Halleluiah and Amen.Winglet said:
JetBlue's plan works for them... Not for US Airways. Reminds me of when CAL started CALite modelled after Southwest. Unfortunately, Southwest's model did work for CAL, and it won't work for UAIR... Just like JetBlue's model will not work for US Airways.
Boeing Boy... I would submit that US Airways has done a tiny bit of restructuring... It just has not been done with any vision of end-goal... No coordination... any many "big" items were missed. That is the problem.
For example, UAIR "restructured" its point-to-point networks from focus cities at DCA, LGA, and BOS (by downgrading it all to RJ's). I find it laughable that UAIR is looking for point-to-point opportunities when it gave away point-to-point markets to the competition (i.e. all of the LGA-Upstate NY traffic now flying via JFK/JetBlue).
I also recall something about UAIR consolidating 20+ health insurance plans into 1. That is a smart restructuring move...
Among the "BIG" things they missed:
FLEET RESTRUCTURING: Coming out of BK, UAIR should have restructured its fleet. It did not... Now, UAIR has two aircraft types for every mission:
A330/B767 for widebody intl
A321/B757 for narrow body intl and high-volume transcon
A320*/A319*/B733/B734 for narrow body short haul
* The A320 and A319 do have better range for thin transcon routes (like SNA or SEA), but US Airways has really not used the Airbuses for these kinds of operations in any large manner.
Something tells me that UAIR should have worked with Airbus to get a common fleet... Think of the cost-savings in training and parts once this is complete. They could have worked w/ Boeing instead... but during the Wolf years, UAIR went with Airbus, and it would be quicker to get to an Airbus Fleet vs. Boeing (because of the difference between B737-3/400 and NG and the closed B757 line).
ROUTE NETWORK: The rolling hub concept is a good one. But one that has not been implemented yet. The Caribbean expansion is a bright spot here... But the west should not be given to UAL. Also, I would have to think that utilization has fallen because of the focus and hub/spoke. Any efficiencies previously gained by having PHL-GSO aircraft turn to LGA instead of waiting for the next PHL bank is gone due to the "restructuring" of the LGA operation to all express.
PIT HUB: US Airways recognizes that the PIT hub is unprofitable... But instead of either commiting to make it work or getting rid of it, they negotiate in the media pitting employees vs. management vs. ACAA, etc. I don't recall any of this kind of publicity when America West closed its Columbus operation or when AA closed its Nashville hub. It seems to me those companies appeared to the outside world to be commited to their hubs, and only pulled the plug when it was absolutely necessary. Instead, US Airways basically threatens the PIT community after having held it hostage to high fares for years and years. This issue should have been solved in BK.
EXPRESS CARRIERS: US Airways has too many Express Carriers fling too many kinds of airplanes. I would have to think that AA and CO gain some management efficiencies by having only one (or now in AA's case a few) Express carrier. US Airways on the other hand... has 10 (3 wholly-owned), then starts to create a new one for a spin-off (DCAir), then another new one when that fell through (Mid-Atlantic), meanwhile they invest in Midway and add it as an Express carrier only to see it ultimately fail, encourage Chautauqua to start Republic to set up J4J which CHQ pilots rejected, and now start to combine the wholly-owneds, and start to form Mid-Atlantic as mainline instead of Express (which begs the question why start it at all, just add the EMB's to mainline anyway), etc, etc, etc.
Good grief... UAIR must have whole departments whose sole function is to keep all the Express stuff straight. Imagine how much more straight forward it would be if UAIR has three Express carriers: Chautauqua, Mesa, and USAir Express Airlines (the combined wholly-owneds). One - you get rid of three duplicative management structures at the three wholly owneds. Two - you make it explicitly clear where each operates and therefore there is no figuring out who flies what. I have noticed some markets that have 3 different Express carriers operating them... I have to think that is awfully confusing. Then you have to figure out how to pay 10 different companies, etc, etc. This entire area needs to be restructured, and BK would have been the place to do it, since BK allows you to void supplier contracts (Express carriers are suppliers of ASM's right?).
It seems to me that these BIG RESTRUCTURING items were not even touched upon during Bankrupcy because the plan was for a super-fast BK which only slashed employee wages but fixed none of the BIG problems. US Airways had no vision of what it wanted to do in BK, and still has no vision on what to do going forward. That is the problem. No restructuring will work until somebody has an idea of what the restructuring is supposed to create.
