Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)
-   -   AA pilots will sign a concessionary contract (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/45751-aa-pilots-will-sign-concessionary-contract.html)

eaglefly 11-18-2009 05:30 PM


Originally Posted by Dirty Rat (Post 714015)
I may be wrong but didn't Eagle have a "flow up" agreement with AA long before there was a flow down? I think you also have to look at "Career Expectation" in this thing. Is your desire to one day fly an AA 777 or 757, or, is your desire to keep flying an RJ? If it is the latter, you are doing it. If you want to move up in life and take their seats, do it like we all did. Apply and get hired. If not, when you are forced to take those jobs, at least acknowledge that you do not support management. It's that easy. In our case, RAH crews took our flying without one word on our behalf to their management. They couldn't look us in the eyes and when deadheading, they would slink down in the back like we didn't know they were there. Again, I have no idea of the relationship between AA and Eagle and I don't want to know when it all comes down to it. I do know that the Regional crews have got to start taking a stand when it comes to taking over mainline routes.

No there was no "flow up" prior to Letter 3/Suppliment W.

Many regional pilots are happy where they're at and don't see themselves as inferior needing to "move up in life" to validate their careers.

Aside from official statements of unhappiness with the evolution of domestic flying away from mainline carriers, what would you suggest regional pilots legally do to change things ?

buddies8 11-18-2009 06:29 PM


Originally Posted by B757200ER (Post 713908)
I understand this is an emotional issue for you, but could you provide specific examples of that? I'm not sure any of that is true.

As far as 'flying they never did', can you imagine how MidEx pilots flying MD88s/717s felt when RAH came in, and systematically replaced ALL their flying on ALL their routes with E-190s and RAH pilots? It could happen again, trust me. The more AMR Eagle grows, the less markets/flights AA has and the smaller the number of mainline jet jobs for aspiring pilots to apply for. It could even result in furloughs.


Like it or not, RAH bought YX and is free to do as they please. I dont like it, but if I bought a car from my neighbor, they are not going to tell me how to drive it.

mccube5 11-18-2009 06:38 PM


Originally Posted by buddies8 (Post 714090)
Like it or not, RAH bought YX and is free to do as they please. I dont like it, but if I bought a car from my neighbor, they are not going to tell me how to drive it.

ding ding ding....someone will come and explain how, well you fill in the blank.

at the end of the day mgmt made the decision to buy and sell the place and everyone else are just pawns in the game.

Phrog Phlyer 04-18-2010 08:22 PM

True and just as it always is. Both AA and TWA took over many different routes from failed or failing airlines with no complaint. Hardly anybody complains when it is happening to other pilots. The complaints only come from pilots where it is happening to them.

atp409 04-19-2010 06:04 PM


Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 712596)
I'm not in your airline(s), but would it be rude to ask how shifting the flying to one particular regional is better than shifting it to another?

Eagle flying does more for AMR shareholders than republic flying would for AMR. Eagle is wholly owned, the money stays in house rather than making someone who flies for AA's competitors rich.

Pineapple Guy 04-20-2010 03:09 AM


Originally Posted by atp409 (Post 798478)
Eagle flying does more for AMR shareholders than republic flying would for AMR. Eagle is wholly owned, the money stays in house rather than making someone who flies for AA's competitors rich.

Not trying to be argumentative, but this is not necessarily true. While it is true that the revenue stays inside AMR, its also true that the expenses do too. Thus, if the NET of revenue over expenses is greater at REP than Eagle, it makes sense to out source.

Don't like it -- but those are the facts, from a purely accounting perspective.

acl65pilot 04-20-2010 04:35 AM

PG, true to a point if you are not on a cost plus contract. With our historical margins over the last decade that means that the mainline balance sheet is net negative plus the profit they are paying for the FFD or Cost Plus Air Service Agreements. It could be argued that under these types of agreements AME-Eagle actually cost AMR less money than DAL's outsourcing scheme.

I had the numbers a few years ago, but the profit that DCi was getting from operating their flights was over 500 million a year. That is a lot of money.

Of course we are going away from this model, but it is going to take something to make these operators willingly give up their profits. What will it be? More jets, jets from other operations? Maybe will will just not renew these contracts when they come due, but that is a long time to be deal with this issue.

Beagle Pilot 04-20-2010 05:08 AM


Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 798560)
Not trying to be argumentative, but this is not necessarily true. While it is true that the revenue stays inside AMR, its also true that the expenses do too. Thus, if the NET of revenue over expenses is greater at REP than Eagle, it makes sense to out source.

Don't like it -- but those are the facts, from a purely accounting perspective.

True. Of course the key word is "if". Since you seem to know something about accounting, you can understand how being able to control and consolidate costs can be advantageous to a corporation. When working with a feeder airline, the costs of the employees, training, maintenance, facilities, aircraft and so forth are about about the same. If the feeder airline is independent, then it's management and investors want to make a profit. Otherwise they'd do like Midwest did and sell out in order to go into another business.

Consolidating purchases of consumables, sharing gates, training facilities, management, etc. assists the bottom line. While it does involve more work to operate a second airline, the profit margin makes it worth the effort.

Don't believe me? Look at the results. If Eagle wasn't worth the effort, we'd have been gone yesterday. While it is true AMR has tried to sell us or portions of us in the past, this has more to do with Scope clause restrictions than a pure business decision. The last time AMR was close to selling Eagle it's rumored that the buyer balked at all the strings which were attached to the deal.

AAflyer 04-21-2010 06:30 AM


Originally Posted by eaglefly (Post 714007)
Amen here as well, brother.

The APA wants to "come in and take it"............ALL of it and has little desire to absorb us.............well, perhaps preferential interviews for RJ F/O positions when their furloughees have vacated them.

The bottom 2/3 of our senioirty list would be kicked to the curb MidEx style in a heartbeat.

You see ?

We're not so different after all.....................

ALPA Eagle and many of your brothers and sisters would like to take the 100 seat flying, which would put 1/3 of our guys on the street with the immediate parking of Super 80s... I can't imagine you wanting to give us anything more than preferential interviews for the FO positions.

ALPA Eagle is no different than APA. Each self serving, and protecting their own members... It will not change, and many have no desire to see it change.

Many including our own and dear beloved Beagle pilot routinely criticize APA, yet ALPA (and ALPA Eagle) acts no differently.

AA

AA

aa73 04-21-2010 08:48 AM

Hear, hear!


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:33 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands