As the Alliance Turns.....more AA/BA/IB drama

[FrequentFlierCA]

Personally, I don't find unions to be "good" or "bad". Just like management they can have excellent, mediocre or disastrous leadership. My point about the current APA administration is that they have fallen into the latter category and are harming their members' interests.

And if one looks at the facts of the case, the JBA will bring revenue to the company. I don't see how that can be "bad" when there is little to no evidence of pilot job losses from previous JBAs.

 

[Boomer]

Personally, I don't find unions to be "good" or "bad". Just like management they can have excellent, mediocre or disastrous leadership. My point about the current APA administration is that they have fallen into the latter category and are harming their members' interests.

And if one looks at the facts of the case, the JBA will bring revenue to the company. I don't see how that can be "bad" when there is little to no evidence of pilot job losses from previous JBAs.

LINK PROVIDED Argument From Ingnorance

SEE LOGICAL ARGUMENTS: GOOGLE.

You cannot prove that jobs losses will not result.

It is a type of ad-hominem argument that results is in a chiken and the egg type discussion. Whether or not the AA-BA ATI results in an increase in income to AA does not address whether or not that arraingment will include a decrease in AA Employment.

Nor does it preclude a drawdown in capacity creating a "demand" for service that was already forecast.

 

[FA Mikey]

None of the other alliances have led to job losses. Why do you beleive this one will?

 

[FWAAA]

I continue to believe that opposition by some employees to the antitrust immunity and the joint business agreement is due to ignorance of the way the agreement works. As AA said last week:

It's important to remember that the proposed Joint Business Agreement with British Airways and Iberia is based on a revenue sharing arrangement, which means the only way an airline gets to share in the revenues is to fly. As a result, the more AA flies, the more revenue it would receive. The less AA flies, the less revenue it would receive.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Independent-...ml?x=0&.v=1

If AA relinquishes flying to BA and IB and the other partners, then AA won't share in the profits.

The 15+ years of experience of the NW/KLM ATI shows that the US partner's flying will likely increase. Same with the UA/LH ATI.

Nevertheless, some employees continue to point to an imaginary bogeyman - the illogical assertion that AA won't fly as much across the Atlantic if it's allowed to violate the antitrust laws (with immunity for those violations) with its partners BA, IB, AY and RJ.

 

[Hopeful]

Let's look at JFK specifically. If this agreement does occur, how many NY-London flights between AA and BA will there be? Will they slash some? If so, how many? Who's flights will get cut? AA or BA?
I really don't think anyone can say for certain what will happen.....

 

[JFK Fleet Service]

Of course they'll cede AA flights in favor of BA, it gives them a tailor made reason for a RIF, and we all know how much AMR management loves a good RIF.

 

[Hopeful]

Of course they'll cede AA flights in favor of BA, it gives them a tailor made reason for a RIF, and we all know how much AMR management loves a good RIF.

True...Having been in this industry for almost 4 decades, it used to be a rif occured, when things got better recalls occurred.
The difference now is that they not only want rifs, they want to decimate the workforce.

That is the main reason I am skeptical about this AA/BA agreement. I just cannot see AA/BA operating status quo with so many seats available.

 

[goodgirl37]

Of course they'll cede AA flights in favor of BA, it gives them a tailor made reason for a RIF, and we all know how much AMR management loves a good RIF.

Of course, AA flights will be a codeshare flight on BA.. Look at LH and UA, for example, LH flies DEN-FRA and UA doesnt have one flight DEN-FRA, and the same on other city pairs. I wish the government would not have allowed this type of alliance, b/c it does take away from US based employees. I agree with the AA pilots in trying to stop it,, smart move.

 

[FA Mikey]

How many DEN FRA flights did UAL fly prior to the alliance? Zero? How many ORD FRA flights did UAL drop to LH after the alliance? Zero?

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Let's look at JFK specifically. If this agreement does occur, how many NY-London flights between AA and BA will there be? Will they slash some? If so, how many? Who's flights will get cut? AA or BA?
I really don't think anyone can say for certain what will happen.....

Call me optimistic, but I doubt there would be any slashing of flights between JFK and LHR which is a major market. I would think there could be even more flights between the two cities operated by AA-BA. NW/KL managed to operate multiple AMS-DTW/MSP flights and even a AMS-MEM flight. These would not be possible without their ATI/codesharing. I can't imagine AA not increasing trans-Atlantic flying, not just out of JFK but also ORD and DFW if/when AA/BA/IB ATI is approved.

 

[Mrs. McFly]

Looking at this press release from Delta about its international plans, I think AA/BA/IB have an even more compelling argument for approval.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/bo...0-65006467.html

 

[eolesen]

If the revenue is truly pooled on a macro basis and pro-rated by ASM's, then there's built in incentive to keep the mix the same (they both have union employees to appease...).

If AA have 50% of the seats, and BA have 50% of the seats, in theory they split the revenue 50/50 (regardless of who actually carries more passengers).

If BA have 70% of the seats, and AA have 30% of the seats, who gets more revenue?... BA does. They get 70% of the JV flying revenue, even if it works out that AA carried 50% of the customers....

What might happen is timings get dovetailed in markets where they both have a large presence (e.g. AA leaves on even numbered hours and BA on odd number hours), split between multiple airports in the same general market (e.g. some of the JFK frequencies move to EWR, or some of the LHR frequencies move to LGW or STN).

 

[goodgirl37]

If the revenue is truly pooled on a macro basis and pro-rated by ASM's, then there's built in incentive to keep the mix the same (they both have union employees to appease...).

If AA have 50% of the seats, and BA have 50% of the seats, in theory they split the revenue 50/50 (regardless of who actually carries more passengers).

If BA have 70% of the seats, and AA have 30% of the seats, who gets more revenue?... BA does. They get 70% of the JV flying revenue, even if it works out that AA carried 50% of the customers....

What might happen is timings get dovetailed in markets where they both have a large presence (e.g. AA leaves on even numbered hours and BA on odd number hours), split between multiple airports in the same general market (e.g. some of the JFK frequencies move to EWR, or some of the LHR frequencies move to LGW or STN).

I douby seriously that they will keep all of the frequencies, I am sure that some will have to be let go of, you have very wishful thinking.

 

[FA Mikey]

No wishful thinking, he has a background in management at AA HDQ. That gives him more insight to the workings than than another airline's flight attendant.


AA has 5 daily, BA has 6 plus 3 EWR. I wonder which will be willing to drop flights to give CO, VS and DAL market share? Answer none

 

[goodgirl37]

No wishful thinking, he has a background in management at AA HDQ. That gives him more insight to the workings than than another airline's flight attendant.


AA has 5 daily, BA has 6 plus 3 EWR. I wonder which will be willing to drop flights to give CO, VS and DAL market share? Answer none

Love the choice words, I would agree that none would WILLINGLY hand over slots, but they may be FORCED to give up slots, to CAL DAL or whoever may want them.. I doubt they will let 14 a day fly, Love that spirit FAMikey!!