Airlines and the major pilot union have lobbied the federal government to put premium air carrier JSX out of business, and the FAA has introduced a rulemaking to do just that.
JSX flies Embraer ERJ-145 regional jets, that are usually outiftted with 50 seats, offering 30 business class seats instead. They operate from private terminals, and include free bags, free drinks, and free StarLink wifi.
Under FAA rules they’re able to employ recently-retired senior captains from American Airlines and Southwest, alongside co-pilots with fewer hours than are required to fly at major commercial airlines. They offer some of the most experienced cockpits in the sky, with some of the best pilot rest (90% of JSX flights return to base at night, so pilots sleep in their own bed), and they pass an IATA safety audit required for their codeshare arrangement with JetBlue.
However, ALPA doesn’t like a paid path to pilots building up hours and growing the profession, and American doesn’t like a premium competitor in Dallas (Southwest has shared their opposition with me as well).
Asking the federal government to put them out of business isn’t the only front on which JSX is under attack by major airlines and their labor unions. Reportedly airlines press airports where they have influence to refuse JSX access to private terminals, and require them to fly from main terminals.
As a part 135/380 operator using no more than 30 seats they are allowed to fly to and from FBOs, which means no long walks or security lines (JSX swabs every carry on bag, scans every passenger, and matches passenger IDs against government targeting lists). This is an advantage for customers that large airlines want to deny them.
Industry premium site Enilria flags that JSX has stopped selling flights from Austin past September.
- Eliminated their 3 times daily Dallas Love Field flight
- Eliminated their new 4 times weekly Las Vegas flight
- Their seasonal Taos flight terminates
JSX tells me that they plan to serve Austin in the future “and are exploring more suitable options for our JSX lounge from Austin Bergstrom Airport or Austin Executive Airport.” Austin Executive Airport is to the Northwest in Pflugerville, and in my view a significantly inferior option.
As one Enilria commenter notes that though JSX is based at and has just build a new corporate headquarters at Dallas Love Field,
All the Major Airlines are pressuring the airports to force them to move their operations to the Main passenger terminals. Rumors JSX will be switching to Dallas Addison in November.
JSX has already publicly shifted from Miami to Opa locka Executive Airport and from San Diego to Carlsbad.
And in Orange County, California the airport and major airlines want them relocated to the main terminal’s commuter gates, which would also limit them under the airport’s capacity allocation to just two daily flights. They’re facing complaints about use of private facilities from major carriers in Westchester, New York as well.
In contrast to much of the world, most airports in the U.S. are owned by (local) governments, and airlines are pursuing a political means of shutting down competition – not just at the federal level, but through local governments where they hold sway as well.
Props to you Gary for keeping up the one man crusade to have more options.
The major airlines should be hit with an antitrust lawsuit but it may have to wait more than a year.
Again…
Gary,
This has nothing to do with JSX or their product but everything to do with whether airlines can completely skirt FAA regulations by acting as charter companies when its actual scheduled service.
JSX is great! but why should they be allowed to operate under different regulations ONLY because they have a sham corporate set up that has one company sell scheduled service while another charters the jets (completely and fully done in a JSX cabin mockup — aka. it’s not a real charter).
If their product is so great, why do they deserve a separate set of rules?
1,500 hour rule is what it is (and I don’t think it’s appropriate) but every other airline like JSX has to utilize it, the ONLY reason JSX doesn’t is because of a sham set up they created to circumvent the FAA.
If the other airlines still offered quality products, then carriers like JSX wouldn’t have to exist.
As a staunch JSX flier, I call bull on all of it. People can do a whole bunch of mental gymnastics on here to justify this, but it all comes down to the simple fact that JSX is offering a much better product to the same clientele, and they’ve viewed as a threat. Otherwise, the other airlines and unions wouldn’t be aiming to, as clearly stated in the article, “put JSX out of business.”
I just hopped off of Contour Airlines yesterday, a nearly identical Part 135 carrier who parks at main terminals and doesn’t (yet) serve alcohol. But they use the same business model and are miles better than the major carriers. Will they be gone after next? I’ll wait…
So where is the documentation that “ALL major airlines” are pressuring the airports to force JSX to move to the main terminals?
even based on the article, it is a commenter – an unverified source – on enilria’s blog – and he is hardly free of bias.
Perhaps the airports THEMSELVES are the ones exerting pressure and they are doing it for financial reasons that, while align w/ what airlines want, are more in line w/ what benefits airports than airlines.
Without written confirmation, this is all speculation and clickbait.
The situation at Orange County is a bit more nuanced as the airport commission spearheaded the effort to constrain JSX under the present passenger caps stipulated by the current iteration of the noise settlement agreement.
The terminal location dispute dates back to 2019. Pressure from the local resident-activists caused the commission to formally propose either a terminal relocation, or to outright ban JSX by forcing one of the FBOs to not conduct business with JSX.
Eventually, JSX won a court injunction to remain at the the FBO after it was found that (1) the airport commission was found to have unduly influenced a potential outcome during negotiations for a future FBO development, (2) in attempting to restrict JSX, the commission used a definition of ‘scheduled air service’ that was in contravention of the DoT rules. Typical Orange County in that regard.
I’ll provide a couple of links for historical background:
https://voiceofoc.org/2021/01/federal-judge-grants-temporary-win-for-charter-jet-service-suing-oc-over-new-john-wayne-airport-restrictions/
https://www.ocregister.com/2021/01/23/oc-nixes-prohibition-on-commuter-jet-operations-at-john-wayne-airport/
The commission continues to threaten JSX with relocation should JSX exceed its passenger allocation under the terms of the settlement agreement. The mainline carriers are supportive of this.
@MaxPower – That’s a DOT issue, not an issue for airports. JSX complies with rules as currently written, so it’s not for airports to second guess that.
aaway
and again, SNA MUST defend its right to control passenger traffic given that they have passenger caps.
That still does not mean that any individual airline – let alone ALL of them – have tried to force airports to kick JSX out.
There is more at risk for airports than for airlines.
If a statement is made that ALL AIRLINES are forcing a change, then there should be something to back it up other than an unverified reply on a biased (whether accurate or not) blogger site
Sham airline—shur it down ASAP
JSX and airlines like it should be encouraged to grow. More competition is good for customers.
@Gary Leff – I’m not so sure this isn’t more a subtle shift in strategy for JSX than it is pressure. On the surface, a couple of things stand out:
(1) The airport being discontinued have had recent development activity, or has ongoing development activity that has affected/will affect operating costs at that field. Those costs will eventually pass on in the form of increased landing fees, or fees charged by FBOs.
(2) Likely more accurate – Because of its 135 status, JSX has the ability – in certain metro regions – to relocate to fields that are in better proximity to its (likely) clientele base. In Dallas, Addison is closer to the north ‘burbs discretionary income, thus having a unique convenience factor. Same can be said of north San Diego County (Carlsbad). Can’t really speak to AUS…isn’t NW Austin where the wealth is?
The one exception is Opa-Locka, but I suppose that’s a matter of ill-suited geographic alternatives.
@MaxPower – “JSX is great! but why should they be allowed to operate under different regulations ONLY because they have a sham corporate set up that has one company sell scheduled service while another charters the jets? If their product is so great, why do they deserve a separate set of rules?”
This is one occasion that I disagree with you. Why can’t this be a case of JSX having found a void, subsequently filling that void, thus creating a niche?
If JSX as currently incorporated is “sham” as you describe it, how has the “sham” passed regulatory scrutiny for the past 20 years? And over the course of multiple operators?
Again I’ll state – though JSX is the focus of these articles, the issue is well beyond JSX. Pilots of SkyWest are upset at the prospect of in-house ‘B’ scale wages with a SkyWest Charters operation. Though SkyWest has indicated the 135/380 operation would be confined to EAS routes, theoretically – beyond the limit of airframes and pilot recruitment – there is no limit to SkyWest possibly expanding the operation beyond EAS.
Though ALPA does not represent SkyWest pilots, the issue was brought to ALPAs’ attention. With regional pilots achieving an unprecedented level of earning power, it wouldn’t be in ALPAs’ interest to see salaries reverse course. Further, ‘B’ scales have been anathema since American got away with implementation in the early 80s. All that said, the issue of pay itself wouldn’t be worthy of the political posturing occurring now.
Enter American Airlines.
ALPA and American Airlines have a commonality that is perhaps being overlooked….ALPA represents the pilots of all the wholly-owned American Eagle regionals.
So, JSX perhaps skims a bit of premium traffic that would otherwise fly AA from the D/FW region.* A formal DoT approved SkyWest Charters operation sets the precedent for similar operations possibly forming at other wholly-owned regionals flying on behalf of mainlines, providing the path for the introduction of lower salaries.* ALPA represents wholly-owned AA Eagle pilots. AAL and ALPA will at some point have to negotiate a new pilot agreement – be it in good economic times….or bad economic times.
Scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.
“Gary Leff is one of the foremost experts in the field of miles, points, and frequent business travel…”
If you need an expert in any of the above fields, Mr. Leff should be deferred to as your authority. However, if you think this translates to expertise in the cockpit, you would be mistaken. A “View From the Wing” is just that…a view from a passenger seat. Based upon my over 26k hours and having trained many airline pilots, the supposition that having an experienced pilot in the left seat counteracts the bare minimum of experience in the right seat is naive in the extreme. When handing the controls to someone there are moments when flying that no matter how experienced the instructor is, you may not have the reaction time to counteract an erroneous control input. During approach and the landing flare, the baseline ability of the pilot manipulating the controls is vital. Mr. Leff can hang on to his “balloon” theory, but the facts are this. JSX is attempting to sidestep the requirements of a Part 121 airline, while pretending and fronting to the public that they are one in the same.
I get it, I want this type of service and would buy a ticket if they offered the same level of safety…BUT THEY DON’T! The standards that are required from a Part 121 carrier from maintenance to flight crew training and observation are markedly different. Blame a labor union or the big airlines for the pushback, but the fact is, this is an operation held to a different standard and one that is not safer, but only possibly less regulated. Does that make them un-safe? Absolutely not. They are simply operating in a region of the regulations that hasn’t been vetted at this level.
I flew (as in manipulated the controls) Part 121 for 39 years. I flew Part 135 for 5 years prior. I flew Part 91 recreationally the entire time. I’m an old aviator and there is a huge difference between viewing the wing and flying the wing. If you haven’t spent a lifetime within the heart of certifying pilots, your opinion is forever from the outside looking in and should be seen from that basis. Fuss all you want about the level of service in the cabin compared to JSX, I would agree about poor mainline service levels, but skirting around the safety regulations does no one any favor.
I believe JSX is Part 135
I have yet to fly JSX because they’re not available through my corp travel portal and I don’t travel where they fly from BJC for personal reasons. But! I really am glad they are based out of BJC instead of DEN. That alone is reason to fly them, because DEN is so far out. I prefer smaller airports and think this is a value-add for JSX and the clients they serve. But I’ll need a larger roster of destinations before they’ll be a viable option for me (or ink a deal with Navan, please!).
let’s also not forget that SKYW’s pilots are not represented by ANY union. Unions have every reason to do all they can to shut down and harness SKYW.
JSX is much smaller but the principle is still the same – unions want control and successful non-union airlines are a threat to union working principles.
Unfortunately, the current administration is driven by their ability to pander to labor rather than what makes sense for consumers or safety.
If airports want JSX to pay terminal passenger fees but operate from FBOs, then there should be a solution.
@Tim
If the airline in question is so dangerous as you suggest because of the inexperience of the co-pilots then why on earth are all these seasoned pilots flying the planes in the left seat?
JSX operates under Part 135 not Part 121
United is not trying to shut them down and has a frequent flyer deal with JSX, so not all airlines are against them.
The feckless (and racist) ALPA are of course against anything that helps young pilots so not surprised they are fighting to cap numbers which keeps their senior member wages inflated.
Politics interfering with private enterprise, picking winners and losers. One more reason why I detest politics, politicians and why I do not vote or participate in the shambolic process.
@Bestoink Dooley
I never said they were dangerous. Actually I said, “Does that make them un-safe? Absolutely not.” The point I was making is they are a Part 135 operation, but in the eyes of the public, they are viewed as a regular airline….even a better one because of the service level. The reason you may find a senior (over 65) Captain is because they aged out of their Part 121 career’s. They can still fly this Part 135 stuff. I’m recently retired and could do the same, but choose to enjoy my open schedule. To your question, having a ton of knowledge in one seat and very little knowledge in the other seat does not balance out the safety equation. You are much better served by two highly experienced aviators in both seats, who work fluidly as a team.
If anything JSX is mainly skimming traffic from WN which operates to many secondary airports itself. But WN does not seem to be leading the charge, probably because its fares are already lower than JSX on most routes.
If unions were really looking out for members they should be happy that JSX is hiring pilots that otherwise would too senior or too inexperienced to compete with its own members. They would jump for joy if the got a contract with JSX, but of course that won’t happen because JSX pilots don’t need the union.
If the government was not run by boneheads they would be encouraging or even subsidizing JSX to start serving some of the podunk “essential air service” routes that nobody else wants, instead of reducing competition. Typical hypocrisy.
@Tim Dunn – SkyWest has an in-house pilot union, the SkyWest Airlines Pilot Association.
I’m not a pilot but a traveler. I have flown JSX SAN to LAS several times and loved it. They recently moved from SAN to CBD and it will kill the business for JSX now. Quite a shame.
What airlines pressuring what airports say who and how?
Shameless clickbait.
I have flown JSX out of BJC, two miles from my home, to Vegas, Burbank and will use for Phoenix next year. The opportunity they provide for travelers who cannot always navigate the larger airports without assistance, 88 year old mother needs a wheelchair at DEN, is invaluable. The service is second to none and most of the planes are extremely comfortable. I recently had a great conversation with a seasoned JSX pilot while waiting for my flight and of course he was thrilled to have the opportunity to be able to continue his career.
I am also a Premier 1k with United due to work travel so the option to earn a few mileage plus miles for a JSX flight is appreciated.
Hopeful greed and antiquated rules do not ruin what is truly a great experience for the consumer.
Our family uses JSX Dallas/Austin/Las Vegas and are sad to see it leave. It was always convenient, comfortable, affordable, even enjoyable. Very recently we wondered why we couldn’t book future flights, so thank you for this explanatory article.
Very sad they hate the competition