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

A message from ALPA

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
TCAS said:
Neal,

If you're on the XJT NC you better take the time to learn a little more about F&H then you currently know. They are the Spawn of Satan to regional airline pilots when it comes to contract negotiations. There are plenty of regional airline MEC NC's who've sat and watched F&H lawyers whisper into the ears of company negotiators at the bargaining table.


A grossly unfair comparison and uneccessarily cruel insult to the actual Spawn of Satan IMO. How do you think poor Mrs. Satan would feel if she knew you were talking about her kids that way? I've seen some pretty vile things here on FlightInfo, but that really takes the cake.
 
Last edited:
TCAS said:
Neal,

If you're on the XJT NC you better take the time to learn a little more about F&H then you currently know. They are the Spawn of Satan to regional airline pilots when it comes to contract negotiations. There are plenty of regional airline MEC NC's who've sat and watched F&H lawyers whisper into the ears of company negotiators at the bargaining table.

Having sat directly across from Claude Sullivan (a partner at F&H) at the negotiating table for 2+ years, I think I am well qualified to comment on F&H. That said, what, in my previous post, warranted your comments? Maybe I am missing something here but I never once said they were good for pilots...good for the profession...or anything even remotely close to what you are insinuating. What I did say is that they are very experienced in what they do and they are different from Bain in their mission. They are hired guns...no different than our ALPA professional advisors. Perhaps you should reread my post.

-Neal
 
This smokescreen is only to give ALPO an ounce of credibility in response to the mounting legal challenges resulting from their lack of representation at the regional level.
 
Green said:
E-190's are all at mainline correct? At US Airways any future 190 orders will be flown by mainline pilots on our certificate. The same is true of JetBlue. Not sure about AirCanada.

Same for Air Canada... 190's to mainline,Canadairs to Jazz (their Express carrier)

PHXFLYR:cool:
 
loverobot said:
Sorry, I was just waxing a story about the future.

I think its Shuttle America (CHQ) that runs the 170's, and the 190 is the stretch version, isnt it?



Correct.


PHXFLYR:cool:
 
better late then never..good luck and save us!!!
 
Dash8301 said:
This smokescreen is only to give ALPO an ounce of credibility in response to the mounting legal challenges resulting from their lack of representation at the regional level.

Is it? If so...why should we even bother...
 
BluDevAv8r said:
This first group is just a start...and will get the ball rolling. I imagine the other small jet carriers will be involved downstream, and perhaps even some non-ALPA carriers in the form of a "coalition." Who knows at this point and time will tell. But if some of the negative folks on here really think it is too late, then maybe I should quit...

-Neal

Good luck Neal, your going to need it. Here is some background info. that you can bring up when you meet in Herndon.

1. The first "scope committee" formed in 1995. There were members from the ASA and CMR MECs among others and presentations from many pilots including ahemm.... Dan Ford ( a full 6 years before the RJDC lawsuit). Nothing was accomplished with this committee.

2. The most recent BSIC, formed some 6 years later, was chaired by TW. When I asked him about the first scope committee report, he responded with "I haven't read it".

3. Why did ALPA remove the term "alter-ego" from it's policy and procedures soon after Delta purchased ASA and CMR?

4. Why does ALPA promote scope language that actually increases the number of portfolio players? Freedom, G0jet$, and Republic were all formed to get around seat limits and thus created even more portfolio players. Even the new NWA scope language MANDATED that new Airlink flying go to someone OTHER than Mesaba and PCL.

5. Why did ALPA oppose the ASA/CMR PID in 2000?

Again, good luck. You follow in a long history of scope committees, BSICs, and brand scope rhetoric. It is a difficult problem, but the problem gets more difficult every day it is allowed to continue. At some point, we will be past the point of no return, and I believe that point is near if not already past.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom