Xjet to fly 22 airplanes for UAL

Considering AWAC didn't take a 16% concessionary cut in compensation for this flying. . .

I do wonder under what financial conditions XJT agreed to do the flying at.

And also, if the pilot group (afaik - already operating under a concessionary contract) will take more concessions to keep flying.
 
surreal1221 said:
Considering AWAC didn't take a 16% concessionary cut in compensation for this flying. . .

I do wonder under what financial conditions XJT agreed to do the flying at.

And also, if the pilot group (afaik - already operating under a concessionary contract) will take more concessions to keep flying.
Click to expand...

Not one word has been said to the pilot group about concessions, neither from management or the union. While XJT and Air Whisky are similar in operating a single fleet, and having decent contracts, we're quite different in terms of fleet sizes, being public/privately owned. What works for AirW doesn't necessarily fit for XJT, although I'm sure all managements would like their pilots to be non-union and flying larger and larger aircraft for the same pay. That will never change.

Do I foresee management coming with their hand out? Probably not. Do I foresee pilots giving up pay? No. Although we're always willing to look at work rule changes etc that could benefit pilots and save money.
 
surreal1221 said:
I do wonder under what financial conditions XJT agreed to do the flying at.

And also, if the pilot group (afaik - already operating under a concessionary contract) will take more concessions to keep flying.
Click to expand...
We are already running pretty lean as a company. In addition, the concessionary aspect of our contract is expired. While we are not back to full pay, we are back to normal increases, and we never had ANY of our QOL rules compromised in the concessionary agreement.

It's doubtful the company would even come to us to ask for more concessions at this point. It even more doubtful that the pilot group would accept.

The best part about this agreement for XJT, depending on your point of view, is that it is all for 145's. There is not another company that I can think of that can operate the 145 more effeciently. For better or worse, we've been in bed with Embraer since day one as the launch customer of the 145.

Our MX guys have the most experience with the jungle jet than any other MX organization, and our engineers have worked with Embraer to tweek the aircraft's W&B and performance characteristics to enable it to go into places that that some folks thought we wouldn't have been able to. Our Training Department continues to create an efficient training system model that has continued to set the bar for RJ training... and there's not many places you can go where you can find pilots who have 10+ years operating this aircraft. Lastly, there's not many companies that have been able to give a Major Airline a "turnkey" temp contract that allowed a fairly seemless transition into their flight operations on a moments notice.

So... my guess is that our management knew our bottom line and break even numbers in advance and combined that with our performance data from the previous two temporary gigs we did with UAL... and possibly included perf data from our DAL, JetBlue, and Frontier gigs too.

Based on that... I'm "hoping" that we were not simply the bottom of the barrel bidder, and that the above performance information also played a part in the successful "competitive" bid.

We'll see how it all pans out.

Bob
[/koolaid outlook]
 
SmitteyB said:
A couple of things- I thought the corporate stuff was doing quite well...why are they taking those airplanes?
Click to expand...

From what I have heard we had more aircraft dedicated to corporate than was necessary in the current economy. There is no doubt that the corporate flying sector of this industry is feeling the pain like everyone else. My understanding is that we have been relatively successful putting together adhoc charters and athletic team charters but long term contracts that were available 18 months ago are all but nonexistent now. In my opinion we have some work to do on the sales staff but I'll leave it at that. Furthermore, I think there will be aircraft taken not only from corp but also out of the COEX system to cover UAL flying. We've been running the aircraft utilization on the COEX side pretty fat, much more so than would be required to cover the block hours given to us by CAL. I'm sure our management and CAL would have no problem drawing down the number of aircraft operated in that system while still covering required block hours.

My guess is that this results in few if any recalls/reupgrades unfortunately. Like I said earlier the line divisors will go up, the reduced flying lines will disappear, and the COLAs will disappear but the numbers of active pilots will not change much. Staffing this summer will be run exceptionally LEAN especially on the COEX side imo. I hope I'm wrong.
 
surreal1221 said:
And also, if the pilot group (afaik - already operating under a concessionary contract) will take more concessions to keep flying.
Click to expand...

I'm no kool aid drinker but I don't see this happening. In addition to the reasons Bob sites, I'm confident that in 18 to 24 months the US economy will be in a very different place....if one believes in cycles as I do anyway.
 
jynxyjoe said:
Warrants


I had to look up what a warrant was, all mumbo jumbo to me. It does appear that, yes, XJT is giving a share in the company for flying.

Am I right to say that it is tied to their success though?
Click to expand...
Yes and no. The difference between the option strike price and the current share price is certainly pay-to-play. But it's also a way for UAL to profit from the bump XJT's stock price will enjoy simply due to the contract award.
 
If ALPA jobs paid more and had better QOL the union vs. non-union argument would have more credence.

As of know Skywest pays fairly well and has enjoyed some good growth to go along with that. Reference Mesa, Pinnacle, and TSA pay rates and QOL. I'll take SkyWest for $100, Alex.
 
I'm still getting paid 30 minutes to repo in ORD, and didn't they just replace the "pilot bonus program" with the Operational/Financial rewards program?
 
GaTechKid said:
I'm still getting paid 30 minutes to repo in ORD, and didn't they just replace the "pilot bonus program" with the Operational/Financial rewards program?
Click to expand...

Congrats to expressjet guys. Hopefully will lead to more jobs. As far as pay is concerned, yes it does suck, however, considering I'm only on 6th year pay, I will max out over six figures this year, barely, but it will be over six. I get all the overnights I want, fly mainly the 700, and go home 4 extra overnights a month while in LAX. I'm not hating this job too much.
 
pat84106 said:
Skywest gets snubbed again.
Click to expand...
Yeah we're only starting like 10 cities on the UAX side in the next few months plus doing flying for AirTran to another 5 cities out of MKE.:rolleyes:

What is it with this "me" attitude some people on here have when another airline, with pilots on the street, gets flying?
 
little_cricket said:
* $200 for Delta Travel
* $200 for United Travel
Click to expand...
All DAL/DALC employees pay the PPR fee to use their flight benefits. And all other UAX carriers have to pay $25/segment domestic and $50/segment international, we get away with a $50/person anual fee that gives us unlimited UA flights. If you fly just 3 segments a year within the US on UA, the $50/person is a MUCH better deal. Don't see why that is a complaint.
 
ChasenSFO said:
All DAL/DALC employees pay the PPR fee to use their flight benefits. And all other UAX carriers have to pay $25/segment domestic and $50/segment international, we get away with a $50/person anual fee that gives us unlimited UA flights. If you fly just 3 segments a year within the US on UA, the $50/person is a MUCH better deal. Don't see why that is a complaint.
Click to expand...

Because you are not a pilot yet (on a 121 seniority list) whom used to enjoy the benefits at no cost. Not to mention, the 'unlimited' part you mention is misleading since if you sit in business or first we still have to pay (when listed, not jumpseat).

Sorry, but from the pilot's perspective it is a bad deal.
 
v1valarob said:
In reference to ExpressJet getting the flying over someone like skywest? Yes. Even happier that it's an airline with a good contract.
Click to expand...

But, if XJT is taking the flying at a 'loss' then it is just a continuation of the race towards the bottom of the industry - no matter how good the XJT pilot contract is. Trading 'X' number of furloughed ALPA pilots for another of 'X' number of ALPA pilots to be furloughed.

I know that everyone likes to play the 'who is the best' regional game, but it's like arguing who should get the biggest bedroom while your childhood house burns down around you.

I guess maybe an argument for a national seniority list or something like that - otherwise the whipsaw will continue.
 
ClearedForOption said:
But, if XJT is taking the flying at a 'loss' then it is just a continuation of the race towards the bottom of the industry - no matter how good the XJT pilot contract is. Trading 'X' number of furloughed ALPA pilots for another of 'X' number of ALPA pilots to be furloughed.

I know that everyone likes to play the 'who is the best' regional game, but it's like arguing who should get the biggest bedroom while your childhood house burns down around you.

I guess maybe an argument for a national seniority list or something like that - otherwise the whipsaw will continue.
Click to expand...
It takes some spin to call inter-regional economics "a continuation of the race towards the bottom". Sounds like you're taking what you heard someone else say, in reference to pilot pay and contracts, applying it to an unrelated situation and pretending its all one and the same.
 
Assuming XJT is flying at a loss I would agree that it doesn't exactly promote the betterment of the industry, however what choice do they have? They would lose a lot more if the airplanes were just idling.

Mesa did a similar thing, they were flying these UA planes while not at a loss at a very narrow profit margin that sometimes was a loss. This is the flying that XJT is replacing. Maybe that is UA's new business model -- only give contracts to carriers whose internal business situation would make flying at or below cost economically sound.
 
ClearedForOption said:
But, if XJT is taking the flying at a 'loss' then it is just a continuation of the race towards the bottom of the industry - no matter how good the XJT pilot contract is. Trading 'X' number of furloughed ALPA pilots for another of 'X' number of ALPA pilots to be furloughed.

I know that everyone likes to play the 'who is the best' regional game, but it's like arguing who should get the biggest bedroom while your childhood house burns down around you.

I guess maybe an argument for a national seniority list or something like that - otherwise the whipsaw will continue.
Click to expand...

Actually, if XJT did not get this contract, we would likely furlough more pilots. Upwards of 150 I imagine (personal opinion). That would mean ALPA pilots from XJT on the street, and ALPA pilots from Mesa on the street. Then the contract would go to ??? (SkyWest, ASA, TSA, GoJets, name your place).

Although this contract could possibly improve my quality of life exponentially, a large part of me wishes it was United mainline getting this flying back. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top