Search
Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Scope, Scope, Scope!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-11-2010, 08:12 AM
  #11  
Underboob King
 
Superpilot92's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
Thumbs up

Not One More Pound, Seat, Jet Or Job!!!!
Superpilot92 is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 08:35 AM
  #12  
APC co-founder
 
HSLD's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Default

This post was taken from another forum but shed's light on the bias towards "regional" code share expansion.



Here's the blog in question.

Here's an earlier blog entry from the same author titled: PATIENCE AND PERSEVERANCE: TILTON WALKS IT LIKE HE TALKS IT.

The author, Swelbar, is a well-known "labor consultant" for management. Think about that for a moment and then consider this excerpt from last week's Plane Business Banter:
This issue of credibility of the message poked its ugly head out of the woodwork the last week or so, and it was you, my readers, that first alerted me to the problem.

This week's email bag had more than 60 complaints concerning what some saw as a "planted one-two punch" PR attempt to make United Airlines CEO Glenn Tilton look good.

The emails started coming after former industry labor consultant Bill Swelbar, who publishes the Swelblog blog, and who we profiled here many years ago in a PBB Lounge Lizard Interview, posted a blog post that was particularly complimentary to Mr. Tilton. "A truly gushing profile," as one PBB subscriber put it. Another subscriber wrote, "Something tells me that Swelbar has a little Tilton shrine built in his house."

Another subscriber wondered, "Holly, is Bill on Tilton's payroll or what?"

The title of this particular blog was "Patience and Perseverance: Tilton Walks It Like He Talks It." According to Bill, "We listen intently to Giovanni Bisignani, the CEO of IATA. But we do not listen enough to Tilton. Why? Because Tilton’s is a message of change not cluttered by this industry’s history, and some people don’t like the message."

The message? I don't mean to be overtly sarcastic here, but this comment reminds me of the joke those of us who observe the industry continued to use time and time again over the last 8 years or so -- every time Glenn Tilton spoke anywhere. The joke? Did he change his speech yet?

Because every time he spoke, no matter what the venue, or where, the message was always the same. Consolidation, consolidation, consolidation. Mixed in with a healthy amount of triangulation. Some of us began to believe he could deliver the speech in his sleep.

It was a fairly long post, and essentially read like the kind of "positive spin" positioning piece that politicians pay to have posted for themselves on the web.

The question of the "placement" of the column was also brought up big time the next day, after the daily news update from the Air Transport Association arrived in my email box. And what was the headlined "news" article for the day? You got it. A link to the Swelblog post.

As many of you are aware, the Air Transport Association contracts out with a vendor to send out a daily news compilation email. The company does the same thing for a number of other organizations.

On that day, the ATA daily email just happened to headline with Bill's blog post -- with the headline, "UA Chief Reiterates Need To Continue Prodding for Evolution."

As more than one of you noted, this cosmic coincidence might just possibly be related to the fact that Glenn Tilton presently serves as the President of the ATA.

We all know how these "plant" efforts work. The email piggybacked onto Bill's post. Bill's blog gets more hits and the clout from having the link in the email update, and the piece gets read far more widely than it would have otherwise.

The number and content of the comments I received this week suggest that ham-handed attempts to plant "positive spin" about someone in this industry or some company in this industry is risky whenever it is attempted. Credit the industry's built-in cynical nature. Credit the change in the way all of us look at information that is "out there" today. This isn't about whether or not you like Glenn Tilton.

Finally, I've known Bill for more than a few years. And I think any of us who have read his blog over the last couple of years is very well aware of his close ties to Glenn. It is what it is. I've talked to him about it before. One thing I do have to give him credit for -- I notice he does acknowledge that he owns shares of UAUA now. That was not always the case. So at least he took my advice on the matter of disclosure.
Somehow I suspect that the 'necessity' for mainline pilots to accept regional pay rates is not a coincidence in Swelbar's blog.....
HSLD is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 08:38 AM
  #13  
SDQ Base Chief
 
Flyby1206's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 320 CA
Posts: 5,583
Default

Originally Posted by wally24 View Post
There’s three questions I have?

1. When regional airlines make a profit, that just means the “mainlines” are paying too much for the regionals. It is profit that the legacies could be making on domestic flying. Why are they outsourcing the profit? After all Southwest would disagree with the domestic market not being profitable.
Regional carriers have (in the past, circa 200-2003) a much lower operating cost than the mainline counterparts. They could operate 100 RJs for the same price as mainline operating 50 RJs. More planes equals more market share, losing less pax to competition, etc.

SWA operates in a completely different ballgame compared to the legacies. I'm not saying they are better or worse than anyone, but it isnt fair to compare the two from a business model point of view.


Originally Posted by wally24 View Post
2. If pilots were to keep strong on scope in exchange for current payscales, what is stopping management from filing bankruptcy just to cancel contracts and leave the door open for more outsourcing?
I'm not sure the BK rules are just that simple...

Originally Posted by wally24 View Post
3. Although I feel scope is important, I feel domestic code sharing could be worse to the profession. What could you negotiate to stop domestic codesharing?
Codesharing is very very minimal in the overall revenue of an airline. The operating carrier in a codeshare receives ALL ticket revenue regardless of who actually sells the seat. The operating carrier will pay the codeshare partner a tiny amount of revenue that only covers the cost of marketing the seat that the codeshare partner sold.

Example: AA and AS are codeshare partners on Alaska Airlines flight 1234 ORD-SEA. AS operates the flight 1234, but AA can sell seats as AA flight 5678 even though it is AS metal. The ticket costs $100, and a customer books it through the aa.com website. AS receives $100, and might wind up paying AA $0.50 to cover the cost of AA marketing the flight.

Sounds like you might be thinking of Joint Venture agreements. That is where both airlines can cooperate and decide when to fly the flight, who will fly the metal, and how much it will cost. They can split the revenue between the two airlines however they want. This is much more intense, which is why all the Anti-Trust Immunity/Joint Venture agreements have "metal neutral" clauses that protect both parties from becoming extinct. There havent been any ATI/Joint Venture agreements signed for US Domestic flying, but I am wondering if that will be the future.


Originally Posted by wally24 View Post
I’m not sure where this industry is going but I think it is going to be a shift away from outsourcing of domestic flying. A few regionals have looked at, or are currently doing their own branded flying because regional contracts are becoming few and far between now.
Ya, I agree. Fee for departure flying is done for. There might be some small scale flying that is done by a 3rd party in the future, but not to the extent it is today.
Flyby1206 is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 09:24 AM
  #14  
APC co-founder
 
HSLD's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Default

Originally Posted by Flyby1206 View Post
Regional carriers have (in the past, circa 200-2003) a much lower operating cost than the mainline counterparts. They could operate 100 RJs for the same price as mainline operating 50 RJs. More planes equals more market share, losing less pax to competition, etc.
Do you have any examples of a regional airline operating a 100 seat jet vs. a mainline carrier operating a 50 seat jet where a fee for departure arrangement exists? I'd be really interested in seeing your assumptions. That's a rhetorical question of course, bypassing mainline scope provisions are airline management's wet dream, just ask Roger.
HSLD is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 09:29 AM
  #15  
SDQ Base Chief
 
Flyby1206's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 320 CA
Posts: 5,583
Default

Originally Posted by HSLD View Post
Do you any examples of a regional airline operating a 100 seat jet vs. a mainline carrier operating a 50 seat jet where a fee for departure arrangement exists? I'd be really interested in seeing your assumptions.
I think you misread my post, I meant that when looking at mainline and regional carriers operating the same exact equipment the regional could operate 100 of them and the mainline could operate 50 of them. There was a HUGE gap in operating costs when looking at Skywest's costs circa 2000 compared to UAL circa 2000. The previous person was asking why did the mainline company contract out that profit to a 3rd party (more airframes could be operated at a regional contractor than if they flew them in-house)
Flyby1206 is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 09:46 AM
  #16  
APC co-founder
 
HSLD's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Default

Originally Posted by Flyby1206 View Post
I think you misread my post, I meant that when looking at mainline and regional carriers operating the same exact equipment the regional could operate 100 of them and the mainline could operate 50 of them. There was a HUGE gap in operating costs when looking at Skywest's costs circa 2000 compared to UAL circa 2000. The previous person was asking why did the mainline company contract out that profit to a 3rd party (more airframes could be operated at a regional contractor than if they flew them in-house)
Oh, got it, thanks

I would add that in the pilot world, pilot's tend only look at pilot crew costs when the reality is also the CSR, mechanic, F/A, etc. costs that drives the CASM. When pilot labor costs are considered, it's only a portion of the total cost of delivering the lift.

Cheers-

Last edited by HSLD; 03-11-2010 at 10:08 AM.
HSLD is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 09:58 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Eric Stratton's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Default

Originally Posted by Flyby1206 View Post
SWA operates in a completely different ballgame compared to the legacies. I'm not saying they are better or worse than anyone, but it isnt fair to compare the two from a business model point of view.
What is it that they do differently that makes them uncomparable?

Is it that one makes money and the other really hasn't?
Eric Stratton is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 10:01 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
iPilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 638
Default

Originally Posted by HSLD View Post
I would add that in the pilot world, pilot's tend only look at pilot crew costs when the reality is that CSR, mechanic, F/A, etc. that drives the CASM. When pilot labor costs are considered, it's only a portion of the total cost of delivering the lift.
That's exactly why I don't get when management says "well we'd love to fly the 190 on our certificate but you're all just so darn expensive!" Average out the costs of the pilots and it costs each passenger pennies on their ticket price. They could double our pay with what they take in every year with surcharges like checked bag fees. It's all such a ruse. I'd bet real money that when CAL and AA wrap up negotiations without scope relief they'll be flying "large RJs" there in no time.
iPilot is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 10:22 AM
  #19  
APC co-founder
 
HSLD's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Default

Originally Posted by iPilot View Post
I'd bet real money that when CAL and AA wrap up negotiations without scope relief they'll be flying "large RJs" there in no time.
I hope your right, my opinion is that maintaining current scope and regaining scope lost in the last decade is one key to upward career movement for pilots now flying at regional airlines.
HSLD is offline  
Old 03-11-2010, 10:24 AM
  #20  
APC co-founder
 
HSLD's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Default

Originally Posted by iPilot View Post
It's all such a ruse.
From airline management? Gasp, Really?
HSLD is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
yamahas3
Major
27
02-12-2011 06:41 AM
Bucking Bar
Major
143
09-05-2009 04:39 PM
joel payne
Major
26
03-28-2009 07:12 PM
boilerpilot
Major
64
03-24-2009 02:00 PM
Daytripper
Major
4
08-19-2008 06:01 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices