Will Parker negotiate

[ChockJockey]

[background=rgb(250, 250, 250)]Attorney Generals[/background]

Attorneys general. They are not military officers with law degrees.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Actually Jim, it's Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.

It's a bit ironic that they named the airport after Reagan. He probably rarely used it, his homes being in California and the perimeter rule being in effect. And when he became president, he never used it since all his flights would have been in and out of Andrews AFB.

 

[gabby]

From Wiki...

In 1984 Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole appointed a commission to study transferring National and Dulles Airports from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to a local entity, which could use airport revenues to finance improvements.[sup][7][/sup] The commission recommended that one multi-state agency administer both Dulles and National, over the alternative of having Virginia control Dulles and the District of Columbia control National.[sup][7][/sup] In 1987 Congress, through legislation,[sup][12][/sup]transferred control of the airport from the FAA to the new Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority with the Authority's decisions being subject to a Congressional review panel. The constitutionality of the review panel was later challenged in the Supreme Court and the Court has twice declared the oversight panel unconstitutional.[sup][13][/sup] Even after this decision, however, Congress has continued to intervene in the management of the airports.[sup][14][/sup]
On February 6, 1998, President Bill Clinton signed legislation[sup][15][/sup] changing the airport's name from Washington National Airport to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, to honor the former president on his 87th birthday.[sup][16][/sup] The legislation, passed by Congress in 1998, was drafted against the wishes of MWAA officials and political leaders in Northern Virginia and Washington, D.C.[sup][17][/sup][sup][18][/sup] Opponents of the renaming argued that a large federal office building had already been named for Reagan (the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center) and that the airport was already named for a United States President (George Washington).[sup][18][/sup] The bill expressly stated that it did not require the expenditure of any funds to accomplish the name change; however, regional, state and federal authorities were later required to change highway and transit signs at their own additional expense as new signs were made.[sup][19][/sup][sup][20][/sup] To this day air traffic controlers in the airport's tower use the call sign "Washington Tower" or less frequently "National Tower". Pilots who call "Reagan Tower" are quickly corrected.

 

[USA320Pilot]

How Mergers are Reviewed by the Federal Government

Among the key provisions in U.S. antitrust law is one designed to prevent anticompetitive mergers or acquisitions. Under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, the FTC and the Department of Justice review most of the proposed transactions that affect commerce in the United States and are over a certain size, and either agency can take legal action to block deals that it believes would “substantially lessen competition.” Although there are some exemptions, for the most part current law requires companies to report any deal that is valued at more than $66 million to the agencies so they can be reviewed.

After the companies report a proposed deal, the agencies will do a preliminary review to determine whether it raises any antitrust concerns that warrant closer examination. Because the FTC and the Department of Justice share jurisdiction over merger review, transactions requiring further review are assigned to one agency on a case-by-case basis depending on which agency has more expertise with the industry involved. During the preliminary review, the parties must wait 30 days (15 days in the case of a cash tender or bankruptcy transaction) before closing their deal. Based on what the agency finds, it can: 1) terminate the waiting period and allow the parties to consummate their transaction (this action often is referred to as an “early termination” 2) let the waiting period to expire, which allows the parties to consummate the transaction; or 3) if the initial review has raised competition issues, the agency may extend the review and ask the parties to turn over more information so it can take a closer look at how the transaction will affect competition (this action often is referred to as a “second request.&rdquo.

The vast majority of deals reviewed by the FTC and the Department of Justice are allowed to proceed after the first, preliminary review.

However, if a second request is issued, the companies must provide more information. Once the parties have certified that they have substantially complied with the request, the Commission has 30 additional days (10 days in the case of a cash tender or bankruptcy transaction) to complete its review of the transaction and to take action if necessary. The agency may decide at this point to: 1) close the investigation; 2) enter into a settlement with the companies; 3) take legal action in federal district court or through the FTC’s administrative process to block the deal from going forward.

 

[wings396]

No, I didn't. I didn't say just "slot-controlled" airports. Senator Leghorn does not have to fly out of EWR, and EWR is not operated by the Federal Department of Transportation. Big difference there.

It's why I said DCA is a special case. There are parameters that apply only to DCA and to no other airport in the U.S. And, underlying those parameters is the politics involved.

But you did say that nothing had to be divested in EWR, and that isn't true.

 

[jimntx]

Well, let's see if we can pick some even smaller nits. The point I was trying to make is that what happened or did not happen at EWR has NOTHING to do with what happens or does not happen at DCA. And, the minutiae you are wrapped up in does not change that fact. Or, you can just go on bemoaning how US Airways and/or AA are not being treated fairly. Make yourself just as miserable as you wish. See how much the DOT and DOJ care about your opinion. (Possibly less than anyone on here does.)

 

[USA320Pilot]

Washington National: The tension between serving the most people and serving the most cities

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2013/07/washington-national-the-tension-between-serving-the-most-people-and-serving-the-most-cities.html/

 

[700UW]

http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/07/02/4978833/lawsuit-filed-by-consumers-seeks.html

A lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court in California seeks to block the merger between American Airlines and US Airways, claiming it would be bad for passengers.

Joseph Alioto, an antitrust attorney who has challenged other airline mergers, said the proposed deal to create the nation’s biggest airline would hurt consumers and drive up ticket prices.

Thirty-eight plaintiffs, including four Texas residents, are named in the suit, which was filed against US Airways. American and its parent company, AMR Corp., were not named as defendants because the Fort Worth-based carrier is operating under bankruptcy protection.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/07/02/4978833/lawsuit-filed-by-consumers-seeks.html#storylink=cpy​

 

[wings396]

Well, let's see if we can pick some even smaller nits. The point I was trying to make is that what happened or did not happen at EWR has NOTHING to do with what happens or does not happen at DCA. And, the minutiae you are wrapped up in does not change that fact. Or, you can just go on bemoaning how US Airways and/or AA are not being treated fairly. Make yourself just as miserable as you wish. See how much the DOT and DOJ care about your opinion. (Possibly less than anyone on here does.)

No need to get all twisted up there Jimmy Boy. I don't much care what does or doesn't happen in DCA. I merely brought out the fact that you were incorrect about nothing being divested in EWR with UA/CO, and you didn't like it. I'm fully aware that EWR and DCA are different animals, but either way something in EWR had to be divested to SWA to pacify them and a few others to get the deal done.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that anyone here values your opinions either......

 

[john john]

What do slots have to do with Union negotiations? You two posters, especially the one above, are totally out-to-lunch. Your bitterness at being utterly defeated by your "ineffective union" is showing..

http://cwa-agents.org/union-members-head-to-capitol-hill-to-save-dca-slots/

On July 9 and 10, a delegation of union members and company representatives went to Capitol Hill to educate Members of Congress about the need to save US Airways’ and American Airlines’ slots at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA).
Members of CWA, Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA-CWA), Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA), US Airline Pilots Association (USAPA), Allied Pilots Association (APA), and Transport Workers Union (TWU) met with the staffs of more than a dozen Senators, including Charles Schumer (NY), Maria Cantwell (WA), Elizabeth Warren (MA), Kristen Gillibrand (NY), and Amy Klobuchar (MN).
Last month, because of union members’ efforts, 106 Members of Congress and several Senators wrote to the Department of Justice and the Federal Aviation Administration, asking them to allow the new American Airlines to keep the slots and continue providing this valuable service.

 

[dash8roa]

Washington National: The tension between serving the most people and serving the most cities

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2013/07/washington-national-the-tension-between-serving-the-most-people-and-serving-the-most-cities.html/

Airways clogged the slots at LGA with many 35 seat Dash's that could have used those slots in accommodating larger aircraft to benefit the larger majority of flyers wishing to fly to New York. Just because a small city wants non-stop access to DCA should not be the determining factor. Like LGA, DCA has only 2 runways and that will never change so the focus should be on moving the most people per flight and let the small cities make one connection to reach DCA.
Perhaps if the small cities can reduce frequency and offer one daily mainline flight on a 100 seat plane, that would benefit all involved. Don't feel sorry for the small cities, they have their benefits, slower pace of life, less of the problems that face big cities, but small cities can't have it all. Move the larger number of people with larger aircraft to better utilize the slots.

 

[jimntx]

Dash, there you go again using logic. You must stop this. It isn't healthy. Service on the DCA-Podunk route has nothing to do whatsoever with serving the traveling public or logic. Service on that route has to do with the Congressman having a nonstop flight home.