Subcontract Airlines (Part 121 "Regional")
 

TonyWilliams,

Let's do it. As the NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman said herself, "Regionals are the Mainline". The term "Regional" is one of the most useful tools the people destroying our industry have. Here's a chance to take that away from them. Make a statement by changing the APC "Regional" forum to Contract Airlines forum. Just maybe you will start a trend that will help stop the brainwashing of the pilots, the public and the media. As long as people let the industry nomenclature be used as a weapon they will never see any improvements. Everyone reading this needs to make an effort not to use the "R" word when referring to outsourced, contracted airlines and you will see a difference in perception. Perception is what drives decisions and airline management knows this well.

winglet

Ok, I'll try to make a bit more buzz about it.

Tony

I'm on board with changing the name to Contract Airlines. It is definitely more accurate.

Good call. The very least that should be done is to seperate the forums into Major, National and Regional by their revenue as is done on APC.com. I am all for Contract Carrier (Airline) replacing Regional on here and in all of our vocabularies.

I completely agree. The term 'Regional' was invented 20-30 years ago by aircraft manufacturers and airline execs to be synonymous with 'lesser', or the equivalent of light beer. It's had a huge negative impact on the careers of thousands of pilots, from the most junior F/O at a contract carrier to senior pilots at legacy carriers. It is also used as a way to convince folks that the crew members are less qualified and therefore deserve less.

It is time to get rid of the term 'regional', especially as it applies to routes which used to be flown by mainline carriers, which is in fact what most so-called RJ's do.

It is a term which is been used to gain public and industry acceptance of a grossly lower standard of compensation for crew members. Nothing more, nothing less.

While I completely agree with the sentiment here, not sure about the birth or timeline of the term regional. It's been around a bit longer.

North Central, Western, Bonanza, Hughes Airwest, MohawkAllegheny, Ozark, etc. were to one degree or another TRUE regional airlines. They flew mainline equipment with similar wages, in direct competition with majors like Pan Am, TWA, etc.

The more recent advent of code-share and small jets, whose sole purpose is to feed the mainline, have changed this industry forever.

You are most probably correct. I am not up to speed on the history of the US airline business.

My own carrier used to fall into this category as well, selling their own tickets and later entered into one of the first-ever code sharing agreements with United Airlines.

In any case, it's a term that has outlived it's usefulness. As has 'commuter' or 'puddlejumper'.

So what are we waiting for? Let's make the change!

Do it.

10char

If you are going to get rid of the "Regional" you must also the synonymous word "Mainline" The average passenger cannot tell the difference before buying a ticket. The so-called "mainline" carriers really do not go out of the way to say that this flight is operated by someone else...

I would be strongly opposed to eliminating the title Regional from these forums. The forum structure is designed to be user friendly and easy to navigate (we hope), not to make a political statement.

Newcomers would be very confused.

I don't really have an issue with adding the word "Contract"..ie "Regional/Contract Airlines" but this could cause confusion too..we would get people interested in contract flying jobs for foreign airlines.

The industry term is "Regional"...how it evolved is not too important but we are not going to be able change it unilaterally. You guys think RAA is going to change their name to "CAA"?

"Fee-For-Departure" airlines might be a little clearer, but even that term is becoming less relevant as contract terms evolve into more risk-sharing.

rickair7777,

As others have said, the term is inaccurate, misleading and has already been politicized by airline managements and industry advocacy groups. I challenge you to de-politicize this type of flying by using a more adequate term.

By calling the outsourced flying that represents more that 50% of domestic flying "regional" is a damaging misnomer. Since "Mainline" is now "feeding" the outsourced airlines, maybe a revision of terminology is in order. "Mainline" pilots and outsourced/scoped/contract pilots would primarily agree that the nomenclature needs to be revised. This "R" word needs to go away along with the other terms mentioned previously (commuter, feeder, etc). Many of these airlines have aircraft up to 86 seats and cover the Arctic to the Tropics. The term does a disservice to the industry, the public and the media. People need to know what company is operating the aircraft they are purchasing a ticket on.

I'll agree that "contract" flying may be confusing to some but not nearly as misleading and confusing as the current term. "Fee for Departure" won't work because not all of these types of companies operate on the disappearing fee-for-departure contracts.

Whenever I hear the word, I mention that it is a misnomer. If enough of us let people know the facts, we can eventually persuade others not to use it either. Let's brainstorm and come up with a term that accurately describes the type of flying that this sector represents. How about seat-scoped airlines, or outsourced airlines, etc?

Like the Government said, "Regionals are the Mainline". Since outsourced airlines are the ones being fed, just change this forum title to Domestic Mainline and the Mainline forum to Domestic Mainline Feeders :D.

winglet

I don't think it makes any difference what people call regional airlines. I think the label major airlines should be reserved for mainline airlines that sells their own tickets on their own routes. It's absurd calling CHQ or SkyWest a major airlines for neither one of them sells their own branded flying.

It doesn't matter what we pilots call regional airlines. What matters is how can we make mainline management take back all flying regardless of size, or route length and make all pilots under one company seniority list and pay same payrates and benefits.

Lighteningspeed,

Don't underestimate the enormous power of words. It's not by accident that the term "regional" was suddenly applied to the outsourced airlines at the same time the scope-relaxation campaign began.

I totally agree and it begins with using the correct terminology to illiminate the manufactured confusion.

winglet

Mainline management isn't going to take back ANYTHING! It's the Airline PILOTS Who will have to REFUSE to extend further "courtesies".. THAT GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE NOW and THE only WAY IT CAN GROW BIGGER if for the next "Trick in the book"!! An Airline like a Skywest will have to Buy into a Major chunk of a United, American or a Delta for the "Right" to fly under their Colors with the Major Airline dictating the Criteria under which Pilots are Hired and deployed even down to the Uniforms and cockpit Equipment.. Once that entity is formed and ALL the scope pay is worked out with flow through proceedures in the manner that a player comes from Triple A ball to the Majors. Then all the "lesser" player Regionals might have to find a "niche" or fade away.. Or?? The "REGIONALS" might again have to return to Branded Flying in the Days of Air Wisconsin, Mississippi Valley, Golden Gate, Golden West, Ransome, Provincetown Boston, Henson, Aspen, Rocky Mountain, Boise Cascade etc. They connected With the majors but they weren't getting the fuel bill paid for them so they Had to be "complete" airlines, Not just a Limo/Taxi Service with wings. They Owned and published their routes and schedules. They managed their way to Success or Failure. And when I worked for one, (Golden Gate) their Pilots walked with pride because they weren't bound by any scope clause They were independent operators with interline agreements.

The newcomers need to learn the reality of this profession from day one.

Just as APC tries to enlighten new pilots/pilot hopefuls on the ways of being a "real life" airline pilot, they need to know this as well. They need to know that there are few regionals left and the disticntion of regional/major/mainline is becoming more blured by the second.

Newcomers better recognize..... We are contract carriers. Flying all across the US and canada/mexico (as many REGIONALS do), is not REGIONAL flying.

The term regional started about the same time the RJ was introduced. I can remember being corrected by XJet employees (that used to be called Co Ex). It "regional" and not commuter now. I happen to be working for a commuter at the time and we sold out own tickets, had our own routes and even had a code share on two of the routes.


Lets be a little more accurate.

Its now contracted small lift providers.

Does that make you happy winglet?

Lots of points here. Seems that term has been used as an excuse to give subpar wages and contracts for years now... the "regionals" have grown out of being regional.

Sounds like regionals need to start demanding mainline wages. When regionals can no longer afford to fly for the majors and shutdown, the majors will have to do more of thier own flying. More jobs at the majors for regional pilots to move to so they can make reasonable wages flying those 70 and 90 seat jets.

Well... we do live in a democratic nation. Shall we take it to a vote?

The Regional Forum name should be changed to:
1. Keep it the same. Regional airlines.
2. Contract Carriers.
3. Domestic Mainline Feeders
4. Legacy Lackeys
5. Contracted Small Lift Providers
6. Dependent Operators
7. Contract Airlines
8. Red-headed Step-Children :D (that's a joke)

Feel free to add to the list and maybe APCF will make an official poll out of it.

We'll also have to snuff the title "Regional Jet" (RJ).........they should just be "SJ's" (Small Jets). Yes, pilots flying for "Contract Airlines" operate "Small Jets" (SJ).

Aside from being more truthful, it sounds better.

It would be really nice if ALPA would try to foster this change as well. I like grassroots efforts like this but think going from the top down would make things easier. A forum name change is a good start though.

Copperhead51,

It would be great if ALPA would focus on the primary problem in the industry but as usual elected leadership only reacts to pressure from the wealthiest donors. ALPA National is more concerned with the problems of their largest contributors and are unable to see the primary cause of their industry's problems. It is going to take the lowly outsourced contract pilot to force change at the top. Changing the name of the type of flying outsourced contract pilots do is just a small step in getting attention focused on the root of the problem.

First APC Forums, then the World :D!

winglet

How about the "A-team" (Mainline)

and the "The Replacements" (regionals)

Better than Contract Carriers, call the forum and aviation segment what it really is (and don't take it as an insult, it should foster nothing but a desire for change).

OUTSOURCED LABOR

The contacted carriers are not "outsourced labor", unless I guess the planes were owned by the contracting carrier.

yamahas3,

Most outsourced, contract, replacement, b-scale, (derogatory name here) pilots will agree with you. Any intelligent pilot flying any aircraft painted with a major carriers logo on the tail and is not a major airline pilot is well aware that they are "outsourced labor" (you noticed I said "intelligent"). This past decade of pilot hiring has not offered any alternatives. I'll say it again, this is by design not by accident.

The question is; "What are we going to do about it"? Major airline managements have created this business model to enable whipsaw amongst the pilot groups and have been very successful at it. There are legions of dupes who will fall into the "my crappy outsourced or b-scale airline is better than your crappy outsourced or b-scale airline" mentality which only enables management to continue their path of self-destruction. Every outsourced airline will have unlimited numbers of applicants to fly their small jets and they are well aware of this. Expecting the lowest bidders to disappear is insanity. The "lowest bidders" are not going to suddenly vanish because of name-calling.

It has become obvious that the airline labor leadership is ignorant of the root cause of the demise of the industry. The individual pilot groups have to each involve themselves in this grass-roots effort of changing the name of this type of flying to bring attention to the fact that they are indeed outsourced small jets. The major airline pilots need to stop complaining about the "replacement jets", swallow their pride, wake up and fight for scope. The outsourced pilots need to stop complaining about the "bottom feeder" outsourced airline, fight the tendency to fall into the blame game, fight the whipsaw, and encourage their mainline brothers and sisters to absorb the small jet flying. They need to spend their valuable time educating the newcomers about the realities of the "race to the bottom".

winglet

Perhaps this is just the idea we need, we also need alpa to go to bat on advertising that name change like crazy.

I think about the change in perception that's circling around bottled water, for years water filters went after bottled water saying... we're cheaper than bottled water,and didn't get much traction because the people buying bottled water probably weren't too concerned with price. Now they've come up with the environment angle, use water filters because they prevent wasteful plastic trash... I was at the gas station the other day, saw a water bottle and was like... geez, how wasteful.... mission accomplished water filter companies... So maybe this is exactly the game changer we need as airline pilots.

Change everyones perception from "regional" to "contract" and suddenly it doesn't have the illusion that it'spart of the mother airline, now it's very clear the relationship is strictly one of contract.

You forgot number nine which would be by far the most accurate description of
what we are: Inexperienced Replacement Airlines.

This name accurately represents all the unsaid nuances of what we are and what's becoming of the domestic airline scene.

The pilots that are most at fault here are the ones that voted for such outsourcing to begin with. I remember a conversation with my father when Eastern started operating Twin Otters out of San Juan with outsource pilots because EAL pilots said they wouldn't fly turboprops, "it is the beginning of the end of a respectable career" he said. What he could have never envisioned is that outsourcing is one of the contributing factors for us to be the lowest paid pilots of all industrialized nations

I would like to see this happen.

How's that work with the wholly owned ones? Not sure about now, but I know at least one company didn't have anything in writing with their legacy partner.... no contract at all other than fee schedules for what they charged for ramp services. I'd bet that was fairly common with the wholly owned ones, as the lack of formal structure means they can act/react more quickly to parent company needs.
Why not just use the DOT ratings... and categories. That woud make it easier for everybody to know who is being talked about.

Major
National
Regional

and bring back commuter, for things like Cape Air, Colgan etc....

Mason32,

These definitions do nothing to describe the relationships between the airlines and the types of operations these airlines perform. There are no universially agreed upon terms for airline type definitions. The DOT airline categories you refer to are based solely on revenue alone for government accounting purposes and are actually called "Groups" . The terms "Major, National, Regional, Commuter, etc. have always been ambiguous terms used randomly by different parties to suit their political needs and often quoted, especially by misinformed media.

Some Group III Carriers are often referred to as "Major" while others are called "Regional". Under the revenue definitions, American Eagle, Atlantic Southeast, Comair and Skywest can all be considered "Major" airlines although their true function is to separate labor groups and create a lower scale of income and quality of life for their respective employees.

The latest Air Carrier Groupings (Financial) were established by the DOT on November 13th, 2009:

Group III Air Carriers (Over $1 billion) - 21

ABX
Air Tran
Alaska Airlines
American Airlines
American Eagle Airlines
Atlantic Southeast
Atlas Air
Comair
Continental
Delta Air Lines
Federal Express
Frontier Airlines
Hawaiian Airlines
Jet Blue
Northwest Airlines
SkyWest
Southwest Airlines
United Airlines
UPS
USAirways
World Airways *


* Reporting in Group III by waiver.

Group II Air Carriers (Over $100 million to $1 billion) - 32

Air Transport Int'l
Allegiant Air
Amerijet
Arrow Air, Inc.
Astar
Centurion Air Cargo
Colgan
Compass
Continental Micronesia
Evergreen Int'l
Executive Airlines
ExpressJet Airlines
Go Jet
Horizon Air
Kalitta Air Service
Mesa Airlines
Mesaba Airlines
Miami Air International
Midwest Airlines
North American Airlines
Omni Air Express
Pinnacle
Polar Air Cargo
PSA
Republic Airlines
Ryan International
Shuttle America
Southern Air
Spirit Air Lines
Sun Country
USA 3000
Virgin America


Group I Air Carriers (Over $20 Million Operating Revenues) - 13
Carrier

Aerodynamics, Inc.
Aloha Air Cargo
Asia Pacific
Capital Cargo International
Casino Express
Florida West
Lynden Air Cargo
Lynx Aviation
Northern Air Cargo, Inc.
Pace Airlines
Tatonduk Outfitters d/b/a Everts
Tradewinds Airlines
USA Jet Airlines


Group I Air Carriers (Under $20 Million Operating Revenues) - 11
Carrier

Ameristar Air Cargo
Avjet Corporation
Falcon Air
Gulf & Caribbean Cargo
Kalitta Air Charters
Murray Air d/b/a national Airlines
NetJets
Sierra Pacific Airlines
Sky King
Swift Air
Victory Air

I propose separating the DOT Airline Group accounting definitions from the operational type definitions. The term "Regional" is a misnomer and needs to not be used when describing the type of flying these airlines perform. Many of these (whipsaw, outsourced, b-scale) type airlines are actually larger and generate more revenue than the "Major" partners they were designed to undercut.

winglet

The problem with this is that FFD carriers report revenue differently depending on their CPA, ASA, or pro-rate agreement.

Nevets,

This is exactly my point. I was trying to show the nonsensical way the media and the industry categorize airlines. The lines have been intentionally blurred between "Major" and "Regional". Describing airlines based on revenue is a poor way to catagorize airlines and provides no information to the public as to the type of operation.

Outsourced airlines are not "feeding" "mainline" any more than they are "regional". The "major" airlines are not even "major" in many cases. "National", "Commuter", "Air Taxi", etc. no longer apply.

Let's stop hiding the outsourced airlines from the public. Better terms need to be established to shed light on the Contractor Airline/Outsourced Airline relationship. If the aircraft you are in has another airline's logo on the tail then you are flying on an outsourced/contracted aircraft. This also applies regardless of the "wholly-owned" status.

winglet

Well, then I guess by your standards, American Airlines is a contract airline, that is owned and operated by it's parent company AMR.

It's sister company (Eagle), also owned by AMR (not by AA) would likewise be a contract company.


Conversely, Comair is owned by DAL and is subsidiary so it would be contract company then right? But then again, all profit created by Comair stays at DAL with their shareholders... so where does that leave RAH doing their contract work for DAL but taking the profit away from the parent company.

I do understand what you are saying; but you are just trading one set of misunderstandings for another.

When places like RAH are profitable enough to buy two large plane operators in one year then were is the profit in this industry? It certainly isn't at the legacy... and that being the case, where do you expect the growth to be?

Changing names isn't going to change the facts except to make you feel better.

Mason,

I think you're splitting rabbits. AMR is a holding company. It produces no product, nor does it sell anything to anyone (except maybe stock to investors).

American Airlines is the 'brand name' airline that sells tickets and cargo space.

American Eagle is a lift subcontractor that has no capacity to sell its product to the general public.

The distinctions are pretty clear to all of us who are familiar with the airline business.


It shouldn't be that hard to differentiate those airlines who sell to the public, and those who sell to other airlines. If the term 'Major' is no longer adequate how about 'Real' airlines and 'Subcontrator' airlines?

I like "subcontractor" airlines to differentiate them from contract (pilot) airlines that most of the developing world have.

Interesting, but not entirely accurate.... there are several cases where you can buy tickets directly from the smaller carriers, even places like Cape Air... you can buy the ticket from them, or get it from their mainline partners on interline and codeshare agreements.

so who sells the ticket doesn't exactly work either.

You're trying to exchange one set of often misunderstood things for a whole new set of soon to be misunderstood things.

I agree, It would be better to have the Govt and Indudstry titles match better... and changing the DOT standards to match a modern economy would be the first step.


Oh, and while I agree Eagle is a lift provider, it is harder to call them a subcontractor since they are a sister company. Up until Eagle was placed on the for sale block in 2007, I am told they didn't even have anything in writing at all with AA about providing lift on contract.
There is no stock that says AA on it, there is no stock that says Eagle on it.... the only stock you can buy is AMR.

Delta on the other hand owns several of their regionals as subsidiary companies. Delta also outsourced (subcontracts) to several non-owned airlines. This pattern is repeated at other carriers as well.
The profit from those owned regionals stays at Delta and with Delta's shareholders.

A primary function of any company is to provide a return to their shareholders... the company has little obligation to make your life easier, or change titles or what they call other companies to make you feel better. Outsourced, Subcontractor, Owned, Regional, Commuter.... it's all the same. What's your flavor of the month? The fact is the flying belongs to the company, not to you and not to your union, if your agreement with the company allows them to hire outside companies, and that makes more financial sense to do for their shareholders, then that is what they will do. Changing their name doesn't change anything except to make people such as yourself feel better.

It's no skin off my teeth, I just think it's a monumental waste of time. We are our own worst enemies, we let scope out of the bag, and changing the name of the companies that got that work won't change a thing except make you feel better, and further divide all off us as airline pilots.

I don't care if it's the guy/gal sitting right seat in a B1900 or the guy sitting left seat in a 777. We're all pilots, and it's time we started acting that way, instead of always fighting with eachother, and trying to put eachother down.