|
AA, AE merger
I have been hearing some back ground chatter from eclectic sources that an AA, AE merger is in the works. There are a lot of things going on that could be behind it. Any Eagle guys out there here anything about this?
|
Yea, this was the hot rumor that started it:
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/re...g-numbers.html New AMR rumours! Categories: American Airlines, American Eagle Though most of what I'm posting is at this point rumor and has been burning the phone lines all weekend in Chicago ... sources that wish to stay nameless will only confirm that there will major changes coming to AA & AE and a major announcement by the end of the month. For AE there was a legal deadline coming up on 18 January in regards to grievances and court cases in connection to pilot issues. It's to confusing here to explain it all. However, prior to the deadline AMR came to the unions with ways to clear the books and set the stage for the future for both AA & AE. Piece things together from all the different sources and you will get a clear picture that AA is looking to create extraordinary changes. • AA (ALPA) & AE (APA) are close to agreeing and signing (if they have not already done so) to combine both the AE pilots seniority list with the AA pilots seniority list. Creating 1 single seniority list for the pilots between both divisions of AMR. • This agreement would allow AE pilots to cross over into the AA operation when opening occur, while AA pilots could cross over to the AE system in the same manner. Which ever pilot crosses over to the other side would retain company seniority, but enter the other side on the junior scale. But, the restriction to crossing between AA & AE would be gone. • This agreement would remove the past restrictions on the size and "scope" of what aircraft AE operations. Now hold on your knickers and you'll see why the buzz about blew Chicago apart today. • AA signs a letter of intent with Bombardier for a large AE order for the new 130 seat CRJ. With the removal of the scope clause it releases AE to fly any aircraft. • AE will have a major expansion as we take over a huge amount of AA domestic flying, while AA decreases their domestic flying. AA will need less F/A's. • AA goes to cross utilization for the F/A's and one reserve pool instead of it's current domestic & international operations. AA would need less F/A's, but AE would need massive numbers. Info is that AA would need between 900-1000 less F/A's, but that AE would need nearly as many to build up their numbers. • AE changing from our current system of attendance to match AA's attendance program, for missed assignments, late calls, sick days, etc. • AA & AE will follow up with the single seniority list for the pilots with 1 single seniority list for the F/A's. • AMR has over 2.5 billion in cash to adds to it's already high cash war chest. Now, I don't need to tell any of you what this would mean. It means a total and complete alternation the to AA as we know it. The pilots scope clause has always held AMR in check to what they can turn over to AE. But, in settling the outstanding grievances, law suits and removing the scope clause it opens the barn door wide open to what can be changed. Would the future be as Bob Crandall envisioned 25 years ago in that AA would fly international, coast to coast and other select flights while AE took over all of the domestic flying? A combined seniority list for pilots and F/A's would allow the corporation to move people from one side to the other freely. As I've said most of this had popped up in the last few days as rumor. This all came started when AA went to their separate divisions and said "We've got a deal for you if you agree to one seniority list between AA & AE." Everything else has been in the final stages ever since and pretty good sources will not deny any of what Iv listed other than to say "Look for big announcements and changes by the end of the month." Maybe I'm only passing on rumor that has kept Chicago tongue tied all weekend, but ... start looking at the way AA is moving. Look at the papers they have filed in Washington, look at their cash on hand, look at the new open skies agreement between the US & Japan, look at the fight between AA / OneWorld and Delta over which way Japan Airlines will move. Could it all be a move in the game with AA and the unions to force the unions to reduce cost? Yes. But, we all know where money is concerned AMR will do whatever it needs. The one thing that won't change is that the grievances and legal cases between the pilots at AMR and each division are on a fast track to resolution. I know that anyone in Chicago this past weekend has seen more screaming and yelling on the AA side than we've ever seen. They went ballistic when some of this new was leaked. "Fasten your seat belts, it's going to be a bumpy ride!" |
Lots of talk about this, if you look a couple of weeks ago in the Regional section a thread was started and promptly closed after it got quite a bit of flame... Dont believe anything you hear, obviously AMR is quite devious and will try anything to get you guys to sign a contract. How long has a rumor been going around like this, I'd say since the early eighties when eagle was first thought up...
|
my snowman melted - it had greater longevity than this rumor. now if it had danced around a bit I might have given the rumor some creedence.
|
I agree that anything that comes from an FA is tenuous at best but this latest one came from a check airman. Who knows? He's probably married to the flight attendant that started the whole rumor in the first place. In any case. The end of January came and went..AA loves to divide and conquer so something like this would be about as interesting to them as cutting their own bonuses.
|
Where there is smoke, there is fire!!!
|
Originally Posted by littlebuddha
(Post 765132)
AMR is quite devious and will try anything to get you guys to sign a contract.
The problems with integrating AE into AA go WAY beyond just the pilots. Just the pilot issues alone are intractable and contentious in the extreme, especially with 2000 AA pilots on the street with 175 more being kicked to the curb after quitting other jobs and returning to AA just a year ago. What management really wants is to dumb-down AA labor contracts towards AE style compensation. They know that's a non-starter and a strike issue with the APA. The rumors being floated are all trial balloons meant to lower expectations in the ongoing labor talks. Nothing new here. Move on. Straight out of Flying the Line. |
Originally Posted by bailee atr
(Post 765161)
Where there is smoke, there is fire!!!
|
You can integrate the pilot lists and leave other parts of the company out of it. Republic is a good example of pilots across multiple certificates.
|
Won't happen. AMR is all about divide and conquer. Ever since AA agreed to allow Eagle to live and 'feed' AA, mgmt has pitted the 2 groups against each other.............they will always want to do this. It's called leverage.
|
This is funny stuff..:D
AA |
Originally Posted by mwa1
(Post 765339)
don't tell the FAA amr is getting hit with record fines already.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Federal regulators have hit the sister carrier of American Airlines with another penalty topping $2 million for safety violations. The Federal Aviation Administration said Wednesday that American Eagle operated at least 1,178 flights with four jets that had main landing gear doors that weren't repaired according to standards set in a government safety order. The airline disputed the penalty, which hinged on whether landing gear doors were removed from the Bombardier planes before being fixed. It said safety was not compromised. The flights took place between February and May 2008. The FAA proposed a $2.9 million penalty against American Eagle, which operates regional flights for American Airlines. |
Originally Posted by Fugawe
(Post 765384)
Won't happen. AMR is all about divide and conquer. Ever since AA agreed to allow Eagle to live and 'feed' AA, mgmt has pitted the 2 groups against each other.............they will always want to do this. It's called leverage.
DALLAS (AP) -- The union representing ground workers at American Airlines wants to take a big step toward a strike against the nation's second-largest airline. The Transport Workers Union said Wednesday it will ask federal mediators to let the employees walk away from contract talks if there is no deal by March 8. If federal mediators agree, it could start the countdown toward a strike this spring. The president or Congress can block strikes, which have become very rare in the airline industry. American Airlines spokeswoman Missy Latham said talk of ending mediation was premature, and that a ruling freeing workers to strike "is also not up to the union." The union represents 28,000 workers at American Airlines and American Eagle, including mechanics and bag handlers. One of the union's smaller groups has been negotiating since 2006 and the rest since 2007. "Four years is time enough to settle a contract," said James C. Little, the union's international president. Little said that in 2003, when American was on the brink of bankruptcy, the union negotiated and approved a contract with wage cuts in just two weeks. Company spokeswoman Latham responded that airline negotiations using mediation last an average of 19 months. Some of the biggest ground worker groups didn't begin federal mediation help until January 2009. Latham said American and the ground workers' union have reached tentative agreements on 71 percent of all items, although union officials said those were relatively uncontroversial topics. The Transport Workers Union's members fall into nine different bargaining units, and some of the smaller ones have reached tentative agreements. But the airline and larger groups, such as mechanics, are still far apart on wages and other items. Union leaders are not satisfied with a company proposal for a 1.5 percent pay raise in the last year of the new contract and with signing bonuses and lump-sum payments instead of raises in other years. They also oppose changes in pensions and retiree health benefits. American's parent, AMR Corp., has lost $3.6 billion in the last two years due to rising fuel prices, a slump in travel because of the recession and tough competition from low-cost carriers. American officials have spoken often about needing to control labor costs. The Fort Worth, Texas-based airline also is in drawn-out negotiations with pilots and flight attendants. The president of the flight attendants union has said that, like the ground workers, she will request a release from mediation if there is no deal by early March. Bargaining in the airline industry is governed by the Railway Labor Act, which bars strikes and lockouts unless the National Mediation Board decides that the talks are hopelessly deadlocked. In that case, the mediation board offers binding arbitration, and if that's rejected by either side, a 30-day "cooling-off" period begins before workers can strike or be locked out. The strained labor-management relations at American could test President Barack Obama's administration. The American groups would be the largest in the airline industry to move close to striking. Although Democrats are often viewed as more sympathetic to labor, the last Democratic president before Obama, Bill Clinton, ordered American's pilots back to work minutes after they struck in 1997. Last fall, pilots at Hawaiian Airlines asked to be released from mediation, but federal mediators didn't approve the request. Instead, talks continued and led to a successful deal that the union said included pay raises of 15 percent to 22 percent over nearly six years. |
No dog in this but I'd be careful what I wish for if I were the AE guys. Common sense would tell me that if an AA/AE merger, no matter how funny, unrealistic, etc, were to happen it wouldn't be good for the AE guys/gals. By that I mean, given the shear amount of TWA/AA guys/gals on furlough for the past 8+years, wouldn't that essentially flush AE? Sorta of like what would happen at CPZ should Delta furlough.
Merely an observation from an outside source. |
Originally Posted by JeremiahWeed
(Post 765512)
No dog in this but I'd be careful what I wish for if I were the AE guys. Common sense would tell me that if an AA/AE merger, no matter how funny, unrealistic, etc, were to happen it wouldn't be good for the AE guys/gals. By that I mean, given the shear amount of TWA/AA guys/gals on furlough for the past 8+years, wouldn't that essentially flush AE? Sorta of like what would happen at CPZ should Delta furlough.
Merely an observation from an outside source. It could be good if done right, with fences and protections. Being at AE aint all grand either considering we have zero leverage when it comes time to get anything accomplished. Pax dont buy tickets at americaneagle.com, we dont have a real brand name and are just a side show to AA. Easily expendable. |
There is a better chance of Eagle integrating seniority lists with British Airways. I am pretty sure AMR is still in the business of making money, therefore the only way they would allow a single list between AA and AE is if the AA guys would drop to regional wages. Carry on with the entertaining threads though.
|
Originally Posted by Flyby1206
(Post 765606)
I agree there would be downsides, but the majority of AA/TWA furloughees have already been given a chance to come back to fly the Eagle RJs through our flowback agreement which has expired.
PS---None of the other airlines that furloughed split their furloughed group into haves and have-nots. Real nifty, AA. |
I thought I heard Eagle ended up with over 400 flowbacks?
|
Originally Posted by B757200ER
(Post 765643)
Not true, FlyBy. Before the recently announced 'Re-Furlough' of 175 AA pilots, there were 1580 AA furloughees. Out of that number, only 200 were eligible for flow-back to AMR Eagle. The cutoff was April 30,2003; if furloughed after that date, you were eligible to flowback, had 24 months of AA passes, and 1 year of medical. If furloughed prior, you were not eligible, only got 3 months of passes, and 6 months of medical. 1300 pilots were furloughed up until March,2003. None were eligible to flow-back.
PS---None of the other airlines that furloughed split their furloughed group into haves and have-nots. Real nifty, AA. |
Aa/ae
Why would AA/AE merge? AE already controls there domestic flying. Where do you think the flying is coming from for the 22 new CRJ's? Maintain that scope
APA. If, 100 seaters come to the AMR property. Who do you think will fly them? |
If we were all paid by years of service instead of airplane size, nobody would care if they wanted to buy RJs, or how many seats the new planes have. Pay a 15 year pilot the same if he's on a 70 seat RJ or an A-380, and we would tell the company to buy the plane that makes the most sense--and the most profit. We'll fly them...and everyone will bid the lifestyle they want.
We brought all this on ourselves by demanding more money for flying bigger airplanes (when, in the 1950s-70s, "we" all thought airplanes would only get bigger and bigger and bigger. Sure seemed like a good idea at the time...) Then management realized that our plan also meant less money for flying smaller airplanes, and the race to the bottom was on. All the scope issues are a result of management trying to get around this "loophole" or you could say, taking advantage of this provision. They can now make a distinction between big planes and little planes to by using our own rhetoric (more revenue, more responsibility, etc.) against us and thus set up the regional subs. Yeah...I know. It's heresy to pay the same on different planes. But as Dave Ramsey so often says, "So, how's that working out for ya?" I'd love to hear someone make the argument that this system has worked out well for the pilots....How well scope clauses have protected us? Time to fix this. |
Originally Posted by ClipperJet
(Post 765811)
Time to fix this.
A more realistic approach would be to eliminate the seniority based payscale, and just have a flat rate of pay for each different equip/seat. This would make labor costs a fixed expense, eliminating the typical mgmt rhetoric of having too senior of a pilot group(seniority should still be used to bid stuff like vacation and schedules though). Also, eliminates the carrot at the end of the stick approach when negotiating payscales that might be unrealistic to pilots who will never reach 18yr pay levels. |
Hi!
You CAN have one payscale: Pay all the pilots the same % of the seat-miles on their airframes. Obviously, for a very small plane, like a 50 seater or smaller, you would need to have a minimum floor salary, as their seat miles could be so low that their % would be too low to be acceptable to the pilots. cliff NBO |
Just Finished 737 School, the APA ORD Chair went through at the same time. He reported that AE ALPA approached APA and said "staple us to your list".
WHY? YOU ASK??? (which is what I said) You can make fun of APA all day long about their contract proposals asking for a 50% pay increase, lower monthly max, etc, etc. But I'll tell you this: every AAL pilot will defend scope to the bitter end. Yes AE has 22 more CRJ's coming, for a total of 72 70 seater's. But we own EVERYTHING ELSE above 50 seats. What if APA signed a sweetheart deal with AMR to fly everything over 50 seats? What would happen to AE? The 50 seat market is dying. Several weeks ago it was reported that chief pilots were roaming the terminals canvasing the pilot group and soliciting opinions about flying 100 seat jets and what we'd be willing to earn flying them. The writing is on the wall, AE was on the sale block once, it could easily go there again. I'm not making any predictions, but there is more than one source for this rumor. |
Aa/ae
Your telling us this while AE is recalling and hiring and AA is furloughing which will bring the total to,I can't count that high. What color of Kool-Aid do they feed you at 73 school.
|
Originally Posted by Oldfreightdawg
(Post 765844)
Just Finished 737 School, the APA ORD Chair went through at the same time. He reported that AE ALPA approached APA and said "staple us to your list".
WHY? YOU ASK??? (which is what I said) You can make fun of APA all day long about their contract proposals asking for a 50% pay increase, lower monthly max, etc, etc. But I'll tell you this: every AAL pilot will defend scope to the bitter end. Yes AE has 22 more CRJ's coming, for a total of 72 70 seater's. But we own EVERYTHING ELSE above 50 seats. What if APA signed a sweetheart deal with AMR to fly everything over 50 seats? What would happen to AE? The 50 seat market is dying. Several weeks ago it was reported that chief pilots were roaming the terminals canvasing the pilot group and soliciting opinions about flying 100 seat jets and what we'd be willing to earn flying them. The writing is on the wall, AE was on the sale block once, it could easily go there again. I'm not making any predictions, but there is more than one source for this rumor. |
Originally Posted by Oldfreightdawg
(Post 765844)
Just Finished 737 School, the APA ORD Chair went through at the same time. He reported that AE ALPA approached APA and said "staple us to your list".
Make sure you clean your pee before you go in for that drug test :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by Flyby1206
(Post 765819)
It definitely is time to fix this, but having a payscale that is only based on years of service wont help. The economics of a CRJ are hugely different than a 777. If you pay the CA 250/hr to fly either then the CRJs will be a money losing airplane. UPS has a payscale like this because all of their aircraft are roughly the same size (747, MD11, 767, A300, 757). They wouldnt be able to operate CRJs, 737s, ERJs, MD80s on a payscale like this.
A more realistic approach would be to eliminate the seniority based payscale, and just have a flat rate of pay for each different equip/seat. This would make labor costs a fixed expense, eliminating the typical mgmt rhetoric of having too senior of a pilot group(seniority should still be used to bid stuff like vacation and schedules though). Also, eliminates the carrot at the end of the stick approach when negotiating payscales that might be unrealistic to pilots who will never reach 18yr pay levels. The airlines like to tout the "Network Efficiency", and thus since passengers 8/10 connect to another flight in the "network", there is really no distinct difference in what the RASM creates, just how you divide the RASM among the CASMs. Does a crew of 4 777 pilots transport the same amount of RASM on a 16 hr flight less than 6 times a month that a MD-80 series transports on 4 legs in a 6:00 day 13 times a month? 777: 280 pax x 1 leg x 5 days* x 16hrs= 22,400 Revenue Passenger Hrs. 22400 / 4 pilots= 5600 passenger hours per pilot per month *=2 trips is 64 hours, 3 is 96....took a median number to average a standard line value (78hrs) MD-80: 150 pax x 4 legs x 13 days x 1.5 hrs= 11,700 revenue Passenger Hrs. 11,700 / 2 pilots = 5,850 passenger hours per pilot per month (based on a 78 hr. month) It would appear(based on the unscientific calculations) that 777 crews should actually be paid LESS based on "revenue per pilot" than an MD-80 crews. I'm leaving out cargo, seating class, etc. BECAUSE PILOTS DONT CONTROL THOSE FACTORS......IN OTHER WORDS: WE DON'T CREATE REVENUE!!!!!! WE OPERATE EQUIPMENT, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. |
Originally Posted by eaglefly
(Post 765856)
The 22 deliveries will bring the total to 47 70-seaters, not 72.
Thanks for the correction. |
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 765862)
Aircraft payscales do not pay on a ratio of seats/revenue. The numbers we've created "sort of" match the economics of the aircraft, but only loosely, and the payscale differences were implemented in the days when jets were first introduced and were HUGE difference makers in terms of the previous economics of big props and how much more dangerous and complex the early jet airliners were to operate.
The airlines like to tout the "Network Efficiency", and thus since passengers 8/10 connect to another flight in the "network", there is really no distinct difference in what the RASM creates, just how you divide the RASM among the CASMs. Does a crew of 4 777 pilots transport the same amount of RASM on a 16 hr flight less than 6 times a month that a MD-80 series transports on 4 legs in a 6:00 day 13 times a month? 777: 280 pax x 1 leg x 5 days* x 16hrs= 22,400 Revenue Passenger Hrs. 22400 / 4 pilots= 5600 passenger hours per pilot per month *=2 trips is 64 hours, 3 is 96....took a median number to average a standard line value (78hrs) MD-80: 150 pax x 4 legs x 13 days x 1.5 hrs= 11,700 revenue Passenger Hrs. 11,700 / 2 pilots = 5,850 passenger hours per pilot per month (based on a 78 hr. month) It would appear(based on the unscientific calculations) that 777 crews should actually be paid LESS based on "revenue per pilot" than an MD-80 crews. I'm leaving out cargo, seating class, etc. BECAUSE PILOTS DONT CONTROL THOSE FACTORS......IN OTHER WORDS: WE DON'T CREATE REVENUE!!!!!! WE OPERATE EQUIPMENT, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. Anyway, I'm not a business wiz, but this whole payscale based solely on seats never struck me as much good, especially considering that if I go to any airline website and check out a 1-hour RJ flight and it costs the same as a 10-hour longhaul flight. And the RJ crew carries as many passengers in a day anyway. I don't have a solution, but the current one seems to be chipping away at the profession from the most junior RJ F/O to the most senior 747 captain. |
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 765862)
The airlines like to tout the "Network Efficiency", and thus since passengers 8/10 connect to another flight in the "network", there is really no distinct difference in what the RASM creates, just how you divide the RASM among the CASMs.
Does a crew of 4 777 pilots transport the same amount of RASM on a 16 hr flight less than 6 times a month that a MD-80 series transports on 4 legs in a 6:00 day 13 times a month? I'm leaving out cargo, seating class, etc. BECAUSE PILOTS DONT CONTROL THOSE FACTORS......IN OTHER WORDS: WE DON'T CREATE REVENUE!!!!!! WE OPERATE EQUIPMENT, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. The reason I proposed an equip/seat flat rate is because I could see this as being something more pilots would consider, as opposed to equal pay for every FO or every CA. |
I say time-n-seat. The military does it w/time-n-grade. A 10 year E6 in the Navy makes the same as a 10 year E6 in the Army, USAF, USMC, or USCG. But I'm only talking base pay. What ever extras the company has, that's just more gravey. JMHO :)
|
Originally Posted by ERJF15
(Post 765912)
I say time-n-seat. The military does it w/time-n-grade. A 10 year E6 in the Navy makes the same as a 10 year E6 in the Army, USAF, USMC, or USCG. But I'm only talking base pay. What ever extras the company has, that's just more gravey. JMHO :)
|
Originally Posted by Flyby1206
(Post 765932)
The USNavy also has an unlimited budget paid for by taxpayers. :)
Oh so very true :p |
If you read some of the ALPA history books or articles they use the word "productivity" when the were trying to justify a pay increase from a DC3 to a DC4. What they really meant is they wanted a bigger cut of the revenue that lager A/C would bring in. Not unlike a salesman who is on percentage or manager that runs a bigger plant.Its all about the $$..
|
It doesn't really matter what the pay scale for an RJ or ATR at AA would be.
Because the RJ or ATR would be at AA! Imagine NOT having to start over after a 5-15 year 'career' at a regional. Imagine all flying being recaptured at a mainline. It puts the scope genie back in the bottle. Its worth going back to the gawd forsaken B scale to undo that mess. Staple, fence off the AE Capt seats, (one AE capt goes to a MD FO seat, one AA FO can go to an AE Capt seat), and who's not happy? |
Originally Posted by robthree
(Post 766073)
It doesn't really matter what the pay scale for an RJ or ATR at AA would be.
Staple, fence off the AE Capt seats, (one AE capt goes to a MD FO seat, one AA FO can go to an AE Capt seat), and who's not happy? |
Originally Posted by robthree
(Post 766073)
It doesn't really matter what the pay scale for an RJ or ATR at AA would be.
Because the RJ or ATR would be at AA! Imagine NOT having to start over after a 5-15 year 'career' at a regional. Imagine all flying being recaptured at a mainline. It puts the scope genie back in the bottle. Its worth going back to the gawd forsaken B scale to undo that mess. Staple, fence off the AE Capt seats, (one AE capt goes to a MD FO seat, one AA FO can go to an AE Capt seat), and who's not happy? Dude...stick to flying your 402 :rolleyes: |
These rumors are from the proposal for a PanAm style master list. The plan is to staple AA on the bottom of AE's list and then staple AE on the bottom of AA's list. The pay scale change on transfer is to alleviate AMR's concern on cost. The scope clause would be adjusted to give AMR more flexibility, but it wouldn't open the flood gates on the RJ's. The reason to adjust the scope would be to entice AMR to sign off on the proposal. I have also heard that this will not happen till the flow throughs move to AA because of the lawsuit liability and obvious seniority issues. I think this is a smart way to get rid of the infighting and scope issues and I will support the proposal.
|
A merger of this sort would definitely answer a lot of questions for AE come 2012.
I can also see this either creating jobs or downsizing quite a bit. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:20 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands