The Big Question

[700UW]

http://www.usairways.com/about/press_2003/nw_03_0709.htm

US AIRWAYS WILL NOT TAKE DELIVERY OF CRJ-705 AIRCRAFT MESA AIRLINES TO OPERATE CRJ-700 AS US AIRWAYS EXPRESS
ARLINGTON, Va., July 9, 2003 -- US Airways said today that it has notified Bombardier Aerospace that it will not be taking delivery of the 25 CRJ-705 regional jet aircraft ordered in May, and instead, will contract with Mesa Airlines to fly at least 25, and perhaps as many as 55 70-seat regional jets under the US Airways Express name.

The decision was made after US Airways and its Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) unit could not reach an agreement on terms under which the 75-seat CRJ-705 would be flown by a wholly owned US Airways affiliate using furloughed US Airways pilots under the carrier’s ‘Jets For Jobs’ program.

"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. That will mean fewer jobs for furloughed pilots and at lower wage rates, but it reflects the position ALPA has maintained in representing its members."

Under the US Airways-ALPA ‘Jets For Jobs’ agreement, half of all regional jet pilot positions at affiliate carriers such as Mesa must be filled with furloughed US Airways pilots. But 100 percent of the jobs associated with the CRJ-700 series and Embraer 170/175 aircraft go to furloughed pilots placed at the airline’s regional carriers (PSA, Piedmont and Allegheny) 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, and 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 workforce, since that is the net result of ALPA’s position."

MidAtlantic will be flying Embraer 170/175 aircraft. The CRJ-705 seats 75 passengers in a dual-class configuration, with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 82,500 pounds. The Embraer 175, which ALPA has already agreed to fly at regional jet pay rates and work rules, seats 76 passengers in a dual configuration, with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 85,517 pounds.

Reporters needing additional information should contact US Airways Corporate Communications at (703) 872-5100.

 

[Rico]

Well, I will deal with that reality when it arrives. PITBull.

Right now the company is coming to our workgroup looking for relief to ease staffing problems.

So although it is possible that they "might" elect to try additional paycuts, it is not too likely... That is what I meant about having reached the "economic point of return". They have reached that point in which attrition, training, and staffing costs would be greater than any real returns in payroll savings.

Realism.., I am protected because I am competitive.

Anyways, I have never promoted, nor wished for the company to enter BK, I would much rather stay out of it. Thus the ongoing posts encouraging people to think and consider everything...

Peace

 

[Rico]

Press Release Source: Air Line Pilots Association

PSA ALPA Pilots Reach Agreement on 70-Seat Jets
Monday July 26, 8:33 am ET

DAYTON, Ohio, July 26 /PRNewswire/ -- The PSA Airlines pilots, represented by the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), International, late last week approved a letter of agreement (LOA) with their management, spelling out the terms and conditions for operating 70-seat jets. By a vote of 8-1, the pilot leadership ratified the proposal.

"We are extremely pleased to reach a settlement with our management for this aircraft," said Capt. William Barnett, secretary-treasurer of the PSA pilots' unit of ALPA. "We want to see PSA prosper and grow. The operation of these larger jets will help us to provide better service and coverage for our portion of the US Airways network."

The LOA provides for the extension of the 50-50 staffing ratio, as outlined in the Jets for Jobs protocol with US Airways and its pilots. Under this arrangement, furloughed US Airways pilots are entitled to fill half of the positions assigned to this aircraft, per the limitations of this agreement. The PSA pilots will staff the remaining half of these positions. The LOA also provides positive reserve rule changes and other quality-of-life improvements for PSA pilots.

ALPA, the world's oldest and largest union of airline pilots, represents 64,000 pilots at 42 carriers. Visit the ALPA website: http://www.alpa.org.

[post="162894"][/post]​

Ummm, ok

YOU were the one that posted this newclip buddy, the other one was dated in early July, and before the agreement you quoted on another post was agreed to...

You should go back to talking about feelings

 

[colorado_cowboy]

I think you all have me confused as an Idealist...

I am a realist.
Cowboy,

I work for US Airways, until such time I do not, I will do everything I can to help US Airways succeed. I am a realist. IF US Airways does go under I will deal with it, but until then, I sure will not wish for it to happen.
Peace B)

[post="169208"][/post]​

Rico your missing my point.
In 1985 I went thru this very same scenario, I felt the same way you do about the company I was working for but the majority of the membership felt different. The contract was voted down and the company kept their promise and liquidated.

At the time the economy in Denver was the pits, I couldnt find a job anywhere so my wife and I packed up our belongings and moved to Southern California.

It took a couple of years but we finally got to a point where we were going to buy another house but US Air started cutting back a couple of years after that they closed San Diego and we were forced to relocate.

My wife and I have since divorced partially because she could no longer live with the uncertainty of US Air so now I find myself in this alone and to be honest with you Im scared as hell. But knowing my past I know that Im a survivor, Ive already made plans to quit US Air hopefully by the first of September and begin a new job in another state no less and at my age starting all over again isnt something Im looking forward to but its something I feel I have no choice but to do.

Best of luck to both you and your wife Rico

CC

 

[Rico]

Press Release Source: Air Line Pilots Association

PSA ALPA Pilots Reach Agreement on 70-Seat Jets
Monday July 26, 8:33 am ET

DAYTON, Ohio, July 26 /PRNewswire/ -- The PSA Airlines pilots, represented by the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), International, late last week approved a letter of agreement (LOA) with their management, spelling out the terms and conditions for operating 70-seat jets. By a vote of 8-1, the pilot leadership ratified the proposal.

"We are extremely pleased to reach a settlement with our management for this aircraft," said Capt. William Barnett, secretary-treasurer of the PSA pilots' unit of ALPA. "We want to see PSA prosper and grow. The operation of these larger jets will help us to provide better service and coverage for our portion of the US Airways network."

The LOA provides for the extension of the 50-50 staffing ratio, as outlined in the Jets for Jobs protocol with US Airways and its pilots. Under this arrangement, furloughed US Airways pilots are entitled to fill half of the positions assigned to this aircraft, per the limitations of this agreement. The PSA pilots will staff the remaining half of these positions. The LOA also provides positive reserve rule changes and other quality-of-life improvements for PSA pilots.

ALPA, the world's oldest and largest union of airline pilots, represents 64,000 pilots at 42 carriers. Visit the ALPA website: http://www.alpa.org.

[post="162894"][/post]​

Ummm, ok

YOU were the one that posted this newclip buddy, the other one was dated in early July, and before the agreement you quoted on another post was agreed to...

You should go back to talking about feelings

Ummm, ok :blink:

YOU were the one that posted this newclip buddy, the other one was dated in early July, before the agreement you quoted on another post was agreed to...

You should go back to talking about feelings

 

[Rico]

Press Release Source: Air Line Pilots Association

PSA ALPA Pilots Reach Agreement on 70-Seat Jets
Monday July 26, 8:33 am ET

DAYTON, Ohio, July 26 /PRNewswire/ -- The PSA Airlines pilots, represented by the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), International, late last week approved a letter of agreement (LOA) with their management, spelling out the terms and conditions for operating 70-seat jets. By a vote of 8-1, the pilot leadership ratified the proposal.

"We are extremely pleased to reach a settlement with our management for this aircraft," said Capt. William Barnett, secretary-treasurer of the PSA pilots' unit of ALPA. "We want to see PSA prosper and grow. The operation of these larger jets will help us to provide better service and coverage for our portion of the US Airways network."

The LOA provides for the extension of the 50-50 staffing ratio, as outlined in the Jets for Jobs protocol with US Airways and its pilots. Under this arrangement, furloughed US Airways pilots are entitled to fill half of the positions assigned to this aircraft, per the limitations of this agreement. The PSA pilots will staff the remaining half of these positions. The LOA also provides positive reserve rule changes and other quality-of-life improvements for PSA pilots.

ALPA, the world's oldest and largest union of airline pilots, represents 64,000 pilots at 42 carriers. Visit the ALPA website: http://www.alpa.org.

[post="162894"][/post]​

Ummm, ok

YOU were the one that posted this newclip buddy, the other one was dated in early July, and before the agreement you quoted on another post was agreed to...

You should go back to talking about feelings

 

[700UW]

Rico,

Why do you keep posting the samething?

 

[Rico]

I just hit the button once...

Some lag happened on the serverm came up with the Google page, then

Came up as three or four posts.

Sorry

 

[to much time to quit]

Rico,

Why do you keep posting the samething?

[post="169226"][/post]​

Once for him and once for his wife.

 

[ELP_WN_Psgr]

Fascinating discussions....I sort of miss MWeiss already.....and as I've said before I don't really have much standing to offer my opinion one way or the other. But I will anyway.

Let me caveat this by saying there are few people out there less pro-management and anti union than me.

Rico, in this case.....the employees have had enough. If they, through their own action or inaction, end up killing the company it won't be because they did anything wrong. It might just simply be the way it has to be. I believe it was Doris Day who said it best --- "que sera, sera."

If you go back as far as Holly Hegeman's Planebusiness.com boards, or airliners,net, or even this board......there have been industry observers like myself telling the USAirways management what they ought to do for the last 5 years.

The concessions previously granted to management should have been adequate, assuming that the management has any sense at all. The jury is still out on that.

Rational fares, more point to point service, rolling hubs.....all ideas that management says they are going to implement. What's stopping them?

They have said they have to get the costs in line first. That's utter nonsense.

If you implement rational fares, you stimulate demand. Increased demand means you can offer more flights. Offering more flights allows you to increase aircraft utilization. If your utiliation goes up, your unit costs come down.

Rolling the hubs allows fewer people to do the same amount of work...better yet, rolling the hubs allows the same number of employees to do more work, which enhances productivity, which forces the unit costs downward more.

U's management has missed the boat entirely. The real competition for an airline isn;t other airlines. It's the automobile.

Pricing the product at "oh my God" levels in 250-500 mile markets pretty much ensures that people will hop in the car to go someplace. If Pittsburgh to Buffalo has a yield of $1.58 per mile, then I would say you have pretty much destroyed the demand for air travel between those two points.

If your average fare was, say, 40 cents a mile..........you'd still be getting a healthy return over and above the ASM costs AND you would be making it worthwhile for folks to catch the airplane.

This is not rocket science. As I recall that's about 190 miles. If your average fare is $286 each way, then it is very apparent that the market for local O&D traffic is not what is could be or should be.

I don't know why USAirways' management finds it so difficult to comprehend this. You aren't going to make money charging $49 from Philadelphia to Florida. Yet they continue to try....when there are pieces of low hanging fruit they could chomp on.

The managers U has had have done nothing to earn the trust and faith and confidence of the employees. Employees are still treated like the enemy.

If management treats you like the enemy, it behooves you to be the enemy. Therefore, the only rational thing labor can and should do is to tell the management to go pound sand.

I agree with the rank and file that this management team is liable to squander any concessions, just like the previous ones. It would be different if management had seriously tried to do things to fix the airline.

But they haven't, and all the more it's a pity.

 

[700UW]

ELP,

Great Post!

 

[bookmdano]

You presented some very thought provoking questions.

What is it exactly that I am trying to accomplish?

I'd like to start out by saying that I have NEVER worked for Mr. Colodny, I have NEVER worked for Mr. Schofield, I have NEVER worked for Mr. Wolfe, I have NEVER worked for Mr. Siegel, and I do not work for Mr. Lakefield or any of their thousands of VP's that have come and gone through US, faster than a revolving door.
I have always worked for myself and my son. I have worked to make sure that we have a home in a safe neighborhood. I have worked to make sure that we can heat and air condition our home. I have worked to make sure that our 10 year old car can still get me to and from my place of employment. I work for family. It just so happens that the company I am employeed by has had pis_ poor management that is greedy. The company I work at has succeeded to this point by the blood, sweat and tears of it's front line employees. Not by the greedy that rap_ and run. The company I work at has not taken any profits and put it back into the company to improve its technology. This company has no forethought.
For example: For weeks I had my eye on a product at K-Mart, it was above my budget. Then I found the same product at Wal-Mart for $40 less. So I bought the product at Wal-Mart. The next week K-Mart met the price. Too late, I had already given my money to Wal-Mart. The consumer is the ultimate boss on what succeeds and what fails. But a wise company does not try to jerk the consumer around.
The employees I work with cry out to be heard on ways to save money, but our cries are not heard. The union employees at this company have given and given, yet the monies are still squandered on outrageous golden parachutes to the unworthy.
As Mr. Lakefield said himself "he's new to the industry", he is absolutely right. And since this is not the first trip down this road for any of the employees, we've witnessed disgraceful waste, pathetic priorities...but still, the front line shows up to mask over distruction.

 

[algflyr]

700,

Exactly how many 701's is Mesa operating for U? (Hint: the answer is ZERO)

 

[Rico]

Well,

I have one up on most of you, because I was around CAL during the super-fun period when they were as desparate as US Airways is today.

All that I read now, reflects all that was said back then (not so long ago)

CAL had been through FAR worse with their management.

But the one thing they had in place was competitive labor costs. Granted, low costs obtained through downright vicious means, but low labor costs.

They had as much if not more of an uphill battle to survive than does US Airways. And they had as many, if not MORE naysayers and anti-cheerleaders than does US Airways

But,

I wonder if you go and ask them now, if they should have quit trying back then...If many are sorry that CAL survived. Sorry that CAL transformed, sorry that later on they were able to regain much of what they had given...


CAL was all of the sudden being ran by yet another CEO, with yet another supposed "bag of tricks" for a group of employees that were in no mood to listen...

But then, things started to change, routes were dropped, routes were added, Hubs were closed, hubs were grown. New attitudes started to arise, and then all of the sudden CAL started to shine.

CAL too had to go through monumnetal changes (Closing Denver, stopping CAL lite, dropping fleet types, starting a codeshare with HP, Closing GSO, and so on)

BUT, the big diff. between CAL and us, is that the cheap labor rates they had, had been shoved down the throats of those employees. No choice in the matter, just take it or leave. BK in no short terms sucked.

We (US) on the other hand, have been given one last chance, to negotiate specific concessions, to negotiate specific returns, to give to get...

To avoid BK and to avoid the loss of control over our future.

Because we might not be as "lucky" (lack of a better word) and be able to "reorganize" (rather than liquidate) if Fuel remains in the Mid 40's a barrel. The funds and investment will dry up and any chance at a comeback, a turnaround, success... will evaporate if we delay any longer.

So, yes, I might look at this situation differently, because I have seen an actual turnaround, and have been through an actual liquidation. I might have a little insight that someone reading these posts mught care to listen to.

Because given a choice between a chance to transform US, or a probable liqudation...,

I would rather work for a transformation, and see if we can make this place survive and succeed too

B) Peace

 

[Dilligas]

Now, the big diff, is that those cheap labor rates were shoved down the throats of those employees. No choice in the matter, just take it or leave. BK in no short terms sucked.

We on the other hand, are given one last chance, to negotiate specific concessions, to negotiate specific returns, to give to get... To avoid BK

The last TWO rounds of concessions WERE NOT negotiated, not t/a, they WERE "take it or leave it" under the threat of and to avoid BK, which the company filed for once the pilots took the bait.

U employees are not now, nor have they been dealt with in good faith by the so called management of the entity. The company violates the current CBA's with impunity and reckless disregard of what is agreed upon.

You are either seriously deluded, or deliberately deceptive. I suspect the latter.