AA to drop Part of AmericanConnection

exeagle

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2002
Posts
238
Total Time
5K
From the mouth of Peter Bowler, AA will drop part of the American Connection Code share to help comply with ASM cap.
 
Last edited:

InclusiveScope

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2002
Posts
385
Total Time
11000+
Imagine that - management finding a way around a mainline scope clause. Wake up ALPA, and APA - time to try another approach.

InclusiveScope
 

MetroSheriff

Hittin' the road...
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
854
Total Time
268
InclusiveScope said:
Imagine that - management finding a way around a mainline scope clause. Wake up ALPA, and APA - time to try another approach.

InclusiveScope
What's wrong with that? Amr has decided to drop a codeshare contract in order to allow for growth at a W/O carrier. Good for Eagle. They are not finding a way around scope, they are working within the scope agreement with mainline and giving the flying to their W/O carrier.
 

InclusiveScope

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2002
Posts
385
Total Time
11000+
MetroSheriff said:


What's wrong with that? Amr has decided to drop a codeshare contract in order to allow for growth at a W/O carrier. Good for Eagle. They are not finding a way around scope, they are working within the scope agreement with mainline and giving the flying to their W/O carrier.

MetroSheriff

I don't see anything wrong with it. I am glad to see Eagle growing. However I am one of those evil RJDC people that is constantly being told that mainline scope against RJs will create more high paying mainline jobs. This is continuing proof that management finds ways around this "RJ scope". It is not me that is upset about this announcement Metro, my comment was TIC. Ask the mainline American pilots what they think about this however. You see AMR isn't "dropping a STL codeshare, rather they are "renaming" or "recoding" this feed to get around the APA scope language. The end result is the regional is growing and Eagle will continue to grow. I just wonder when the mainline pilots will wakeup and realize that their beloved contract language that limits us is not working for them either. Time for a different approach.

InclusiveScope
 

TSA Pilot

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
81
Total Time
5000
I'm confused by this whole thing. Our CEO put out a memo basically making it sound like we wouldn't be losing any flying just operating as "Trans States Airlines" instead of "American Connection". Maybe it will be like any other "oneworld" carrier, whereas we would still be booked through SABRE but instead of the AA code we will fly our own code kinda like BA. I don't see why this hasn't been thought of before. It sounds to easy, but maybe I don't have all the facts. Here is a quote from Peter Bowler :

Although there will be some loss of connect traffic to American when the "AA*" code is removed, American will continue to have a relationship with the AmericanConnection carriers and is working on plans to retain as much connect revenue from these carriers as possible.
It doesn't sound to me like they "dropped a code share contract" sounds like we are gonna be making more money on these runs until they get their ASM thing under control.

TSA Pilot
 
Last edited:

I.P. Freley

I like people food
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Posts
2,038
Total Time
Enough
Hoo boy!

I can't wait to be recalled to TSA!! Any day now! I'm sure of it!!!!

LOL!!!
 

FL370

New member
Joined
Jan 7, 2002
Posts
3
Total Time
6000+
What AA mgt has done is removed the AA flt numbers off the non Eagle feed, there for allowing for more Eagle flying. This is good for Eagle because it keeps them under the cap but it doesn't help them get rid of American Connection. I don't even think that the Arbitrators will do that completely either.

FL370
 

sabreliner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2001
Posts
216
Total Time
5000+
The American Connection flying should ALL have been dropped cold a long time ago. It is in direct violation of the American Eagle PWA, one of the few good things in that contract. I'm certainly not going to rejoice over mgmt finding another way to walk all over a contract they negotiated and signed in good faith.
 

I.P. Freley

I like people food
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Posts
2,038
Total Time
Enough
But...

It sure ain't going to stop you from rejoicing in the fact that a whole bunch of "American Connection" pilots are going to be either thrown out of work or have their furloughs extended, right?
 

dispatchguy

Dad is my favorite title
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Posts
1,569
Total Time
NIL
sabreliner said:
The American Connection flying should ALL have been dropped cold a long time ago. It is in direct violation of the American Eagle PWA, one of the few good things in that contract. I'm certainly not going to rejoice over mgmt finding another way to walk all over a contract they negotiated and signed in good faith.
Correct me if I am wrong, but when I read the AEA>ALPA Contract, I read the scope clause to mean that the flying performed by aircraft where Eagle has operational control over the aircraft would be flown by members of the ALPA/EGF Seniority list, i.e., aircraft listed in Eagle/Exec's OpsSpecs. Since CHQ and TSA are not owned by eagle, nor are those aircraft listed on the Eagle OpsSpecs, I dont see where the letter of scope is violated, but the SPIRIT of scope is, but when dealing with AMR, we all know its the LETTER that counts, and NOT the SPIRIT.

I agree, Connex shouldve been let go when TWA was bought by AMR, but then who wouldve done the feed, and with the time between TWA and 9.11, the timing didnt leave much to be desired.
 

3green

Active member
Joined
Nov 29, 2001
Posts
26
Total Time
4500
You said it in your fist statment. Operational control!! If you look at The TSA/CHQ contracts, AA not only has operational control but has the rigt to take over the leases on these aircraft.
 

atpcliff

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
4,260
Total Time
6000
Hi!

Over on the TSA website, one poster had an interesting suggestion, to help both the American Connection carriers and AEagle.

That is, for Eagle to totally drop all of the Connection flying in St. Louis, then the 3 airlines that fly the Connection can join American's alliance, and do all of the same flying and feed, but just not be called American Connection.

Then, AA doesn't lose any feed, and the Connection carriers don't lose any passengers or revenue, and Eagle can add lots of jets and still stay under the ASM.

I just thought of something else. AA could sell Eagle, and have them join the Alliance, then they could permanently shrink AA mainline, and only grow the Eagle alliance, which would save AA a lot of money, and they could keep the B and C scale pilots flying at Eagle and Connection, without having to worry about all of their scope problems.

I think scope is causing problems for the pilot groups that have put this in their contracts, and inclusion will be better for them in the future.

What is your opinion?

Cliff
GB,WI
 

flx757

I gotta have more cowbell
Joined
Mar 6, 2002
Posts
1,356
Total Time
15000
My opinion is that there are numerous threads on this site and many others where everyone that has an opinion on scope has expressed it over and over. Bottom line...scope is absolutely necessary.....in ANY contract at ANY airline.
 

MetroSheriff

Hittin' the road...
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
854
Total Time
268
atpcliff said:
Hi!

I just thought of something else. AA could sell Eagle, and have them join the Alliance, then they could permanently shrink AA mainline, and only grow the Eagle alliance, which would save AA a lot of money, and they could keep the B and C scale pilots flying at Eagle and Connection, without having to worry about all of their scope problems.

Cliff
GB,WI
Cliff,

I couldn't tell if your were being sarcastic or not. This is exactly what we want to prevent. Management would love to do just that. Basically, that idea supports the abrogation of scope and mgt ability to farm out the flying to lower paid pilot groups which in the long run would have a tremendously depressive effect on pilot compensation throughout the industry. This is a terrible idea and the consequences would not be pretty for any of us, regional or mainline.

Again, hard to tell the tone of your post. If you were being sarcastic, than please disregard.
 

Saluki Dawg

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2002
Posts
395
Total Time
10000
Now that TWA and AA have been awarded single carrier status, ALL flying being done in and out of STL SHOULD be flown by pilots on the Eagle seniority list and with Eagle A/C, period. I don't wish anyone from Chatauqua, TSA, or Corpex to lose their jobs, but the simple fact is that TWA doesn't exist anymore. When that happened, it was just as if TWA went out of business. I don't have a solution for what the Connection Carriers could do, but something needs to be done.

I work for COEX, and right now, we are having our own scope battles over both Commutair, and Gulfstream. There are also rumors that Chatauqua has been down in Houston talking to our senior management about doing feed for CAL. I know that WE at COEX or (ExpressJet) aren't going to let that happen, and Eagle cannot continue to let this happen. I think everyone needs to support the Eagle MEC in their efforts to get the flying out of STL done by American Eagle.
 

3green

Active member
Joined
Nov 29, 2001
Posts
26
Total Time
4500
well said (saluki dawg) Eagle needs all the feed, It's the way it has been and it's the way it should be. TSA/CHQ need to focus on something else, they are going to get jurked around in this mess, and it would be more advintagus for them to not get cought in the middle of this. I like TSA&CHQ, there a good group of pilots. They should pressure there company into focusing on more secure flying..
 

I.P. Freley

I like people food
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Posts
2,038
Total Time
Enough
CommutAir scope violation!?

Let me get this straight, you are "battling" over the flying that GI and CA do on your behalf?? Do you really think that a bunch of 19-seaters are a threat to you? CoEx dumped all their 19-seat operations already, so don't blame the little guys for the problems over YOUR way. The scope already keeps the CommutAir planes out of Newark, for crying out loud (yes, they are Continental Connection but THEY AREN'T ALLOWED TO ACTUALLY CONNECT YOU TO ANYTHING!!), and I hardly think that CoEx is interested in many, if ANY, of the lines that CommutAir flies. If anything, they are feeding some traffic to Continental that Continental wouldn't or couldn't offer on their own... Read, more revenue for Continental, taking traffic away from Airways and the others that are the real competition in the northeast.

Do you realize that the average number of people on CommutAir flights is about a half-dozen? You think you want to run ATR's or Brasilias on those routes? CommutAir nearly went under last year carrying half that average load... Don't think that you could do any better, do you?

Stop thinking that anyone who flies under the Continental colors and isn't owned by Continental as the competition and you will probably sleep better at night. Worry about your own management, or mis-management, not the meager amount of traffic that you could THEORETICALLY carry at CoEx that is "stolen" from you by CommutAir or Gulfstream.
 

Uncle Don

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Posts
21
Total Time
6500
OneWorld spin

Let get something straight.

1)Eagle nor Connection can be spun off into a OneWorld Member!

OneWorld must be an International Carrier/Feed, not Domestic.


2)If AMR Mngt would go along with APA and allow APA to take over all the flying done by AMR, none of this would even be a debate. You could put the best a/c on the best route.

Well, it is going to be a battle in Section 6 negotiations, but at least the Eagle and American Pilots and their unions are finially in the same army against the same enemy on this one. And are are playing a full court press.

Stay tuned!
 

dispatchguy

Dad is my favorite title
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Posts
1,569
Total Time
NIL
3green said:
You said it in your fist statment. Operational control!! If you look at The TSA/CHQ contracts, AA not only has operational control but has the rigt to take over the leases on these aircraft.
I'm defining Operational Control as its defined in 121, the right to delay, divert, or cancel a flight - which is reserved to the dispatchers of CHQ and TSA for THEIR flights - Eagle DXR's cant touch a Connection flight.

AMR therefore, under 121, has no operational control over those aircraft - they may set the schedule, fares, yadda yadda yadda, but as far as 121 is concerned (and while I havent read a grievance specifically addressing it), the operational control meaning that I read in the AEA contract means the definition in FAR 121 - the right to delay, divert, cancel, or initiate a flight. That right rests with CHQ/TSA, their PICs and DXRs.
 

TSA Pilot

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
81
Total Time
5000
Saluki Dawg -

Even though I disagree with you because I stand to lose my job in the UNLIKELY event that the arbitrators rule we can't operate as American Connection. I just want to say GO SALUKI's!!! Tonight against Texas Tech on CBS baby!!!!!!! I won't hold it against you since you went to SIU. heheh

TSA Pilot
 
Top