https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...struction/amp/

“The airline estimated that it will cut a maximum of 40 arrivals and departures from previous estimates, while United will be required to shave off more than 200 flights for peak summer travel days.”

 

Probably the best result possible for AA.

 

As it should be considering it wasn't AA trying to start this mess, it was Kirby's attempt to "de-hub"

 

Certainly agree

 

I get the banter between difference pilot groups, but objectively speaking, it’s not “petty games.” If gate allocation is based off utilization and your competitor dumps a bunch of flights into ORD, the normal response is to dump a bunch of flights too.

Kirby told the company in a townhall that he would’ve rather not have gotten into ****ing match in ORD, but AA shoved a bunch of flights into Chicago so he was forced to respond (paraphrasing, of course).

We’ll see how this plays out for our respective carriers

 

And the reason AA did that was due to a backroom deal Kirby made with Chicago to steal some gates away that went against the post-COVID agreement the airlines had with Chicago. I know the lawsuit got thrown out but it wasn't because American's claim was wrong, it was more due to technicalities. Then the infamous "de-hubbing" slide presentation got leaked and all but forced AA's hand. So yes, it all started with UA and Kirby's ego.

 

So a slide with metrics and performance numbers showing UA winning ORD that would eventually force AA to de-hub is forcing AA’s hand?

I don’t recall the specific slide you mentioned, but our quarterly townhalls with the E-Team have slides with financial and operational numbers showing how United did compared to the rest of the industry. Doubt it was some sort of slide that was made specifically with the intention to force AA to do anything. If the slide was from the townhall, it’s public. If it was leaked from a management meeting then it was never meant for anyone (including AA) to see. Regardless, only AA decides how to react.

The reality is, Kirby can’t make anyone do anything they don’t want to. If AA management decided to react the way they did, that falls on them. Bobby Ice runs AA, not Kirby.

That said, idk Chicago politics. UA is the headquartered in Chicago so it would make sense for United to be favored. If UA started a war in DFW, the local politicians would probably side with AA. Same with ATL and Delta. Just the way it is

 

So what you are saying is you basically do not know the history at all of how this all started. Why are you in this thread and what exactly as a devote Kirbylite what are you defending? That United shouldn't have taken the lion share of cuts? Why?

 

I’m saying that some “leaked” slide of AA de-hubing ORD did not make Isom grow ORD by hundreds of flights. I’m also saying that it wasn’t “petty” that UA responded to AA by also adding flights.

I didn’t look into the details of the flight cuts so I won’t comment on that. Whatever comes of it, management will manage and I’ll fly the metal.

Some of you guys get wrapped all around the axel about Kirby. Anyone that goes against whatever narrative is popular at AA for the day is a “Kirbylite”. It’s just strange.

All this is business, not personal. As pilots, we’re all on the same side. Yet, some of yall make bashing UA, Kirby and UA pilots a personality trait. Relax, gents. It’s not that serious

 

It’s a huge strategic win for American management. I’m glad they’re not boasting about it. We know SK absolutely would be. AA intentionally pushed more connections through DFW-CLT-MIA after Covid as a strategy to convince those cities to award AA more gates—40 new gates awarded in DFW, 17 new gates in MIA, CLT estimate is around 10. They almost got burned in ORD by the city of Chicago. AA will be back to the amount of gates they wanted in ORD by next year.