Mesaba out, AWAC in….

[Heavy Set]

I doubt it...

Why would NWA want to add additional 50-seat RJs with so many used at Pinnacle? No way - I don't care how cheap the feed is... That's going against the trend of larger RJs (E170s,etc.) with lower unit costs in this low airfare environment. Business travelers (the only high-yield traveler left) hate the 50 seaters. I don't buy this AWAC deal with NWA - sounds like BULLSPIT to me.

 

[PCL_128]

I'm as skeptical about this as anyone else, but there is a certain amount of logic to it. Talks between MSA ALPA and Mesaba management were really heated just three or four weeks ago and just stopped all of sudden. Why is that? This could be one possibility. Maybe AWAC saw the writing on the wall a couple of weeks ago about the UAL deal and started talking to NWA to work something out. Who knows? I wouldn't count anything out in this crazy industry though.

 

[Beer&Brauts]

Interesting, I didnt know that AWAC ran this route MSP-MKE. Could they have been visiting NWA?

[font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Airline[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Air Wisconsin[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Flight Number[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]9407[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Departure City (Airport)[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Minneapolis, MN (MSP)[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Departure Time[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]04/10/2005 09:51 AM[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Arrival City (Airport)[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Milwaukee, WI (MKE)[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Arrival Time[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]04/10/2005 10:38 AM[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Remaining Flight Time[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]00:00[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Aircraft Type[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Bombardier CRJ 200[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Current Altitude[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]0 feet[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Current Groundspeed[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]0 mph[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Flight Status[/font][font=arial, helvetica, sans serif]Arrived[/font]

That would be a repo flight (AC 407) from our mx base in MKE to MSP. AWAC has been flying MSP-ORD for awhile now.

 

[Dr.Hwang]

AWAC/NWA Airlink will not happen. There are cheaper alternatives to Air Wisconsin. Any airline can set up a little base in MKE for NWA; AWAC does not have that market cornered. Dumb subject.

 

[crashpad]

I could see Skyway doing it in a heartbeat. They are so low costwise, they're off the radar. It would also be a crushing blow to Midwest Express,which NWA has been slamming into the turnbuckle since 2001.

 

[Heavy Set]

The future lies in 70+ seat regional aircraft - that's a fact with the low fare environment. True, there will always be a need for 50-seaters in some hub-and-spoke markets where there is limited competition and demand only requiring 50 or fewer seats (e.g., Salt Lake to Pasco). But, most airlines are looking to reduce unit costs further - and adding 50 seaters to an existing 50 seater fleet (i.e., on top of Pinnacle's available CRJ fleet) just doesn't make a lot of sense. I still think NWA will look to adding more 70+ seat aircraft - it gets a lot of use out of Mesaba's Avros...

 

[HowlinMadMurdoc]

I could see Skyway doing it in a heartbeat. They are so low costwise, they're off the radar. It would also be a crushing blow to Midwest Express,which NWA has been slamming into the turnbuckle since 2001.

That's pretty funny given our load factors out of MKE are better than NWA. Just check out the DOT numbers for the past year. Skyway doing work for NWA? Even funnier since we're wholly-owned by Midwest.

Thanks for the laugh...needed it.

HMM

 

[I.P. Freley]

Good luck to all AWAC pilots, you have held the bar up when others have not, and unfortunately now you pay the ultimate price.

Didn't AWAC's pilot group accept a concessionary package a couple of years ago??

When you compare current rates for AWAC to, say, CHQ, the numbers are pretty much a wash. Plus a dollar here, minus a dollar there, the only place where the difference is really noticeable is Yr2 pay for an FO or any FO pay past Yr5... Otherwise, it's pretty much the same (comparing 50-seat rates here).

Not pooh-poohing the AWAC boys here, but to hold them up as a shining example of "holding up the bar" isn't very accurate if you look at the numbers.

 

[RampTower]

What does NWA's 70 seat scope say exactly? 70 seat turbojet? 70 seat aircraft? 70 seaters? ?? 70 what?

If it just says 70 seat turbojet, could the Dash 8 Q400 be on the backburner?

 

[Workin'Stiff]

Don't quote me, but I believe the scope clause has provisions in it for any aircraft over 50 seats, regardless of propulsion. That's why the Q400 would be outta scope. I think this whole subject has been beaten to death in other threads in reference to NWA scope... Along with every other airlines scope as a matter of fact...

 

[Mel Sharples]

You are right. Even turboprops are not allowed that big. No Dash 8's for anyone in the Northwest family unless the scope is changed.

 

[captpetefam]

Conflicting News

I'm as skeptical about this as anyone else, but there is a certain amount of logic to it. Talks between MSA ALPA and Mesaba management were really heated just three or four weeks ago and just stopped all of sudden. Why is that? This could be one possibility. Maybe AWAC saw the writing on the wall a couple of weeks ago about the UAL deal and started talking to NWA to work something out. Who knows? I wouldn't count anything out in this crazy industry though.

This is the first time I've heard that our Union and Mgmt were in "heated talks" about this deal. One of our top ALPA guys said the other day that everything is all done, they're just waiting for the go ahead. He said he has the power point presentation all written up and they're ready to pitch it to the pilots. (This also means they are going to try and sell us something.) So, it sounds to me like it's all a done deal and NWA is just waiting for the right time to launch the announcement.

All that being said, I do think AWAC and UAL falling out threw a bit of a monkey wrench in their ideas. That was the whole reason NWA and their Pilots penned their little 3rd carrier agreement.

I guess we will see what the future holds. Cya

CP

 

[sewerpiper]

Didn't AWAC's pilot group accept a concessionary package a couple of years ago??

When you compare current rates for AWAC to, say, CHQ, the numbers are pretty much a wash. Plus a dollar here, minus a dollar there, the only place where the difference is really noticeable is Yr2 pay for an FO or any FO pay past Yr5... Otherwise, it's pretty much the same (comparing 50-seat rates here).

Not pooh-poohing the AWAC boys here, but to hold them up as a shining example of "holding up the bar" isn't very accurate if you look at the numbers.

You ever heard of a contract before? Maybe you should compare yours to ours sometime.

 

[crashpad]

Anytime Murdoc. Here's another one.
Is it it true the yx crews are getting furloughed, but with the option to apply at Skyways at newer and more efficient payscales?

 

[Twotter76]

Didn't AWAC's pilot group accept a concessionary package a couple of years ago??

When you compare current rates for AWAC to, say, CHQ, the numbers are pretty much a wash. Plus a dollar here, minus a dollar there, the only place where the difference is really noticeable is Yr2 pay for an FO or any FO pay past Yr5... Otherwise, it's pretty much the same (comparing 50-seat rates here).

Not pooh-poohing the AWAC boys here, but to hold them up as a shining example of "holding up the bar" isn't very accurate if you look at the numbers.

While it is true that our hourly rates (for Captains) are very similar now that is right about where it ends. I would compare W2's with anyone at CHQ with my same senority and I guarantee I make more. And work less. Payrate is only a small part of a good contract.

 

[Maiko]

Delete

 

[Pukindog]

Didn't AWAC's pilot group accept a concessionary package a couple of years ago??

When you compare current rates for AWAC to, say, CHQ, the numbers are pretty much a wash. Plus a dollar here, minus a dollar there, the only place where the difference is really noticeable is Yr2 pay for an FO or any FO pay past Yr5... Otherwise, it's pretty much the same (comparing 50-seat rates here).

Not pooh-poohing the AWAC boys here, but to hold them up as a shining example of "holding up the bar" isn't very accurate if you look at the numbers.

Yeah...except for duty rigs, trips rigs, min day, days off, etc. Minor details though.

 

[rptrain]

...the only place where the difference is really noticeable is Yr2 pay for an FO or any FO pay past Yr5....

yeah, and there aren't very many of those guys on the property. only about 40% of each list.

god, i love that argument. the pay's only bad until you upgrade.

 

[CptOver]

Let's compare apples to apples here...

I've heard it several time in multiple threads here only comparing dollar figures in each others contracts to calculate an airlines "Cost" or a pilots "Worth". You need to look at the entire contract...

Duty rigs are worth there weight in gold, but only if written right. (4 hour min day has increase my pay by about 5hrs a month, but ask a Comair guy how averaging their min day over the entire month may increase a little less than that (this is only what I have heard))

Trip/Leg this also increases my pay by about 5 hours a month over my scheduled credit (ask a Pinnacle guy how nice it is working for free until 16 minutes over block)

Min days off....should I say more

The truth is probably more that we all sent out multiple resumes to work for ANY regional while we were flight instructing or in the academy and would work for any of them without looking at or comparing their contracts. And now those with inferior contracts are trying to justify how they are comparable to others with better contracts. Air Wiskey had a great contract when it was signed, they have taken concessions and extended their contract, but it was still better than most. And when it came time to negotiate (if United pulled through) they most likely would have had one of the better contracts in the industry again, just by negotiating pay and no QOL issues. That being said, They held the bar up. Leave them alone. And best of luck to all AWAC drivers (and no I am not one)