US Airways says 'thanks': Another shafting ahead?
Thank you, US Airways, may we have another?!
That seems to be the early reaction of Allegheny County officials learning that the airline with a rich history of delivering a splintered shaft to its public benefactors appears to be whittling a brand-new thank you.
Two decades ago, the county was snookered into building new billion-dollar airport terminals to US Airways' specification only to have the airline “de-hub” Pittsburgh in 2004.
To show that it wouldn't stand for such shabby treatment, Allegheny County put up its dukes — throwing more than $16 million in new public subsidies to US Airways to build a $25 million flight operations center in Moon Township. It opened in late 2008. Long-term benefits were assured, we were told.
Now, US Airways appears ready to abandon that facility. When it merges with American Airlines, the Moon facility very well could be mothballed in favor of American's Dallas flight-ops center.
But have no fear, Allegheny County officials won't take the slap sitting down; they'll stand tall and are considering offering the new American more incentives to not only keep the facility here but massively expand it to trump Dallas.
Sorry, folks, but the insane are running the asylum. And it's time to fight back against CEO Doug Parker and his merry band of pickpocketing charlatans. Should US Airways/American indeed abandon Moon, it should be billed for the public subsidies and the value of the 20-year lease it will abandon. And if it balks, take 'em to court.
Enough really is enough.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.