SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
I'm very much in favor of a return of regulation and the CAB.
Those goals have not been achieved. An incredible number of markets have completely lost service since 1978. Markets like Toledo, OH, where 727s used to serve the community, now have no airline service whatsoever. For years, NWA was the only airline continuing to serve that market, finally with Saabs from Mesaba, but under a deregulated environment, it ended up being unsustainable, and service ended in 2002. That's just one example, but there are many others. How has deregulation worked out for the people in these markets? Most other markets outside of the largest metropolitan areas have lost quality in service, now only receiving RJs or turboprops rather than mainline aircraft with full service.
But, let's talk about deregulation's biggest goal: price competition. A complete and utter failure. Everyone likes to talk about the reduction in fares, but no one wants to look at when fares actually started falling. News-flash, folks: it was not after 1978. The biggest reduction in fares happened from 1962 to 1978, not after deregulation. Prices started to level off after deregulation. In addition, the difference between coach class and first class fares has actually increased. Under regulation of the CAB, first class seats sold for a maximum of only 130% more than coach seats. Now, the spread can be over 2,000%. Unless you're getting a free upgrade, then you're going to get raped for a first class seat. This is what has caused the exodus of business travelers to the fractionals, not airport security or other hassles, as some like to claim. It's a price issue. It's cheaper to get a Marquis NetJets card for your executives than it is to buy them first class tickets on the airlines.
Under the CAB, airlines had to bid on markets, and the CAB took into account not only cost, but reliability and quality of service. Airlines were forced to not only control costs, but to also provide a quality, reliable product. Markets that could not be flown for a profit received limited subsidies, ensuring that smaller markets still received quality air service.
Absolutely false. The CAB never forced any companies out of business, and all airlines had their niches and thrived. Could you consolidate with another carrier and instantly become the world's biggest airline overnight? No, nor should you. The CAB provided competition by ensuring that each market had at least two carriers providing service, in most cases. The carriers all competed to win bids on routes. After the "Spoils Conference" became known way back in the early days, the CAB received plenty of oversight, and there was no favoritism.
Southwest did exist under a regulated market. It was a smaller regional carrier that served Texas markets and was quite popular in those cities. It was a choice by Herb Kelleher to not pursue other markets in other states, because he didn't want to deal with bidding through the CAB. I guarantee he would have had no problems getting awarded routes through the CAB in the late '70s if he had been interested in doing so.
There's no reason to believe the regulation would involve any sort of limits on pilot pay and work rules. Regulation under the CAB never involved any such thing. To the contrary, the bidding system provided an incentive to control costs without outside controls.
It worked wonderfully for our industry for 50 years. The 30 years since then have been a complete and utter disaster from the very beginning, and it's only getting worse.
Give him a few years. He'll learn.
Two things, here. First, a job at a "regional" or "national" carrier under regulation was a damned good job. These included carriers such as North Central, Republic, and PSA. They were career jobs. So, even if you didn't go to a "major" under regulation, you still had a very good career, unlike now.
Second, the idea that the growth in airlines, and therefore growth in airline jobs, was due to deregulation is a fantasy. The GDP of this country has gone up by far more than double since deregulation. The passenger growth rate in that same period of time? Yep, just about identical. The growth of airlines in this country has been a result of overall economic growth, not deregulation. Put the charts side by side (both can be found with a google search). You'll see that RPMs have pretty much tracked perfectly with GDP growth. Deregulation didn't help airline growth. If anything, it stunted it.
Those goals have not been achieved. An incredible number of markets have completely lost service since 1978. Markets like Toledo, OH, where 727s used to serve the community, now have no airline service whatsoever. For years, NWA was the only airline continuing to serve that market, finally with Saabs from Mesaba, but under a deregulated environment, it ended up being unsustainable, and service ended in 2002. That's just one example, but there are many others. How has deregulation worked out for the people in these markets? Most other markets outside of the largest metropolitan areas have lost quality in service, now only receiving RJs or turboprops rather than mainline aircraft with full service.
But, let's talk about deregulation's biggest goal: price competition. A complete and utter failure. Everyone likes to talk about the reduction in fares, but no one wants to look at when fares actually started falling. News-flash, folks: it was not after 1978. The biggest reduction in fares happened from 1962 to 1978, not after deregulation. Prices started to level off after deregulation. In addition, the difference between coach class and first class fares has actually increased. Under regulation of the CAB, first class seats sold for a maximum of only 130% more than coach seats. Now, the spread can be over 2,000%. Unless you're getting a free upgrade, then you're going to get raped for a first class seat. This is what has caused the exodus of business travelers to the fractionals, not airport security or other hassles, as some like to claim. It's a price issue. It's cheaper to get a Marquis NetJets card for your executives than it is to buy them first class tickets on the airlines.
Under the CAB, airlines had to bid on markets, and the CAB took into account not only cost, but reliability and quality of service. Airlines were forced to not only control costs, but to also provide a quality, reliable product. Markets that could not be flown for a profit received limited subsidies, ensuring that smaller markets still received quality air service.
Absolutely false. The CAB never forced any companies out of business, and all airlines had their niches and thrived. Could you consolidate with another carrier and instantly become the world's biggest airline overnight? No, nor should you. The CAB provided competition by ensuring that each market had at least two carriers providing service, in most cases. The carriers all competed to win bids on routes. After the "Spoils Conference" became known way back in the early days, the CAB received plenty of oversight, and there was no favoritism.
Southwest did exist under a regulated market. It was a smaller regional carrier that served Texas markets and was quite popular in those cities. It was a choice by Herb Kelleher to not pursue other markets in other states, because he didn't want to deal with bidding through the CAB. I guarantee he would have had no problems getting awarded routes through the CAB in the late '70s if he had been interested in doing so.
There's no reason to believe the regulation would involve any sort of limits on pilot pay and work rules. Regulation under the CAB never involved any such thing. To the contrary, the bidding system provided an incentive to control costs without outside controls.
It worked wonderfully for our industry for 50 years. The 30 years since then have been a complete and utter disaster from the very beginning, and it's only getting worse.
Give him a few years. He'll learn.
Two things, here. First, a job at a "regional" or "national" carrier under regulation was a damned good job. These included carriers such as North Central, Republic, and PSA. They were career jobs. So, even if you didn't go to a "major" under regulation, you still had a very good career, unlike now.
Second, the idea that the growth in airlines, and therefore growth in airline jobs, was due to deregulation is a fantasy. The GDP of this country has gone up by far more than double since deregulation. The passenger growth rate in that same period of time? Yep, just about identical. The growth of airlines in this country has been a result of overall economic growth, not deregulation. Put the charts side by side (both can be found with a google search). You'll see that RPMs have pretty much tracked perfectly with GDP growth. Deregulation didn't help airline growth. If anything, it stunted it.
