United Airlines has warned that it will suspend service to New York (JFK) at the end of October if the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) does not allocate it additional slots.
Ultimatum From United Airlines To FAA: More JFK Slots Or We Suspend Service
A year and a half after United Airlines returned to JFK, the carrier is struggling in the highly-competitive airport. With slots limited, the carrier operates only two flights a day between JFK and each of its west coast hubs (Los Angeles and San Francisco). United has determined that it cannot support a station like JFK with only four flights per day. Consequently, United is asking the FAA to allocate it more slots, warning it will otherwise suspend service at the end of October.
In a memo to employees reviewed by Live and Let’s Fly, United shares its rationale for the ultimatum:
“The reason is simple: without permanent slots, we can’t serve JFK effectively compared to the larger schedules and more attractive flight times flown by our competitors. For example, JetBlue currently flies to Los Angeles six times more often from JFK than United does and American flies there more than four times as frequently.”
United finds itself in a catch-22, having originally placed premium-heavy Boeing 767-300 jets on the route only to switch to aged Boeing 757-200s last October in the face of limited demand that made it more attractive to use the 767-300s on other routes.
Last week, United sent a letter to Acting FAA Administrator Billy Nolen asking him to increase capacity at JFK. United argues that despite perpetual congestion in the New York City area, this should be done because of JFK improvements including:
- widened runways
- multi-entrance taxiways
- aligned highspeed turnoffs
United adds:
“More specifically, JFK has four total runways (compared to just three at Newark – EWR) – two pairs of parallel runways – with the ability to consistently shift between two arrival or two departure runways to accommodate arrival or departure demand spikes. Yet, the airport capacity has remained the same: 81 operations per hour since 2008, just two more movements per hour than EWR’s stated limit of 79.”
The message is clear: JFK has been updated to handle more traffic.
Now United says it can either “expand and provide consumers a more competitive JFK offering” or suspend service altogether, something it calls “a tough and frustrating step to take and one that we have worked really hard to prevent.”
CONCLUSION
In a bold move, United Airlines is demanding the FAA allocate it more slots at JFK, such that it can offer meaningful service and be a true competitor, not just a two-flight-per-day sideshow. With United courting the Biden Administration’s favor on many issues during the pandemic, this move marks a test of United’s influence in Washington. Absent this grant of more slots, United claims it will (again) suspend operations to JFK at the end of October.
As a pilot who clue into and out of JFK constantly their is no doubt that ATC at JFK mismanages their airspace.
For example look at the runway configuration in SFO and the one at JFK and you will find they are very similar with each having two sets of parallel runways and a right angle to each other. SFO on a normal day is running all four of those runways. JFK on its best day and ideal configuration never runs more than 3 runways at a time.
To be fair some of this is driven by LGA. It’s traffic flow significantly impacts JFK and limits what JFK can do. But for example JFK could run arrivals to the 31s while departing the 22s without getting into LGAs airspace. Their are other options as well that they refuse to use. So United is correct that JFK can handle more operations than it does.
That being said I’ve little sympathy for United. Because when other smaller airlines want to add flights at a place like EWR they aren’t exactly accommodating. They left JFK and gave up the slots they had years ago. That the current management team views this as an error does not in any way compel the FAA to fix it for them.
Someday I’ll learn to proofread before posting lol.
Someday Matthew will learn to proofread as well 🙂
Seriously though I liked the line about “Aged 757s.” Aged compared to what? The 763s that are in most cases older?
Part of the problem is the terminal that United currently uses at JFK. Terminal 7 reminds me of a subsidized housing project. Low ceilings, cramped accommodations, pinch point TSA passage, gates bunched up against each other, etc, etc. Next, United will demand to be moved to a different terminal at taxpayer expense.
It is understandable that United is upset.
At the same time, so much of their service at LGA is on a319’s. If they wanted to could up-gauge and easily add 50 seats to a flight by using a 737-900ER.
They can’t fly to California from LGA
Incorrect. You have no concept of performance apparently.
You can’t fly to California from LGA any day except Sunday, and you can’t fly a 737-900 into LGA as it has short runways. There is a reason they only fly 737-800s and A320s into LGA.
This is the same case in SNA for example, they have short runways that can’t handle a 737-900.
Since United voluntarily left it seems this mess is their own fault
Honestly I really have little sympathy to United on the JFK situation. United is the one, who chose to give up all the slots in 2015 in exchange for more slots at other major US airports. United was the airline, who chose to leave JFK, and it is too bad that you do not realize how important JFK is to your corporate base till now! JFK is already pretty hectic at the evening times. I don’t see FAA giving them good reasonable slots anytime soon!
I agree.
Based on the decisions airlines have been making the past few years, they’ve been abysmal. Seems like US airlines in general like to either ignore their risk analysts or need to fire them. The job of a risk analyst is to see the risk in making the decisions and to come up with the loses of each decision. Risk analysts should’ve seen that or if such projections were reported, United clearly ignored it and are clearly wallowing in their loss.
I prolly said this a few times, but if I had done what the airlines have been doing at my job, I would’ve been fired immediately.
They gave this market up under felonious Smisek. I don’t think slots or not, this is a long term market for success for UAL. They can’t run them from LGA. Why not try them from ISP? a less expensive gamble than threats and $$$ to squeeze a couple more in at JFK.
Public posturing on the eve of the DOJ’s suit against AA/B6 NEA going to trial. Note the letter specifically targets only American and JetBlue with the backdrop of anticompetitiveness, and how United is being “forced” to cut and run.
Read the tea leaves… something will shake loose here. AA/B6 (not to mention NK waiting in the wings) won’t skate here without any sort of divestiture in NYC/BOS. Even if there is a public auction, United is willing pony up cash for slots. I would be surprised to see United actually leave JFK again.
I don’t know the law/rules in a situation like this…can they horse trade (that is, in theory, could UA give B6 LHR slots in exchange for JFK slots?).
They could, but the example you propose will not happen
United has an easy trade here – EWR slots to spirit plus jetblue and equal jfk slots back to UA from B6. This should be a fairly easy trade to set up
I don’t think the FAA will cave in to such demands. I’m not sure that United isn’t posturing because it wants to end service.
Alaska Airlines faced similar problems at JFK but it has slowly added flights and also bought Virgin America.
JFK probably could increase capacity slightly, though. Does United want to use 767-400ERs to JFK?