Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

SkyWest may seek merger with rival airline ExpressJet

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

flyboy06

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Posts
62
SkyWest Inc., cited by an ExpressJet Holdings Inc. investor as a possible merger partner for the rival regional airline, is considering acquisitions as a way to grow, according to SkyWest's chief financial officer Brad Rich.

As SkyWest seeks to expand, new contract opportunities from larger carriers have "kind of slowed down of late," Rich said in an interview Wednesday. "So one alternative is to look for ways to grow through acquisitions."

ExpressJet "would be just one opportunity we see," Rich said, declining to name other potential targets for the St. George-based airline. SkyWest operates commuter flights for UAL Corp.'s United Airlines and Delta Air Lines Inc., and Houston-based ExpressJet flies mainly for Continental Airlines Inc., Delta and under its own name.

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695246656,00.html
 
hahaha...nice. 2008 is gonna be one heck of a year!

It's like one big limbo game. How low can you go?!?!
 
As SkyWest seeks to expand, new contract opportunities from larger carriers have "kind of slowed down of late," Rich said in an interview Wednesday. "So one alternative is to look for ways to grow through acquisitions."

SkyWest doesn't merge...they acquire.
 
Today...ExpressJet. Tomorrow....THE WORLD!
 
Skywrst...possibly destroying another Great Regional Airline. Good Luck Express Pilots...the majority of the Skydorks can't wait for the quick upgrade! They will be happy to take your job, just ask the Skyway Pilots!
 
Successor and Mergers
1. This Agreement shall be binding upon any successor or assign of the Company
unless and until changed in accordance with the provisions of the Railway Labor
Act, as amended. For purposes of this paragraph, a successor or assign shall be
defined as an entity which acquires all or substantially all of the assets or equity
of the Company through a single transaction or multi-step related transactions
which close within a 12 month period.
2. No contract or other legally binding commitment involving the transfer of
ownership or control pursuant to a successorship transaction, whether by sale,
transfer or lease of the Company or substantially all of its assets, will be signed
or otherwise entered into unless it is agreed as a material and irrevocable
condition of entering into, concluding and implementing such transaction that
the rates of pay, rules and working conditions set forth in this Agreement will be
assumed by the successor employer and employees on the then current Pilots’
Seniority List will be employed in accordance with the provisions of this
Agreement. The Company shall give notice of the existence of this Agreement
to any purchaser, transferee, lessee, or assignee of the operation covered by this
Agreement or any substantial part thereof. Such notice shall be in writing, with
a copy to the Association, at the time the seller, transferor, or lessor executes a
definitive agreement with respect to a transaction as herein described.
3. Unless otherwise agreed, the following provisions shall apply in the event of a
successorship transaction in which the successor is an air carrier or an affiliate of
an air carrier, or a transaction in which the Company acquires control of another
air carrier; and
a. The integration of the seniority lists of the respective pilot groups shall
be governed by Association Merger Policy if both pre-transaction pilot
groups are represented by the Association. If the other pre-transaction
group is not represented by the Association, Sections 3 and 13 of the
Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions ("LPP") shall apply. The
successor or Company, as appropriate, shall accept the integrated
seniority list, including any conditions and restrictions, established
through Association merger policy or LPP proceedings, as applicable;
and,
b. The respective pilot collective bargaining agreements shall be merged
into one agreement as the result of negotiations among the pilot groups
and the successor or the Company. If a fully merged agreement is not
executed within 9 months from the date a final and binding integrated
pilot seniority list is issued, the parties shall jointly submit outstanding
issues to binding interest arbitration; and,
c. The aircraft (including orders and options to purchase aircraft) and the
operations of each pre-transaction airline shall remain separated until
such time as both pilots’ seniority lists are integrated and the pilot
collective bargaining agreements are combined in accordance with
paragraphs D.3.a. and D.3.b., above; and,
d. Pending the merger of the pre-transaction carrier and the pilot collective
bargaining agreements and seniority lists, no pilot on the Pilots’ Seniority
List shall be reduced in status or pay category as an effect of the merger,
purchase or acquisition.
4. The following additional requirements shall be applicable in the event of a
merger, purchase or acquisition involving the Company, regardless of the identity
of the surviving carrier or whether formerly separate operations are to be
integrated.
a. Unless and until any operational merger is finally effectuated, the
Association will continue to be recognized as the representative of the
pre-merger Company pilots, so long as such recognition is consistent
with the Railway Labor Act and any applicable rulings or orders of the
National Mediation Board. Recognition of a post-merger representative
shall be governed by the Railway Labor Act and by any applicable rulings
or orders of the National Mediation Board.
b. Subject to applicable securities and other laws and regulations, the
Company will review with the Association the details of any material
agreements relating to successorship transactions in a timely manner,
provided that no financial or other confidential business information need
be disclosed unless suitable arrangements are made for protecting the
confidentiality and use of such information.
c. The Company or surviving carrier, if different than the Company, shall
meet promptly with the Association, upon request, to negotiate the
implementation of the requirements of this paragraph.
 
Last edited:
Skywrst...possibly destroying another Great Regional Airline. Good Luck Express Pilots...the majority of the Skydorks can't wait for the quick upgrade! They will be happy to take your job, just ask the Skyway Pilots!

Ask ASA pilots how they feel too. Skywest pilots are nothing but non-union scabs to a certain extent.
 
Ask ASA pilots how they feel too. Skywest pilots are nothing but non-union scabs to a certain extent.

you might want to review the definition of scab, as it isn't a word that should be thrown around without sufficient reason. skywest pilots never flew struck work, and there is no reason to suggest that skywest is an alter ego with low pay and crappy working conditions that is taking jobs away from other pilots. last time i checked, there were no skywest pilots involved witht the decision of buying ASA, or of flying Midwest express in place of a fleet that their management wanted to get rid of. do everyone in the industry a favor, and don't point fingers to blame the industry's problems on someone else. you my friend are a great cause of the biggest problem we have, a split group of pilots industry wide with very little desire to fix problems, but only to blame them on someone else. and don't throw in my face the fact that skywest pilots voted ALPA down, I am one person with only one vote.
 
Presuming you're referring to SkyWest pilots, you're facts are wrong. We presently have 1469 captains, and 1398 first officers. The majority of us have already upgraded.

You're good at math and English. Congratulations. You're probably underemployed.
 
It is called a GOOD CONTRACT….
If SKYWEST buys EXPRESSJET, they must honor the terms of the contract ie.. pay rates, work rules and the integration of the seniority lists.
ExpressJet Pilots will make more money for flying 50 seat airplanes…
 
you might want to review the definition of scab, as it isn't a word that should be thrown around without sufficient reason. skywest pilots never flew struck work, and there is no reason to suggest that skywest is an alter ego with low pay and crappy working conditions that is taking jobs away from other pilots. last time i checked, there were no skywest pilots involved witht the decision of buying ASA, or of flying Midwest express in place of a fleet that their management wanted to get rid of. do everyone in the industry a favor, and don't point fingers to blame the industry's problems on someone else. you my friend are a great cause of the biggest problem we have, a split group of pilots industry wide with very little desire to fix problems, but only to blame them on someone else. and don't throw in my face the fact that skywest pilots voted ALPA down, I am one person with only one vote.

No but you guys sure enabled it....
 
you might want to review the definition of scab
From the Merriam-Webster dictionary: b (1): a worker who refuses to join a labor union
 
Oh great, people on the Regional board at Flightinfo.com are once again getting pissed off about stuff that has yet to, and probably never will, happen.
 
From the Merriam-Webster dictionary: b (1): a worker who refuses to join a labor union
I never refused. Does that mean I'm still a SkyWest scab? Does that mean you want to see me lose my job as you stated earlier? I was a yes vote, but I will probably not be the next time around because of the mentality of some ALPA members. I know they are probably to vocal minority, but it doesn't sound like an organization I want anything to do with after seeing some attitudes...
 
I never refused. Does that mean I'm still a SkyWest scab?
I wasn't calling anyone a scab. The guy said that it doesn't fit the definition, and technically, he's incorrect. But personally, I have nothing against anyone that voted YES, and I certainly don't consider you a scab. I have the utmost respect for the people that did the right thing and voted YES. For the people that didn't vote, not so much.
 
I never refused. Does that mean I'm still a SkyWest scab? Does that mean you want to see me lose my job as you stated earlier? I was a yes vote, but I will probably not be the next time around because of the mentality of some ALPA members. I know they are probably to vocal minority, but it doesn't sound like an organization I want anything to do with after seeing some attitudes...

PCL128, Rez, are you listening...... Y'all are doing more harm than good..... Is this the message you are trying to deliver?
 
From the Merriam-Webster dictionary: b (1): a worker who refuses to join a labor union

....and from the same source......

(4): one who works for less than union wages or on nonunion terms

How does that definition fit with you paying to sit in the right seat at Gulfstream?

Who is doing more harm to the profession?....
 
you might want to review the definition of scab, as it isn't a word that should be thrown around without sufficient reason. skywest pilots never flew struck work, and there is no reason to suggest that skywest is an alter ego with low pay and crappy working conditions that is taking jobs away from other pilots. last time i checked, there were no skywest pilots involved witht the decision of buying ASA, or of flying Midwest express in place of a fleet that their management wanted to get rid of. do everyone in the industry a favor, and don't point fingers to blame the industry's problems on someone else. you my friend are a great cause of the biggest problem we have, a split group of pilots industry wide with very little desire to fix problems, but only to blame them on someone else. and don't throw in my face the fact that skywest pilots voted ALPA down, I am one person with only one vote.
While I agree that you guys arent scabs. All I would have to say is that you guys now are going to be flying what I would call unemployed work. My 2cents
 
Last edited:
While I agree that you guys arent scabs. All I would have to say is that you guys now are going to be flying what I would call unemployed work. My 2cents

That applies to many union pilots also..... ASA, CMR, Mesaba, EGL, etc. are all flying work that used to be done by other pilots...... This really isn't a "union" issue.....

The union pilots replace people just as fast as the non-union folks...... Some just pay Herndon for the ability to say it is "OK"....
 
....and from the same source......

(4): one who works for less than union wages or on nonunion terms

How does that definition fit with you paying to sit in the right seat at Gulfstream?

Who is doing more harm to the profession?....
As you know, I already admit that that was wrong. When are the Skywest union haters going to admit that they're wrong? I'm waiting patiently. But to answer your question, Skywest being non-union is far more harmful to the profession than a handful of newbies down in South Florida paying to bounce around in a 1900 for 300 hours. When the PCL CNC goes to the bargaining table, PCL management doesn't throw down the GIA contract on the table. They throw down the Skywest "employee handbook" with the same payrates for 50-99 seat airplanes and say "the non-union Skywest pilots do it for the same rate, so you should too."
 
As you know, I already admit that that was wrong. When are the Skywest union haters going to admit that they're wrong? I'm waiting patiently.

You didn't answer the question..... does paying Gulfstream not also meet the definition of a scab that you provided?

PCL_128 said:
But to answer your question, Skywest being non-union is far more harmful to the profession than a handful of newbies down in South Florida paying to bounce around in a 1900 for 300 hours. When the PCL CNC goes to the bargaining table, PCL management doesn't throw down the GIA contract on the table. They throw down the Skywest "employee handbook" with the same payrates for 50-99 seat airplanes and say "the non-union Skywest pilots do it for the same rate, so you should too."

You live on the big river in Egypt..... The fact of the matter is the PCL pilots would have a better deal if they worked under the pay and rules of Skywest.....

Here at ASA, the PCL contract, and the Mesa contract did far more harm than the Skywest "employee handbook"..... Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that..... That is why ALPA is losing credibility......It was fellow union downward pressure that hurt us at ASA......
 
I don't get it.

What does the Ganges River have to do with this?

.....well since the Ganges is in India, not Egypt, I guess the connection is that working for Gulfstream is like working in India.........
 
You didn't answer the question..... does paying Gulfstream not also meet the definition of a scab that you provided?
Gulfstream is an IBT airline, so therefore, no, working at GIA does not fit the definition you provided. GIA has been union for a long time.
The fact of the matter is the PCL pilots would have a better deal if they worked under the pay and rules of Skywest.....
The pilots of Pinnacle will be better off with the legally binding contract that they negotiate.
 
Gulfstream is an IBT airline, so therefore, no, working at GIA does not fit the definition you provided.

So paying to sit in the right seat doesn't meet the definition:
(4): one who works for less than union wages



PCL_128 said:
The pilots of Pinnacle will be better off with the legally binding contract that they negotiate.

Nice tapdance..... who has better pay and workrules? Reminds me of the TommyBoy line about putting a guarantee on the box....... A "legally binding" POS isn't better than what Skywest has....

"Tommy: Because they know all they sold ya was a guaranteed piece of $h!t. That's all it is, isn't it? Hey, if you want me to take a dump in a box and mark it guaranteed, I will. I got spare time. But for now, for your customer's sake, for your daughter's sake, ya might wanna think about buying a quality product from me."
 
So paying to sit in the right seat doesn't meet the definition
No. Plenty of unionized regionals (yours included, as you know from personal experience) had PFT. Many unionized regionals to this day don't have anything in their contracts to prevent their companies from requiring PFT. PFT is bad, but it isn't scabbing by any definition that I can find.
Nice tapdance..... who has better pay and workrules?
We'll find out after the PCL pilots get a new contract. Their current contract is 9 years old. But in the end, it's always better to have union protection than not.
 
We'll find out after the PCL pilots get a new contract. Their current contract is 9 years old. But in the end, it's always better to have union protection than not.

....using your definition, it is better to work for Gulfstream than for Skywest.... Are you saying you would rather work for Gulfstream than for Skywest....

If you answer YES to that question, then you truly don't understand why people have trouble with ALPA.....

You already said you would rather work for Mesa than for Skywest..... Gulfstream too?
 
Are you saying you would rather work for Gulfstream than for Skywest....
I wouldn't want to work for either. I don't trust the IBT to represent air line pilots, so it's barely more valuable than no representation at all. The possible exception would be at a large regional like RAH that has a large enough pilot group to draw resources from. At GIA, the IBT just doesn't work. They need a real union like ALPA to be effective at that airline.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom