ACA Pilots Vote for the right reasons...

[surplus1]

Surplus 1 - I agree with much of what you say.

Furthurmore, I'd like to apologize to you, in advance, since I strongly suspect this TA will pass. I don't know how I could look at myself in the mirror if I vote Yes, unfortunately many of my fellow ACAers are scared and will be voting yes.

You have no need to apologize to us, sir. All I am really asking is that you all take a second look and act to protect your own interests first. If you do that, it will be a no vote and it follows, our interests will be left to us to protect which we can do. We just can't stand alone.

-Our former MEC chair is hardcore against this TA. Of special concern to him is the way our relatively airtight ACA scope clause is being napalmed. Under our current contract, all Atlantic Coast Airlines Holdings Inc flying must be be done by pilots on the ACA seniority list. The new TA is giving the company plenty of wiggle room to start another Freedom type operation, while also providing a virtually meaningless flow thru agreement that lets a small amount of ACA pilots transition to this new company.

I have not seen the full text of the TA, just the pay rates and so I did not know that you wer also giving up your Scope. That is unbelievable. The binding of your Holding Company may well be the best thing that you have in your entire contract. To give that up is the equivalent of commiting suicide. If he objects to that, your former MEC Chairman is 100% correct.

Do not do this guys, that would be a much bigger mistake than the wages!

I personally would rather sacrifice my career here at ACA than vote Yes to this TA.

In all sincerity, I do not believe that you or any other ACA pilot would be sacrificing his career by voting down this TA. In fact I believe you will do more to damage your career if you vote yes, and you will take many others with you. I admit that I could be wrong, but I do not believe that I am.

You may not get the 70-seaters if you vote no, but as I said earlier .... if you vote yes, there is no guarantee that you will get them and if you do, it will also mean that you will have to vote yes again and accept J4J, United style and they will be flying at least 1/2 of whatever 70's you get.

If you are really giving up your holding company Scope, you are opening a pandora's box the lid of which you will never again close! That is more foolish than I know how to say.

Once we give in, it's only inevitable that this concessionary b.s. trickles to other regionals trying to raise the bar - COEX, Mesaba, CMR, ASA, etc......
JT

See my previous post to 46Driver and you will know I agree completely with that.

Best wishes. Here's hoping the majority will keep their head on their shoulders and defeat this proposal.

(Edited for format and spelling)

 

[surplus1]

This is not Jets for Jobs. ACA has a policy of giving preferential hiring to furloughed ALPA pilots. UAL management could care less about employment opportunites for furloughed pilots. It's the union. I'm not aware of any deals on the table to put furloughed guys in the left seat of any 70 seaters at any express carrier. I'm not saying someone wouldn't agree to that if that was the stipulation to get the contract but that is NOT the way it is right now.

Sorry, but it is the equivalent of Jets for Jobs, UAL style. I am not talking about preferential hiring for furloughed pilots, that would be fine.

Yes, UAL management couldn't care less, and YES IT'S THE UNION.

I didn't say there was a deal on the table now. What there is, is an agreement between UAL ALPA and UAL management that specifies these "opportunities". Don't take my word for it, read the latest UAL contract.

The "deal" (J4J) will not hit the table until after you have agreed to these concessions, and after you have been chosen by UAL (assuming that you are). Their proffer to your Company will have to include their agreement with the ALPA/UAL MEC. It's not an option its a contract. Job opportunities for furloughed United pilots is a requirement of any UAX agreement that includes aircraft with more than 50-seats. I didn't write the contract, ALPA did. Please read it.

Perhaps it will take the form of preferential hiring only. If that is the case, I would be amazed and you can easily agree with no harm. However, in my opinion, that is highly unlikely. The UAL MEC is highly experienced and much more agressive than USAirways. If AAA could get the J4J deal that they did, which I assume you are aware of, then surely the UAL MEC can do the same. As you say, management doesn't care. It will be dumped on you, just as it was on ALG, PDT, PSA, MES, MDW, CHQ, TSA. .... all of which have agreed to it. If you refuse in (in whatever format it may finally take) then you will not get the contract for 70-seaters. If you are not aware of that, then it's hopeless.

 

[46Driver]

There has been no, none, zilch, talk of jets for jobs on the ACA ALPA boards for the last few weeks. There has been talk of preferential hiring and I have no problem with that - they can come in at the bottom of the seniority list - just as I would if I got hired by United. I think the pilot's union would burn down the house before that happened.

 

[Patriot328]

I have not seen the full text of the TA, just the pay rates and so I did not know that you wer also giving up your Scope. That is unbelievable. The binding of your Holding Company may well be the best thing that you have in your entire contract. To give that up is the equivalent of commiting suicide. If he objects to that, your former MEC Chairman is 100% correct.

Do not do this guys, that would be a much bigger mistake than the wages!

Surplus, I just want to make a correct about what my coleauge said. Our scope is not being losened. If ACAI runs it, we're flying it. What the language talks about in the TA is regarging what happens if ACAI buy a minority (non-controlling) stake in another airline. Our scope today says we have absolutely no right to any of the flying at the other company. The new scope language would allow a few of our guys (ie, furloughed guys) to transfer to this new company at their option.

ie, if ACAI teams up (buys a 25% stake, say) with Branson (and someone else) to start up Virgin Slut in the US, under our current agreement we see NOTHING because ACAI isn't operating the other airline, it's just an investment. Now, under the "new" language (we'll see about that, but that's another thread), we will get some preferential hiring for some of our guys (small amount, I think it works out to be 72 of them). The language reads something along the line of "the company HAS to get the pilots jobs if it's a start up carrier" and it "will try to make arrangements for jobs" if it's not a start up carrier. If ACAI buys 25% of UAL's stock, it'd be hard to get our guys a few jobs there right now, ya know?


Anyway, just on this aspect of the TA, people have been greatly mis-informed. We're not giving up any of our scope language (which is perhaps some of the best in the business). We're adding to it. It's not much of an addition, really, but it's a start.

 

[surplus1]

Surplus, I just want to make a correct about what my coleauge said. Our scope is not being losened. If ACAI runs it, we're flying it. What the language talks about in the TA is regarging what happens if ACAI buy a minority (non-controlling) stake in another airline. Our scope today says we have absolutely no right to any of the flying at the other company. The new scope language would allow a few of our guys (ie, furloughed guys) to transfer to this new company at their option.

Anyway, just on this aspect of the TA, people have been greatly mis-informed. We're not giving up any of our scope language (which is perhaps some of the best in the business). We're adding to it. It's not much of an addition, really, but it's a start.

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition... I'm really pleased to hear that and hope you are correct. The fact that your Scope binds ACA Holdings does make it one of the best in the regional segment and I'm really glad to hear that you are not giving that up too.

I hope you realize that I only want the best for you guys and of course for our guys. I can't fathom the necessity of any regional jet carrier making concessions when the Company is not in trouble and I am not at all convinced that ACA is in any danger of losing its UAL contract. It would take years, literally, for Mesa to replace you and ARW and SkyWest all at the same time.

While United's Jets for Jobs policy has obviously been kept on the back burner, in my opinion for political reasons, I believe you will have to deal with that as soon as the first CRJ-700 is allocated to ACA. Preferential hiring for furloughed UAL pilots is not a problem in my view, but anything close to the USAirways concept is anathema.

Since you will have to face this prospect regardless of how you vote on the TA, I feel you all should be totally aware that it is coming down the pike.

That is why I think that gutting your contract to get flying that will be ultimately given to someone else, if you accept J4J, just makes no sense at all.

Thanks for quieting some of my fears. I hope you are correct.

 

[surplus1]

There has been no, none, zilch, talk of jets for jobs on the ACA ALPA boards for the last few weeks. There has been talk of preferential hiring and I have no problem with that - they can come in at the bottom of the seniority list - just as I would if I got hired by United. I think the pilot's union would burn down the house before that happened.

46,

Jets for Jobs is a political hot potato. It should not surprise you if it is being kept on the back burner for that very reason.

Preferential hiring and Jets for Jobs are two very different animals. Pref hiring is a good idea that helps pilots in trouble with furloughs. Jets for Jobs is the grand theft of regional pilot seniority.

Unfortunately, the United PWA is not specific enough to let anyone know, outside of ALPA and the UAL MEC, just what their real plan is going to be. That lack of clarity is the obscure "devil in the details" of this equation.

As soon as the union got away with the imposition of Jets for Jobs on the USAirways affiliates, every warning light in the cockpit of regional carriers should have gone to RED with the Master Caution screaming. That so-called protocol is one of the worst things to ever come out of Herndon. It may benefit mainline pilots, but it is nothing more than the theft of regional pilot seniority.

If it is possible, I predict the UAL MEC will do its best to ensure that the 70-seat "job opportunities" provided for in their contract becomes J4J-II. They would be foolish if they did not attempt it, and you all will be even more foolish if you do not see it coming and you let it happen.

Jets for Jobs is an ALPA National policy. They created it, they support it fully and they will try to implement it wherever they can.

Yes, you have the contractual right to refuse it. So did all the USAirways affiliates. Originally, with the exception of Mesa, they all opposed it, but one-by-one they have all come to accept it. Even CHQ was forced to reverse their no vote and swallow J4J, in a futile effort to stop Republic. Once PSA took the bait, every regional associated with USAir Group was forced to follow suit.

There are 3 of you (ARW, ACA and SKYW) playing Russian Roulette with these "concessions" in what I think is a misguided effort to "match Mesa" and keep what you already have plus get more. I believe it is unnecessary and ultimately you will all shoot yourselves in the head if you agree to this.

United management has done a lot of really stupid things and may still lose the entire airline, but I doubt seriously they will put all of their regional feed into the Mesa basket. That's not going to happen; even they are not dumb enough to do that. They are using the Mesa pilot contract to spread fear among their current affiliates and drag your contacts down to the lowest possible denominator. You all are letting them do it.

Try to remember what FDR said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." Courage is the ability to do the right thing in the face of fear. Concessions at this time are not the right thing.

The union (ALPA National) should be urging you all to stand your ground and defend your contracts. Instead, it is advising you to join the race to the bottom and duplicate Mesa by gutting two of the best regional contracts that ALPA has ever negotiated (ARW & ACA). SkyWest is not ALPA, but they too are embracing the fear strategy and participating in a very foolish bidding war. It will hurt us all and benefit none.

Why is the union doing this? It will destroy every decent regional contract in existence as well as prevent other ALPA carriers like Mesaba, COEX and ASA from making any progress in their negotiations. I can't believe that the folks at Herdon don't know that. Why then are they recommending these concessions? There's a reason and it is certainly not because ARW or ACA are in any immediate danger due to excessive pilot wages.

When you figure it out let me know. Meanwhile, I hope you all will stand your ground along with SKYW and stop this unwarranted race to the bottom.

Good luck.

 

[KingAirKiddo]

One benefit of the 70 seat deal with United, though, is that it could potentially bring those of us who were furloughed back on property faster. The deal specifically calls for the "preferential hiring" of UAL furloughees. There can be no hiring at ACA until all of us who are furloughed get recalled. I'm personally not getting excited...the furlough has taught me to believe it when I see it, but it is at least a glimmer of hope.

Oh, well...hopefully my Comair interview will go well next month so that I can have a fresh start in "airline world".

 

[D'Angelo]

interesting guess the TA was voted down, we all know what happened next. Definately a tragic turn of events.

 

[GogglesPisano]

interesting guess the TA was voted down, we all know what happened next. Definately a tragic turn of events.

Quit trolling.

 

[dojetdriver]

interesting guess the TA was voted down, we all know what happened next. Definately a tragic turn of events.

Wow, you dug back THREE years to find a thread that has no real bearing on anything going on now. Impressive.

Guess you also don't know what happened with the TA do you?