But the larger RJs'

[john john]

This guy is here to stay
New Generation Regional Jets Reshape the Market

Legacy carriers are fighting to get their costs in shape while maintaining flight frequencies and capitalizing on their networks' reach, a key strategic advantage legacy carriers have over the point-to-point Low Cost Carriers. Some US legacy carriers are confronting this challenge through the use of the new generation of larger 70-90 seat regional jets on substitute service for larger aircraft, or on wholly new service on routes too thin for larger equipment. And Air Canada is about to flood its routes with RJ frequencies as its weapon of choice to combat LCCs. Clearly, the 70-90-seat regional jet has increased legacy carriers' range of competition options.

But the larger RJs' flexibility cuts both ways. The introduction of 70-90 seat aircraft by JetBlue is a further low-cost challenge to network carriers. In Europe, with less 50 seat RJ activity than in North America, the 70-90 seaters may allow network carriers to compete with LCCs in leisure markets. The ATW/A2A/ASM webcast on December 13th will examine the likely outcomes in terms of network development patterns, and the consequences for airports.

Featured Speakers:
Jerry Glass, President - J. Glass & Associates, a division of Ford & Harrison
J.A. Donoghue, Editorial Director - Air Transport World

Date: December 13, 2005
Time: 11:00 a.m. EST

https://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/Ev...cepage=register

 

[diogenes]

While it is true Rj's are here to stay, the reason is not the one CEO's and the talking heads tell the public.

Inescapable fact number one. RJ's have higher intrinsic operating costs. While it is counterintuitive that a smaller aircraft is more expensive to operate, the fact is the small size means there are fewer passengers (revenues) to absorb operating costs. The aircraft with the lower CASM's are the 777's and A330's - fuel efficient aircraft with lots of revenues to spread the costs over.

Inescapable fact number two. Many of the 'thin' markets alluded to have supported 6-10 737's for the past twenty years. These small metropolitan areas have grown and want, and can justify, more air service. Some of these markets run 80% plus load factors. Moreover, Southwest and JB do not serve these markets, so the majors can and do charge a premium. Many of these markets are the highest yields on the system.

The major reason for RJ's are labor costs.

Way back before Siegel came to US, he told a PlaneBusiness reporter Rj's would break scope clauses at Continental.

Back in the Wolf days, there were still clauses (Series 4, IIRC) in the ALPA contract to operate RJ's - a holdover from the F28's inherited from Piedmont. Wolf could have bought a fleet of RJ's and presented them to ALPA as a fait accompli.

Why did he not choose to do so? Because the BOD had bigger game in mind. Use the RJ's to not only lower pilot compensation, but break unions and lower compensation across the board. The proof, as I contended in 1999, is before us today - US got exactly what they wanted.

Ask yourself this. IF US was just mainline with all employees receiving mainline pay, and ALPA was paid the modern equivalent of F28 pay, how many RJ's would U want? I'd say, not nearly as many as they now have.

I am not saying there is no place for RJ's - there certainly is. Station start ups, truly thin markets, additional frequencies - those are good reasons that would need to be balanced against RJ CASM and operating shortcomings.

But the increase in RJ's has little to do with the inherent efficiencies of the aircraft (there are none) and everything to do with the wage structure the Rj's bring with them.

 

[smmech]

I read an artical that said that the US Airways pilots made a deal with the company to fly the ERJ 90 seaters? Mainline.. :blink:
Any insite into this, like do we have these planes, or an order? Will this add maintenance, F/A, ramp work?

 

[BoeingBoy]

The ALPA transition agreement with the company (company's ???) calls for the Emb-190 to be flown on "mainline". So far, no orders have been announced, though there are hints that they could be forthcoming (negotiating ploy ???). As for the other employee groups, I have no idea.

Now for Paul Harvey's "other side of the story"....

Both the company (East) and the East ALPA MEC insist that MDA is a "division" of East mainline. Could that be a loophole for a resurrected MDA, having lost it's 170's to Republic, acquiring and flying the 190's under it's separate contract with separate employee groups?

Only the shadow knows.....

Jim

 

[vsi0]

BoeingBoy:

Generallly speaking, I concur with your view of the situations. However, on multiple occasions elected ALPA officials have told me point blank that I am not mainline. Just passing along my experiences.

I don't need to mention the jumpseat denials and threats of, "I carry around a list of all the plantiffs from the EMB-170 Division". The best one was a couple of weeks ago when one commuter wanted me to give up the jumpseat because he missed his flight and I was a "OH! Your MidAlantic". If he would have asked nicely, I might have considered helping out but he didn't--so the consideration wasn't required.

Anyway just a point of reference from one of the cogs in the wheel.

ALL OR NONE!

The ALPA transition agreement with the company (company's ???) calls for the Emb-190 to be flown on "mainline". So far, no orders have been announced, though there are hints that they could be forthcoming (negotiating ploy ???). As for the other employee groups, I have no idea.

Now for Paul Harvey's "other side of the story"....

Both the company (East) and the East ALPA MEC insist that MDA is a "division" of East mainline. Could that be a loophole for a resurrected MDA, having lost it's 170's to Republic, acquiring and flying the 190's under it's separate contract with separate employee groups?

Only the shadow knows.....

Jim

 

[Furloughedagain]

What i'd like to know if why we continue to call these things "RJs"?

We are perpetuating the myth that there is anything "regional" about these aircraft. We furthermore create a perception among the commuter pilots that these aircraft belong to them -- and that mainline is taking them away.

Call a spade a spade. These are 70 - 105 seat airliners -- and there ain't nothin "regional" about them.

 

[BoeingBoy]

BoeingBoy:

Generallly speaking, I concur with your view of the situations. However, on multiple occasions elected ALPA officials have told me point blank that I am not mainline. Just passing along my experiences.

You're right - in their zeal to keep you separate they created that "division" of mainline argument once it became unsupportable to argue that the "Embraer division" was a separate company. That's what led to my speculation (that's all it is) about the potential loophole in the transition agreement - it just says the 190's will be operated by "mainlime", not which "division" of "mainline". Hopefully that's just my paranoria of the old management modus of operation - exploit every possible loophole and invent some new ones - and doesn't apply to the new management.

As for your comments about the "redheaded stepchild" treatment, you're right - it's as deplorable as everything else that's happened to all the "Embraer division" folks. Unfortunately, it amply demonstrates that there still too many "mainline" pilots who don't really have a clue about the Embraer folks and what they've been and are going through. You're seen as "just another RJ pilot" by too many.

Jim