Mesa To Leave Us Airways Express?

[funguy2]

Well... This move sure looks aligned with Orenstein's previous comments that Mesa is working with other airlines / has options.

However, I would have to think that DAL doesn't really need any more RJ's or RJ partners. So, it makes me think that DAL is trying to position themselves for a US Airways liquidation... By having a relationship with many of US Airways's contract feeders, DAL probably thinks they can "pounce" when/if US Airways stops flying.

I think this is an interesting and potentially dangerous strategy on DAL's part... Probably a good move for Mesa. As for US Airways, I would think its a non-issue... since US Airways has the ability to cancel contracts in BK.

Also, I understand that Mesa operates both ERJ's and CRJ's for US Airways... Does anyone know the breakdown?

 

[OldpropGuy]

Nope. The "old school" scope limited the number & size on express planes (as does the "new school" scope, the limits are just much higher), not who could fly them. As scope was relaxed, the additional flying could have stayed "in house" but the company chose to contract it out.

Jim

[post="266466"][/post]​

If I remember correctly, the "old school" scope was stubbornly pushed in the face of the "in house" carriers until group’s losses were so great that there was no financing available to acquire RJ's. The stance back then was "Any jets on the property must be flown by mainline pilots." Thus, it did limit who could fly them, as does the current agreement.

It's amazing, and sad, how this inflexible attitude contributed to the downfall of a once great airline. U was no longer competitive in the regional market as the customers in the smaller cities were attracted to the competition's shiny new RJ's. The old "in house" turboprops, while still great, cost-effective, dependable, safe aircraft, were just not the passengers' choice if a modern RJ was also available.

Later, even mainline ALPA could not pretend that RJ’s were a necessity and no longer just an option, if the airline was to remain competitive. They also realized that they could not productively fly them at mainline rates. Once ALPA comprehended this, and chose to "relax the scope," they also chose to allow Mesa, and later other contract carriers, to take the flying and apparently the profits! The once “only mainline pilotâ€￾ jets were now being flown by low-time, entry level, low-paid, outside group, pilots!

But, some still insist that the blame for the current predicament must fall on management. I agree to an extent. If past management had possessed the guts to stand up to ALPA and run the airline, rather than allowing the pilot group to dominate company decisions, then everyone just might be in a different position today.

 

[ringmaruf]

Light Years,

Not quibbling, because something may have changed, but according to Mesa's latest quarterly report (released in late April) they operated 59 RJ's for US Express (plus 16 B1900's).

"These deliveries increased Mesa’s fleet of regional jets to 136 regional jet aircraft, comprised of 92 50-seat regional jets, 15 70-seat regional jets and 29 86-seat regional jets (47 America West, 30 United and 59 US Airways."

As for the DL/Mesa agreement, so far I've seen nothing that says those RJ's will be removed from US Express service, though if their affiliate contract is cancelled or modified it would certainly happen. As of the end of 2004, Mesa was obligated to add 13 RJ's under their various affiliate contracts, but had 20 CRJ's scheduled for delivery in 2005. Additionally, there are CRJ's becoming available - primarily FlyI's that are being returned to leasors.

Jim

[post="266492"][/post]​

I think you're right that it's 59 RJs. I believe it's 36 ERJs and 23 CRJs. Perhaps it's just a coincidence, but notice that the 23 CRJs Mesa has at US plus the 7 unassigned CRJs they're taking this year adds up to the 30 that DL is getting.

 

[BoeingBoy]

If I remember correctly, the "old school" scope was stubbornly pushed in the face of the "in house" carriers until group’s losses were so great that there was no financing available to acquire RJ's. The stance back then was "Any jets on the property must be flown by mainline pilots." Thus, it did limit who could fly them, as does the current agreement.

[post="266499"][/post]​

Correct to a point, and that point is that the company never utilized what was available to add RJ's to the W/O carriers even when the finances were better (like Wolf using money to buy back stock instead of equip the W/O carriers with RJ's).

The company has never (and still doesn't) utilized the full extent of RJ's allowed by scope, whether "old school" or "new school". Of course, if you go back to earlier days, we were "ahead of the curve" on RJ's - they were just weren't called that. Remember the BAC's and F-28's?

Jim

 

[fr8tmastr]

The WO's were not allowed to have any RJ's, even the very first 35 that ML scope allowed were not to be at a WO they were instead given to MESA, This continued with the next 35. Now at this point the whole J4J thing started and the WO were allowed to participate. Also at this time the money ran out, so even though the WO were allowed to participate, no money to buy. The only WO to survive this is the one with the worst contract. It was too little too late. Now the contract carriers with their cost plus 8% are in charge of our destiny. So, IMO the scope thing did not work out.

 

[sfb]

However, I would have to think that DAL doesn't really need any more RJ's or RJ partners. So, it makes me think that DAL is trying to position themselves for a US Airways liquidation... By having a relationship with many of US Airways's contract feeders, DAL probably thinks they can "pounce" when/if US Airways stops flying.

Actually, I think Delta's strategy here is two-fold. First, they remove US Airways' leverage in trying to extract an equity investment from Mesa; if Mesa is guaranteed a home for most of the RJ's flying for US, they don't have to put up cash to make sure US survives. Second, if US does indeed liquidate, they're well-positioned to add capacity on key routes which would be left unserved at US's (former) hubs.

I think this is an interesting and potentially dangerous strategy on DAL's part... Probably a good move for Mesa. As for US Airways, I would think its a non-issue... since US Airways has the ability to cancel contracts in BK.

Agreed that this is an interesting strategy on DAL's part. I wonder if the phrasing of "up to 30" in the press releases involves whether or not Mesa continues to have a home for those RJ's as part of US Airways Express; i.e. Delta agrees to take as many as would be freed up should US liquidate or reject its contract with Mesa.

The big issue here for US Airways is that they lose the leverage some claimed they would have over Mesa to force them into investing cash into the bankrupt company's reorganization. US also loses negotiating power with Mesa in attempting to force them to accept less profitable contract terms if they're trying to do that.

 

[BoeingBoy]

The WO's were not allowed to have any RJ's, even the very first 35 that ML scope allowed were not to be at a WO they were instead given to MESA, This continued with the next 35.

[post="266507"][/post]​

That is undoubtedly true, the company did not give any of those aircraft to a W/O and instead turned to Mesa. However, nothing in the scope language prevented any or all those planes going to a W/O carrier. In short, it was the company's choice and not forced by scope.

Old scope language:

Section 1(B)1 and 1(B)2 say that all flying and training will be performed by pilots on the US Airways seniority list (it's too long for me to type it all).

Section 1(B)3 says that 1(B)1 & 1(B)2 do not apply to a carrier that "is owned, controlled or operated by the company or US Airways Group, whether directly or indirectly" as long as the number of aircraft "in conjunction with all other Commuter Carriers using the company's code, name, logo or marketing identity" does not exceed that allowed. Of course, there are limits on the type of aircraft (not over 69 seats, no F-28's, no freight aircraft over 70,000 lb gross wt)

Jim

 

[funguy2]

Good info ringmaruf... That certainly suggests a "downsizing" of Mesa for US Airways Express, not a complete elimination... Unless Mesa has another trick up its sleeve for the ERJ's...

 

[pilotpayne]

Hey guys,

As an awac pilot I would just like to say that I don't think you need to worry about our perf. We just finished the month ahead of all the united express carriers and even mainline for O.T. perf. That is great considering the fact that yonited has droped us. Awac is full of a great group of people and I think we will work very hard for Uair. I would also like to say that every pilot I talk to hear hopes that our moving does not hurt alg pdt and psa......Well who knows what the future holds but hopefully we can make it work.

Jp

 

[jack mama]

Maybe U doesn't need to leverage Mesa anymore because the money is already coming from somewhere else.

I think Mesa should be more worried about DAL going CH 11 than the liquidation of U.

 

[funguy2]

The big issue here for US Airways is that they lose the leverage some claimed they would have over Mesa to force them into investing cash into the bankrupt company's reorganization.  US also loses negotiating power with Mesa in attempting to force them to accept less profitable contract terms if they're trying to do that.

[post="266515"][/post]​

The other side here is that potential rejection of the US-Mesa contract has now become easier for US... Prior to this agreement, I would have suspected that Orenstein would have fought real hard to maintain its contract with US, one way or another. Presumably, if Mesa now has a home for roughly half of their US Airways Express fleet, then one would think any objections or other trickery Mesa could pull to delay or otherwise inhibit US Airways from rejecting its contract would be unsuccessful or unwarrented.

Thus, rejecting the Mesa contract just became "easier" for US Airways.

You also made a good point about removing Mesa's potential for investment into US-HP from the equation... But I am not sure it was ever there to begin with...

 

[PBRmeASAP]

I don't think I would be so excited about AirWilly! I heard there performance wasn't stellar at AirTran. However, I guess anything is better then Mesa's performance. Please don't take that Personal 'Turtle', I don't want to upset my number 1 fan....

[post="266490"][/post]​

Have you actually looked at the performance numbers comparing Mesa to the other Express carriers. If so and you have them why not post them here.

 

[WSurf]

Don't have numbers on that. You are right, but for awhile our company was trying all it could do not to have our crews DH on Mesa flights into any overnights(delays were killing us). One thing I do know However was that Mesa was running A/C as much as 4 hrs late. Flying a Jet round trip with nobody on the aircraft allowing them to get the completion factor, thus get paid by US Airways. Talking about another Example of Group tossing money out the window.
I do think that Group finally caught on to this practice, and impossed a ruling that the flight has to be completed within 3 hrs. to get paid!
O' Well! Then again US Airways will step over a dollar to pick up a quarter.

 

[PBRmeASAP]

Don't have numbers on that. You are right, but for awhile our company was trying all it could do not to have our crews DH on Mesa flights into any overnights(delays were killing us). One thing I do know However was that Mesa was running A/C as much as 4 hrs late. Flying a Jet round trip with nobody on the aircraft allowing them to get the completion factor, thus get paid by US Airways. Talking about another Example of Group tossing money out the window.
I do think that Group finally caught on to this practice, and impossed a ruling that the flight has to be completed within 3 hrs. to get paid!
O' Well! Then again US Airways will step over a dollar to pick up a quarter.

[post="266567"][/post]​

Well I had a mainline deadhead delay almost an hour because the Captain didnt "feel" like lying from CLT to PHL. His buddy that wanted to jumpseat to Philly and was going to fly the leg for him so he could catch a flight home to Dallas didnt show and this Captain made a big emotional scene in front of all the passengers waiting to board and then commenced running around the airport looking for someone else Airbus qualified who would take the flight. Andjust before this happened there was a deadheader from a training event sitting next to me talking about how awful Mesa was...he was kind of quiet after I mentioned "and you were saying".

Also I was told by many a gate agent when PSA first started flying CRJ's and Mid Atlantic first started flying the E170 "thank god your a Mesa flight" which at the time I thought they were smoking crack until I heard abot the maintenance issues and lack of crew planning by those two.
The reality is all the regionals and majors have their good days and bad days, good people and bad people. So get off the high horseand quit looking down your nose at everyone else. I will get the numbers and post them.

 

[WSurf]

High Horse!!! Too Funny! I believe any airline that gets new a/c is gonna have delays. Sooo whats your excuse!
Anyway, I have more invested into this company then someone that can go suck on the tit of another carrier.
I want my company to make it. On the other hand you (mesa) code shares with about 4 different airlines, (all of which compete against us) and you could care less what happens. Really, you dont care.
So I wasn't making this personal, or looking down on anyone. Group goes out of business, well then so does PDT/PSA. You guys will still be able to low ball other carriers and continue you fly.