[P]pitguy[BR][BR] This rumor has its roots growing from the heavy checks being delayed to save money right now. I will not get into it here, but what Dell told you earlier is very true, that work is ours alone and what you are insinuating requires a union vote. Right now the only thing that matters to the company is getting past the T/As, if they can't, it's all moot anyway. [/P]
Oliver Twist
Advanced
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]
[P]Chris Chiames,[BR][BR]One question I hope you can clear up in my mind and about 30,000 others is this. Why does it appear that we are doing little or nothing to give passengers what they really want here. Decent fares and sensible rules? I and many others believe that fare rationalization will bring back passengers in greater numbers and revenue in buckets. Does it make sense to charge 1 single business person 1500 bucks to go to LAX while he sits surrounded by the family of 5 who paid 1000 bucks for 5 to do the same trip?[BR][BR]It seems to almost anyone that getting the family of 5 out to fly is a no brainer for US. Its getting the guy on business off his phone and out of his car and back flying that is the real mystery here. I venture to say that the guy who spent 1500 bucks to go to LAX once in 6 months would gladly come back more than once for a fare that was 500. As you can well imagine, these fares are off the top of my head, but I think the logic is there. We MUST get the passengers back out of their cars and back in the air. The best way to do it is by lowering the price on unrestricted fares to a level that is reasonable.[BR][BR]Anyone can tell you that if the price is lowered enough, then the numbers who buy make up for the lower yield per buyer. It works in other industries, I see little reason why it wont work in ours. A company guy may spend 500 twice, but won't spend 1500 once. That logic gives us 1000 we didnt have before because he was in his car instead or on his phone.[BR][BR]Thanks for your time.[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]
[P]Chris Chiames,[BR][BR]One question I hope you can clear up in my mind and about 30,000 others is this. Why does it appear that we are doing little or nothing to give passengers what they really want here. Decent fares and sensible rules? I and many others believe that fare rationalization will bring back passengers in greater numbers and revenue in buckets. Does it make sense to charge 1 single business person 1500 bucks to go to LAX while he sits surrounded by the family of 5 who paid 1000 bucks for 5 to do the same trip?[BR][BR]It seems to almost anyone that getting the family of 5 out to fly is a no brainer for US. Its getting the guy on business off his phone and out of his car and back flying that is the real mystery here. I venture to say that the guy who spent 1500 bucks to go to LAX once in 6 months would gladly come back more than once for a fare that was 500. As you can well imagine, these fares are off the top of my head, but I think the logic is there. We MUST get the passengers back out of their cars and back in the air. The best way to do it is by lowering the price on unrestricted fares to a level that is reasonable.[BR][BR]Anyone can tell you that if the price is lowered enough, then the numbers who buy make up for the lower yield per buyer. It works in other industries, I see little reason why it wont work in ours. A company guy may spend 500 twice, but won't spend 1500 once. That logic gives us 1000 we didnt have before because he was in his car instead or on his phone.[BR][BR]Thanks for your time.[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
US Airways
Newbie
- Jan 3, 2003
- 9
- 0
One more thing to Andy S. With regard to my work at AA, are you referring to my trying to explain to thousands of stranded passengers why APA was engaging in an illegal job action? Or maybe you want to criticize my very frequent defense of employees when they were accused of causing accidents(i.e., Little Rock), not following DOT procedures (i.e., hazardous cargo),and racially harassing co-workers in the hangar, among other incidents.
Gimme a break. You don't know anything about me, let alone my character or integrity. I'm on here providiing the company's point of view and trying to answer questions and you resort to personal attacks. Seems to me someone else has the integrity problem.
For US employees, I came to this company in May because of the professional challenge and the strong desire to be a part of the team that turned this company around. We may not always agree, but I'm always ready for a healthy debate. Ultimately, I believe we all want to see the company succeed.
Chris Chiames
Gimme a break. You don't know anything about me, let alone my character or integrity. I'm on here providiing the company's point of view and trying to answer questions and you resort to personal attacks. Seems to me someone else has the integrity problem.
For US employees, I came to this company in May because of the professional challenge and the strong desire to be a part of the team that turned this company around. We may not always agree, but I'm always ready for a healthy debate. Ultimately, I believe we all want to see the company succeed.
Chris Chiames
[P][SPAN class=BodyFont]But there is nothing to stop them for abrogating a lease right now or renegotiate a lease when the are out of BK then have the check done and release the airplane.[BR][BR][/P]
[P]----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[BR][BR] cynics abound[/SPAN][/P]
[P]----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[BR][BR] cynics abound[/SPAN][/P]
pitguy
Veteran
- Aug 21, 2002
- 1,509
- 0
[DIV][STRONG][FONT size=4]
[DIV][STRONG][FONT size=4]DELLDUDE and others,[/FONT][/STRONG][/DIV]
[DIV] [/DIV]
[DIV][STRONG][FONT size=4]The concern about outsourcing heavy maintenance out is raised from the option of the company having an airplane that is due a heavy maintenance check and removing that airplane from lease and returning it to the leaser whom then has the airplane heavy maintenance check done and the re-leases the airplane back to the airline after the heavy maintenance check was done hence bypassing the union contract. Can this be done or would it? I do not know. It does sound feasible and I read that Airbus is starting such a program. This is part of the reason for the questions for Chris Chiames.[/FONT][/STRONG][/DIV]
[DIV] [/DIV][/FONT][/STRONG][/DIV]
[DIV][STRONG][FONT size=4]DELLDUDE and others,[/FONT][/STRONG][/DIV]
[DIV] [/DIV]
[DIV][STRONG][FONT size=4]The concern about outsourcing heavy maintenance out is raised from the option of the company having an airplane that is due a heavy maintenance check and removing that airplane from lease and returning it to the leaser whom then has the airplane heavy maintenance check done and the re-leases the airplane back to the airline after the heavy maintenance check was done hence bypassing the union contract. Can this be done or would it? I do not know. It does sound feasible and I read that Airbus is starting such a program. This is part of the reason for the questions for Chris Chiames.[/FONT][/STRONG][/DIV]
[DIV] [/DIV][/FONT][/STRONG][/DIV]
ITRADE
Veteran
I'm definately waiting as Andy, nervously and a little out of breath, attempts to concoct his rebuttal.
US Airways
Newbie
- Jan 3, 2003
- 9
- 0
PITguy, I apologize for the delay. I haven't been online and just saw your note.
We are not going to outsource heavy maintenance in PIT or elsewhere. We never even proposed it. (Unlike UA which has proposed the outsourcing of heavy maintenance.)
We will pay all furlough pay as provided for in the contract.
We have no further plans to lay off more mechanics beyond what is published. With the new commitment to operate 279 a/c, we will need just about all the mechanics on the property to perform the maintenance we have scheduled, since our fleet plan anticipated retiring some planes that we will now be flying.
Finally, we are not trying to vendor maintenance with either Boeing or Airbus.
Chris Chiames
We are not going to outsource heavy maintenance in PIT or elsewhere. We never even proposed it. (Unlike UA which has proposed the outsourcing of heavy maintenance.)
We will pay all furlough pay as provided for in the contract.
We have no further plans to lay off more mechanics beyond what is published. With the new commitment to operate 279 a/c, we will need just about all the mechanics on the property to perform the maintenance we have scheduled, since our fleet plan anticipated retiring some planes that we will now be flying.
Finally, we are not trying to vendor maintenance with either Boeing or Airbus.
Chris Chiames
ITRADE
Veteran
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/5/2003 9:29:17 PM US Airways, Inc wrote:
[P]One more thing to Andy S. With regard to my work at AA, are you referring to my trying to explain to thousands of stranded passengers why APA was engaging in an illegal job action? Or maybe you want to criticize my very frequent defense of employees when they were accused of causing accidents(i.e., Little Rock), not following DOT procedures (i.e., hazardous cargo),and racially harassing co-workers in the hangar, among other incidents.[BR][BR]----------------[/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]Chris, was this the APA "sick out" which was undertaken in defiance of an order from a United States district judge - resulting in APA's forfeiture of approximately $45 million dollars.[/P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/5/2003 9:29:17 PM US Airways, Inc wrote:
[P]One more thing to Andy S. With regard to my work at AA, are you referring to my trying to explain to thousands of stranded passengers why APA was engaging in an illegal job action? Or maybe you want to criticize my very frequent defense of employees when they were accused of causing accidents(i.e., Little Rock), not following DOT procedures (i.e., hazardous cargo),and racially harassing co-workers in the hangar, among other incidents.[BR][BR]----------------[/P][/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P]Chris, was this the APA "sick out" which was undertaken in defiance of an order from a United States district judge - resulting in APA's forfeiture of approximately $45 million dollars.[/P]
flyonthewall
Member
- Aug 19, 2002
- 56
- 0
I am not trying to get off topic, but here is some background info on your question that Itrade raised.
Per the Washington Post.
The judge threatened to fine the pilots millions of dollars for disobeying his order to end a week-long sickout that has disrupted the travel plans of more than half a million passengers.
“Unfortunately, the radical element that appears to be in control of the Allied Pilots Association (APA) seems determined to fly American Airlines into the side of the mountain, taking themselves, the company, their co-workers and their customers with them,†U.S. District Judge Joe Kendall of Dallas wrote in his contempt order.
Per the Washington Post.
The judge threatened to fine the pilots millions of dollars for disobeying his order to end a week-long sickout that has disrupted the travel plans of more than half a million passengers.
“Unfortunately, the radical element that appears to be in control of the Allied Pilots Association (APA) seems determined to fly American Airlines into the side of the mountain, taking themselves, the company, their co-workers and their customers with them,†U.S. District Judge Joe Kendall of Dallas wrote in his contempt order.
GadgetFreak
Advanced
Well put and spot on Oliver.
[BLOCKQUOTE]
----------------
On 1/5/2003 10:54:04 PM CCY wrote:
[BLOCKQUOTE]
The main goal for your inventory management team is to maximize individual flight revenue. We want to sell as many seats as possible at the highest possible fares.[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
While I understand the "basic concept" of yield management, does anyone in CCY actually think its worth $300 to fly from Tampa to Miami at the last minute? I actually had a guy laugh at me (actually I've had more than one do this) when I quoted this fare to him. With AA and FL flights later to MIA and WN to FLL, do you honestly think someone is going to pay this fare unless we are the ONLY seat going and he doesnt want to rent a car and drive? I'm sure we get SOME suckers buying these fares systemwide, but how many more WOULD we have sold if it had been more reasonable to start with? I wouldnt suggest giving these last minute seats away for a song, but if you look at some of the "walkup" fares in certain markets, you're basically asking people to keep on walking. [/P]
----------------
On 1/5/2003 10:54:04 PM CCY wrote:
[BLOCKQUOTE]
The main goal for your inventory management team is to maximize individual flight revenue. We want to sell as many seats as possible at the highest possible fares.[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[/P]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
While I understand the "basic concept" of yield management, does anyone in CCY actually think its worth $300 to fly from Tampa to Miami at the last minute? I actually had a guy laugh at me (actually I've had more than one do this) when I quoted this fare to him. With AA and FL flights later to MIA and WN to FLL, do you honestly think someone is going to pay this fare unless we are the ONLY seat going and he doesnt want to rent a car and drive? I'm sure we get SOME suckers buying these fares systemwide, but how many more WOULD we have sold if it had been more reasonable to start with? I wouldnt suggest giving these last minute seats away for a song, but if you look at some of the "walkup" fares in certain markets, you're basically asking people to keep on walking. [/P]
