ACA: No to Yes....

[Redtailer]

We don't want to give the Tom And Jerry (whups Kerry) Show the rights to create an "alter-ego" airline with non-ACA pilots. Did you guys actually READ the TA?

I don't have a copy of the entire TA in front of me but is this really in there?

If it is, it should be voted down just for that very reason. Has anyone ever heard of Freedom or Republic? You guys will really screw yourselves if this is the case. ACA Mgt. is just upset because they couldn't pull the same whipsaw technique. Now they will be able to do it.

 

[tarp]

From the roadshow (blurb, not the contract)

Minority Investments:

Minority investment of more than 25% in a start-up carrier:

Company will condition the investment on the start-up carrier’s agreement to extend preferential hiring to active and furloughed ACA pilots in seniority order. Limited to 1:5 open pilot positions at the start-up carrier; and no more than 4 ACA pilots per month and 36 per year.

Minority investment of more than 25% in an existing carrier:

Company will use reasonable efforts to obtain the existing carrier’s agreement to extend preferential hiring to active and furloughed ACA pilots in seniority order. Limited to 1:5 open pilot positions at the existing carrier; and no more than 4 ACA pilots per month and 36 per year.

This provision will expire ED + 24 months

Ergo, ACA can build an alter-ego of itself (like using ACJet certificate), create a "start-up", agree to hire 1-to-5 ratio but basically can create 5 non-ACA positions for every 1 ACA/union position.

You guys open the door (by voting yes) and I guarantee one other thing, Tom and Kerry will drive a Mack truck through this little loophole! We are creating a loophole in one of the only ironclad things we have going for us - all investments by ACAI must hire ACA-Alpa Union pilots - i.e. scope for us. We allow this language to go in and we are shooting ourselves in the foot!

Just tell me how many times "scheduling" has interpreted the contract language in favor of the company - OK, you tell me how this doesn't open a loophole in our contract. I'm not going to work for "ACA Light" with 80% less ACA pilots. I'm working for original ACA with all the calories and all the costs of a regular airline.

Sorry, I have to start making jokes or I'm just going to explode.

 

[70Cuda]

Good point,

The ACJet issue could be real nasty for ACA pilots. That and the 5 year issue make this TA almost too hard to swallow.

 

[KingAirKiddo]

The minority investment part of the TA is in addition to current scope language; it is not a replacement. It does nothing but cover a loophole in our current scope language...current language says that all flying in REVENUE service by ACA or ACAI must be done by pilots on the company seniority list (paraphrased...I don't have the contract in front of me). However, current scope language does nothing to address INCOME derived from investing a minority stake in another carrier. The TA basically states that if we hold a minority interest in a new startup, then 1 out of every 5 ACA pilots must be given preferential hiring. If ACAI holds a majority stake in a new startup, then all flying must be done by ACA pilots on the seniority list.

The fundamental difference is the economic/legal definition of REVENUE versus INCOME...sorry, I'm not an MBA so I can't really expand on that point.

later,
KAK

 

[General Lee]

Dave Benjamin,

As of right now, pre-Dalpa negotiations anyways, there is no way for you to get around the 57 allotted 70 seater agreement. Only ASA and Comair are getting portions of the 57 70 seaters. I have heard that Delta would like to have more 70 seaters, and they may throw us a bone by offering new 100 seaters to us for our furloughs. But, it would take awhile to get the new 100 seaters, so we may ask for some of the 70 seaters (over the 57 amount going to ASA/Comair) for our own, under a separate cerificate. There are a lot of options out there. For right now though, Skywest will not have any 70 seaters flying for Delta, but that may change in the future.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[mckpickle]

Check this website out. Click on the left above the picture of the pilots.

http://www.martinlevitt.com/

 

[Dave Benjamin]

For right now though, Skywest will not have any 70 seaters flying for Delta, but that may change in the future.

Gen Lee,
I haven't heard anything about 70 seaters for DAL just for UAL. In fact we're slated to have 30 70 seaters online by summer 2005. The bigger question is whether or not your union could prevent us from flying a 86 seater for UAL.

 

[General Lee]

Dave,

I wasn't aware of that. I guess I do not really know all of the rules of the contract. I was only aware of the 57 limit on the number of 70 seaters for the DCI flying. Seriously, what does it say about the number of planes and what types you can fly for a competitor? I could go try to find my copy of the contract, but I might have been using it as toilet paper since 9-11.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Patriot328]

The minority investment part of the TA is in addition to current scope language; it is not a replacement. It does nothing but cover a loophole in our current scope language...current language says that all flying in REVENUE service by ACA or ACAI must be done by pilots on the company seniority list (paraphrased...I don't have the contract in front of me). However, current scope language does nothing to address INCOME derived from investing a minority stake in another carrier. The TA basically states that if we hold a minority interest in a new startup, then 1 out of every 5 ACA pilots must be given preferential hiring. If ACAI holds a majority stake in a new startup, then all flying must be done by ACA pilots on the seniority list.

The fundamental difference is the economic/legal definition of REVENUE versus INCOME...sorry, I'm not an MBA so I can't really expand on that point.

later,
KAK

KAK,

EXACTLY. The language in our TA STRENGTHENS our scope, it does NOT loosen it. A lot of people are mis-informed when it comes to that portion of the TA.

 

[Cappy]

ACA allready sent in their proposal to ual before they asked for concessions from the pilots.

So how is taking concessions going to make aca more competitive. Are they going to re submit their bid.

Again 5 years jesus. We'll be back on the downturn by the time the 5 years are over.

70cuda- How could you look yourself in the mirror for flying a 70 seat rj for 50 seat wages.

Clearly, you did not attend one of the roadshows or watch the streaming video presentation. If you did you would have seen the answer right there. Come back and post after you have the information unless you do not work at ACA. If that is the case, your opinions about an in-house issue are of no use to me or anyone else.

As far as the last sentence, you must have ACA confused with Skywest. SKY will fly the 70 at 50 rates...we have 70 rates established. Again, please get the facts before posting.