US Airways Halts 25 RJ Deliveries

[wackford]

From: http://www.aviationheadlines.com/

US Airways Halts 25 RJ Deliveries

Jul 10, 2003

US Airways, which is planning its future growth strategy around smaller regional jets, says it will not be taking delivery of 25 Bombardier CRJ-705 planes because of a contract dispute with the airline's pilots.

The Arlington-based carrier said that, instead, it will ask affiliate Mesa Airlines to fly at least 25 and perhaps as many as 55 regional 70-seat jets under the US Airways Express banner.

The Bombardier aircraft were part of a massive 170-plane order split between the Canadian manufacturer and Brazil's Embraer which was placed in May.

US Air, which emerged from bankruptcy protection at the end of March this year, said the decision was taken after it failed to reach agreement with the Air Line Pilots Association on terms under which the 75-seat CRJ-705 would be flown by a wholly owned US Airways affiliate using furloughed US Airways pilots.

"We continue to believe that the CRJ-705 falls within the parameters of our contract with ALPA, and we were enthusiastic about the purchase of these planes, which would have provided jobs for up to an additional 225 furloughed US Airways pilots," said Bruce Ashby, president of US Airways Express.

"ALPA disagreed, and rather than spend months, maybe even years, negotiating and arbitrating our differences we have decided instead to place the jets at Mesa."

Under the US Airways deal with its cockpit crews, half of all regional jet pilot positions at affiliate carriers such as Mesa must be filled with furloughed US Airways pilots. But all the jobs associated with the CRJ-700 series and Embraer 170/175 aircraft go to furloughed pilots placed at the airline’s regional carriers or its new wholly owned MidAtlantic Airways division.

"Throughout our negotiations we impressed upon ALPA the need to stay on track in order to take delivery of these new regional jets," said Ashby. "We finally concluded that we must agree to disagree. Since we must continue to run the company and implement our new business plan, the end result was the decision to utilize Mesa and its work force."

 

[wackford]

Bombardier's thoughts on the news

From Reuters:

Bombardier sees no harm in US Airways order change
Wednesday July 9, 6:12 pm ET
By Charles Grandmont


(In U.S. dollars unless noted)
MONTREAL, July 9 (Reuters) - Bombardier Inc (Toronto:BBDb.TO - News) said on Wednesday it will not be hurt by US Airways' decision not to take delivery of 25 of its Canadair Regional Jets because the planes will still be flown by the carrier's regional affiliate Mesa Air Group (NasdaqNM:MESA - News).

"There is no reduction in the number of aircraft to be delivered and the number of firm orders, and the value of the contract, $2.2 billion, remains the same," said John Paul Macdonald, spokesman for Bombardier, the world's third-biggest maker of civilian aircraft.

US Airways said on Thursday it would not take delivery of some of the planes it ordered in May from Montreal-based Bombardier because it had failed to get its pilots to agree on terms for flying them.

US Airways, the seventh-largest airline in the United States, has signed instead a letter of intent with Mesa Air Group allowing the regional carrier to fly at least 25 and perhaps as many as 55 of the 70-seat jets under the US Airways Express name.

US Airways had originally ordered 75-seat planes from Bombardier, but the carrier has revised its order to get 70-seat aircraft, the Bombardier spokesman said.

"It looks to me as a neutral event (for Bombardier)," said aviation analyst Cameron Doerksen, of Dlouhy Merchant.

Bombardier's order from US Airways was for 85 regional jets, 60 of them 50-seat CRJ 200s and 25 of them the 75-seat CRJ 700 series 705. Deliveries were to stretch from the fourth quarter of 2003 to second quarter of 2005.

US Airways also agreed to buy 85 70-seat jets from Brazil's Embraer (Sao Paolo:EMBR3.SA - News), Bombardier's main rival. Those planes will still be delivered as planned because US Airways pilots have already agreed to fly them.

The pilots' opposition stems from so-called "scope clauses", negotiated as part of labor contracts, that determine the size of aircraft that mainline and regional pilots can fly.

In recent years, regional airline pilots have criticized scope clauses for limiting the size of aircraft they can fly, in effect restricting the number of regional jets flown by mainline carriers and their affiliates.

US Airways emerged from bankruptcy protection this spring and wants to significantly expand its regional jet operations.

Bombardier stock closed down 16 Canadian cents at C$5.04 on the Toronto Stock Exchange (News - Websites). The stock has doubled since tumbling to a 52-week low of C$2.56 in March on concerns about the health of Bombardier's aerospace business.

($1=$1.37 Canadian)

 

[acaTerry]

US Airways, which is planning its future growth strategy around smaller regional jets, says it will not be taking delivery of 25 Bombardier CRJ-705 planes because of a contract dispute with the airline's pilots.
The Arlington-based carrier said that, instead, it will ask affiliate Mesa Airlines to fly at least 25 and perhaps as many as 55 regional 70-seat jets under the US Airways Express banner.

Please don't do it guys.....

 

[blzr]

Someone please tell me how it is against the scope for a Regional to fly those 70 seat RJ's, and not against the scope for Mesa to fly them? What a crock of Sh1t.

Anyone know Duane Worthless' emil address?

 

[hhab]

...

 

[hhab]

"Someone please tell me how it is against the scope for a Regional to fly those 70 seat RJ's, and not against the scope for Mesa to fly them?"

There is no scope for any commuters to fly 70 seaters for U. (But of course there has to be an agreement )
Mesa allready had a agreement to fly 25 and up to 55 Crj700s. (loa 83, some 5-6 months ago) But it was never really "confirmed".
U wants Ualpa to fly CRJ 705, Ualpa did not agree upon it. Now you see those 705 converted into 700 and U is about to give these ( 25 up to 55 crj 70s ) to Mesa. So I am not sure there is any real news here....

 

[blzr]

The pilots' opposition stems from so-called "scope clauses", negotiated as part of labor contracts, that determine the size of aircraft that mainline and regional pilots can fly.

We at the W/O's are definately scoped. We are limited to to 50 seats or less. We are a regional, so is mesa. What's good for one should be good for the other.

I think Scope is just descrimination by another name. Only "MAINLINE"can fly these types. Now, all you mainliners substitute any of the following words for MAINLINE [ men, white men, non Jews, et. al.]

 

[hire_me]

Those mainline pilots are idiots. I support the unions, but it doesn't make sense to prevent your employer from making economically sensible decisions. The mainline pilots blocked the 75 seaters from the company to protect their jobs? Now they can go after the same jobs with 70-seaters at Mesa for pennies on the dollar!

Am I missing something here?

 

[B1900DFO]

"It doesn't make sense to prevent your employer from making economically sensible decisions." So by your logic the Airways mainline pilots should shift all their flying to the Wo's because it's cheaper? They drew the line at 70 seaters, not 75 seat jets. They are merely trying to protect their profession. I despise mesa just as much as the next guy but I don't think somebody who was making six figures at a mainline carrier is going to see much of a difference between working for Mesa at 21k/year or pdt/alg/psa for 24k/year. I wish alpa had fought for rj's at mainline years ago so this wouldn't be an issue now.

 

[Tim47SIP]

1900

OK I'll bite,

They drew the line at 70 seaters, not 75 seat jets. They are merely trying to protect their profession.

So exactly how is allowing contract carriers to fly up to 70 seats but not the WO's? That looks like pure and simple "We are in charge, and you get what we give you" bullying tactics to me!. Personally, I think mainline U screwed the pooch AGAIN on this one. They have an agenda, and if things around them dont conform, they will just stick their heads in the sand untill it goes away. YeP! they shure showed the company who was boss on this one!

 

[NYRANGERS]

Re: 1900

OK I'll bite,

They drew the line at 70 seaters, not 75 seat jets. They are merely trying to protect their profession.

So exactly how is allowing contract carriers to fly up to 70 seats but not the WO's? That looks like pure and simple "We are in charge, and you get what we give you" bullying tactics to me!. Personally, I think mainline U screwed the pooch AGAIN on this one. They have an agenda, and if things around them dont conform, they will just stick their heads in the sand untill it goes away. YeP! they shure showed the company who was boss on this one!

This is BS. This was an obvious ploy by management to change the U PWA. I believe Mesa is getting a permitted type (ie. a true 70 seater). U management wanted to take seats out of bigger planes and fly them at companies with lower rates.

My understanding is that U management is honoring the contract by changing their order. In turn they are "punishing" the W/O and mainline pilots by giving aircraft (they could have given to the W/O's) to mesa.

Another brilliant ploy to whipsaw the mainline and W/O pilots. And you guys are playing right into it. Real nice.


NYR

Wondering at what point regional guys will support mainline guys trying to get management to honor their contracts?

 

[NYRANGERS]

Re: 1900

OK I'll bite,

They drew the line at 70 seaters, not 75 seat jets. They are merely trying to protect their profession.

So exactly how is allowing contract carriers to fly up to 70 seats but not the WO's? That looks like pure and simple "We are in charge, and you get what we give you" bullying tactics to me!. Personally, I think mainline U screwed the pooch AGAIN on this one. They have an agenda, and if things around them dont conform, they will just stick their heads in the sand untill it goes away. YeP! they shure showed the company who was boss on this one!

From the press release above........


US Airways had originally ordered 75-seat planes from Bombardier, but the carrier has revised its order to get 70-seat aircraft, the Bombardier spokesman said.


I can't believe how many here blame the U pilots and not management.

 

[stillaboo]

Re: 1900

Personally, I think mainline U screwed the pooch AGAIN on this one.

From what I've heard, the Mesa pilots agree. They are as confused why UALPA would want to give up this flying too.

Just when you think ALPA is gonna' figure out that mainline needs to take ownership of some of these bigger RJ's (or EMR's, as the case may be) and their payscales for the good of all pilots, they give it up, further enforcing the idea that there are 2 different tiers of pilots, and they should be compensated differently.

In the end, this is creating jobs for the newhires at the regional level while eliminating jobs for furloughed mainliners. This kind of thing is exactly what ALPA is supposed to prevent from happening. Since when have ALPA members out of work been less worthy of new opportunites then unidentified future ALPA members?

-Boo!

 

[NYRANGERS]

Someone please tell me how it is against the scope for a Regional to fly those 70 seat RJ's, and not against the scope for Mesa to fly them? What a crock of Sh1t.

Anyone know Duane Worthless' emil address?

From the above press release............

US Airways had originally ordered 75-seat planes from Bombardier, but the carrier has revised its order to get 70-seat aircraft, the Bombardier spokesman said.

You guys are so conditioned to attack U mainline PILOTS that you don't read the press releases.

Some of you regional guys say this **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** and then wonder why there is animosity between groups.

 

[hire_me]

Boo - right on!

I've got a full application package into Mesa including the $50 check. I'll take any flying job with them tomorrow and give up my instructing job to any furloughed Airways mainline pilot who wants it.

Unions have a time and a place to stand firm. But any move by labor to prevent economically prudent competitiveness by their employer is shortsighted. In the end the free economy will prevail. Those that want to be a part of it will have to adjust. Those whom fight it will lose. If I were a mainline Airways employee I'd gladly welcome RJ's onto the property. Sure the pay will be less and it should be. But it's a temporary concession. In a couple of years we'll all be moving up.

 

[NYRANGERS]

Boo - right on!

I've got a full application package into Mesa including the $50 check. I'll take any flying job with them tomorrow and give up my instructing job to any furloughed Airways mainline pilot who wants it.

Unions have a time and a place to stand firm. But any move by labor to prevent economically prudent competitiveness by their employer is shortsighted. In the end the free economy will prevail. Those that want to be a part of it will have to adjust. Those whom fight it will lose. If I were a mainline Airways employee I'd gladly welcome RJ's onto the property. Sure the pay will be less and it should be. But it's a temporary concession. In a couple of years we'll all be moving up.

You should save your post and look at it in 5 years.

This kind of mentality has to stop. This profession can be upheld. Although it looks like the demise will come from PILOTS not management.

NYR

PS. Your statement about "welcoming rj's to the mainline" shows that you are not familiar with the situation.

 

[boeingdriver213]

The furloughed mainline guys at U that are going to Mid Atlantic will never see a Boeing again. The earliest they will see mainline is 2007, maybe. That's about where U is planning to buy ERJ190s to replace them, most likely at lower pay rates. Not much to look forward to there........

 

[Cmdr Taggart]

Boo - right on!

I've got a full application package into Mesa including the $50 check. I'll take any flying job with them tomorrow and give up my instructing job to any furloughed Airways mainline pilot who wants it.

Unions have a time and a place to stand firm. But any move by labor to prevent economically prudent competitiveness by their employer is shortsighted. In the end the free economy will prevail. Those that want to be a part of it will have to adjust. Those whom fight it will lose. If I were a mainline Airways employee I'd gladly welcome RJ's onto the property. Sure the pay will be less and it should be. But it's a temporary concession. In a couple of years we'll all be moving up.

Hay hire me, I got a new airline I am starting up, send me $50.00 and I will look at your application.

 

[FlyingFarmer]

Another Low Timer Needs Educating

Well,

That's it guys...we are screwed, how can we stop this
mentality? Pa-44 Hire_Me WTFO? Don't you understand that unless we all STOP saying

I'll suffer for now, until I get ....."MY BIG JOB, FLYING BIG IRON"

Pilots saying things that you have said are sending a very clear picture to management! Every time one of us has said, Sure, I'll buy my job, or, Sure I'l pay for time, or ever said, yes, I'll do it for less. We send a very clear picture to management, and they have heard you loud and clear.

Look Hire_me, I apologize, but you and all your cohorts (and me and all MY cohorts) have to start realizing that what we do AFFECTS us all! We don't live in a vaccumn (spelling?) You can talk macro and micro economics and market forces affecting economies of scale ad nauseum infinitummmmmmm but DUDE!!!!!!!!!

What you do!

Your skill...

your dedication,

YOUR PASSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IS

WORTH

MORE

THAN

YOU

THINK


Don't sell out for less.


I didn't.

(lot of good my principles did me! I'm still looking down the
mean end of a furlough, because not enough pilots felt like I do.)

Good Luck Bruddah!


PS-

You know what....I can't post on this subject anymore, can someone else hop on this education bandwagon that's more articulate than I am?? All I did just now was just piss a bunch of people off probably.


out

 

[Cadillac]

Right on, FlyingFarmer

I agree with you.
Stop the excuses.
1. Its only for a few years till the majors call me
2. I have a family to feed
3. But this way our airline can grow
4. If we don't vote for this someone else gets OUR flying

And my personal favorite:

5. But I just love to fly! I would do anything to fly!

When we stop using these, we can work on getting pay increased

 

[stillaboo]

Free market this!

Boo - right on!

Unions have a time and a place to stand firm. But any move by labor to prevent economically prudent competitiveness by their employer is shortsighted. In the end the free economy will prevail. Those that want to be a part of it will have to adjust. Those whom fight it will lose.

HM- I don't think you read my post the way I meant it to be interpreted exactly. I'm a fan of using the union to subvert the free market, not for the free market to slowly chip at the compensation scale until we reach a market-based contract. I'd advocate that you not get hired at all until all furloughed union members have been offered a job. It's what's best for the industry, even if it sets you back 5 years; you are a sacraficial lamb to the greater good.

See, many pilots who have yet to work for a 121-type airline are willing to fly for a wage that cannot support them for the short term, believing that, "In a couple of years we'll all be moving up."

Yeah, we will, but not b/c of the free market! If we were to allow the free market to reign supreme, the wage of a 777 driver would go to an even lower level that that of a Beech 1900. If I were to offer you $18,000 a year to fly the 1900 or 17.5 to fly the 777, you'd take the 17.5, right, b/c you'd get a 777. But part of the reason you want the 777 is what comes with it (the respect and high pay, but only b/c those pilots busted their ba!!s for 30 years to get there and earned the position).

See, b/c pilots are compensated well (we are, relative to many other professions, even computer programers ) and the attributes that make a good pilot often are similar to those of a socially strong individual, there is a mistique to being a pilot. Normally, if you were to have to devote 10 years of your life to job training (the military route) or pay 30,000 + and learn on the job, moving up as you go (the civilian route), the market would deem your skill set and experience to be worthy of a premium salary. Now, over the long run, if we were to let the market control alone, pilots would become highly paid. But there would first have to be a huge correction downward as all of those pilots currently willing to work for less would pressure the wage downward until it reached a level that people were no longer willing to become pilots at, given the costs to attain the skill set needed. I'd guess this would be around $13,000 a year (I have no factual basis for this # other than my own opinion). This would take at least 30 years, probably more! Those of us who currently work in the field cannot afford to sacrafice our entire career (30 years + wipes out every single one of us) just for a free-market experiment.

That is why lowering the compensation package is such a big issue for us (well, some of us know this, most just jump on the band wagon b/c they know that THAT guy knows what's best for them). It's alot easier to lower the compensation then it is to raise it up. The US$ slowly loses value over time. If we allow concessions in the down times (easy to do) then we have to fight tooth-and-nail to get them back in the good times (manamgent tells us that's why it's the good times, b/c our wages aren't pulling the company under. Don't believe it!). End result, by the time we get our wages back to where they used to be, the economy goes back into the crapper and we start the concessions again. So, now things cost more, but we only got back to the level we were at 5 years ago, and we slowly devalue ourselves over time. Yes, all this b/c of some small concessions made in a downturn. Downturns happen after ups, so, by not getting a raise, we ARE conceeding in the downturns. Concessions on top of this built-in 'inflationary concession' will kill us.

We can't afford concessions, and, right now, we can't afford to lose mainliners and replace them with regionals. Mainliners may be old and stogey, but they have the wisdom and patience of their experience, experience that has taught them to always ask for a little more, and to not freak when things don't go the way they wanted. That's why they're paid more. Anyone with some RJ time could fly a 74 or 77 without breaking a sweat, and though the landing might be a bit rough (74's flare pretty high!), the plane will get put on the runway at its destination. It's not flying skill anymore at that level, it's the payoff for patience and experience. To allow the payoff to disappear to 'market forces' is not something we can allow to happen in our lifetime.

Keeping new hires out of the mix and getting the furloughs back is for the good of all pilots, as is eliminating the idea that there are 2 different groups of pilots. We are all pretty much skilled enough to fly anything out there (do you really think a $50K RJ Captain is 1/6th the pilot of a $300K DL Captain?), but we cannot allow the market to reflect this idea. Please do everything in your power to achieve small gains. Though it will benefit the industry as a whole, it will benefit YOU immediately. You deserve a raise if you work at a regional, and no pilot deserves a pay cut.

I'll get off my long-winded high horse now. Sorry.

-Boo!

 

[stillaboo]

Back to the origin, the US RJ's

This is Roy Freundlich with a US Airways MEC update for Wednesday,
July 9, with two new items.

Item 1. In a press release today, US Airways announced that it will
not take delivery of the 25 Bombardier 75-seat CRJ-900 Series 705
small jet aircraft it ordered in May, which violated the maximum
small-jet weight and seat limitations of the July 2002 Restructuring
Agreement. The Company stated it will instead contract with Mesa
Airlines to fly at least 25, and possibly up to 55 70-seat small
jets that do comply with the pilots working agreement. The total
number of aircraft being ordered and to be operated under US Airways
code will not change according to the Company's and Bombardier's
issued statements. There will be no reductions in jet for jobs
positions, contrary to the Company's public statements.

Bruce Ashby, president of US Airways Express, made several
irresponsible statements in the Company's press release today
suggesting that US Airways is taking punitive actions against
furloughed mainline pilots as well as wholly-owed pilots. These
statements focused on assigning blame to ALPA for forcing the
Company to comply with the pilots working agreement.

ALPA required US Airways to bring its aircraft order into compliance
with the scope provisions in the July 2002 Restructuring Agreement.
Despite the Company's ramblings in its press statement, the total
number of aircraft ordered and jets for jobs positions available to
APL pilots do not change.

US Airways' attempt to force additional small jet authority through
an aircraft order and then fabricate the notion that this would
create additional jets for jobs positions was one of many attacks on
your contract. Violations of scope provisions put additional
pressure on current mainline pilot jobs and cause delays of mainline
pilot recalls.

There were several other statements made by Bruce Ashby in the
Company's press release that were extremely misleading. ALPA and US
Airways never entered into negotiations to consider permitting
operating the CRJ-900-705 aircraft at other airlines. These aircraft
exceeded the agreed-to limits. MEC Chairman Bill Pollock reminded
management that authority to operate these aircraft on the mainline
remained available.

This issue is part of the much larger issue concerning US Airways
disloyal administration and systemic non-compliance of the pilots
working agreement. With a record 235 grievances pending, the MEC
has been taking steps as part of a comprehensive program to bring US
Airways into compliance with the working agreement, as well as
resolving other outstanding issues.

For the first time since US Airways entered and emerged from
bankruptcy, it has been forced to comply with an important provision
of the pilots working agreement. This is only the beginning. Expect
further information on a restore compliance initiative being
implemented during the upcoming weeks.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Re: Back to the origin, the US RJ's

Blah Blah Blah

This is Roy Freundlich with a US Airways MEC update for Wednesday,
July 9, with two new items..

Item 1. ALPA National does not like Regional Jets because we do not feel the airplane is a "real" jetliner to be operated by mainline pilots at a mainline airline. We further fear that operating these airplanes at mainline might grant legitimacy to the type and possibly lower wages expectations for the senior mainline pilots who are comfortable in their jobs. We will fly 737's, or we will fly nothing!

Item 2. Your union effectively got this threat off the property to another location where we can restrict it. The fact that it will be flown by pilots who do not have voting rights at ALPA National is a side benefit.

And this is an intentional misquote, but you read in between the lines and that is the message.

~~~^~~~

Other Voices...

Bombardier - "who cares."

US Airways - "who cares, we fly them a little cheaper now."

US Airways passengers - "Who cares"

Mesa pilots - "Y I P P E E ! climbs like an empty 757, the air conditioning works and upgrades are like four months dude, I'm holding a great schedule."

 

[Catbird]

"Mesa pilots - "Y I P P E E ! climbs like an empty 757, the air conditioning works and upgrades are like four months dude, I'm holding a great schedule."

And-" Maybe I can buy a house without wheels in 14 years. I love Jonathno."