XJT did operate more flights to mexico from the US than any other operator. At least that was the statistic in 2006. We fly to maybe 15 places in canada as well out of EWR and i think to Toronto out of IAH still. It has been that way since 2000 i think?

INTL Jumpseating on xjt is very difficult. We have a different procedure from CAL because of different software capabilities. we were being fined by customs because gate agents werent listing people properly. Let your jumpseat coordinator know your not happy. Sorry.

 

OK, a couple of cities here and there in canada, mexico, understood....

But a regional airline operating the most int'l flights - even if it is mexico - than any other US operator? I mean, are you talking major cities like MEX, ACA, PVR or little podunk towns?

Please forgive my ignorance if it is that obvious, but I was always under the impression that international flying was always done by the major airline. Have regionals been flying international for some time now?

I ask because when I was at ACA in the late 90s, we maybe had ONE flight to canada out of IAD and that was it. And that wasn't until ACA got its first CRJ in 1997. Before that, with the props, fuhgedaboudit. Has it changed that much?

 

We (XJT) fly more flights to more destinations in Mexico than any other carrier (major or regional). This includes your little cities and yes your MEX, Cabo, and ACA

 

It sucks, and I can't personally tell you why XJT changed the policy of using the JS privilege to occupy a seat in the cabin on flights going into/out of the country.

We got a change in policy a while ago. Up till that point, yes, an offline pilot could occupy an open cabin seat using the JS privilege.

As has been mentioned, XJT serves large populace cities in Mexico;

MEX/PBC/GDL/MTY, etc,

As well as small podunk/industrial cities that most people have never even heard of;

QRO/CUU/ZCL/TLC/OAX/TRC/AGU/BJX/MLM/SLP/SLW, etc.

As well as plenty of other types, to include vacation destinations;

SJD/VSA/TAM/VER/ACA/PVR/ZIH/MZT/ZLO/HUX, etc.

And believe it or not, some do make for good overnights. As long as there's actually time when you're there.

With the advent of the DelCon program and the LGA/BOS bases, ACA did more Canada flying than the UAX side of the house did. YFC, YHZ, and YUL.

 

All I can say is, wow.

Then again, I'm still in shock that United Express now flies from Washington Dulles to Hartford, CT with an EMB-170 when I clearly remember jumpseating up there on a United 737-200 back in '99. What was the UAL crew's salary back then and what is the UEX pilots' salaries now - on the same exact route with almost a similar size aircraft?

The outsourcing to regional carriers is really just plain disgusting. And yes, I fully know who is to blame - it's the major airline pilots who started it when they allowed scope to crack. However I'm sure Midex pilots had a decent scope clause, and look what happened to them. I'm hoping we can stand firm on scope in our next contract, in fact I will vote for my very own furlough if it means keeping our scope clause intact.

Quick question - before Coex came along into Mexico, who flew all those routes into all those cities?

73

 

Eagle flies to many of the cities in Mexico that XJT flies in and out of. I know AA flies to the bigger cities in Mexico, but Eagle definitely has a presence down there.

Not saying it is right, but at least XJT and Eagle are only doing it with 50-seaters (AA & CAL pilots please keep it that way) and nothing larger.

 

Understood, thanks.

P.s. Dojetdrvr.... I left ACA long before the Delta Connection deal, that is why I am just a little ignorant about where they flew. In fact I left there not long after ACA got its first CRJ, yes it's been a while! I was a lowly J41 F/O and had just gotten my J32 upgrade notice when I left.

 

Mainline flew some of the larger cities but much of the service to smaller places like Chihuahua was started when the 50 seaters became popular. A handful were flown with small turbo-props by the regionals that became xjt.

I dont think you are going to find anyone on here that disagrees with your view of scope relaxation but there is little we can do now. A lot of scope was given up in bankruptcy court and "concessionary" contracts to prevent bankruptcy. Which is complete BS to me. How can it be cheaper to guarantee a profit to another company, while paying the salaries of every management type at that new company, create the training curriculum, have another spare parts and mx department.... you cant tell me that it wouldnt be financially beneficial for them to operate the aircraft themselves. It doesnt cost that much to pay the crew right.

 

I would venture to guess that many of those cities had none, or very limited service at all. Many of the airports down there are pretty new and surprisingly modern as far as the terminal construction goes.

This can have the potential to get really really sticky on a TOS level as it relates to a circumstantial fact. So everyone look past the politics of it please.

But I thought I heard that it was NAFTA, and it's results, that helped spurn the huge demand for much of the service to the industrial places. Many of the industrial cities serves are very close together and sometimes it makes you scratch your head wondering why there is service to places that are so close together. Often times the passenger demographic on those routes is an even mix of people traveling for personal reasons, and business men.

Royer yetlink.

 

Colgan will be doing some flying down there too I bet, MMMY I would bet at the very least...........