additionally, how much poor "performance" can be attributed to ASA? We're only FA's, Pilots, and Mechanics, with currently VERY bad leadership. Hopefully that changes. Baggage, parking, gate agents, all that stuff is no longer for ASA.

Trojan

 

[strega7]

Westair was a shoddy operation, as Mesa's airlines are.

You should do some research. Westair was THE regional in the last 80's early 90's. This was before they were purchased. A few years later, yes Mesa allowed them to become a "shoddy operation" and then it lost it's UEX contract.

If you see SkyWest planes/crews flying to what was once "ASA only" cities, I would start to take notice. Just because an airline has 1700 pilots does not make it immune to bad things that go bump in the night.

I would hope that Brad brings you guys the leadership that has been sorely lacking. Maybe he has visions of competing against SGU and ASA will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!!!!!

Have a happy Thanks!

 

[Andy Neill]

Maybe he has visions of competing against SGU and ASA will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!!!!!

Have a happy Thanks!

Sounds like a quote from Marianne Williamson:
http://www.simonsdiary.co.uk/miscellaneous/fear.html

 

[ASAFOE120]

Just a few reasons why I believe doing away with ASA is not on the horizon:

1) As mentioned above, ASA is very profitable and makes Skywest Inc. a ton of money.

2) If Inc. began shrinking ASA, Atkin and the boys would have to answer to the shareholders why they were dismanteling the regional airline with the highest profit margin that brings in so much cash. (a tough sell to shareholders).

3) We just voted in a contract that will lock in our pay, benefits, etc... and guarantee our costs stay in check while still bringing in tons of cash to Inc.

4) Over the next 3 yrs of our contract, several other regionals will be negotiating their next working agreement. As they surpass our pay, benefits, etc... the boys in SGU will stay have us locked in at our rate and be getting quite the bargain.

5) No more whipsaw. I'm sure he would miss being able to do this to both groups if the proper occasion arose. (via threats and scare tactics of course).

6) Probably most importantly, the lack of pilots. We cannot fill our classes currently. Neither can Pinnacle, Comair, SkyW, or anyone else. I know, you say that "well, those folks that were going to ASA will just go to Skyw". True, some would, but there are many pilots out there that would rather go to an airline that does not discriminate against a pilot for what aircraft he flies (bro guys get no raise, what a crock of ....), has union benefits and protections, a contract thats locked in rather than a hand shake, etc...

7) Surely you know that as an airline grows, its costs decrease. As an airline shrinks, its costs rise. In your scenario, ASA's costs would increase as each airfram left and at some point, it would just have to dump the entire operation so they would not lose their butts with soaring costs (sure to please all shareholders). With our new contract, "dumping" the enitre thing in that manner would not be allowed.

8) The transfer of airframes is extremely expensive (as Atkin and the boys found out the hard way when they transferred a few of our a/c over a while back). I loved it when they posted their earnings and had to explain why they missed Wall Street estimates and one of the reasons was due to the "cost of transfer of assets from ASA to Skyw". I'm sure the shareholders loved that. Thats when the transferring came to an ubrupt halt.

Their are probably more I could come up with but these are just the ones that come to mind.

Just my $.02

 

[Andy Neill]

Just a few reasons why I believe doing away with ASA is not on the horizon:

In my original posts, I acknowledged there are a lot of good reasons on both sides about whether to take this course or not. In my scenario, I had presumed all those considerations wrere made and the deicsion was to go ahead. I was wondering what agreements would prevent that.

That being said, let me address your well presented points:

1) As mentioned above, ASA is very profitable and makes Skywest Inc. a ton of money.

2) If Inc. began shrinking ASA, Atkin and the boys would have to answer to the shareholders why they were dismanteling the regional airline with the highest profit margin that brings in so much cash. (a tough sell to shareholders).

3) We just voted in a contract that will lock in our pay, benefits, etc... and guarantee our costs stay in check while still bringing in tons of cash to Inc.

4) Over the next 3 yrs of our contract, several other regionals will be negotiating their next working agreement. As they surpass our pay, benefits, etc... the boys in SGU will stay have us locked in at our rate and be getting quite the bargain.

No argument there. I would expect with the newly approved TA, its margin will diminish somewhat.

5) No more whipsaw. I'm sure he would miss being able to do this to both groups if the proper occasion arose. (via threats and scare tactics of course).

I can certainly see that. There are some on the board saying that it would be even better since you have a diminishing union voice whipsawed against an unprotected group. In the end, it's just the unprotected group.

6) Probably most importantly, the lack of pilots. We cannot fill our classes currently. Neither can Pinnacle, Comair, SkyW, or anyone else. I know, you say that "well, those folks that were going to ASA will just go to Skyw". True, some would, but there are many pilots out there that would rather go to an airline that does not discriminate against a pilot for what aircraft he flies (bro guys get no raise, what a crock of ....), has union benefits and protections, a contract thats locked in rather than a hand shake, etc...

While there are those that strongly prefer a unionized operation, I think if it were a choice of SkyWest or nothing (or some undesireable union operations) they would choose SkyWest.

7) Surely you know that as an airline grows, its costs decrease. As an airline shrinks, its costs rise. In your scenario, ASA's costs would increase as each airfram left and at some point, it would just have to dump the entire operation so they would not lose their butts with soaring costs (sure to please all shareholders). With our new contract, "dumping" the enitre thing in that manner would not be allowed.

...and as one operation decreases in efficiencies of scale, the other side benefits so I see this as a wash. When the overhead gets to be too much, then it's time to merge into one HQ.

8) The transfer of airframes is extremely expensive (as Atkin and the boys found out the hard way when they transferred a few of our a/c over a while back). I loved it when they posted their earnings and had to explain why they missed Wall Street estimates and one of the reasons was due to the "cost of transfer of assets from ASA to Skyw". I'm sure the shareholders loved that. Thats when the transferring came to an ubrupt halt.

I missed your point on this one. SkyWest Inc had positive earnings surprises on the last quarter and the one before that. Are you talking about three quarters ago?

Is there anything in the TA (new contract) that would preclude the described scenario from happening if no furloughs are involved?

 

[79%N1]

Yes. A limit to the amount of aircraft transfers allowed in a 12 month period, up to a maximum amount, and a no-furlough clause. This was something we negotiated in our contract. After that, we get transfer rights to Skywest. As a side note, we also negotiated tranfer rights for Skywest pilots to ASA if transfers go the other way! Nice huh? Your welcome.....

 

[Andy Neill]

Yes. A limit to the amount of aircraft transfers allowed in a 12 month period, up to a maximum amount, and a no-furlough clause. This was something we negotiated in our contract. After that, we get transfer rights to Skywest. As a side note, we also negotiated tranfer rights for Skywest pilots to ASA if transfers go the other way! Nice huh? Your welcome.....

Yes, thanks for the reminder. SkyWest Inc. can essentially transfer an aircraft every 13 weeks with no need to offer pilot transfers. Nothing stops them from transferring more if offers to transfer with seniority is made. If that happened, I wonder how far down the ASA seniorty list the offers would go before getting used up. If it got to the bottom, SkyWest Inc has made good on it's part of the bargain.

I presume the "You're welcome" was directed to the SkyWest people - I am not one.

 

[bobbyice]

Yes, thanks for the reminder. SkyWest Inc. can essentially transfer an aircraft every 13 weeks with no need to offer pilot transfers. Nothing stops them from transferring more if offers to transfer with seniority is made. If that happened, I wonder how far down the ASA seniorty list the offers would go before getting used up. If it got to the bottom, SkyWest Inc has made good on it's part of the bargain.

I presume the "You're welcome" was directed to the SkyWest people - I am not one.

You gotta be honest here though Andy...were you not a former SkyWest employee? In the training department on the E120 if I recall correcly? At least you're one of the few on this board who consistently makes respectful posts.

 

[sweptback]

Never mind.

 

[Andy Neill]

You gotta be honest here though Andy...were you not a former SkyWest employee? In the training department on the E120 if I recall correcly? At least you're one of the few on this board who consistently makes respectful posts.

Yes. I was a ground instructor on the Brasilia at SKYW until a year ago.

As for my forum behavior, that is one of the reasons I use my name so I can be held accountable for what I say. Bill Mostellar is my hero in this respect.