Exactly. Just like the DelCon. If anybody thinks the 10 CPA aircraft were operating on a profit, they're fooling themselves.

As far as the pro rate aircraft went, well, you could just toss the money into a dumpster and light it on fire.

 

hmmm ....agreed. i think? Any numbers or factual data to back that up would be nice y'know with regards to anything being cheaper than mesa or TSA...im pure hear-say...

 

You could say XJT is cheaper than the rest of the 50-seat operators out there because we operate one fleet like Southwest does. Plus all of our 50-seaters can take 50 revenue passengers plus full baggage for the most part.

Our CEO has said this and it makes sense. We may have charged more for services in the past, but due to us losing flying we have been forced to offer our services at the going rate.

Just because the employees are paid more doesn't translate to the operation being more expensive than those that pay less. Southwest is a prime example of this. They pay some of the highest wages around, yet their product costs less than most.

 

It's too bad that CAN'T utilize the crews like Southwest does.

 

haha, do you want more furloughs ... or were you meaning more block hours a day... i'll take that

 

JO is doing this with GO! Flying for loss never wins. Better hope they're making money.

Or maybe UAL will use this as some sort of whipsaw against anther regional in hopes of forcing them to lower their price to a point where the company accepts a deal vs. closing their doors, operates at a loss, and then asks for paycuts from their pilots which will then allow that group to call other regionals scum because they allegedly lowball contracts and are bringing the industry down

 

I know where you're going with that. And I KNOW you see/read the same stuff I do.

"We staff on block hours, NOT airframes".

But it sure is some coincidence that when we had 274 planes, we also had that about 2700 pilots, PLUS the usual 10ish% for training, management, etc. In other words, about 10 bodies per airframe, just like most other "regional" carriers.

And now we're down to 240ish airframes, we're also down to about 2400 pilots, plus the usual 10%.

I know it's apples to oranges because Southwest does longer stage lengths that we do, but we engage in pretty much the SAME type of operation they do. Flying concentrated for the most part to the U.S. Yeah, we go to Mexico/Canada, but those are nothing but 1-3.5 hour stage lengths that happen to leave/return the U.S. and have ZERO effect on how we staff. Unlike true "international" operations.

According to APC, Southwest is operating 529 airframes, with 5900 pilots.

I don't think more efficient crew utilization would result in more furloughs. It would simply mean that it wouldn't take 12+ hours of duty with 5-6 hours of sit time to get paid for 5.5 for 6. I'd gladly take the 5.5 hours of pay for ONLY 8-10 hours of duty and longer, more restful overntights. I don't know about you, but if I'm gonna sit, I'd rather sit in the hotel, NOT the airport/crewroom.

 

Seemed to "win" for RAH, TSA,MESA, and SKW when UAL was in Ch.11 and put the flying up for bid.

 

So you are admitting that RAH and others did that to XJT with our CAL flying?

Except our pilots are still compensated in the top 10% for the amount of seats we fly.

I'd take that.

 

This wasn't in reference to the mainline. Obviously someone will always win. Everyone can't be a loser. Mainline management, mainline pilots, regional management, regional pilots, and so on.

GO! has always operated at a loss and is an anchor sinking Mesa, so they won't win. Then it was a decent piece of the puzzle that brought down Aloha so those guys didn't win. XJT took a contract with CAL operating at a loss so their pilots didn't win(paycut which is argued that "scum" regionals underbid that flying), now XJT is doing the exact same thing with UAL which could cause the same repercussions to others. RAH, TSA, MESA, and SKW "won" because they were able to secure contracts with a nice profit margin. Now that that's being cut we'll have to see if anyone wins. Anyone capable of seeing the big picture should be able to understand that when one operates at a loss it hurts the rest in both the short and long term.

No because "admitting" to that would be ignorant to what to took place. CHQ didn't underbid XJT for CAL flying. They were willing to operate those aircraft at a loss just like they are now. CHQ has a cheaper operating cost yes, but they didn't underbid XJT. BB won't fly for a loss or at least that's why he recently turned down CAL business in past but we'll have to see what happens with this Hawaiian bit.