That's all I'm saying. I would say 25% of airways hotels would not be allowed by most regionals contracts. Why is this? One guy told me it's always been this way at airways. Is that true? So I'm curious if the MOU will change this or the merger.

And I think it is stupid to say that one 'should have stayed away from this place' because a couple of the hundreds of hotels system wide are subpar.

With that said, I completely agree that they are poor and should be changed. Would I wish that I had stayed away from this place because a couple of crappy hotels? Nope.

It's not a few, it's most. If you have a half decent career and travel for bussiness, your company doesn't put you at the cheapest holiday inn or Fairfield that they can find in the metro area, they put you at a bussiness hotel downtown. Also if you work for a half decent regional airline and you have a long layover you stay at hilton or doubletree downtown. Obviously this is not the case at usair so something to think about to myself and anyone else that is looking to go there.

Gotcha. Well neither of the 2 regionals I worked for had short/long stay hotels. We always just stayed near the airport, and the hotels weren't any better than the hotels I've experienced thus far with airways. Different perspective based on past experiences, I guess.

Just curious...why would you compare a legacy to a regional in this particular topic?

Haven't most of the legacies traditionally been ahead of most of the outsourced companies in the realm of hotels for quite some time?

I'm not saying you have low hotel standards or something, don't take my post that way, but I'm just thinking that if you felt like a piece of the contract is lagging behind the competition, such as the hotel section, wouldn't it make sense to compare it to Delta/United/SWA etc. rather than a regional.

Side note, a bunch of regionals do have long/short but that is another topic.

The ENTIRE contract is lagging behind the competition. It's better than the regionals, but is far behind Delta/United/SWA. Hopefully this can all be improved upon if the merger goes through. If not, I'm not sure why anyone would work here if given the chance to work at one of the aforementioned companies.

It's not better than the regionals.

Ok I see what you mean then with the hotels.

I personally think the merge will happen with not much sacrifice required on the part of the companies...that will bring quite a bit of leverage.

Re: AA hotels. They have definitely gone south in quality (domestic, at least: international they remain quite good.) Remember that we're still in BK and suffering under management's free-for-alls as they exploit what they can. let me point out however that, during Bk, DL and UA went through their dark years in hotels as well. Once they came out and merged/became profitable, the new contracts addressed hotels and quality came up. We will be no different...

Thanks aa, can you give an example of a bad aa hotel?