|
New AA Contract Offer - Scope Details
Good news, provided they're not hiding any other objectionable bullet points.
Edit: Seems one such bullet point is a dramatic increase in the number of RJ's at the current seat limit.
Originally Posted by LIOG41
(Post 1761797)
Sky Talk: American presents contract proposal to pilots
NOVEMBER 11, 2014 American presents contract proposal to pilots American Airlines has formally presented a contract proposal to its pilots union which is considering whether or not it will send proposal to its members for a vote. According to a letter sent by American president Scott Kirby to the Allied Pilots Association on Tuesday, the contract proposal would give pilots the highest pay rate among legacy carriers. "It is my hope that as we build a stronger, more trusting relationship that, together, we will be able to reach the best economic considerations for the 100,000 employees of American and the company in the future," Kirby wrote in the letter obtained by the Star-Telegram. The proposal does not include the company's initial request to add 5 more seats to the regional jet work scope section of the contract that would allow regional carriers, like Envoy Air and Piedmont Airlines, to fly jets with 81 seats instead of the current scope of 76 seats. Kirby said that adding those five seats would translate into tens of millions of dollars in new revenue annually to the airline. "Even though we believe the scope request is in the best interest of all involved, we believe that establishing trust with our employees is even more important," Kirby wrote. "Today's proposal ommits a request to add five seats to the 76-seat jets as a sign of good faith to demonstrate the trust we want to build." The APA's board is meeting on Wednesday to consider the proposal. The two sides had previously agreed to a 30-day negotiating extension that lasts through November 15. If the APA decides by the end of the week to send the proposal to members for a ratification vote, there is another extension for 45 days. And if a contract agreement is reached outside of arbitration, pay rates would become effective on December 1, regardless of the actual effective date of the contract. Read more here: Sky Talk: American presents contract proposal to pilots |
no more RJ's!!!
|
The regional pilots flying those get paid more money too right? Or do they just need us to pull in more revenue to pay themselves more?
|
New AA Contract Offer - Scope Details
How about neither
|
Originally Posted by pitchtrim
(Post 1762467)
The regional pilots flying those get paid more money too right? Or do they just need us to pull in more revenue to pay themselves more?
|
why would you say it's good news? do you know what good news is?
|
Not good news. If it passes, Parker and his minions will be able to put more large RJs at the regionals than they are currently allowed to...good news would be what Delta is doing, which is to take back flying from regionals. Any press release from Parker or Kirby should be taken with a ton of salt, and lemon...and tabasco sauce, the kind you can only get in Mexico.
|
Originally Posted by billyho
(Post 1762466)
no more RJ's!!!
The problem isn't the existence of the RJ - the problem is the existence of regional airlines as separate companies from mainline. We need to bring down the regional industry as a separate entity from mainline. |
I'm in support of the 81 seat jets! I think it's a great idea.
There is absolutely no reason that mainline can't fly them! :) |
Originally Posted by billyho
(Post 1762466)
no more RJ's!!!
|
Originally Posted by deltajuliet
(Post 1762431)
Good news, provided they're not hiding any other objectionable bullet points.
Edit: Seems one such bullet point is a dramatic increase in the number of RJ's at the current seat limit. The APA would never vote in such an offer. This is just as concessionary as what's being presented by AAG management to their wholly owned regional feed carriers. |
The PSA and PDT kids won't understand why this is good news.
|
Originally Posted by RJ Pilot
(Post 1762536)
The PSA and PDT kids won't understand why this is good news.
|
Originally Posted by RJ Pilot
(Post 1762536)
The PSA and PDT kids won't understand why this is good news.
|
Originally Posted by Roger That
(Post 1762500)
You can't possibly be serious. More outsourced labor at the expense of the mainline?
The APA would never vote in such an offer. This is just as concessionary as what's being presented by AAG management to their wholly owned regional feed carriers. |
Originally Posted by billyho
(Post 1762541)
What the hell is a GV Captain doing trolling the Regionals? Get a life.
Still have plenty of friends there. |
Originally Posted by RJ Pilot
(Post 1762555)
I was a former Legacy Eagle, thats right, the REAL Eagle, pilot for 20yrs.
Still have plenty of friends there. If you are dead, then your wording would be correct. If you are alive, you are just using bad grammar. |
Originally Posted by RJ Pilot
(Post 1762555)
I am a former Legacy Eagle, thats right, the REAL Eagle, pilot for 20yrs.
Still have plenty of friends there. |
Originally Posted by RJ Pilot
(Post 1762536)
The PSA and PDT kids won't understand why this is good news.
|
We're all lifers....until we get hired.
|
Originally Posted by RJ Pilot
(Post 1762555)
I was a former Legacy Eagle, thats right, the REAL Eagle, pilot for 20yrs.
Still have plenty of friends there. This "Legacy Eagle" is a complex puzzle sir.. |
Originally Posted by buddies8
(Post 1762554)
Actually they passed it in the mou. It is a done deal. Parker is not asking to change scope he is happy the way it is. The extra 5 seat request was smoke and mirrors. If he got it great if not not sweat.
|
Originally Posted by FLowpayFO
(Post 1762588)
Simmons, Nashville Eagle, Wings West, Executive?
This "Legacy Eagle" is a complex puzzle sir.. |
Originally Posted by Saabs
(Post 1762609)
This is in no way shape or form accurate. The proposal scope language is not the same as in the MOU at all. Not even close.
a. The maximum number of commuter aircraft as a percentage of the Mainline Narrow-Body Fleet shall not exceed 75%. b. The maximum number of large regional commuter aircraft as a percentage of the Mainline Narrow-Body Fleet shall not exceed 30% through 2014, 35% in 2015 and 40% thereafter. Paragraph b is what parker wants to change |
If you guys would just read the mainline american thread on this you can understand what is being sought. Bottom line is mainline flying and the vast majority of domestic flying needs to be done on mainline equipment at a mainline airline at mainline pay rates. This proposal does not address those issues and is just the opposite.
|
Originally Posted by buddies8
(Post 1762660)
You are correct to an extent. I am wrong to an extent. Here is the part of the mou in question..
a. The maximum number of commuter aircraft as a percentage of the Mainline Narrow-Body Fleet shall not exceed 75%. b. The maximum number of large regional commuter aircraft as a percentage of the Mainline Narrow-Body Fleet shall not exceed 30% through 2014, 35% in 2015 and 40% thereafter. Paragraph b is what parker wants to change |
Yes.........
|
Originally Posted by buddies8
(Post 1762660)
You are correct to an extent. I am wrong to an extent. Here is the part of the mou in question..
a. The maximum number of commuter aircraft as a percentage of the Mainline Narrow-Body Fleet shall not exceed 75%. b. The maximum number of large regional commuter aircraft as a percentage of the Mainline Narrow-Body Fleet shall not exceed 30% through 2014, 35% in 2015 and 40% thereafter. Paragraph b is what parker wants to change |
Right. You cannot strike because you are to big to shut down would effect the economy is what will be said by the NMB and president of usa.
Delta plus 4 percent with profit sharing with the quality improvements and scope will be bartered away. Check delta and United scope in arbitration aa scope will be increased in management's favor. |
While DAL and UAL do have 70 seat scope, it's a much lower number of airframes (102 iirc, or roughly 20% of their 550ish mainline fleets vs. AA's ask of 35% of 800 which is 280).
|
Originally Posted by buddies8
(Post 1762777)
Right. You cannot strike because you are to big to shut down would effect the economy is what will be said by the NMB and president of usa.
Delta plus 4 percent with profit sharing with the quality improvements and scope will be bartered away. Check delta and United scope in arbitration aa scope will be increased in management's favor. |
I belie there are trying to change definition of large RJ now. Currently 51-76 seats is large. Trying to change it to 71-76 seats is large
|
So maybe they are giving up the 5 seats in "good faith," in order to get a concession from the pilots to allow more large jets.
It's clear what they are doing. 17% of all domestic flying was done by regionals in 2001. In 2012 it was 53%. Now you have E-175s flying routes like Houston to Montreal, and I'm willing to bet AA charges the same wether they use a 175 or 737. But they make more on that ticket if they use a 175 flown by a regional. It's good business from a management standpoint, but stinks for us. |
Originally Posted by ArcherDvr
(Post 1762878)
.....and I'm willing to bet AA charges the same wether they use a 175 or 737.
But they make more on that ticket if they use a 175 flown by a regional. |
Originally Posted by TallFlyer
(Post 1762975)
And I'm willing to bet a lot more that aircraft type has very little to do with what an airline charges for a given ticket. I suggest doing a little research on yield management.
Eh, don't think so either. Pretty sure the cost to move one seat a given distance is more expensive on a regional aircraft than a mainline one. Having large regional fleets have allowed airlines to sell frequency and flexibility, which thus far has proven easier to sell that one mainline flight at a lower cost into a given smaller destination. |
Originally Posted by TallFlyer
(Post 1762975)
And I'm willing to bet a lot more that aircraft type has very little to do with what an airline charges for a given ticket. I suggest doing a little research on yield management.
Eh, don't think so either. Pretty sure the cost to move one seat a given distance is more expensive on a regional aircraft than a mainline one. Having large regional fleets have allowed airlines to sell frequency and flexibility, which thus far has proven easier to sell that one mainline flight at a lower cost into a given smaller destination. To the second point, you probably know more about it than I do. What I meant was they make more money using the regional 175 vs a 175 flown by mainline pilots because of lower payroll which is a huge expense for companies. More and more we see routes flown by regionals vs. mainline, and I'm not talking small destinations either, I'm talking like IAH to ORD, DFW -IAD. Why would they be doing this if it wasn't making them more money. |
Originally Posted by ArcherDvr
(Post 1762996)
To your first point, I believe that is what I am trying to say.
To the second point, you probably know more about it than I do. What I meant was they make more money using the regional 175 vs a 175 flown by mainline pilots because of lower payroll which is a huge expense for companies. More and more we see routes flown by regionals vs. mainline, and I'm not talking small destinations either, I'm talking like IAH to ORD, DFW -IAD. Why would they be doing this if it wasn't making them more money. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:03 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands