|
More SFO / San Francisco cuts: AA closes pilot base
The nail on the coffin for the return of AA non-hub SFO flights: AA is closing its pilot base there.
Source: http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/a...close-pil.html The San Francisco base has been deemphasized in recent years as American has adopted a "cornerstone" strategy focused on its Dallas/Fort Worth, Chicago and Miami hubs and Los Angeles and New York. |
Originally Posted by hillrider
(Post 17267588)
The nail on the coffin for the return of AA non-hub SFO flights: AA is closing its pilot base there.
Source: http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/a...close-pil.html IIRC, all the other SFO routes are hub routes. |
I don't think AA flies nonstop from SFO to AUS.
|
Originally Posted by Jacobin777
(Post 17267840)
Besides AUS, what other non-hub routes does AA fly to out of SFO?
IIRC, all the other SFO routes are hub routes. Cheers, LBBZman |
Until recently there was SFO-BOS and SFO-HNL. Eagle also flew SFO-SNA and maybe SAN?
|
I'm surprised its lasted this long. Another blow to AA's SFO area operations.
Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...ilot-base.html |
Apa information hotline
APA INFORMATION HOTLINE This is APA President Captain Dave Bates with the APA Information Hotline for Thursday, Oct. 13. SFO BASE CLOSURE: APA has been informed that American Airlines management plans to close the San Francisco crew base. This regrettable development will adversely affect hundreds of American Airlines employees and their families, including more than 300 SFO-based pilots. APA is disappointed that management could not find a way to maintain the San Francisco base as part of the airline’s network. In consultation with APA’s general counsel, we have reconfirmed that there are no contractual limitations on management decision-making with respect to crew bases, and no status quo implications associated with a base closure during Section 6 negotiations. In our airline’s history, there have been a number of cities where airline management once maintained crew bases, only to decide later to close those bases. Rest assured that your APA leadership will engage management to explore ways to mitigate the impact of this unfortunate situation on our SFO-based pilots and their families. We intend to do everything feasible to protect the interests of the pilot families that will be affected. We are keenly aware of the hardship that results from a base closure. I remain convinced that the best course of action in our present situation is to conclude negotiations expeditiously. While we cannot necessarily influence management decision-making with respect to where to locate crew bases, a contractual agreement that is good for our pilots and good for the operation will help move American Airlines in a more positive direction. Thanks for checking this hotline. There you have it-they have no recourse if the company decides to close the base. |
at what point to the SFO people just plain realize AA isn't coming back there and move their business to wherever they think the grass is greener?
|
Originally Posted by AAerSTL
(Post 17268333)
I'm surprised its lasted this long. Another blow to AA's SFO area operations.
Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...ilot-base.html Also, one thing people here keep forgetting is that this is one company's decision. AA is not the bellwether corporation that knows which market is good and which is bad. Also, AA is still in the Bay Area. We all know that AA sees SFO a spoke. I will continue to fly AA because other than getting to SNA (which I can take WN on), it gets me to where I need to be. And the benefit of flying SFO-LAX-wherever means that I'll trump anyone originating in LAX for upgrades. |
How many (and what are they) non 5 corners crew bases are remaining?
BOS is one (for now), is it next? What else? |
Originally Posted by Xero
(Post 17268560)
I don't think it's a blow. We all knew it was going to happen.
Also, one thing people here keep forgetting is that this is one company's decision. AA is not the bellwether corporation that knows which market is good and which is bad. I will continue to fly AA because other than getting to SNA (which I can take WN on), it gets me to where I need to be. |
Originally Posted by zman
(Post 17268591)
How many (and what are they) non 5 corners crew bases are remaining?
BOS is one (for now), is it next? What else? |
Originally Posted by EaglesOhThree
(Post 17268476)
at what point to the SFO people just plain realize AA isn't coming back there and move their business to wherever they think the grass is greener?
its EXP phone and other service (compared to UA 1Ks, who like EXPs secure status by virtue of 100K miles per year), SWU upgrade availability at time of booking and SFO-based EXP's scoring complimentary upgrades compared to UA 1K's. That last advantage stems from far fewer AA than UA elites here, a trend that I imagine may even accelerate. And the terminal AA now occupies at SFO is even nicer than the rest of the airport. Now, having said this, my own domestic flying patterns make sticking with AA easier than it will be for many SFO-based folks. And ironically, my reliance on UA earlier in the year before its FF deterioration became clearer and my flying less than usual later in the year means that I'll retain 1K and lose EXP for 2012. But barring some unexpected changes in my travel or in UA's or AA's programs, I aim to reverse that for 2013. [removed deleted quote and response - moderator] |
Originally Posted by zman
(Post 17268591)
How many (and what are they) non 5 corners crew bases are remaining?
BOS is one (for now), is it next? What else? |
That's too bad. I recently started flying more for business and tried to keep on AA, primarily because the SFO-HND flight is convenient...looks like I should just give up, accept that I have to fly into NRT and switch to UA...
|
Originally Posted by Xero
(Post 17268614)
SFO I think still has an FA base, but I am not sure if they announced a closure for that.
|
Originally Posted by newyorkgeorge
(Post 17268658)
Does STL still have a FA base?
|
Originally Posted by FWAAA
(Post 17267855)
I don't think AA flies nonstop from SFO to AUS.
Kind of strange though as it doesn't give a connection city..:confused:
Originally Posted by lbbzman
(Post 17267915)
According to the current AA PDF timetable, even SFO-AUS isn't nonstop. To answer your question, I don't see any nonstop AA-operated flights from SFO to anything other than a hub or 'cornerstone' city.
Cheers, LBBZman
Originally Posted by AAerSTL
(Post 17268611)
You can deny it all you want now, but there have been posts in the past praising SFO crews and their service (specifically regarding the now discontinued SFO-HNL route) and its clear the locals have a sense of pride in their local base and valued it somewhat. Although the DOMESTIC FA base closure has not been announced its looking increasingly likely following this announcement. Again, you can spin things however you want but it doesn't change the facts. Administrative support positions are eliminated; perhaps there is a small office in the airport housing the base that will close. Commuting crews have "crashpads" in their base city that they now no longer need, fewer crews will spend money at the airport concessions.
|
I'm coming late in the game to this, but...
I'm in SFO and I'm wondering why I would want it to be a hub? Wouldn't that mean I'd pay hub fares for every flight? Also, as a mileage runner, I consider longer itineraries to be a bonus. As long as the AC stays open, I don't think I'm going to complain. |
Originally Posted by EaglesOhThree
(Post 17268476)
at what point to the SFO people just plain realize AA isn't coming back there and move their business to wherever they think the grass is greener?
The grass is not always greener on the other side just because they have more flights. |
Originally Posted by Thunderroad
(Post 17268639)
I know I'm going against the flow here, but given the recent and IMHO ongoing deterioration in UA's FF program, I might well prioritize AA over UA next year.
|
Originally Posted by EaglesOhThree
(Post 17268476)
at what point to the SFO people just plain realize AA isn't coming back there and move their business to wherever they think the grass is greener?
What's getting redundant is the usual complaints we have every single time the market is mentioned-as if some would advocate a ban on mentioning any news related to it whatsoever. really.
Originally Posted by Xero
(Post 17268560)
And the benefit of flying SFO-LAX-wherever means that I'll trump anyone originating in LAX for upgrades.
-- We know that every decision AA has made so far has been beneficial to the company and to its customers, that's why they're posting record profits! :rolleyes: <sarcasm> Since switching to United/Continental and becoming a 1K/Plat, I noticed that from a frequent flyer standpoint I preferred being an EXP. UA's route network, which blows AA's out of the water in the Bay Area and almost every where else, is of course, another story. And I've been greatly satisfied with on-time departures/arrivals (of which UA has bested AA in time and time again)-and a convenient schedule across the country. So, I'm as satisfied as I can be with UA now, but AA's continuation of route cuts and deterioration of a convenient schedule makes it impossible for me to fly them. It would maybe be a different story if the network had stayed the same as it was 2 years ago. Like I said, the cuts hit home when you're trying to fly between two major cities (SFO and MSP)--and a major storm in DFW cancels your SFO-ORD segment--and AA tells you that due to the planes being 100% full, they can't get you to Minn. for 3 days and tough luck-where as on virtually every other airline, all the other flights were open. Cancelled it out, and purchased an F class ticket on DL. That's when you know it's time to go-the deteriorated network leaves little room for IRROPS and I don't want to be constantly on-edge with AA's proactive cancellations and stingyness on rebooking and compensation. Bottom line in my view: AA = below average airline (in terms of planes, IFE, on-time issues, customer experience) with a world class FFP for its top tier elites. UA = fantastic airline (superior route network even in non-hubs, E+, chan 9, DTV w/ CO, on-time) with an OK FFP that focuses a bit more on high rev. |
Special Flight Department Hotline
SPECIAL FLIGHT DEPARTMENT HOTLINE October 13, 2011 This is CA John Hale with the Flight Department Hotline for Thursday, Oct. 13. One fact of life that you and I as pilots have accepted is that while we don’t always choose the circumstances we find ourselves in, we must find the course that ensures the safe completion of our flight. No matter what position you hold on the flight deck, it is understood that you will analyze every situation and given the options ahead, you choose the best of what you’re given. That’s the reality of leadership as well, and while I’d prefer to deal with only the good news and positive situations, just as we all do in the cockpit, I must deal with them all. Today I have to inform you of the decision to close our San Francisco crew base. This decision was not made lightly and comes with much regret and only after intensive discussion and strategic analysis. Unfortunately, this difficult course of action proves to be the best in the long run for all concerned. As many of you know, the recent surge in retirements has left our manning levels to be critically short to the detriment of our schedule reliability. We were unable to achieve a bridge agreement to allow us to temporarily ease the manning crunch, so we must find another way to underwrite the reliability of our operation. That means concentrating our resources where we were need them most and marshaling our forces around our cornerstones strategy. The current economic environment also leaves us faced with making tough choices about where and how we spend our money and this closure will save significant reserve and management costs. While this is not the course we’d planned on or hoped for, we must nonetheless take the required steps to deal with the situation we now find ourselves in, adapting and finding another clear path through difficult circumstances. That’s not only the commitment we make every day on the flight deck, but also the reality of the airline business in the 21st century. Of course, we understand the impact this decision has on pilots and families, just as we have experienced many times before in the closing of pilot crew bases in Raleigh-Durham, Seattle, Nashville, and San Diego. We in the Flight Department stand ready to help the pilots who are affected by the base closure to move smoothly into positions at other bases around our system. You’ve heard me say it before, but I’ll repeat it again: we are the strongest we can be when we work cooperatively and with a commitment to the ultimate goal, which is a thriving and secure American Airlines, solidly positioned for the future in a very competitive industry. Together, we’ll get through this difficult time, reinforce our airline’s resilience, and, in the process, ensure our future and that of our 70,000 coworkers. That’s all for today. |
Originally Posted by tom911
(Post 17269084)
It will be a rainy day in hell before I move my business to UA at SFO after the devaluation of their frequent flyer program for both midtier and lifetime members. I have been flying both AA and UA and will be moving all my business to AA now. As a leisure flyer I can live with the changes. Just not enough to make me abandon AA. A separate factor, for those at the 1K level at UA, is you have to "buy-up" to a higher fares to use systemwides there. I refuse to do that and have given all my systemwides away the last two years. I have not done that with AA systemwides.
The grass is not always greener on the other side just because they have more flights. If the frequent flyer program alone was my choice, I think AA would be the easiest option in terms of redemption benefits (miles for hotels) and upgrades (no fare class consideration other than Y/Bconnection trumping etc)--but I just got really tired of spending hours in ORD and DFW and dealing with proactive cancellations every time it sprinkles. As long as I get my domestic upgrade I'm usually OK with the experience thereafter. There's a few things I miss on AA-but again, I just enjoyed arriving early 95%+ of the time and sitting in a cushy leather domestic F seat or E+ seat w/ a decent BOB option along with a convenient schedule that fit my travel needs |
I'm assuming that most of the pilots will be stationed down the Coast at LAX?
|
Originally Posted by demkr
(Post 17269342)
with a convenient schedule that fit my travel needs
On another note, I had no clue AA even had an SFO pilots base. They should have closed that down a while ago... can't see how it lasted this long given their strategy/cornerstone cities. |
Originally Posted by mmjaysee
(Post 17269443)
Wow, you travel 200K mostly-domestic miles a year and live near SFO? I can't believe you ever flew AA in the first place. UA definitely makes the most sense for you.
On another note, I had no clue AA even had an SFO pilots base. They should have closed that down a while ago... can't see how it lasted this long given their strategy/cornerstone cities. I had been with AA since 2006, since living in Southern Illinois (MWA/STL) back when it was a hub operation-and was mainly pretty satisfied, and didn't see any reason to change after achieving status on AA for the first time. After the last two year's consistent cuts to destinations and capacity cuts to the hubs, the picture was bleaker and I experienced more delays/cancellations/IRROPs than ever before--because of these situations that understandably are out of AA's control, I would find that getting rebooked would be a challenge since there were few flights with empty seats. That, among other issues that I had with the way AA handled certain problems I faced, made me decide it was time for a change. As I have said before there are things that I miss, but the schedule/CR1s/IRROPs operation was the make-or-break for me. AA has clearly decided that the Bay Area doesn't matter-and the many of us that have switched loyalties as a result wish them and their employees all the best |
Originally Posted by demkr
(Post 17269292)
Bottom line in my view: AA = below average airline (in terms of planes, IFE, on-time issues, customer experience) with a world class FFP for its top tier elites. UA = fantastic airline (superior route network even in non-hubs, E+, chan 9, DTV w/ CO, on-time) with an OK FFP that focuses a bit more on high rev. |
Originally Posted by Thunderroad
(Post 17269658)
I might quibble with your view a bit (e.g., I'd never call UA a fantastic airline) and add a few elements to the calculation, but basically I think you've summed up the differences quite well.
Aside from that, UA has an amazing ability to turn a plane in under 15 minutes (something AA couldn't do for the life of itself) and get the plane out to the runway as quickly as possible for takeoff. This is what the making is of a good airline. Their weaknesses compared to AA are the new FFP (which largely puts revenue before status in a lot of areas, and to AA's credit, status comes 1st in most)--and airport experience. SFO T3 is a madhouse in the morning and at UA the TSA security checkpoints have long lines -- if AA was still in T3 I don't know *how long* we'd be waiting. lol |
Originally Posted by EaglesOhThree
(Post 17268476)
at what point to the SFO people just plain realize AA isn't coming back there and move their business to wherever they think the grass is greener?
|
Let's also not forget how many pilots AA just lost. Not sure what % were from the SFO base, but perhaps this was an opportunity to consolidate?
Also, for a city with so few AA flights there is a surprising amount of fleet diversity (seemingly more than before) so if the pilots aren't multi-type certified the utility of an actual pilot base may be diminished. |
Originally Posted by demkr
(Post 17269292)
That being said, it'd be nice if Bay Area flyers would not have to fly out of SJC to take a morning connection out of LAX. I believe there are no flights earlier than 7am still and still only 6 a day to LAX.
Originally Posted by demkr
(Post 17269292)
UA's route network, which blows AA's out of the water in the Bay Area and almost every where else
|
Originally Posted by demkr
(Post 17269342)
I don't travel internationally too much so when I do the buy-up isn't usually too big of a problem.
For those of us that do significant international travel and want to use our systemwides, the rules at AA are entirely different than the rules at UA,and it really does need to be spelled out. Right now an upgradable base fare SFO-SYD on UA is $1,730 vs $1,038 for discounted economy, so almost $700 more to get on the upgrade list. I know an FTer that has similarly priced fare for Singapore coming up in order to get on the upgrade list. There is no guarantee you'll clear the upgrade list (in fact, the term "upgrade lottery" has been coined on the UA forum). No refunds or reduction in fare if you don't clear, either, and this is after buying the higher priced ticket. Here's part of a post from a UA flyer from just two days ago on a routing to Shanghai:
Originally Posted by Cantheplanegofaster?
(Post 17257681)
10/10/11 -> ORD-PVG on W fare failed to clear.
Now a paltry 1 for 7 on for me clearing SWUs. If you're comparing AA systemwides to UA systemwides there's a world of difference in the product. Granted AA doesn't fly the amount of routes UA does, but you won't be paying over $500-700 extra just to try and use your systemwides to get there with AA. That's the main reason I elect to keep EXP at AA over 1K at UA. I could have gone in either direction this year but couldn't afford to hold onto both. |
Originally Posted by tom911
(Post 17270202)
Right now an upgradable base fare SFO-SYD on UA is $1,730 vs $1,038 for discounted economy, so almost $700 more to get on the upgrade list. I know an FTer that has similarly priced fare for Singapore coming up in order to get on the upgrade list. There is no guarantee you'll clear the upgrade list (in fact, the term "upgrade lottery" has been coined on the UA forum). No refunds or reduction in fare if you don't clear, either, and this is after buying the higher priced ticket. Business travelers who don't want to take convoluted routings to use their elite SWUs are going to find AA harder to fly based on where they are going. For price sensitive leisure fliers EXP is a dream, but I'm not sure that is going to drive a profitable bottom line. |
Originally Posted by elitetraveler
(Post 17270985)
How would you be able to even use an AA SWU to Syd?
The second example I posted (ORD-PVG) is a direct comparison. |
Originally Posted by tom911
(Post 17271007)
You can't. It is a route I have used UA systemwides on before they went to H fares and then dropped down to W fares. That was the first route I thought of where there is a significant price difference to buy a fare you can try to use a UA systemwide on. I posted it to show how much more you need to spend there to try and use systemwides.
The second example I posted (ORD-PVG) is a direct comparison. If you have a business traveler's schedule the AA route network is certainly lacking in lots of areas if you want to use SWUs. |
Originally Posted by Xero
(Post 17268560)
I don't think it's a blow. We all knew it was going to happen.
Also, one thing people here keep forgetting is that this is one company's decision. AA is not the bellwether corporation that knows which market is good and which is bad. Per BTS statistics, United plus Skywest had fewer boardings in the twelve months ending June 30, 2011 compared to the twelve months ending June 30, 2007. The Skywest numbers also include their operations for Delta-so even assuming Skywest didn't operate a single flight for DL (which isn't true) United HAS indeed retreated at SFO. Total Enplanements Twelve Months ending June 30, 2011 (in thousands): United: 10,130 Skywest: 2,995 Total=13,125 Total Enplanements Twelve Months ending June 30, 2007 (in thousands): United: 10,792 Skywest: 2,364 Total=13,156 SOURCE: http://www.transtats.bts.gov/airports.asp?pn=1 Skywest does have significant operations for DL at SFO offering 10x daily service to Los Angeles and several frequencies to Salt Lake City (augmented with mainline service). So even assuming Skywest didn't board a single passenger on behalf DL, UA's SFO operation is smaller today than in 2007 and certainly smaller than in 2005 or 2000. Contacting UA's investor relations and requesting information about the SFO operation will reveal that fewer flights operate today than in 2005 and UA also has fewer SFO-based employees today. Besides, having a greater proportion of flights operated with regional carriers doesn't "bode well" for the viability of a hub as other posters have incited. The SFO overhaul base has also been downsized substantially even with local incentive money provided to retain jobs. Like it or not, Chicago is UA's world headquarters, Houston will remain the largest hub, and Newark is the premier international gateway. The 787 will allow more routes to be served from those cities where UA can handle passengers at lower costs than SFO which further diminish SFO's relevance in the UA system. Don't let the facts get in the way. |
Agree with many of the sentiments in this thread. As a San Francisco-based EXP for 4+yrs now who runs his own firm with need for both Asia and Europe business travel (generally once each a quarter), and usually cannot pass off cost of full fare F or J, pressure is inevitably towards maximizing dollar value of airfare spend. AA has been amazing the past four years to me personally, with only one SWU not clearing since becoming EXP -- happened to be last week out of PVG-ORD (were 26+ EVIP requests on a fully sold out flight).
With capacity cutbacks out of SFO have been closely watching UA and the temptation to switch, but with chaos in integration of their FFPs all anecdotal evidence I have is that unless you can justify the spend to become Global Services on UA (revenue basis), there is no way the reliability of using SWUs is comparable out of this hub. In the end for international travel one kills a day plus as it is so it's worth the connection in LAX or DFW going either west or east. It's the domestic travel that becomes more frustrating when trying to make cities like DEN, WAS, BOS or SEA (although Alaska helps there). We do need one more morning and late evening LAX connection both directions, that would go a long way to easing the burden. And by the way, for you SFO-haters out there, I second someone's comment earlier that it's tiring to hear the negativity from you all. This thread was clearly titled SFO, so if you don't want to listen in our conversation about painful changes to the airline we love and rely on, just don't click on the thread please. Recognize we are largely still trying to stay with AA and that in its own small way helps makes the airline better and viable for all of us, even those who don't live in the Bay Area. |
Originally Posted by raucous
(Post 17362512)
And by the way, for you SFO-haters out there, I second someone's comment earlier that it's tiring to hear the negativity from you all. This thread was clearly titled SFO, so if you don't want to listen in our conversation about painful changes to the airline we love and rely on, just don't click on the thread please. Recognize we are largely still trying to stay with AA and that in its own small way helps makes the airline better and viable for all of us, even those who don't live in the Bay Area. If injecting facts into a discussion is construed as negativity, then I'll be a negative poster through my FT tenure. I'm glad FT and AAdvantage have allowed you to have a more enjoyable travel experience while saving money at the same time-that's precisely why many of us are here. Please recognize that this is a public forum and a confluence of people with different background, perspectives, experiences, and expectations. I've enjoyed partaking in these threads throughout the past several years in AA's gradual pull-down in the Bay Area and will continue to do so. |
Originally Posted by AAerSTL
(Post 17363240)
If injecting facts into a discussion is construed as negativity, then I'll be a negative poster through my FT tenure.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:39 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.