US Airways watches fleet size as air travel drags

[cavalier]

Now... on the other hand, his comment was ridiculous and he should have rephrased it. The first few times I read that press release I had the same reaction as everyone on this board. It was an interesting spin job on the fleet size, IMHO.

----------------


Heard a radio preacher the other day explaining that a "spin" is just an old way of lying, being dishonest, disingenuous. . . . .I don’t think that is interesting really coming from our leader.
​

 

[CLIPPEDWINGS]

----------------
On 5/13/2003 926 PM a320av8r wrote:

LavMan,
Our contract says the same thing. I''ll walk over any reductions below 279 as would most of the other pilots and employees.

----------------​

WE WILL FIGHT THEM THIS TIME!!!!!!1
I suggested a sick out in a topic starter, but I guess management got scared and had "Todd B moderator" take it off. This board is NOT the only way to communicate with the employees of US Airways...Mr & Mrs Management.

 

[delldude]

----------------
On 5/13/2003 539 PM PITbull wrote:

I have a sneaky suspecious feeling that the way this mangement operates, they may take our mainline planes OFF the property and replace them with small jets and still maintain 279 jets. If you remember, in December, I don''t think the pilots were thinking about the co. perhaps conceding to making Mid-Atlantic a division of mainline, for their own scheming purpose. Just so happens that they terminate the leases in PIT Hub 20 minutes before emergence from BK, and if they don''t close down PIT completely as a Hub, and operate INSTEAD as Mid -Atlantic out of PIT, they don''t have to buy any homes here in PIT or moving expenses to transfer the remaining employees out. Why? Cause PIT Hub will operate as the division of mainline instead of as a wholly owned. Pretty shrewd of these characters. They then will get away with the millions of dollars for moving expenses of the employees in PIT, as they didn''t shut the base down, on top of that, if they take mainline fleet out and replace them with RJs..PRESTO, you still can maintain 279 airplanes most will be RJs.
yea, we sure got ''snowed'' in these negotiations.

This is the NEW CORPORATE TRANSACTION folks.

We will all be either be working for Mid Atlantic at their pay rates and benefits or we will have the option to "hit the street". I believe "mainline" will eventually go away, and we will just operate 279 at the very minimum, only ''small jets''. Period.
​

if i remember there is a clause at least in the mechanic contract that anyone employed at 279 WILL NOT be cut if they go below 279..so now what about that? kind of kills the rj replacement for mainline unless they want them fixed at mainline rates.
This Story is one for airline history books.

----------------​

 

[gilbertguy]

----------------
On 5/13/2003 7:06:40 PM PITbull wrote:




----------------
On 5/13/2003 6:43:44 PM cubfan02us wrote:

pitguy I believe you''re right.US Air''s mgt will lay off
more people,park more planes,and give more flying to
the regionals and mid-atlantic.They''ve got to do something
with those new regional jets that will be turning the
skies blue...

----------------​

Yup, you guys got it...all 450 of them..brandy new,  great RJs coming our way. All being paid for by  furloughs and concessions.

Right on the mark! Furlough as many of the workforce and then as the RJ''s come on line, offer the layoffs an ''express'' job at $13.00 hr, if you''re lucky......


Beam Me Up, Scotty!!

 

[MarkMyWords]

Alright, once again I am going to go against the grain here and try to be the voice of reason.

USFlyer is correct when he said that Dave''s choice of words were probably not the best. Prior to the war in Iraq, most all major airline fleet counts leveled off with US taking the largest fleet reduction of any major carrier post 9/11. Since the start of the Iraq war all other major airlines had cut their schedule another 10-20%, and did so by grounding additional airplanes. Our approach was to reduce the flying day for many airplanes on Tues, Wed and Sat. By doing this we maintained our 279 a/c fleet count and still reduced flying by 5%.

Dave''s original comment was that if loads did not pick up by September that there may have to be some MODEST fleet count reductions. Defining modest fleet reductions would be tough to do since we all have different views of what modest would be. I think modest adjustments could be achieved in a number of ways, and not reduce total fleet count. First would be the already announced reconfiguration of the 757 and Shuttle fleets. This will require that those airplanes be taken off line for a downtime and may be in addition to the heavy mtc tracks that are already out there. Aircraft painting is another way to reallocate an active airplane. As many people have commented, many of the airplanes are starting to look a bit rough and will require repainting. Painting of aircraft usually occurs every 5-6 years, depending on the wear. Then there is reallocating active airplanes to become spares. As it stands now, we start our day with very few operational spares in the system. Bumping up our spare aircraft count again maintains the active fleet count of 279, but reduces the active lines of flying. Airbus "S" checks are coming due this fall also. This again will reallocate an active airplane(s), not reducing the fleet count, but reducing acitve lines of flying.

So if you have 2 aircraft being reconfigured, 2 aircraft in paint, 3-4 additional spare airplanes, 1-2 Airbus S checks then you have modestly reduced the number of planes actively flying revenue, while still maintaining the total fleet count of 279. I am not sure if the Pilot contract contains a provision for the number of block hours to be flown or anything like that. I don''t see how the comapny can claim Force Majeur when the war event ended 5-6 months prior, but stranger things have happened.

As for the RJ''s at MDA accounting for part of the 279 fleet count, I think LavMan has shown that the language is there, in all the contracts, that will not allow them to be counted as a mainline airplane.


Again, this is just a different perspective on things.....take it for what you will.

 

[TailSpin]

----------------
On 5/13/2003 926 PM a320av8r wrote:

LavMan,
Our contract says the same thing. I''ll walk over any reductions below 279 as would most of the other pilots and employees.

----------------​

• The Company will maintain a minimum fleet size of 279 Total Mainline* Aircraft (inclusive of maintenance and spares), subject to a force majeure clause that includes acts of terrorism.

I would have to consider what Dave and Dave are doing "is" an act of terrorism.

 

[AP Tech]

----------------
On 5/13/2003 926 PM a320av8r wrote:

LavMan,
Our contract says the same thing. I''ll walk over any reductions below 279 as would most of the other pilots and employees.

----------------​

Its funny how now that "Labor Friendly Dave" is directly affecting more and more employees and reducing more and more everybody is ready to walk and talks about a contract. Read all the previous posts during the INITIAL giveback talks and the SECOND round of talks. Wake up people the writing is on the wall, "Dave" gets what he wants at any cost. To all the YES voters you are getting what you deserve, to all the NO voters at least we went down swinging. To quote many previous posts "We must give so U can survive and prosper in the future securing our jobs". Good luck to all!!

 

[USAirUnited]

United to Reinstate 162 Flights in June

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Bankrupt United Airlines said on Thursday that in June it would reinstate most of the domestic and transatlantic flights it had cut in April and May, when the war in Iraq curbed travel demand.


Wait a second here, I thought they were worse off then we were, and they are growing... Looks like demand is back up.
anyone else with some pithy comments on this.

 

[RowUnderDCA]

Well, it''s not pithy, but it''s obvious.

The flights that United is restoring from the "war cut" is equivalent to the flights that U didn''t cut and the ones that Siegel was presumably referring to. I suspect.... (well, guess) that Siegels ''in artful'' reference to misjudging the need to further cut the fleet is serving some other agenda. Like demonstrating to PIT that there very likely won''t be any mainline jets to serve the airport anyway. or some other posturing.

In my experience when folks say stuff with the wrong emphasis, or without including reference to obviously significant information (like the fact that U had OBVIOUSLY experienced MASSIVE cuts in service and fleet), it is because there is a reason for leaving that impression... even if it''s a stupid reason. Lowering expectations, generally, would be in the interest of U, wouldn''t it? I mean that''s not particularly venal or mendacious, just common human nature.

 

[2aislesmileJB]

Some people have Friends with benefits.
Dave Seigel has himself a regional airline with benefits.

Sex is great with SO MUCH less retained and recycled baggage than the actual dedication to the relationship. Hmm I think I get it now. Have a COMAIR style carrier in terms of your a/c and core route structure. Add a few decades of employee loyalty, mix in a couple of great Transatlantic flights (minus the once fabulous Envoy product) a week as well as a few Florida and transcon destinations to top it all off.....throw the s*** into a blender you got on sale just across the street from the bankruptcy court......TA' DAAAAA'......you've got yourself a purdy lil' airline at a DAMN CHEAP OPERATING COST. Unfortunately, they just have to drag the employees through the mud month after month until the whole damn company is furloughed or retired. If I were a slimy bastard, this is EXACTLY the gameplan I would follow.


1 year, 6 months, 19 days on furlough...and counting................

 

[gilbertguy]

----------------
On 5/19/2003 1:01:51 AM 2aislesmileJB wrote:

Some people have Friends with benefits.
Dave Seigel has himself a regional airline with benefits.

Sex is great with SO MUCH less retained and recycled baggage than the actual dedication to the relationship. Hmm I think I get it now. Have a COMAIR style carrier in terms of your a/c and core route structure. Add a few decades of employee loyalty, mix in a couple of great Transatlantic flights (minus the once fabulous Envoy product) a week as well as a few Florida and transcon destinations to top it all off.....throw the s*** into a blender you got on sale just across the street from the bankruptcy court......TA'' DAAAAA''......you''ve got yourself a purdy lil'' airline at a DAMN CHEAP OPERATING COST. Unfortunately, they just have to drag the employees through the mud month after month until the whole damn company is furloughed or retired. If I were a slimy bastard, this is EXACTLY the gameplan I would follow.


1 year, 6 months, 19 days on furlough...and counting................





2....you''re right....a lethal mixture.....
1 year, 4 months, 28 days.....no more counting.....