What's the Latest at ASA/Expressjet?
08-07-2014, 04:20 AM
#6841
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 611
This is what was said on the call, so my opinion is even if we voted yes, the planes would have been parked.
"I think we've been very clear that the primary challenge at ExpressJet is not necessarily the cost side. Although there are those issues, but the contract side with some of our major partners, and that's what we're focused on today."
"I think we've been very clear that the primary challenge at ExpressJet is not necessarily the cost side. Although there are those issues, but the contract side with some of our major partners, and that's what we're focused on today."
08-07-2014, 04:23 AM
#6842
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 58
This is what was said on the call, so my opinion is even if we voted yes, the planes would have been parked.
"I think we've been very clear that the primary challenge at ExpressJet is not necessarily the cost side. Although there are those issues, but the contract side with some of our major partners, and that's what we're focused on today."
"I think we've been very clear that the primary challenge at ExpressJet is not necessarily the cost side. Although there are those issues, but the contract side with some of our major partners, and that's what we're focused on today."
08-07-2014, 04:50 AM
#6843
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Just another RJ guy
Posts: 906
Back in the day at Pinnacle they touted "No bankruptcy is in the works" up until the day they declared bankruptcy. Of course they aren't going to forecast a bankruptcy. That would be harmful to the company if an executive said "yeah, we're thinking bankruptcy might work out well for us down the road...we aren't sure though".
08-07-2014, 04:56 AM
#6844
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Just another RJ guy
Posts: 906
Listen to the call. It was alluded that it may harm the holding company. Also, the benefit of bankruptcy protection would be the renegotiation of labor costs. But they admitted that the financial problems with xjt are with the CPAs, not really labor costs. In other words, it's a revenue problem more than anything else. Which is why, other than parking unprofitable aircraft, they are concentrating on operational incentives. They actually lose leverage of trying to renegotiate CPAs in bankruptcy because of the boiler plate bankruptcy clauses in the CPAs.
2) Right, it's with the CPAs...Now, if they company can't renegotiate better rates with United then what do they do? They come after the labor group to cut costs. They can control labor costs through bankruptcy, they can't necessarily control the CPA once it has become a problem. They cut costs with vendors, hotel contracts, labor groups, bank loans, unfavorable aircraft lease deals..etc....all done through bankruptcy.
3) They could very well leave the CPAs in tact in bankruptcy if they were able to cut costs elsewhere.
I"m not saying they will declare bankruptcy but don't think for a second that a large company that is losing money every single quarter won't do what they need to to fix the problem. It's happened at SO many other airlines. You're not immune.
08-07-2014, 05:33 AM
#6845
Bracing for Fallacies
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: In favor of good things, not in favor of bad things
Posts: 3,543
That, and the fact that our performance (both sides) is vastly improved. XJT (both sides) will eventually shrink as you said in a post just recently, yet as several people mentioned there is a chance, and I think a pretty good one, that some non XR aircraft will be extended as UAL realizes "oh yeah, I guess we can't replace that flying..." for a least a few more months and then we'll shrink down to all XR's and eventually E 175s where the Delta side (depending on the implosion of 9E) sheds more, but not all CR2s and adds CR7 and CR9s (I hope).
I got from the call, and as you pointed out, that SKYW is finally growing a pair and will soon knock on Jeff and Richard's door saying, "Time to pay us what is fair, if not, find somebody else to do it for less...oh wait, there isn't anyone...your choice, lose the flying or break out the checkbook." Like I've always said, our size is our leverage. Mesa, G7 etc can only take but so much. The days of our mainline partners are making billions (pre tax) off OUR BACKS and not giving anything back for our troubles will hopefully be over soon.
I got from the call, and as you pointed out, that SKYW is finally growing a pair and will soon knock on Jeff and Richard's door saying, "Time to pay us what is fair, if not, find somebody else to do it for less...oh wait, there isn't anyone...your choice, lose the flying or break out the checkbook." Like I've always said, our size is our leverage. Mesa, G7 etc can only take but so much. The days of our mainline partners are making billions (pre tax) off OUR BACKS and not giving anything back for our troubles will hopefully be over soon.
08-07-2014, 05:46 AM
#6846
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2012
Posts: 56
Attrition is about 30 to 40 per month on the ERJ side, that will increase into YE 2014 and into 2015. Inc will try to mitigate furloughs by parking planes with attrition. Inc. is focused on improving performance numbers in order to stop "bleeding money". 97 planes = 970 pilots, attrition = 720 pilots. Those extra pilots can be used to run proper staffing numbers in order to meet all the performance metrics that pay bonuses to Inc through the CPA.
Voting yes on the JCBA would have not changed a thing.
08-07-2014, 06:05 AM
#6847
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 611
There is a natural retirement of aircraft in the CPA for the ERJ, when that time comes, those specific tails will be parked. This was all known when the CPA was signed years ago. However, the BOD said, that unless the 97 AC that are due to come offline by YE 2015 can get extended under more favorable terms, than they will be parked as defined per the CPA.
Attrition is about 30 to 40 per month on the ERJ side, that will increase into YE 2014 and into 2015. Inc will try to mitigate furloughs by parking planes with attrition. Inc. is focused on improving performance numbers in order to stop "bleeding money". 97 planes = 970 pilots, attrition = 720 pilots. Those extra pilots can be used to run proper staffing numbers in order to meet all the performance metrics that pay bonuses to Inc through the CPA.
Voting yes on the JCBA would have not changed a thing.
Attrition is about 30 to 40 per month on the ERJ side, that will increase into YE 2014 and into 2015. Inc will try to mitigate furloughs by parking planes with attrition. Inc. is focused on improving performance numbers in order to stop "bleeding money". 97 planes = 970 pilots, attrition = 720 pilots. Those extra pilots can be used to run proper staffing numbers in order to meet all the performance metrics that pay bonuses to Inc through the CPA.
Voting yes on the JCBA would have not changed a thing.
08-07-2014, 06:15 AM
#6848
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B777 Capt
Posts: 844
The cuts are going to be deep and there will be plenty of pilots in the pipeline when this is over to stave off any shortage for quite some time.
08-07-2014, 06:32 AM
#6849
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 3,202
So they tell DL and UA the rates don't work. DL and UA show them the signed contracts, just like the express carriers did to the majors during their own financial troubles. DL and UA will tell SKYW if they want reduce the flying prior to contract expiration, then they will need to pay the penalties outlined in the agreement. Just so happens DL and UA are trying to reduce the number of 50 seaters so they win with the reduction and they get to hit SKYW for a breach of contract.
The cuts are going to be deep and there will be plenty of pilots in the pipeline when this is over to stave off any shortage for quite some time.
The cuts are going to be deep and there will be plenty of pilots in the pipeline when this is over to stave off any shortage for quite some time.
Regional pilots deserve better pay and work rules, believe me I was there......But with better pay and work rules comes more expense. DL and UA will not increase what they pay for the CPAs and they don't care if SkyWest takes their ball and goes home. SkyWest is a great airline but that means nothing.
08-07-2014, 06:38 AM
#6850
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 611
So they tell DL and UA the rates don't work. DL and UA show them the signed contracts, just like the express carriers did to the majors during their own financial troubles. DL and UA will tell SKYW if they want reduce the flying prior to contract expiration, then they will need to pay the penalties outlined in the agreement. Just so happens DL and UA are trying to reduce the number of 50 seaters so they win with the reduction and they get to hit SKYW for a breach of contract.
The cuts are going to be deep and there will be plenty of pilots in the pipeline when this is over to stave off any shortage for quite some time.
The cuts are going to be deep and there will be plenty of pilots in the pipeline when this is over to stave off any shortage for quite some time.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
