US Pilot Labor Thread--11/16-23
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
Bus Driver
Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2004
- Messages
- 60
- Reaction score
- 2
Dear able...able,
Mostly a lurker, but let me bring up the one thing that you westies don't seem to understand.
The big issues for most east pilots with the Nic award.
1. It is "not about today" It is all about tomorrow. It is about having younger pilots, with much less LOS/DOH placed ahead of east pilots. This is a permanent placement. One of the only things the east pilots had left was the attrition that the future held. Now the younger West pilots capture the attrition, instead of the East pilots who have been waiting years. It is all about the attrition. There are many examples of east pilots who will have 35+ years and still be 500+ numbers down the seniority list. Out of these 500 pilots, only a handful will have more than 20+ years. For an East pilot, the difference is between being number 5 and number 555. For a West pilot, the difference is between being number 250 and number 257. For many east pilots, the number is a difference of 700+ numbers, the difference between years of widebody Captain and not - big bucks and big way of life. It is huge for the east pilots, not so much for the west guys.
2. The east pilots agreed to ALPA merger policy which included binding arbitration. Think about this . . . the east pilots agreed to binding arbitration that followed ALPA merger policy. The issue for the east guys, is that the arbitrator did not follow ALPA merger policy. Its not an integrity thing, not a "final and binding" thing, its the deal that we agreed to wasn't followed by the parties. ALPA should have fixed it, but didn't and they were removed. ALPA even said it publically, many times that they had issues with the award, but they didn't fix it. USAPA was a last resort for the east.
Just a few thoughts on your comments, with all respect . . .
you wrote:
The west pilots are attempting to preserve what they had prior to the merger and not move backward.
my comment: We are separate ops, we are reaping what we had prior to the merger. PHX and LAS have seen a drawdown due to the market. many East pilots have lost the left seat (again). I have and I would never ask for a west captain seat even though they are 13 years junior to me, they keep what they brought, I have to wait for the east attrition to kick in (or growth) That said, I do want the east attrition, not give it to the west guys. That happens under NIC with no fences and no C&R.
You wrote:
Because the west pilots do not want to sacrifice their careers to pay for the problems that the east pilots encountered prior to the merger you see us as self centered children.
my comment:
What is your sacrifice? Merger or no merger, the economy and markets change. We are separate ops, east and west. All that the east guys want is their attrition and to share in the growth. If you look at the models down the road, the west inherits the airline, and the widebody flying you did not bring to the airline, even with a DOH/LOS list.
You wrote:
Jim's simple explanation of seniority is probably the best so I will cite it here. He maintained that a true measure of seniority is to asses how your bidding horsepower compares pre and post merger. After integration, given no growth or contraction, if you can hold the same equipment, seat, schedule, vacation etc. as you could prior to the merger, then the lists have been fairly combined.
My comments:
This is fine for a snapshot in time. Right this very minute. Right when the NIC award was announced. It does not work moving forward, and that is 99% of the issues that the east pilots have. It also contradicts all union principles. Look at the other unions. What did they do? Why? Because it works in the long term.
You wrote:
DOH/LOS with C&Rs would not produce this result. We would see the eventual trading of fortunes. Indeed it has already started. Furloughed east pilots are now doing the jobs brought to the merger by (now) furloughed west pilots. There are west captains now in the right seat and east F.O.s in the left seat. An integrated LOS list would only exacerbate this effect. You consider this a fair and just ends because east pilots worked longer for USAir than west pilots worked for America West.
My Comments:
This is basically false. The west furloughs and west downgrades are because the west flying, under separate ops has been reduced. I have lost the left seat on the east as have many of my peers, and many east pilots are furloughed too, because of the reductions in east flying. Show me where east pilots have moved west and caused west furloughs. again, lets be clear here . . . separate ops.
You wrote:
This longer tenure confers no special privileges or protections, nor should it do so. (That's why we call it a seniority list, not a longevity list.) The fact that you are so hung up on the fact that east pilots have been working at their old carrier longer and therefore deserve special consideration tells me that your ego is effecting your point of view. Because you worked for a company that existed prior to deregulation you were well compensated and I congratulate you for that. I hope that you were able to use the purchasing power of those dollars to make strong investments. You have already been compensated for your prior service.
You were also hired in at a time when it was easier to get a major airline job. By your own admission you had less than four thousand hours when a USAir predecessor company hired you. This does not impugn your qualifications it just is the what the hiring market allowed at the time. Most of the AWA new hires had five to eight thousand hours, jet PIC and management experience when they were offered employment.
The fact that you are older and worked for an older company longer than we worked at a younger company has no and should have no bearing on the seniority integration.
My comments:
The fact is this, the east pilots have more time in service. This is recognized in most companies, and especially in unions. Hell, it is even recognized in my family, I bet if you have kids, you exercise it too. Its all about "seniority" and the reason seniority has been around for so long . . . is it works.
Back in the mid-80's, UPS didn't exist or was just an upstart flight department, no one wanted to work for SWA, FEDEX was an all night freight outfit. The premiere pilot airlines were Piedmont, USAir, and Western. We all applied and we got hired by the best airline that was at the time "the one who called with a class date first" The airline business has survived many years, and the pilot ranks have too. Much of this history has been bad and unfortunate, some of it, downright criminal. If the lists ever get away from seniority as a cornerstone, the bedrock of what it is all based upon, then we get into brown-nosing and favorites and ability and office favorites. To be honest, I do quite well under those parameters . . . would you? So, to abandon seniority, or LOS or DOH, or the bedrock of unionism, would be to destroy the profession itself.
In my opinion, the NIC award is the first step to just that.
Just as the westies here shout for the east pilots to be "free thinkers" and have integrity. I ask the same of the west posters here. Look to the future. You will see the rewards of DOH/LOS and seniority for the majority of the west guys as they inherit this airline. But beyond that, you will see all pilots benefit from the core principles of unionism, of life, and of living.
back to lurking . . . .
Bus Driver
Mostly a lurker, but let me bring up the one thing that you westies don't seem to understand.
The big issues for most east pilots with the Nic award.
1. It is "not about today" It is all about tomorrow. It is about having younger pilots, with much less LOS/DOH placed ahead of east pilots. This is a permanent placement. One of the only things the east pilots had left was the attrition that the future held. Now the younger West pilots capture the attrition, instead of the East pilots who have been waiting years. It is all about the attrition. There are many examples of east pilots who will have 35+ years and still be 500+ numbers down the seniority list. Out of these 500 pilots, only a handful will have more than 20+ years. For an East pilot, the difference is between being number 5 and number 555. For a West pilot, the difference is between being number 250 and number 257. For many east pilots, the number is a difference of 700+ numbers, the difference between years of widebody Captain and not - big bucks and big way of life. It is huge for the east pilots, not so much for the west guys.
2. The east pilots agreed to ALPA merger policy which included binding arbitration. Think about this . . . the east pilots agreed to binding arbitration that followed ALPA merger policy. The issue for the east guys, is that the arbitrator did not follow ALPA merger policy. Its not an integrity thing, not a "final and binding" thing, its the deal that we agreed to wasn't followed by the parties. ALPA should have fixed it, but didn't and they were removed. ALPA even said it publically, many times that they had issues with the award, but they didn't fix it. USAPA was a last resort for the east.
Just a few thoughts on your comments, with all respect . . .
you wrote:
The west pilots are attempting to preserve what they had prior to the merger and not move backward.
my comment: We are separate ops, we are reaping what we had prior to the merger. PHX and LAS have seen a drawdown due to the market. many East pilots have lost the left seat (again). I have and I would never ask for a west captain seat even though they are 13 years junior to me, they keep what they brought, I have to wait for the east attrition to kick in (or growth) That said, I do want the east attrition, not give it to the west guys. That happens under NIC with no fences and no C&R.
You wrote:
Because the west pilots do not want to sacrifice their careers to pay for the problems that the east pilots encountered prior to the merger you see us as self centered children.
my comment:
What is your sacrifice? Merger or no merger, the economy and markets change. We are separate ops, east and west. All that the east guys want is their attrition and to share in the growth. If you look at the models down the road, the west inherits the airline, and the widebody flying you did not bring to the airline, even with a DOH/LOS list.
You wrote:
Jim's simple explanation of seniority is probably the best so I will cite it here. He maintained that a true measure of seniority is to asses how your bidding horsepower compares pre and post merger. After integration, given no growth or contraction, if you can hold the same equipment, seat, schedule, vacation etc. as you could prior to the merger, then the lists have been fairly combined.
My comments:
This is fine for a snapshot in time. Right this very minute. Right when the NIC award was announced. It does not work moving forward, and that is 99% of the issues that the east pilots have. It also contradicts all union principles. Look at the other unions. What did they do? Why? Because it works in the long term.
You wrote:
DOH/LOS with C&Rs would not produce this result. We would see the eventual trading of fortunes. Indeed it has already started. Furloughed east pilots are now doing the jobs brought to the merger by (now) furloughed west pilots. There are west captains now in the right seat and east F.O.s in the left seat. An integrated LOS list would only exacerbate this effect. You consider this a fair and just ends because east pilots worked longer for USAir than west pilots worked for America West.
My Comments:
This is basically false. The west furloughs and west downgrades are because the west flying, under separate ops has been reduced. I have lost the left seat on the east as have many of my peers, and many east pilots are furloughed too, because of the reductions in east flying. Show me where east pilots have moved west and caused west furloughs. again, lets be clear here . . . separate ops.
You wrote:
This longer tenure confers no special privileges or protections, nor should it do so. (That's why we call it a seniority list, not a longevity list.) The fact that you are so hung up on the fact that east pilots have been working at their old carrier longer and therefore deserve special consideration tells me that your ego is effecting your point of view. Because you worked for a company that existed prior to deregulation you were well compensated and I congratulate you for that. I hope that you were able to use the purchasing power of those dollars to make strong investments. You have already been compensated for your prior service.
You were also hired in at a time when it was easier to get a major airline job. By your own admission you had less than four thousand hours when a USAir predecessor company hired you. This does not impugn your qualifications it just is the what the hiring market allowed at the time. Most of the AWA new hires had five to eight thousand hours, jet PIC and management experience when they were offered employment.
The fact that you are older and worked for an older company longer than we worked at a younger company has no and should have no bearing on the seniority integration.
My comments:
The fact is this, the east pilots have more time in service. This is recognized in most companies, and especially in unions. Hell, it is even recognized in my family, I bet if you have kids, you exercise it too. Its all about "seniority" and the reason seniority has been around for so long . . . is it works.
Back in the mid-80's, UPS didn't exist or was just an upstart flight department, no one wanted to work for SWA, FEDEX was an all night freight outfit. The premiere pilot airlines were Piedmont, USAir, and Western. We all applied and we got hired by the best airline that was at the time "the one who called with a class date first" The airline business has survived many years, and the pilot ranks have too. Much of this history has been bad and unfortunate, some of it, downright criminal. If the lists ever get away from seniority as a cornerstone, the bedrock of what it is all based upon, then we get into brown-nosing and favorites and ability and office favorites. To be honest, I do quite well under those parameters . . . would you? So, to abandon seniority, or LOS or DOH, or the bedrock of unionism, would be to destroy the profession itself.
In my opinion, the NIC award is the first step to just that.
Just as the westies here shout for the east pilots to be "free thinkers" and have integrity. I ask the same of the west posters here. Look to the future. You will see the rewards of DOH/LOS and seniority for the majority of the west guys as they inherit this airline. But beyond that, you will see all pilots benefit from the core principles of unionism, of life, and of living.
back to lurking . . . .
Bus Driver
ableoneable
Veteran
- Joined
- May 6, 2007
- Messages
- 711
- Reaction score
- 0
First, thanks for the civil response, devoid of sarcasm and melodrama.
One by one.
1. Your argument about the capturing of east attrition has some merit but not as much as you ascribe. Quite a bit of the east attrition came out of the right seat and would have led to zero upgrades. The arbitrator was charged with looking at the situation in the here and now and gave less weight to the future. This is a valid approach. Look at USAir in the ten to fifteen years prior to the merger; there was a lot of attrition during that time frame but it led to no upgrade or advancement opportunities for the junior pilots.
The arguement that a pilot was on track to be number 5 but will now be number 500 is also unpersuasive. For an arbitrator to give this approach weight the likely futures of the individual companies would have also had to have been weighted into the decision. Many east posters have objected to the hypothetical demise of the old USAir as an issue in the arbitration. If this argument is to be considered then the condition of an independent USAir must also be included in the decision tree. Number one on the list of a defunct company is worth considerably less than number 500 of a viable enterprise. The former argument can not exist in a vacuum absent the latter.
2. You are going to have to outline where you think the arbitrator diverged from ALPA merger policy. (I am not baiting you as I do not know your personal view on this matter.)
Others have expressed the same opinion but have utilized circular logic; i.e. ALPA merger policy is supposed to provide a fair outcome: the arbitrated outcome does not match my perception of fairness: ergo the arbitrator did not follow ALPA merger policy.
You state that ALPA should have "fixed" the award. They did all that they could to re-write the rules and give the east another bite of the apple. The only reason ALPA national did not set aside the award was because there was no mechanism that allowed them to do so. The award did comply with their merger policy and they were therefore stuck.
3. Separate ops is still in effect but the borders of the two airlines are now gone. Trying to argue that the drawdowns are "in the west" is a specious argument because the airline is steered by management as though it were a single entity. Because management "runs"a single airline it is no longer possible to ascribe strength or weakness to east or west. If we are going to follow this route then we need to acknowledge that America West Airllnes was making USAir's payroll between the time the merger was announced and the time it was consummated. We must also still see these two as separate generators of revenue and overhead. Because this would involve an extremely high level of prognostication: (What would AWA or AAA have done in this environment had they been independent competitors?) It is impossible to determine.
4. The issue of "seniority" is still confusing to many. It is used to set your position in your company but not another.
Ten years at AMR is not equal to ten years at AAA, which is not equal to ten years at JetBlue, which is not equal to ten years at WN, which is not equal to ten years at Alaska etc. etc.
We do not have a national seniority list. The fact that east pilots desperately and retroactively wish it so, does not make it so.
5. With respect to "inheriting the airline" and the wide body flying:
As I stated earlier, because the future is always an unknown, the arbitrator is charged with considering the here and now above future prognostications. It would be impossible to craft a solution that was fair over time for every point in time.
The argument that any pilot was certain to retire at number one or five or 200 was always weak. The old USAir had a very unlikely future. The current USAir has a very uncertain future. The odds are that there will not be an airline to inherit. I am interested in what is fair today, tomorrow, next year etc. with less and less emphasis as time passes.
As far as the wide body flying is concerned: I would have found it perfectly acceptable, if as a result of negotiations, there was a restriction that every east pilot must have an opportunity to fly the core widebody fleet (either seat) before any west pilot had the opportunity. The problem is discussions never reached this phase.
The east had one unchanging position. At the first day of negotiations it was DOH.
At the last arbitration session, when the arbitrator asked the east if they were really, really sure they did not want to make any modification to their position, the answer was still DOH.
At Wye River the east offered the same concept.
There may have been a more palatable solution than the one offered by George Nicolau but the east was not interested in anything but their one and only offering.
One by one.
1. Your argument about the capturing of east attrition has some merit but not as much as you ascribe. Quite a bit of the east attrition came out of the right seat and would have led to zero upgrades. The arbitrator was charged with looking at the situation in the here and now and gave less weight to the future. This is a valid approach. Look at USAir in the ten to fifteen years prior to the merger; there was a lot of attrition during that time frame but it led to no upgrade or advancement opportunities for the junior pilots.
The arguement that a pilot was on track to be number 5 but will now be number 500 is also unpersuasive. For an arbitrator to give this approach weight the likely futures of the individual companies would have also had to have been weighted into the decision. Many east posters have objected to the hypothetical demise of the old USAir as an issue in the arbitration. If this argument is to be considered then the condition of an independent USAir must also be included in the decision tree. Number one on the list of a defunct company is worth considerably less than number 500 of a viable enterprise. The former argument can not exist in a vacuum absent the latter.
2. You are going to have to outline where you think the arbitrator diverged from ALPA merger policy. (I am not baiting you as I do not know your personal view on this matter.)
Others have expressed the same opinion but have utilized circular logic; i.e. ALPA merger policy is supposed to provide a fair outcome: the arbitrated outcome does not match my perception of fairness: ergo the arbitrator did not follow ALPA merger policy.
You state that ALPA should have "fixed" the award. They did all that they could to re-write the rules and give the east another bite of the apple. The only reason ALPA national did not set aside the award was because there was no mechanism that allowed them to do so. The award did comply with their merger policy and they were therefore stuck.
3. Separate ops is still in effect but the borders of the two airlines are now gone. Trying to argue that the drawdowns are "in the west" is a specious argument because the airline is steered by management as though it were a single entity. Because management "runs"a single airline it is no longer possible to ascribe strength or weakness to east or west. If we are going to follow this route then we need to acknowledge that America West Airllnes was making USAir's payroll between the time the merger was announced and the time it was consummated. We must also still see these two as separate generators of revenue and overhead. Because this would involve an extremely high level of prognostication: (What would AWA or AAA have done in this environment had they been independent competitors?) It is impossible to determine.
4. The issue of "seniority" is still confusing to many. It is used to set your position in your company but not another.
Ten years at AMR is not equal to ten years at AAA, which is not equal to ten years at JetBlue, which is not equal to ten years at WN, which is not equal to ten years at Alaska etc. etc.
We do not have a national seniority list. The fact that east pilots desperately and retroactively wish it so, does not make it so.
5. With respect to "inheriting the airline" and the wide body flying:
As I stated earlier, because the future is always an unknown, the arbitrator is charged with considering the here and now above future prognostications. It would be impossible to craft a solution that was fair over time for every point in time.
The argument that any pilot was certain to retire at number one or five or 200 was always weak. The old USAir had a very unlikely future. The current USAir has a very uncertain future. The odds are that there will not be an airline to inherit. I am interested in what is fair today, tomorrow, next year etc. with less and less emphasis as time passes.
As far as the wide body flying is concerned: I would have found it perfectly acceptable, if as a result of negotiations, there was a restriction that every east pilot must have an opportunity to fly the core widebody fleet (either seat) before any west pilot had the opportunity. The problem is discussions never reached this phase.
The east had one unchanging position. At the first day of negotiations it was DOH.
At the last arbitration session, when the arbitrator asked the east if they were really, really sure they did not want to make any modification to their position, the answer was still DOH.
At Wye River the east offered the same concept.
There may have been a more palatable solution than the one offered by George Nicolau but the east was not interested in anything but their one and only offering.
nostradamus
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,038
- Reaction score
- 0
At the last session, the West was also asked to make modifications, they declined.
At the Wye River conference, after the flawed award, West declined to make modifications. The result, West furloughs and separate ops.
Freighterguynow
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,276
- Reaction score
- 1,207
Block hours down in Las Vegas by 25% ( in line with all the other 'single' airlines in the industry ),
Phoenix cut by 10%,
Charlotte and Phliiy by 2-3% domestically but 4 new international destinations added.
Seems pretty clear to me where the weakness is.
If this list was slotted by relative position you might be right, but it wasn't. Show me how the top 500 east pilots were slotted. Why do they deserve the top spots with all it brings with it. To protect the widebody flying? Fences could have taken care of that without giving them super seniority in the west bases. If Mr. 942PS is who I think he is, I believe he is more interested in a PHX A320 than a PHL A330. He would be at the top over there, something he had no expectation of.
This list was a mixture of DOH, random slotting and a staple job. Unfair to many, but mostly the east long term furloughed pilots.
Nicolau was a nut-look at what he has given us. For all the anger around here, more should go his way.
But you are right, it's up to a judge now and all this BSing doesn't really matter.
Nice response
On the highlighted parts of your post, on the Nic award.
The Alpa merger policy was followed, once in arbitration the arbitor does not need to conform to any rule, hence the term "arbitrary". Look it up.
On the further, the east during the Alpa hearings on the award agreed the process was sound. And continuing, the company has accepted the award as it was in compliance with their requirements.
On to the other highlighed section on east attrition. The only atrtrition the old usair has had is been in the loss of jobs due to furloughs. You make this argument yourself as you state you are waiting for it to kick in, it will not. usair is doing what it always does, merge and continue to die.
I was involved in gap analysis dicussions, when usair people talked, they spoke in terms of RIF, when America West people spoke it was in terms of upward movement. It was very difficult to get on the same page because neither side could understand the others language.
The Nic is it, and usapa will adopt it or fail.
HF
Pacemaker
Senior
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2002
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 0
I think it's crystal clear where the weakness is; we've learned the same sad lesson the PSA & Piedmont folks learned. SFO LAX SAN DAY MIA BWI
Before the merger, AWA & WN CASM 7-8 cents
now, usair 20c, WN 10c
cleardirect
Veteran
- Joined
- May 24, 2008
- Messages
- 6,234
- Reaction score
- 9,749
Do you think that separate ops is sustainable into the near (1-2 years) or distant (5-10 years) future?
If so what will be the financial loss for both sides be? No new contracts. What happens if the east coast takes a big economic hit? Reverse the situation say a 10-15% cut in east flying. 300 furloughs only from the east. Still willing to operate under separate ops?
E
EastUS
Guest
"Do you think that separate ops is sustainable into the near (1-2 years) or distant (5-10 years) future?" Three years and counting thus far.....
"No new contracts." Wouldn't be any ratified by the east with nic in them...What's your point?
"What happens if the east coast takes a big economic hit?" That would reflect an economic hit on a national level, not to be confused with leaisure travel by itself. New York/Boston/PHL/DCA/etc are not comparable to the PHX market in any way.
"Reverse the situation say a 10-15% cut in east flying. 300 furloughs only from the east. Still willing to operate under separate ops?" Yes. What I feel that you fail to understand here is that the east group has previously seen more furlough losses numbers than AWA has ever even had as pilots. That, of itself, serves to further highlight the need for meaningful and actual, versus "relative" seniority..whatever the heck "relative seniority" actually means, as anything other a moment's fantasy. Our perspectives can't be expected to be at all similar on such issues.
sharktooth
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2006
- Messages
- 1,846
- Reaction score
- 0
The bearded butman told me the company _first_ asked for a frozen plan nine months prior to it being given away, well after Davis retired. The MEC sat on it, with no response.
That is not to say the company has not been asking for the termination each negotiation. After all, contrary to what many pilots seemed to think, that is management's job, to reduce costs.
OBTW, your comment about unemployment percentages spans a major change, rendering at least that part of the comment wrong. Now, a 6% unemployment figure is in reality about 11%, as measured prior to Reagan, whose administration changed a lot of accounting rules, removing accountability and oversight.
E
EastUS
Guest
"I was involved in gap analysis dicussions, when usair people talked, they spoke in terms of RIF, when America West people spoke it was in terms of upward movement."
Interesting. Which of those models has proved itself to be accurate?
"The Nic is it, and usapa will adopt it or fail." Uh Huh...ummm...sure, if you say so....."So let it be written". For USAPA to adopt the nic..well..gosh.."all" it has to do is completely disregard it's charter, and then convince all the east people to vote the whole happy package, and future contract containing it, into being. Alpa couldn't begin to pull even the ear tips of that rabbit from it's hat, and it was the proud father of the Nic. The west contingent has worked so very hard to further endear themselves to all out east in the meanwhile, so naturally; enthusiasim for super-"seniority" for the west is definately at an all time high nowadays, Oh Well = You do the math.
Phoenix
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2003
- Messages
- 8,584
- Reaction score
- 7,430
It is ironic how the West waxes long about how USAir has repeatedly stepped up to the edge of the cliff and starred down into the abyss of financial extinction...
How can AWA observe the repeated financial exposure USAir has had but miss the obvious immunity from fear that USAir has built up over the last decade or so? Get it yet?
Apathy has no fear. Whatever dude..
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
A situation created by the merger, seperate ops or not. HP had a cost structure significantly lower that LCC's, while US had a cost structure somewhat higher than LCC's. Without the merger, some/many/most of those "unprofitable" West routes would have still been economically feasible because of HP's lower cost structure. Likewise, absent the merger some/many of those "profitable" East routes would not have been economically viable because of US' higher cost structure.
Jim
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2002
- Messages
- 2,627
- Reaction score
- 945
Pretty hard to talk about CASM without reference to RASM, a number which the East side is ALMOST ALWAYS tops in the industry.
A lot of carriers with low CASM have gone broke. In fact, I'd bet most do, since they can't generate enough revenue to keep going. If CASM were the only measure, AWA would have been an industry behemoth. Guess what? It wasn't.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
