AirTran/SkyWest Expansion Rumors

mrivc211

mrivc211

Well-Known Member
I just flew the most miserable forced trip out of MKE. Even though I'm based in ORD. Ya'll know my beliefs about where this flying belongs. I recently had a 4 four sit in PIT with a couple of AirTran pilots, and expressed to them how this should be there number one priority one their next contract. (southwest vs united if you dont) They were in agreement.

Now here are the effects of mgmt running away with the loophole:

Timeline of Events:

Oct- SkyWest starts hiring FA's again

Nov-AirTran/SkyW announcement made

Dec-

AirTran/SkyW code share begins

Email put out by Dir of Flt Ops stating all VLA's will no longer be granted, as we are expecting dramatic increase in block hours starting this summer.

For the past year, we are overstaffed, now no time off is being awarded.

SkyW sends out emails to poolies telling them to get ready.

SkyW begins accepting applications for pilots again

SkyW starts hiring substantially more Dispatchers and Crew Schedulers(not just for replacements)

Loads are very FULL on all MKE flights

JAN-

AirTran announces commitment and new crew bases for MKE

100 SKYWEST(not AirTran) FA's are being transfered to MKE


Seeing this trend, one would guess that it is in preparation for expansion in MKE. Estimates are 25-50 Regional Jets to feed AirTran operation.

SIGNIFICANCE to AirTran and SkyW pilots:

Skywest got snubbed by Republic by the Midwest deal. They returned to MKE for a "at risk" deal. My feeling is some of it was to get back at Bedford for taking away their piece of the pie. It will be fought tooth and nail for, for the foreseeable future. Here's the bad part, SkyW will really see profits from this deal since a significant portion of the sales generated will go to Skyw since its at risk. Could this be Skywest long awaited desire to enter their own market like Republic? Under the loop hole of Code Sharing? This was the rumor going around for the past couple of months, but we all didn't really think it would amount to more than a rumor. With these crew movements taking place, it points to that direction. An airline that runs a very lean ship doesn't send 100 FA's to a closing base for nothing.

What this means to me? Prolonging our stay at a regional carrier. I love working at this company, but respectfully speaking, my goal was to fly mainline.



To add to my post, we are in a recession, any job is a good job. But..........
 
The future of domestic flying is going to end up being "regional" airlines flying EMB-190 sized aircraft under their own name, only they won't do any of their own booking; they'll work closely with their mainline partners under a code share.

If you partner closely enough with the mainline company, then the risk for the regional is low and the reward for both companies is high.

Within 10 years this will be the absolute trend in domestic flying, and in 20 years it will be all we know.

The direction that this is going in is obvious enough, and the direction that labor groups take in the next decade, and really starting with Republic's current contract negotiations, will tell us what kind of a career this job will be.

The future is now if you have eyes to see it.
 
jtrain609 said:
The future of domestic flying is going to end up being "regional" airlines flying EMB-190 sized aircraft under their own name, only they won't do any of their own booking; they'll work closely with their mainline partners under a code share.

If you partner closely enough with the mainline company, then the risk for the regional is low and the reward for both companies is high.

Within 10 years this will be the absolute trend in domestic flying, and in 20 years it will be all we know.

The direction that this is going in is obvious enough, and the direction that labor groups take in the next decade, and really starting with Republic's current contract negotiations, will tell us what kind of a career this job will be.

The future is now if you have eyes to see it.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%.

To add more to the conspiracy:

Southwest snubbed Skywest two years ago. I personally think the skywest boys have made AirTran an offer they can't refuse.

I think Skywest has offered AirTran to bigger and better than Southwest. I don't think FL has the capability (financially/logistically) to expand to compete with WN on a macro level. Skywest has the money, infrastructure, and capability in every sense to allow this to happen. Skywest has already offered AirTran the opportunity to takeover WN market share by using our "code share" using EMB-190 type equipment to expand and go into markets AirTran can't.

If United wants to open a new city, it will cost them $5M(arbitrary). If AirTran wants to open a city, it will cost $500K using Skywests already existing equipment, man power, infrastructure, ready to go personnel. United or even Southwest for that matter, can't compete with those numbers.
 
I think the "code share" will be the future of getting around scope. The rumors I've heard/read about the last few weeks were... SkyWest picking up more AirTran flying, SkyWest opening MCO base, AirTran expanding out West utilizing SkyWest. All rumors.

If this all happens, you can kiss that major airline job good-bye, forget about quick upgrades and moving on.

This might sound all exciting to some folks because of possible pilot hiring, but it will only hurt us!!!!
 
Indeed.

And more to the point, this isn't conspiracy theory stuff; this is how to run your business as efficiently as possible stuff.

If I was in management at Skywest, and I was looking for the next big thing, THIS is what I would be doing. To the guy at Skywest that just thought it up? They'll be riding the gravy train with biscuit wheels, and will be riding point on the next paradigm shift within the U.S. airline system.

It seems plainly obvious to me that this is the next big step, and if anybody running a union is listening, then I'd be ratcheting down "code share" language in the contract, or ramping up for a fight with regional contracts.

Fee for departure is over, this is the future.
 
Well, I'm beginning to think the days of flying domestic planes for mainline at $150+/hr in the right seat are gone. The unions aren't strong enough, and business is too quick to be stopped. Back in the days, there was no internet or quick way of doing business. What took 6 months back then, takes 3-4 weeks now.

If this is the case, I wouldn't mind flying EMB-190's domestically for $150k+/yr in the left seat. Do I want it this way? 10 years of my posts on here clearly states no. But I'm beginning to think it is going more and more in this direction.
 
I think the best we can hope for is JetBlue rates on EMB-190 sized equipment.

pay_jetblue2009.gif


But I think if we stop the slide at $150,000 a year, at year 12, in the left seat of an EMB-190, then we won't be in horrible shape.

In my mind, the minimum should be on $30,000 a year for first year in the right seat, $50,000 a year second year in the right seat and then an immediate $100,000 paycheck when you hit the left seat. The only thing that would make any of that palatable, and I think it's a complete sham, FYI, would be that you would be hired into a company you'd retire from, and there would be no lateral jumps and thus, seniority and pay hits in doing so.
 
I'd like to see FO's pay rates a little higher. Most don't care what the FO's make, and they don't realize its only hurting them. If your FO ain't happy, he's going to make your life hell. I think starting pay should be no less than 40K. And since the regional/mainline scene has changed, second year should hit 65K and up from there. 95K base salary after 5 years on the EMB 190 is not unreasonable.
 
mrivc211 said:
Estimates are 25-50 Regional Jets to feed AirTran operation.
Click to expand...

Our contract won't allow it. We only allow a maximum of 20% of block hours to be outsourced. We have roughly 45,000 block hours system wide right now, which means 9,000 can be outsourced. That's roughly 30 airplanes max at normal aircraft utilization. If they want to use 70-seaters, then the restriction is less, at only 15% of block hours.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Our contract won't allow it. We only allow a maximum of 20% of block hours to be outsourced. We have roughly 45,000 block hours system wide right now, which means 9,000 can be outsourced. That's roughly 30 airplanes max at normal aircraft utilization. If they want to use 70-seaters, then the restriction is less, at only 15% of block hours.
Click to expand...

It's not outsourcing.

It's code sharing.

Does your contract speak to it? If it doesn't, how have these issues been interpreted in the past? If it doesn't, and it hasn't been addressed, is your legal team ready to blaze a trail with this issue? If so, you'd better get hopping because Obama ain't gonna be in office forever.

If Skywest operates as Skywest Airlines, doing a code share with AirTran, then it's not outsourcing eh? Who cares that Skywest doesn't do any of their own booking.

If I were at the tranny right now, the last thing I'd want to rely on language that has never been tested, or worse yet, language that does not speak to this situation specifically.
 
Just a quick correction, the contract deals in ASMs, not block hours. So, the company could outsource roughly 4 million ASMs per year. Anyone that's better in math than me able to do a rough calculation of how many 50-seaters or 70-seaters that is?
 
jtrain609 said:
It's not outsourcing.

It's code sharing.

Does your contract speak to it?
Click to expand...

It does. We have specific language that deals with "commuter and express carriers." We also have specific language dealing with sub-service, code-share, and other "marketing arrangements." The company has also acknowledged that they are bound by the ASM restrictions for the SkyWest deal.

If Skywest operates as Skywest Airlines, doing a code share with AirTran, then it's not outsourcing eh? Who cares that Skywest doesn't do any of their own booking.
Click to expand...

If our code is on the flight, then yes, it is outsourcing.
 
mrivc a good write up you have there. However it leaves out one BIG question, why close the MKE base if all this has been brewing for as long as it appears.

Also if this is all true how has it affected your career plans? Despite how you feel about it, financially and QOL speaking would your preference now be to stay put?
 
E_Dawg said:
mrivc a good write up you have there. However it leaves out one BIG question, why close the MKE base if all this has been brewing for as long as it appears.

Also if this is all true how has it affected your career plans? Despite how you feel about it, financially and QOL speaking would your preference now be to stay put?
Click to expand...

Mke closing was announced in sept no? They made the airtran deal in nov so I don't think they knew this was coming. I think the airtran annoucement came 3 weeks prior to the start of flying.

And it sure looks like a half assed job after flying thru there for 4 days.

For me to stay at skyw flying emb-190's they'd have to do two things:

in house union

and

Jetblue or higher payrates. This is why it was so important for republic to set the bar high so oters could follow suit. Knowing OO mgmt, they'll throw an offer slightly higher than republic and the pilots will cave and salivate.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
It does. We have specific language that deals with "commuter and express carriers." We also have specific language dealing with sub-service, code-share, and other "marketing arrangements." The company has also acknowledged that they are bound by the ASM restrictions for the SkyWest deal.



If our code is on the flight, then yes, it is outsourcing.
Click to expand...

What if your code isn't on the flight?

I'm glad you've got language to cover this, do most mainline carriers? If not, this is a HUGE loophole that management can exploit.
 
jtrain609 said:
What if your code isn't on the flight?
Click to expand...

Then why would it be our concern if SkyWest wanted to operate their own flights as an independent airline? Or am I missing your point?

I'm glad you've got language to cover this, do most mainline carriers? If not, this is a HUGE loophole that management can exploit.
Click to expand...

Most carriers have very detailed scope language now, yes. Midwest was one of the exceptions.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Then why would it be our concern if SkyWest wanted to operate their own flights as an independent airline? Or am I missing your point?



Most carriers have very detailed scope language now, yes. Midwest was one of the exceptions.
Click to expand...

How does it get coded if Skywest operates as "Skywest International" using their own aircraft, their own booking system, blah blah blah, but the reservation is made through your airline via a code share? Or more to the point, the flight operates as Skywest flight 1 and not as a fee for departure (or at risk) setup that we normally see with the regionals? A true branded type airline that will operate a flight regardless of bookings from your airline through a code share.

Does that make more sense?
 
jtrain609 said:
How does it get coded if Skywest operates as "Skywest International" using their own aircraft, their own booking system, blah blah blah, but the reservation is made through your airline via a code share? Or more to the point, the flight operates as Skywest flight 1 and not as a fee for departure (or at risk) setup that we normally see with the regionals? A true branded type airline that will operate a flight regardless of bookings from your airline through a code share.

Does that make more sense?
Click to expand...

By definition, it can't be a code share unless our code would be on their flights. It's possible to set up a system where we could redirect passengers to the SkyWest website to book on their own independent flights to our hubs if we wanted to, but AirTran would see no benefit from that, since we wouldn't get to share in the revenue. The SkyWest arrangement works to our benefit (and theirs) because they share our code on their flights, and in return, we get the revenue when the passengers connect to our flights. Without code sharing, we would get no revenue, so there would be no benefit to AirTran.
 
Word holmes. I do hope you're right in that scope clauses are broad enough to encompass this kind of flying, because if that language fails, or somebody finds a way to exploit it, the career is over.

I'm not a pessimist...really :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top