JSX, formerly known as JetSuiteX, is asking customers and the US public for help in defeating what it calls “baseless allegations” masking competitive fears from American Airlines and Southwest Airlines over the innovative carrier’s business model.
JSX Roasts American Airlines, Southwest Airlines For Anti-Competitive Subterfuge
While most US carriers operate under 14 CFR Part 121 (a classification for regularly-scheduled air carriers), JSX operates under 14 CFR Part 135 (a classification primarily for commuter and on-demand operations).
This is what allows JSX to offer a quasi-private jet experience and use pilots older than 65 (who still must pass the same rigorous health requirements as their younger counterparts) or have flown less than 1,500 hours.
I’ve written in detail about this issue here. The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) has worked since July to ban JSX and now American Airlines and Southwest Airlines are fully onboard that effort. They allege that JSX really offers scheduled service and therefore should operate as a Part 121 carrier, not a Part 135 carrier.
Alex Wilcox, the CEO of JSX, penned the following letter that I received in my inbox yesterday that reads just like a political party fundraiser:
Dear Friend of JSX,
I’ll get right to the point: JSX needs your help.
The FAA, under pressure from two huge airlines, is considering major changes to regulations that have been in effect for decades. These changes would ban JSX’s award-winning and innovative style of flying. If they succeed, you will lose the freedom to choose how and where to fly.
The truth is that two huge airlines – American and Southwest – and their labor union leaders – have been lobbying the FAA, TSA, and elected officials in Washington D.C. with misinformation and unsubstantiated safety claims in a brazen attempt to regulate JSX out of business. In fact, JSX has a flawless safety record and far exceeds applicable safety, security, and regulatory standards. By any measure, JSX has a better safety, security and operating record than they do – and as you know, JSX customer satisfaction scores are far higher than either of them!
Hiding behind baseless allegations and fearful of competition and innovation, these companies are trying to outlaw small air carriers, like JSX, that care about providing you with much needed choice and high-quality service. It’s hardly a surprise that these airlines would try to mislead you about JSX. American has an 86% market share at DFW and Southwest has a stunning 96% market share at Love Field. This is a de facto duopoly in Dallas that they surely want to preserve. That they’d stoop to trying to convince regulators and lawmakers that safety is in jeopardy, in order to maintain their duopoly, is shameful.
We cannot let them stop us.
This is about more than just your freedom to choose to fly with us. In many small communities, JSX is the only air carrier that provides by-the-seat air service. Every day, in the biggest and smallest airports in the country, we serve you, we serve the elderly, we serve families, we serve people on the autism spectrum or who have other special needs, and we serve many others unable or unwilling to endure the crowded terminals, packed planes, onboard altercations, and operational meltdowns that have become all too common on the huge carriers who want us gone.
Here is where you come in. The FAA has opened a public docket where you can comment on their proposal, and make your voice heard about protecting your right to fly on JSX.
We need you to weigh in, right now.
The chance to express your voice and lend your support on this important docket ends on Thursday, October 12. With just a few clicks, your comment will be sent to the FAA and to your congressional representatives. Our 1,200 Crewmembers and the diverse communities and people we serve are counting on you.
Please make your voice heard by submitting your comments through the link here.
JSX is committed to providing you with a Joyful, Simple Experience every time you fly. The future of air travel is bright. Let’s make sure it stays that way.
I am quite sympathetic to the JSX cause and was happy to offer my comments in support of its efforts (despite this rather melodramatic letter). I encourage you to do the same. No matter what you may think about JSX, the following is true:
- Southwest and American are driven by anti-completive concerns, not safety
- More competition is good for consumers
- Labor concerns aside, the JSX (and SkyWest) business model is better than no air service at all
If JSX is banned, we will see the price of airfare go up. This will impact you even if you never set foot on JSX.
CONCLUSION
The pilot unions coming after JSX want to keep the supply of pilots scarce to keep wages high. The airlines coming after JSX want to eliminate a pesky competitor that offers a valuable product at a reasonable price. These are the roots of the opposition to JSX, a carrier that is not only safe, but arguably safer than flying on a larger carrier when you have a sharp and experienced pilot who simply aged out as a Part 121 operator.
This is not a paid endorsement.
> Read More: JSX Represents A Legal Test Case For Innovation
image: JSX / Facebook
Jsx isn’t being banned. It’s being told that it should operate under the rules for the number of passengers it carriers under scheduled operations. Hiding behind a separate chartering company is just a game. Jsx is a scheduled operating carrier. I don’t agree with the current pilot requirements but why should jsx hide behind a separate chartering company? Every airline will start doing the same eventually and the faa will have no teeth based on a technicality rather than their mission: safety.
Again, I don’t think the current pilot requirements are correct but jsx should operate under faa regulations and not try to circumvent them.
If you don’t want to fly JSX missy, don’t.
Miss me with this load of bs, though. It’s a market that desperately needs competition.
I have nothing against JSX whatsoever. But they shouldn’t be able to circumvent FAA regulations via a chartering company doing business as scheduled air service. If they do it, who won’t? It’s an obvious flaunting of FAA regulations.
If JSX can’t survive or do business under the FAA regulations for the number of passengers that they carry, then they shouldn’t be in business or they should lobby to change the pilot training rules or the number of passengers it applies to.
If you don’t think the FAA (or Congress for that matter) should have any enforcement teeth when they enact regulations, that’s one thing, but hiding behind an obvious loophole like JSX is to get different pilots shouldn’t be allowed. All the airlines will do that if JSX is allowed to and you’ll have no regulatory authority in the space at that point.
But conflating JSX superior product with anything else is just silly. Of course they have a great product and I’m not arguing that but that doesn’t mean they should be allowed to flaunt Congressional or FAA regulations/laws on regulations governing scheduled passenger service for a certain number of people like JSX does.
And please… trying to demean others by calling them “Missy”? Get a life if you don’t have an argument.
JSX is more than welcome to stay in business and inject competion at DFW, Love Field, Meacham Field, or Addison Airport for all I care, but it should be done under the laws for the number of passengers they carry.
JSX is following all the rules, honey.
Now calm down and stop spreading disinformation.
coming from the guy that hasn’t disputed a thing I said… got it.
L rebuttal.
JSX is the best alternative to flying private we’ve ever used.
We fly JSX to numerous locations throughout the western states at a fraction of the time of legacy airlines. We can arrive 20 minutes before departure
Price is competitive
If I wish for the Best pilot and the Best plane , I will opt for LH and the 747 .
JSX calls themselves a public charter operator, yet they have publish schedules. I think where they problem stems from is the FAA allows operators like JSX to operate a limited number of scheduled daily flights but there is no clear definition on what “limited number” means. If the FAA were to clarify limited number meaning putting an actual number like 20-30 daily scheduled flights per day that would clear up this who situation.
What is clear is that JSX is operating more scheduled flights per day than charter flights per day but since there isn’t a clear limit on the number of scheduled flights JSX can just continue to expand their schedule flights without consequences. I don’t so much see this as anti-competitive as much as I see this as the FAA needs to better define limited number of scheduled flights.
That’s actually not how JSX is doing it. They have a company that sells scheduled flights. Completely separate from that, they charter planes (in the jsx logo and LOPA) that aren’t owned by the same company selling flights but those planes are well aware that in that logo and configuration, the only company that can charter them is the JSX company selling scheduled service (someone can correct me here but I believe it’s two separate companies owned by the same holding company but I could be wrong). JSX claims to be a charter company even though they’re clearly selling scheduled air service.
JSX product is great and I have no issue flying with someone over 65 (under the same medical requirements as those under 65) accompanied by a junior pilot without 1500 hours. But… they do sell scheduled air service and their seats are above the number that puts them at the same pilot requirements as an Envoy, Endeavor, Delta, or AA. They just found a loophole that should be closed otherwise every carrier will start doing the same and FAA/Congressional authority on the issue will be a joke.
Or, here’s a novel idea: the FAA take their greasy paws and shove ’em where the sun don’t shine?
Maybe let’s let the market decide, not some fat diversity hire in DC.
And your true colors show… you just don’t like laws or regulations. Got it.
Uh-oh! She’s big mad, everyone.
Why won’t JSX stop showing Americans how terrible the big airlines are! Boo hoo, MissyPower.
Are you five years old? lol
Enjoy your day, “Loretta”. 🙂
Slavery was a law too. Not all laws are good and thankfully they often change.
Even the mythical union created 1500 hour rule, which does nothing for safety as the FAA’s own data shows. And why do they keep waiving the hour rule for military pilots with under 1500…
Take your 1920s union shill nonsense somewhere else.
Thankfully United is in JSX’s corner at least.
You’re really comparing an FAA safety regulation to slavery? There are a lot of laws I don’t like either but I don’t make a business model around circumventing them.
Grow up.
At least there is some private competition. The airlines should not have a monopoly and take advantage of people/passengers anymore.
The “carve-out” that ALPA refers to is actually a deliberate policy change done by the Obama administration to encourage these types of operations(like what JSX offers). This was done to help slow/reverse the huge drop in service to smaller airports over the past 20 years. As Matt says, if JSX is banned, many of these routes would cease to exist. Again, it’s not a “loophole” if policy exceptions were delibrately created to have a desired effect and that effect has occurred.
If JSX wants to fly as a scheduled carrier then it has to follow the rules.
The proponents of JSX converting to 121 rules is roughly like saying the fractionals should have converted to 135 regs… they were unique and innovative at the time, and didn’t really fit into any existing mold. Their uniqueness necessitated writing new regs… 91K.
JSX is a unique product too, and shouldn’t be subject to 121 rules. I agree there needs to be oversight, but consumers deserve a choice. 135 charter has a good safety record when compared to 121 operations. It’s not inherently unsafe as the fear mongering would have you believe.
Now I need to Google Jsx and compare rates!
Nashville to Dallas about $300 to $390 on JSX and about $300 to $400 on AA, so JSX is competitive on price alone. Add in the seemingly exquisite service inside JSX’s relatively smaller terminals and inside JSX’s airliners and I’d definitely try them if they ever eventually fly MCN(Middle Georgia Regional) to PWK (Palwakee Airport Illinois).
Let’s remember that it wasn’t that many years ago that mandatory retirement for commercial pilots was age 60. Pilot unions got mixed signals from its members. Older pilots were in favor of raising the retirement age to 65. Younger pilots were opposed, because it meant longer time as a First Officer or as narrowbody aircraft Captain.
What was a deciding factor was the airline bankruptcies. Under federal pension rules, if the government assumes pension obligations of a bankrupt employer, people who retire before age 65 get dinged hard, even if another federal agency mandates a younger age.
Let’s also remember that after the Colgan Air crash in Buffalo in 2009, the FAA mandated that commercial pilots have a minimum of 1,500 hours. My recollection is that the FAA got pressure from Congress, because too many commuter airline pilots were “green,” when compared to pilots at the mainline carriers.
There is room for scheduled service under Part 135. AA uses Contour Airlines – a Part 135 carrier – as a regional feed for airports in which they can’t be truly competitive, such as White Plains NY. Is there really any difference here or just sour grapes from the Goliaths trying to ace out the David’s?
Competition drives business and creates entrepreneurial ideas to be realized. The big airlines continue to stumble in just about every measurement, seat space, fares, add on costs for everything except toilet paper, big airport crowds congestion. I deserve the right to choose who where and how the airline flies. Smaller airports relieve the congestion in many ways. The JSX notch should be applauded not a scapegoat for big airline loss of passengers…
Remember when, a few decades ago, the FAA was pushing for more flights from smaller airports to save them from going bankrupt and being closed?
The FAA was all gungho for having some kind of scheduled airline service from every possible airport.
” Hey charter/air-taxi operators get you some of those newfangled Cessna Grand Caravans and Pilatus PC-12s and start a scheduled passenger airline service from Macon GA City of Macon Airport or Perry GA airport.
Maybe even purchase some tail dragging Maule aircraft and start an airline from Warner Robins GA Airpark.”.
Now what’s the deal with the FAA? No more love and affection for scheduled airline service from smaller airports?
JSX Violating CFRs.
JSX is circumventing CFR Part 121 (a classification for regularly-scheduled air carriers), by abusing 14 CFR Part 135 and Part 380 (a classification primarily for commuter and on-demand operations.
I stand firmly against JSX abuse of Part 135, when it should be operating under Part 121. Congress should direct the FAA to clamp down on abuses of of Part 135 and Part 380 (public charter) operators.
I’m not sure I would call it abuse. Taking advantage of loopholes and gray areas in the regs yes, but they are operating legally under part 135 to the satisfaction off their FSDO. It’s not like their inspectors are oblivious to the scope of their operations. They’re not hiding anything.
Before regional jets were a thing, there were quite a few “commuters” operating under 135. In the end, it’s the FAA”s decision to allow them to operate under 135 or not.
Let’s face it… If this were a public safety issue, the FAA would have banned 135 passenger charter operations loooong ago. As it is, part 135 has a pretty good safety record.
You are wrong, Big carriers don’t give a damn for the customer, they cancel left and right “blaming the FAA, weather whatever they want” even though most of the time its Shortage of personnel or equipment,
JSX cares for the customer and provides excellent service, We want more like JSX
You are wrong, Big carriers don’t give a damn for the customer, JSX does.
,
JSX cares for the customer and provides excellent service,
WE WANT MORE JSX’s
Yall are missing a really important distinction about part380 which is that it is categorically unscheduled. Go read the regs. The regs even clarify that 380 flights can APPEAR to be scheduled in nature because a time date and location has to be given to passengers, but that, systemically and categorically, it is an unscheduled class of operations. Part121 airlines cannot fly part380 flights because Part121 airlines are scheduled.
I’m confused.
I was told that JSX was a “commuter airline” operating under the FAA’s commuter airline rules that mandated so many flights per day and flights per week between two specific airports designated in a published schedule using only airliners with an FAA specified maximum passenger capacity.
Where’d all this alleged charter aircraft operator stuff enter into that.
Now I’m wondering about all those EAS “airlines” and Alternate EAS “airlines” operating in the Continental USA. What’s the deal with those?
I think there should be a mandatory 65-year retirement age for politicians. If they need to remain in charge of things, we can have special villages in Florida and Arizona where they can go and continue setting bad policy until they die at age 97. We can call it Government Suite X, and people will be free to go live under their rules if they so choose. It’ll improve the lives for all of society.
Matthew – you seem to be missing on how companies adjust to competition. FAA needs to come back with either updated regulation or an affirmation of the current framework. Say it is the latter. Shouldn’t we expect that Delta, or Southwest, or American set up a JSX competitor? Maybe one 10x the size of JSX?
These carriers should and I like that idea (I argued that in my previous story on this topic, which I linked to above). Pilots unions will not.
I think it would be great to see more quasi-private service and whenever I fly private on a carrier like XO (JetSmarter), I love the older pilots.
Matthew Klint, it seems you have a youthful appearance. Do a majority of your press releases come from airline management? Do you also engage in interviews with airline unions to present balanced viewpoints in your writing?
In the ’90s, pilot unions successfully battled a similar Part 135 issue under the ALPA campaign called “One Level of Safety.” This led to transitions for carriers like Chautauqua Airlines from 135 to 121. It’s important not to overlook the progress achieved by pilots in enhancing flight safety.
While pilot unions won’t ultimately decide the issue, the FAA holds that authority. However, pilots play a pivotal role as stakeholders in operational safety and often transition from airlines to hold FAA positions. They have always been and will continue to be significant stakeholders, much to the chagrin of airline management.
For your upcoming article, consider investigating allegations of operational neglect in the ongoing FAA examination of Part 135 carrier Southern Airways Express. It’s my hope that you won’t solely rely on airline press releases, but conduct inclusive journalistic reporting opinions and beliefs of all stake holders.
JSX should be compelled by FAA force to operate as a Part 121 carrier.
JSX has an unfair advantage with this loophole that their pilots can operate at far, far less hours of experience than scheduled part121 carriers.
A first officer of any regional airline is 1500 hours minimum. Level that playing field and I will send notice to my Senators and representatives to keep JSX in business.
What if the 1,500 hour rule is a bad rule in the first place?