AAG to Transfer Envoy CRJ-700s to PSA

J Cole

J Cole

Well-Known Member
I will paraphrase what was posted on the company news site today.

American will be transferring all 47 CRJ-700s currently at Envoy to PSA starting mid-2015. Exact dates and rates have not been determined, but they expect to be done by the end of 2016.

The operational theory here is that PSA will be Bombardier and Envoy will be Embraer in order to reduce costs.

I will quote the next paragraph verbatim:

"While it is too early to determine the exact impact that this change will have on Envoy and our people, we know that we will need to adjust staffing. For most groups, we believe that normal attrition will address much of these staffing changes. In some cases, there may be displacements from one location to another."

My commentary: It appears that AAG plans to continue to deal with Envoy's massive pilot attrition problem by removing or parking aircraft. This looks like a major blow to Envoy, and suggests that we will continue to shrink. This news letter did not rule out the placement of any 175s eventually, but it didn't hint that Envoy would receive any either. Following the news of placement of the first 20 175s at Compass and the possible placement of the next 20 175s at Piedmont, this new information is all the more discouraging.

Edit: I saw this was already posted on another thread, so I will add it here as well.

http://www.psaairlines.com/american...-47-bombardier-crj-700-aircraft-psa-airlines/

Edit: Here is a news article which includes both the letters from Envoy's CEO to Envoy and PSA's president to PSA.

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/...r-planes-from-envoy-air-to-psa-airlines.html/
 
Last edited:
Hopefully eagle won't have to furlough, and I doubt they will due to attrition . Everyone assumed pinnacle would furlough and they are begging for pilots now.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Weren't these the only > 50 seaters at Eagle/Envoy? What's left now? I thought they had parked all the 135/140s.
Click to expand...
Yes. All that will be left is 44 and 50 seat ERJs. The 140s are on a schedule to be parked, leaving approx. 120 ERJ-145s. From what I understand, the parking of the 140s has been accelerated due to staffing.
 
Sorry to hear. Definitely not good news for Envoy. It almost seems like a conflict of interest. If AAG can move the CR7s to PSA, what keeps them from just moving whats left of the Envoy fleet to their other lesser paying regionals?
 
JustinS said:
Sorry to hear. Definitely not good news for Envoy. It almost seems like a conflict of interest. If AAG can move the CR7s to PSA, what keeps them from just moving whats left of the Envoy fleet to their other lesser paying regionals?
Click to expand...

Conflict of interest? How? AMR Corp, the holding company, owns both airlines, and can do with their assets what they wish.

We may not like this, but I see no conflict of interest here.
 
Roger Roger said:
Despite all the happy happy joy joy kumbaya around the campfire that I'm seeing about how PSA shouldn't be hated on it seems pretty scummy to me. (Looking in from very much the outside)
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

Denying jumps eats and what not is childish and shouldn't be done. You don't know if the guy needing a ride was one of the no voters.

That said, this is a great example of how we absolutely need to stand as one. Until we do, we will continue to be abused.

PA shot the entire industry in the foot and they should be embarrassed.

The root of the problem however is weak leadership from national. Allowing one ALPA carrier to undercut another is absolutely unacceptable.
 
jtrain609 said:
Conflict of interest? How? AMR Corp, the holding company, owns both airlines, and can do with their assets what they wish.

We may not like this, but I see no conflict of interest here.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was thinking about that. Not really sure how it would be a conflict of interest really, but it seems like it's a way for AAG to get around the fact that Envoy's MECs/Pilots won't allow a new contract to be voted in.
 
I feel for the Envoy guys/girls. Hopefully they can find spots at the majors to land at soon.
 
JustinS said:
Yeah, I was thinking about that. Not really sure how it would be a conflict of interest really, but it seems like it's a way for AAG to get around the fact that Envoy's MECs/Pilots won't allow a new contract to be voted in.
Click to expand...

captain-obvious-hed-2014_0.jpg
 
Since they said that Envoy would be an Embraer operator, would that mean that those 700's will be replaced with 175's?
 
Screaming_Emu said:
The root of the problem however is weak leadership from national. Allowing one ALPA carrier to undercut another is absolutely unacceptable.
Click to expand...
I understand the frustration, but I think this represents a misunderstanding of the situation. The only way to do this would be for national to create a set of standards for collective bargaining agreements which could supersede the will of the pilots. This would go against the very nature of a collective bargaining agreement - that unions and CBAs are fundamentally democratic systems, where the union allows the work group to "bargain collectively" with their management. MEC and LEC members are elected and pilots can vote for TAs. Any other system wouldn't really be a "collective bargaining" system, would it?
 
ross9238 said:
Since they said that Envoy would be an Embraer operator, would that mean that those 700's will be replaced with 175's?
Click to expand...
This would be possible light at the end of the tunnel. However, that light grows dimmer every time AAG places more 175s at other carriers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top