I think a lot of people are confused here. Oh well:rolleyes:

Delta doesn't pay for staffing, other than station staffing. All flight crew expenses are on ASA.

The 80% in flying covers both SkyWest and ASA flying out of Atlanta. This used to be ASA, but was renegotiated when Delta took over the ASA ramp operation in ATL.

Speaking of Delta taking over the ramp, rumor has it that all current ASA outstations have their station ops out for bid. I'd imagine Comair would snap all of these up given their push into ground service operations.

Also, ASA's contract for Delta covers 151 aircraft. This was in the current Among Friends. It is a hard aircraft number, not a block hour number. So, the way I see it, after the ATRs leave we are in breach of contract unless Delta awards us more aircraft. Also, Delta can't easily take their 30 or so 200s back unless they are replaced due to the contract that they signed.

I would imagine that for the purposes of "second lowest costs" that SkyWest and ASA are considered the same airline. Remember that JA himself said that SkyWest bids one price to Delta and decides internally who to award the aircraft to (there's no decision, it's always SkyWest...) So to Delta, it is one entity, so why determine the cost structure separately?

We have until 5 years from the date of purchase to be second lowest cost. A lot can happen in 2 years (just look at the way things were around here 2 years ago). The only reason SkyWest is a much lower cost structure that ASA is because they have about 1000 additional pilots, as well as 100 or so more aircraft to spread their costs over. You switch places with ASA and SkyWest and ASA would be every bit of the lower cost machine that SkyWest is. After all, Jerry gave the SkyWest pilots the ASA payscale after we signed our deal, and our workrules are identical. Keep in mind that when SkyWest bought ASA, we were the low cost machine!

So, the sky is not falling. ASA is in decent shape. The trend with DCI carriers may be to the wholly owneds, but we all heard that story in 1999. Things can and do change.

100% of operating costs pass through to Delta, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.


And it will be renegotiated again. The 80% WILL be gone. Delta has no other choice.

See the above. Delta is holding a gun to ASA's head right now and saying "let's negotiate".


So let me get this straight. ASA's outstation operations are now up for bid to be outsourced? But the sky is not falling? Sounds to me like ASA is being chopped up one limb at a time. We are being prepared to be phased out. We flipped off JA and won the battle, but lost the war. We will now slowly be replaced by SkyWest.

100% fuel cost yes... never heard that 100% of our operating cost gets pushed to D.

It's true. Delta buys every seat on our planes, and in return covers all associated costs plus a small profit margin. The only thing ASA (SkyWest Inc) actually has to pay for is outstation personnel.

So let me get this straight. Delta buys every seat on ASA's planes from Delta who are the ones that sell the seats. That doesn't quite sound right. I know that Delta pays ASA to fly the routes and covers the fuel, but all the other operating costs just doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make sense because this JP character seems to be mistaken (or just a kook). No fee-for-departure airline would have an incentive to keep costs down if their mainline partner wrote a blank check to cover expenses.

I thought this was common knowledge, since it was among the first things explained to me when I first came into the company a little over a year ago. This explains why we may occasionally fly a route with little or no pax, because it makes no difference, since all seats have already been bought and paid for by Big-D. We only provide the end service, with big-D doing all the marketing, booking, and all the other things associated with filling seats.

Earlier this year I took 3 hour maintenance delay, they end up moving our pax over to next scheduled flight, but we still flew our originally scheduled flight, be it with an empty airplane, only 15 minutes apart from the other flight. One may think this makes no sense, except when you consider our primary goal too D is driven by completion factor, not pax loads.

I don't think the confusion lies in the fact that the mainline partner pays a fee for each departure (hence fee-for-departure airlines) regardless of load factor. The controversy is over the fact that this JP character is saying that it isn't a set fee per departure but that the fee varies depending on variable costs at the FFD airline.

Zayo – Your right, I apologize for jumping the gun with my quick reply. Your point being over ‘set fees’ verses ‘varying fees’ and JP’s remarks referring to ‘covering all cost except outstation personnel.’ I’m not sure if anyone would have a clear answer for that, except an airline accountant, even then, it might require interpretation.

" The 80% WILL be gone. Delta has no other choice.



See the above. Delta is holding a gun to ASA's head right now and saying "let's negotiate".




I really don't think that skywest/ASA will cave on this. Why would they, all the other contracts delta has tried to cancel (mesa/pinnacle) haven't worked out the way Delta management had hoped. Why would they give to this? xj gets the growth that they could have given to us per the contract!

Thanks for restating my confusion more perfectly zayo. Spot on.

Amen to that.........I was thinking the same thing. People are speaking as if Delta was in bankruptcy. It's hardly that situation. There are a lot of contacts and clauses that do actually protect pilots.

There would be some serious lawsuit action if all you "Nostradamus" thinkers are right. ASA's money is Skywests money. The contract at ASA had to be approved by JA not just ASA for that reason. Do you think Jerry would allow Delta to do what everyone is claiming they are going to having approved the scope clause at ASA. I'm sure you are familiar with it as I won't bore anyone. I understand JP's frustration with the whole ATR displacement and I don't have much to say about that but rather than assuming only bad plots are afoot, you never know if it could be a good thing.

If you truly think we are doomed why sit on a sinking ship delaying the inevitiable while there are smaller boats and some bigger just floating all around you offering help?

So then where are our aircraft to make up for the 80% and the minimum aircraft....both of which we no longer meet?

MAYBe....... We will get some more CRJs once the ATRs are all gone??? i dunno..... Only time will tell.

When Jerry Atkins came by our groundschool class he said that ASA/Skywest is right at the 80% mark and that they had to give Delta a "friendly reminder"
about that.

If Delta plans to expand ATL like they say they will under the "New Delta" something HAS to come our way. Only time will tell....

Management has said publicly that the excess costs of flight crew overstaffing are on us. I have no reason to believe that they are not being truthful.


It takes two to negotiate. Delta may not have a choice given their growth plans, but SkyWest sure does. You think they're going to voluntarily sign away their biggest protection?

I don't think being replaced by SkyWest is an option. If they were getting the growth then maybe I'd see your side, but all the growth is going away from SkyWest, Inc.

Delta is realizing that SkyWest, Inc. is too big of a player in the DCI game. We control 55% of the daily flights pre-merger. Delta can't cut our operation down (at least as long as our performance metrics stay high), and the only thing they can do is spread the flying out more to reduce our stranglehold.

I think, personally, that ASA wants out of the station staffing business. When we ran the ATL ramp it was different, and we had economies of scale there. Now that we have to manage 30 or so stations, it increases our costs with no real benefit. Easier to just pay the $300 or so per flight, which Delta would pay anyway.

We're not an airline, anyway. We're a contract lift provider. I see us going to a RAH model where we just fly and have a management structure as lean as possible to just support our primary business.

Bottom line is, we have a contract until 2020. It can only be cancelled for certain reasons, and Delta not liking us isn't one of them.

Don't forget, if Delta hands more flying to Skywest/ASA due to the 80%, Skywest will most likely keep any new planes on their side, with ASA once again taking a kick to the nuggets.

Just a benefit of being their *****, I guess.

We are SKYWEST's spare parts airline.....

I'll believe it when I see it....

It can also be canceled in two years if we're not second from the bottom in cost. Right now we're second from the top, with no solution in sight. If nothing changes, the contract is canceled in two years.

If you don't believe this "JP character", then why not research the issue yourself and report back instead of just stating your opinion of what you THINK it is?

When I got to ASA I was told it was PERFORMANCE not cost that we had to be #2 on. This was in training.

Just curious how you came to that conclusion because once again I'm hearing different from MULTIPLE sources.

The contract can only be canceled for that reason if ASA/SkyWest Inc. doesn't agree to match the 2nd lowest bid. They will, and if necessary, will take a small hit on their profit margin to maintain their relationship with Delta.

Given that the 2nd lowest cost business is in every DCI agreement (JA himself said this during one of his crewroom chats), don't you think there's an issue here? After all, they can't cancel everybody's contract or there will be no DCI lift left.

No, it gives Delta the ability to cancel any agreement they wish. History shows that Delta NEVER, EVER signs an agreement they can't worm their way out of.

quote=John Pennekamp;493790]No, it gives Delta the ability to cancel any agreement they wish. History shows that Delta NEVER, EVER signs an agreement they can't worm their way out of.[/quote]

Sorry if I missed this, but what's your take on what DL will do with ASA? Stay same size, reduce, grow? Do you think there is likelihood of furloughs? I know from the GLA threads you jumped to ASA at the right time. So what does your crystal ball say about the brave new world for DCI?

[QUOTE=Spad;494125if I missed this, but what's your take on what DL will do with ASA? Stay same size, reduce, grow? Do you think there is likelihood of furloughs? I know from the GLA threads you jumped to ASA at the right time. So what does your crystal ball say about the brave new world for DCI?[/QUOTE]


ASA will stay the same size with little to no growth within DCI. We will get outr piece of the 80% pie out of ATL and nothing more. Were our growth opportunity will be is outside of DCI. Our greatest weapon is the ton of money that Skywest Inc. has in the bank. It sounds bad but this is the truth; we must wait for financially stricken regionals to go out of business and move in. I know for a fact that ASA is looking closely at two regionals which I won't mention and if they do fail we will move in quickly for their flying.

Despite Trip 7 being a new hire, I basically agree with his analysis. I do, however, believe that the "ATL 80%" will be renegotiated in exchange for the "2nd from the bottom in cost" clause, and we will lose some ATL flying, but gain flying elsewhere. I also doubt we will see new flying from other airlines, since everyone else (especially UAL) is in the ditch. Mesa COULD tank, opening up some UAL flying, but I get the vibe from St George that SkyWest Inc wants less tickets on the Chicago Titanic, not more.

I gave my take on furloughs above. I'd consider the 30-40 -200s that DAL owns the wild card on that. It all depends what they do with them. They could sell them to us (unlikely), leave them alone (possible), take them with no replacement (unlikely), or take them and replace them with half as many -900s (very likely). Options 3 and 4 would require less pilots, and we're already overstaffed. We'll have to wait and see what happens.

I'm starting to hear credible mumblings of new bases up north. Some people in the GO are buzzing that "we will be taking over 60% of CVG flying next year, and a base is being considered". I have not been able to verify this, so I'll consider it a rumor. One thing that is clear is that The New Delta plans to completely reshuffle the deck with DCI and "spread the wealth around". I wouldn't be surprised to see ASA do more flying in The Great White North, just like MSA and PCL are down here.

Bottom line: yes, I have had great success "reading the writing on the wall" throughout my career, and I don't see ASA in immediate danger. I think we will shrink a little for the next few years. By then we'll be in our next contract negotiations. If our pilots beat their chests for an industry leading contract again, I wouldn't expect to see growth. If we settle for reasonable QOL gains and a COLA, we may see some. Time will tell.

Keep Holding onto your 80% mantra......why don't you all get tags for your chart cases that say it. You will be chanting it right onto the street.... ALPA will sell you out too.....so just stick with it.......And now 60% in CVG.....Better get two tags!!!!!!!

I've heard the CVG rumor as well. Sadly what I think is going to happen is Delta will take away from Comair to make sure they fulfill ASA contractual limits because of two reasons,

1. They own CMR and can do whatever they want with their planes, schedule.

2. ASA is actually cheaper than CMR.

Damn it takes a XJ FO 8 years to match the pay of a 2nd year 70 FO at ASA

But they can upgrade to the SAAB under a year and make $45/hr

Hey you forgot to mention that your regional is better then ours! Seriously guys, I know I sound like a broken record but delta really isn't having an easy time cancelling contracts. The truth is they may renegotiate the 80%, but JA doesn't give things away and I don't think he will let any airline he runs go down because delta wants to violate the contract they signed when they sold ASA to skywest. Do you really think that a court would go with delta if they did? Delta has no legs to stand on in that fight. Mesa and Pinnacle had bad performance and the courts sided with the regionals, In ASA's case, the performance has moved from last in dci to about the middle and Delta knows that with the ground staffing in ATL that's about all we can do, that's why our numbers are pretty much identical to DAL's. I really don't think ASA will take concessions without retribution.

Not any more...it's probably about a 2-3 year year wait...right now the upgrades have on average 1.5 years and it's a Saab, sometimes 9 legs a day...no APU...those guys deserve that...you work your A** off in that plane

using the facts provided by this website

Mesaba 2 year FO pay
25,200 pre-taxed and no union dues taken out...

ASA 2 Year FO pay on the 50-seater
31,500 pre-taxed and no union dues taken out...

ASA 2 Year FO pay on the 70-seater
34,200 pre-taxed and no union dues taken out...


The 70 seat FO @ ASA makes almost 10 grand more pretaxed...than a 76 seat FO at Mesaba...no wonder why you guys aren't getting any more airplanes...i'de love to stop eating hotpockets and ramen noodles, as an XJer I'de love to get paid what you guys do...I never see that happening especially with the bankrupcy train we just got off of, and you can bet when our contract comes up they'll dangle these airframes in front of us like meat to a pack of wolves

XJ pilots, don't you have a snapback provision?

Yea but it isn't enough to make a difference it's an extra dollar if that for an FO anyways(just an extra hotpocket)...I believe it starts Dec 1 due to having 100 A/C on property

Even with the extra 15 900s on property it won't make SAAB upgrade drop thru the floor? With as junior as Mesaba is I wouldn't be surprised if they asked for street captains again.

They hired fat...which is probably the reason everyone is anoyed with XJer's and how we've been talking about more airframes...I was flying the CEO of XJ an DAL down to ATL and back out of MSP in July, so they knew all along something was up...I can't believe no one spilled the beans at the GO...they overhired on the Saab a year ago and finally have gotten caught up in the last few months...trust me no Street Captains...they have plenty of people with the mins...it is a junior company but I'de say alot of the guys we've hired came in close/ if not at ATP mins anyway, especially lately...most of the street captains we were hiring a year ago had 5,000 hours of ERJ time from Eagle....we have way to many pilots for them to start doing that again....when the hiring spurt started a year and a half ago, they were putting the people with more hours in the Saab as FO's because of the very reason which is upon us today...some of the guys flying the 900 and the 200 when the spurt came upon us have over 1100 hours on the jet just at Mesaba...I just don't see it happening

Thanks for the info. Understood