What happens? Does the CBA contract get re-negotiated/agreed to? Does one group's existing contract get applied to the entire new group?
How do these things work?
I would expect that this new pilot group would have to elect it's own MEC and ratify it's own labor contract, right?
A new joint contract must be negotiated, TAd by both MECs, and ratified by all the pilots. The MEC will be elected after SLI.
No, because at the time SkyWest Airlines, not ASA, was looking at taking over the XJT aircraft. Now, its ASA this time and NOT SkyWest Airlines.
Let me break it down for you. SkyWest, Inc. owns two airlines. One is named Atlantic Southeast. The other is named SkyWest Airlines. Atlantic Southeast and SkyWest Airlines are owned by the same company but have nothing at all to do with one another. SkyWest, Inc. has agreed to buy ExpressJet Holdings, Inc. in exchange for merging with Atlantic Southeast. SkyWest Airlines will continue to have as much to do with Atlantic Southeast after this transaction as it did before. Which is nothing. Not one iota.
I think this will end up in a federal court somewhere or at least on the lap of an arbitrator to decide. Its too bad that the boss' first act towards his new employees is to disrespect the letter and clear intent of their hard fought legally binding contract.
Regarding the XJT scope, we did hear JA speak in the earnings call. He did say that thy have talked with all Labor groups leading up to this.
So, really everyone needs to wait and see what the ALPA leadership have to say about all of this.
No telling what they have tenatively agreed to.
Talking to all labor groups and getting commitments or assurances from them are two different things and dont necesarily mean anything was tentatively agreed to. In fact, the XJT MECs email made it seem as though they were looking at all options and consulting with ALPA and independent attorneys. Doesn't sound like anything regarding integrating just ASA/XJT has been agreed to by our MEC.
XJT is being merged with ASA Holdings not SkyWest Holdings. Therefore SkyWest Airlines doesn't have to merge with XJT. It smells fishy but this apparently has already been pre-approved by Union leaders. The merger will only be ASA and XJT. This loophole was created after SkyWest failed on their first attempt.
This has not been approved by the XJT MEC. They have said they are currently consulting with attorneys. There has been no loophole created since the failed Skywest purchase of XJT. That language in our contract has not changed at all.
Doesn't the buying airline (ASA), have more leverage in how lists are integrated? Hasn't this been the case historically?
In no particular order or weight, this is the merger policy. The two MCs will decide what is fair and equitable.
status and catergory
longevity
career expectations
It's stupid to come to the table with only one option. Like the USAir East pilots only wanting DOH with NO negotiating. If this 1List issue goes to arbitration and they lose, will the XJT MEC whine like the USAPA pilots?
Be willing to negotiate. It could work in ASA/XJT's favor. But, no one never know unless your MEC is willing to sit at a table without being thick headed.
(BTW, I want 1List, but don't want you guys to F yourselves in the process)
I don't see a problem with trying to get our contract enforced while negotiating a joint contract. I'm sure the XJT MEC will do everything it legally can to require SKW to abide by our contract. There is nothing wrong with that and I would personally think that if they don't, they would be violating their fiduciary responsibility to their constituents.
Xjunk is being salvaged (acquired) by SkyWest Inc. SkyWest Airlines is the airline that made it all possible years ago. ASA and SkyWest are the airlines of Inc. Xjunk is now part of a bigger better deal. By barnstorming in with your demands, does sound a wee bit like an us air eastee. Inc. Will prevail in this not xjunk.
One list could work but not with the xjunk attitude.
Attitude? You mean the attitude of wanting to be treated with dignity and respect by respecting the letter and clear intent of our contract?
Leverage for what? As if we have any control over how these companies are ran, purchased, merged, etc. We hope to fly for a living without getting furloughed, getting paid solid wages, and good benefits.
No, ALPA does not and does not want to control how their companies are run, purchase, or merged. They just want to protect their members from those actions. But ALPA does have leverage, not just hope, in getting paid solid wages and good benefits. That is one of the primary reasons for ALPA.
Well, the releases say they were: maybe you are just not aware that they have been approached and agreed?? Are you the MEC Chairman? If not, then I guess you were not in that meeting
The email from the MEC made it pretty clear that they are consulting attorneys. I'm sure SKW informed the MECs of the facts as they see them and what they hope for.
They spent 113 million to secure the opportunity to make millions more by securing some of the sweet UAL/CAL tea. My question is in fact quite simple, given that scope language TODAY prohibits XJET from flying anything larger than 50 seats, how will that reflect on the 700/900 airframes at ASA if they become one certificate with XJET? The re-fleeting question is somewhat rhetorical, does SKYW have a deal in place for the broaching of the CAL scope, or is the re-fleeting merely consist of transferring the 700/900s off the ASA certificate to another certificate, SKYW or some other certificate being purchasre/acquired in the future. I guess my point is we are sitting at the poker table, blindfolded, drinking kool aid spiked with Everclear, holding our cards backwards, while Jerry and Brad sit at the table smoking cigars and getting BJs from our sisters. Point is watch your 6, the smoke and mirrors crowd in SGU have been very busy. My bet is there will be another ATL domicile for a Skyw Inc. certificate by 12/11. The upside for all concerned is very minimal with a very large potential for disaster(pilot wise).
Good Luck we are gonna need it.
PBR
Its not the XJT scope that prevents larger aircraft. But I do have concern that the replacement aircraft and/or the growth aircraft (whether they or 50 seaters or bigger) may be whipsawd against us using Skywest Airlines as the threat of where they will end up.
One thing to keep in mind: if this is a real priority for both the ASA and XJet MECs, we are both fortunate to have our contracts up for renegotiation this year. Even though the current XJet contract might not be able to force the issue, firm contract negotiation by the newly combined group could possibly get a three-way merger done. We as pilots would have to let our MECs know this is a priority, though.
Excellent point. It may be that JA knows that he has a 50/50 chance at this and figures if he wins, great. XJT/ASA will have to spend capital at the bargaining table to get one list. If he loses, well it didn't hurt to try, right?
Oh snap,
Lets think like
SKYW Inc. contract is up lets negotiate.
Pilots: We want......
Inc.- No
Pilots-we will strike
Inc-you gotta do what you gotta do
Pilots-ok we strike
Inc- Brad go ahead and chain the doors shut, call Delta and UAL/CAL Hdqtrs, let them know all the excess 50 seaters are parked, call the BK court and file, and call the lessors and let them know where their future beer cans are parked.
The system is flushed of excess 50 seat A/C, and the Majors have a fresh pool of newhire applicants for their expansion. Inc will pick up a 250M thank you payment from concerned parties, and throw a RV party at the '11 RNO Air Races, Genny Lee will cream his brazillian banana hammock, and the world will be at peace.
PBR
You forgot the part about transferring aircraft over to Skywest airlines if this were to ever happen. At the very least, they would hang it over our heads as whipsaw to extract whatever it is they want that day.
Which is the whole point of getting one list. SKW is just trying to keep as much leverage, just in case hoping they never have to use it. Lets not set this antagonistic situation to begin with and all work towards one list.