ACA Pilots Vote for the right reasons...

[DoJetJock]

ACA Pilots should not base their vote on pressure from the pilots of other airlines. No one flying for Comair, with the exception of their senior MEC officers, who were at last nights road show to show their support, has attended a roadshow, nor completely understands our predicament. The fact is if you vote no based on the fact that you want to look tough in the industry and the company goes under due to the loss of UAL flying, no other pilot group is going to give you a medal or honor , or anything else other than maybe a thanks and goodluck at Home Depot. This TA does not represent a race to the bottom. It still puts us among the top regionals in the country as for as total contractual benefits, (better scope protection, CVR/FDR protection). IF you vote no please do it for the right reasons and not to simply make a statement. Hundreds, if not thousands of people's livelihoods and careers are riding on this vote. BAIN IS FOR REAL. UAL would not go out and spend $1M per month on a BS organization. They take nothing into consideration other than Line item Expense. UAL is not paying them to make a recommendation then go with something different.
To the Comair guys. I speak for all when I say that we respect you for the strike and for what you have achieved for yourselves and for the industry and I thank you for treating our stepchild pilot group in CVG with respect and for always giving me a ride to work. But when you struck, your partner was not in CH.11 and there was no consulting group holding a loaded pistol to you head saying lower your costs or else. Your strike happened during the race to the top and being Pre-9/11 you had the ability to hold the upper hand. Well now in the days of Regional Portfolios, and underbidders, and bottom feeders, it is a little tougher to make a stand. There are too many others willing to say 'hey we'll do it for less money and less headache'
Fortunately, you were never in the position we are in now and it must be easy from an outsiders view to say what we should do. I am still soul-searching for what my vote will be. But as a person who has always acted honorably, whatever decision I make will be final and I know I will hold my head high regardless.
Frats.

 

[sideshow]

UAL would not go out and spend $1M per month on a BS organization

I see this number has increased since the roadshow I went to. Cleary it's not BS. If Bain get's Express carrier pilots to take 7.5% wage reductions over a 5 year period by just being hired they can show United that they were worth every bit of the money they shelled out for them.

Well now in the days of Regional Portfolios, and underbidders, and bottom feeders, it is a little tougher to make a stand

When exactly is it easy to make a stand. I'm sure the Comair guys that went without pay didn't see it as easy. Delta could certainly have held a gun to their head and said, Okay, we'll give all of your flying to ASA, Skywest and ACA. Good luck.

.

They take nothing into consideration other than Line item Expense. UAL is not paying them to make a recommendation then go with something different

Gee, where did I hear this before. Oh, at the roadshow. As if Bain would tell anyone exactly how they were going to make their decision. When you hire a high priced consulting firm, I used to work for one, of course they are going to drop in 20 guys 2 years out of college to look at everything to do with the business. They are of course getting paid to do that. But that does not necessarily mean that is the bottom line decision. If it is then Skywest is out as an Express carrier. Now is that the FACT.

(better scope protection, CVR/FDR protection

Absolutely NOT better scope protection. I see you take what the MEC and negotiating committee say regardless of anything else. If that's the case maybe you can tell the guys who went for Time Off Without Pay (TWOP) why they can not use their travel benefits OR jumpseat during their time off. As they were told by the Union they would be able to. Since the MEC and negotiating committee UNANIMOUSLY voted for this you might as well send in your YES vote right now. And oh by the way, why don't you tell the unioin you would like the 7.5% cut everyone else is taking. Or just take it yourself and send it to some furloughed guy. Maybe then you can hold your head high, regardless.

 

[DoJetJock]

Like I said I haven't made my decision yet but I thank you for your insight into some of the things I said and one of the reasons I chose to post my thoughts was so I could have them dissected and analyzed which goes into helping me make a completely informed decision.
I feel it is good to have different perspectives on things and I now have that and realize some things I posted should be disputed, and thanks for that.

 

[sideshow]

As I posted elsewhere on this board I believe that something has to be done, not for financial reasons but for political reasons. That is why I think Skywests 18 month pay freeze is pretty wise on their part. In 18 months things will be alot more clear in terms of United's situation and the number of 70 seaters in the Express network will be negligible, in my opinion. But, if Skywests TA is voted in it looks like they did something. Outsiders will not disect these TAs like the pilots will and if things turn around the Skywest pilots have an opportunity to move forward. You can be assured that no matter what good happens, ACA management will not look at the pilots contract for 6+ years. Now, if anything else bad happens OR we don't get the United contract then management will get even greater reductions and concessions.

 

[Diesel]

DoJetJock- I read your post and thought it was a well written clear explanation of your reasons and thoughts. Here are my reasons for voting NO.

1. If this TA is voted yes on then will united accept ACA's proposal?

2. Why are the pilots the only one taking pay cuts? How much of a paycut is managment taking?

3. Why are the paycuts for so long? Why not for 6 months and then reevaluated after that? 5 years is a long time.

4. 2 percent per year doesn't even cover inflation.

5. Why pay cuts and work rules. Why not one or the other.

6. If this TA is accepted will there be no more furloughs? NO

7. This isn't about what comair or anybody else thinks. Comair stood up for what was right and took a stand. Good for them. I've got a ton of respect. It's time now for aca to take a stand and avoid this mesa TA.

The roadshows suck. There is no information coming from them.

 

[Patriot328]

Originally posted by Diesel

DoJetJock- I read your post and thought it was a well written clear explanation of your reasons and thoughts. Here are my reasons for voting NO.

1. If this TA is voted yes on then will united accept ACA's proposal?

If it's voted NO, does that improve the chances of UAL accepting ACA's bid? No clear answer. I suspect voting NO will not HELP ACA's chances, however.

2. Why are the pilots the only one taking pay cuts? How much of a paycut is managment taking?

Don't have an answer. Apparently Tom and Kerry didn't budge on management compensation. That's a HUGE sticking point for me. The MEC brought up the "management knows we're pi$$ed off" speech again. I think we heard that during the greenbook shows. I also believe that Bain will be laying the hammer down on our inefficiencies as well as our "over paid" pilots.

3. Why are the paycuts for so long? Why not for 6 months and then reevaluated after that? 5 years is a long time.

It was negotiated. Like they said, the company wanted longer, MEC wanted shorter. That's what they came up with. SKYW got 18 months (subject to change at any time), AirWhiskey got 8 (management originally wanted 16!?) Not having any kind of snap backs is a huge sticking point as well.

4. 2 percent per year doesn't even cover inflation.

You're right, it doesn't. But there are two ways to look at it: A) You are getting more than a 2% increase every year because you are not only getting the ED+12 or 24 raises, but also your longevity increases as well.

That being said, B) a pilot in their first year now will be making about the same in five years as what I do now (a 5 yr guy) on the FRJ CA scale. Sucks.

5. Why pay cuts and work rules. Why not one or the other.

Work rules = $ The company wants money. Work rules are nothing but money to the company. Would you have rather seen us keep transition conflict pay (which will go away with PBS anyway) and take a 10% cut or vice versa? Either way, it's money out of your pocket.

6. If this TA is accepted will there be no more furloughs? NO

If it's denied, will there be no more furloughs? NO. It's been made relatively clear, if we do NOT get 70seaters in this deal, we will be furloughing another 400 pilots. The 41s are going bye-bye and we are done getting 50 seaters. If there is nothing to replace the 50s (ie, 70 seaters), we're going to have a lot of pilots hanging around doing nothing. I firmly believe even if we vote no, we'll keep the 87 RJs we have now, but then that's it. We'll be tremendously fat on pilots and it will be very ugly. The number were 400 MORE pilots on the street, 3 years to do the bump and flush, and about $15,000,000 in costs to the company. We will not have any time to be looking for growth in that scenario.

7. This isn't about what comair or anybody else thinks. Comair stood up for what was right and took a stand. Good for them. I've got a ton of respect. It's time now for aca to take a stand and avoid this mesa TA.

I agree. I personally think we rolled over for the green book too easily. That being said, even under the TA, we're miles above Mesa and their contract. We're still one of the highest paid regionals, with CMR being the leader. If we weren't dealing with a bankrupt partner, we'd have more leverage than we do now.



I arrived at the road show in CVG at 1:30pm. I said goodbye to the last MEC person a little after midnight. Something I gathered while I was there: This TA isn't about growing, it's about trying to keep as many of our pilots employed. It's about lowering costs *enough* to get UAL's business, but no more. We will be, by no means, putting in the lowest bid to UAL. I sincerely believe that. I think the idea of this TA is to get our costs just low enough to get a deal. The somewhat lower costs, the infrastructure we have already, and our history with UAL, is what will get us the UAL contract.

There's so much uncertainty in this, one might as well flip a coin. It's a helluva a bet either way, because either voting yes or no can be really good or really really bad.

Still doing some soul searching....


Patriot

 

[46Driver]

I was a definite "NO" to begin with myself and the more I hear, the more I am sitting on the fence. This is not similar to the Comair situation being that Delta was not in bankruptcy vice United in deep trouble and above all, the BAIN corporation making those decisions - in particular the line item expense. In particular, the one thing that is making me think is that all of our MEC reps are good guys, they have the most info, and they recommended this TA - unamiously. I may not like it - but a lot of things in life are unpleasant. Now, back to my graduate school classes.....

 

[skootertrash]

But why 6 years. Does managment expect the pilots to go to them when the economy is doing good and ask for raises? NO why?, because the pay rates are set in the contract.

 

[embraerdriver]

VOTE NO!

Stay strong folks,

CHQ Pilots

 

[House_X]

embraerdriver is right!

Anybody who is in fear of their job because of this TA should consider the benefits of having a fallback career. This fear tactic is a typical negotiating tool. We have to stay strong and stay united. Think about all those times in the past when people fought for better pay and working condtions in our profession.
Well, now it's OUR TURN. ALL EYES ARE ON ACA!

It's about honor and respect. What about our furloughed brethren, have we forgot about them? Nothing in this deal addresses those issues. We need a solid business plan, not a paycut!!!

Don't be a BEOOOTCH!

house

 

[Diesel]

How are they going to cut more pilots? They don't even have enough pilots to cover the trips right now. Check out the reserve buckets.

Why should we keep cutting and then saying hey at least we aren't mesa. Why not just say no and prove we aren't mesa.

Just vote NO

 

[Old Crow]

Very difficult situation you guys are facing. I would like you all to consider why the "commuters", "Regionals" or whatever, are paid and treated poorly.
Up until Sept. 11, 2003 a Regional airline was losing approximately 13 pilots per month to the majors. Training cost, and lack of pilots to grow efficiently became quite expensive. Pay for training was begun, disregard to all aspects of a general wage description was a standard because the market would support it. They were pilots with low experence breaking into the industry.
THIS NO LONGER HOLDS TRUE.
Management of any company must adapt to the current economic position. The Regional industry has grown tremendously in the past two years.

Good luck guys.

 

[Patriot328]

How are they going to cut more pilots? They don't even have enough pilots to cover the trips right now. Check out the reserve buckets.

Just vote NO

You aren't serious, are you? Look at ALL the reserve buckets! We are incredibly overstaffed right now, just not in the correct places. We might be low on FOs, but we are VERY fat on captains.

 

[StaySeated]

I have no right to tell another pilot how to vote, but two things stated above concerned me enough to reply.

"In particular, the one thing that is making me think is that all of our MEC reps are good guys, they have the most info, and they recommended this TA - unamiously. "

Unfortunately, the MEC reps HAVE to support the TA. They can't recommend a contract for a vote while at the same time recommend that the membership vote "no". This is a huge legal no no. Your MEC is on board because they have to be, not because they want to be.

I noticed a mention of scope, and quickly closed my eyes and scrolled down to avoid reading any more. Please don't eat any more of the "scope sh1t sandwich" that ALPA has been cramming down regional carrier's throats. Scope is absolutley useless. Period.

Good luck ACA, for my own selfish reasons I hope you guys vote no and stop the domino effect. We are in a simliar, but much worse situation here at Skyway. One additional thing to consider is whatever the duration of your TA, you will probably still be there at the amendable date, so what are you willing to accept as pay in 6 or 8 years? With NO movement in the industry, your next contract should seem more important than ever.

 

[Diesel]

Riiight I'll just add the overstaffed remark in the section that BOS crews have longer blocks than CVG crews. It's all how you twist the numbers.

 

[neflyguy]

Went to the road show in Boston yesterday, as one of the ones
who will get furloughed possibly in the future,
my vote before the road show was "hell N0", after the road show,
"HELL Underscore NO!!"

DO NOT LET THEM SCARE YOU!!!!

 

[sideshow]

I'll state this as someone who has attended a roadshow, for what that's worth. If anyone learned anything different from attending a roadshow then you haven't paid much attention to what is going on. If the facts were stated succintly, the roadshow would take 30 minutes to an hour.

The fact that these things were negotiated, the company wanted more etc. Is that a surprise?

You mean the company wanted a 15% wage reduction and we wanted none so we agreed to 7.5%.

You mean the company wanted a 10 year deal and we wanted a 0 year deal so we agreed on a 5 year deal.

What a bargain for the company. I guess I should vote YES and be happy the company didn't want a 20 year deal and 30 percent wage reductions. That would have assured we get ALL of the express flying and Skywest and Air Wisconsin would have been shown the door.

Even with the unions and your current logic Skywest will not be continuing as an United Express partner.

I would lose respect for the company for not trying to get us to take the biggest and lengthiest concessions possible. That is their job. Whatever they get contributes directly to the bottom line. Period.

Imagine the company trying to decide where to get 7.5% (at a minimum, guaranteed) contributed to the bottom line. Don't forget 7.5% is even greater for the company when it comes to any matching in the 401k, payroll taxes etc. They have historically allowed the operation to run inefficiently.

AND PLEASE, NOBODY SAY THERE IS ANY SCOPE PROTECTION IN THIS TA.

 

[MarriedToIt]

edit

 

[g159av8tor]

I'm so scared, if I vote yes then everyone will just shut-up and it'll all go away...

Wake up!!! Vote this bastard down. Want to know why? Because the industry is on the way up. The Iraqi war is over, it's summer time, people are traveling. Things are on the upswing:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2003-06-03-air_x.htm
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentS...StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1054416422132
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,87491,00.html

You want to enter into a 5 year concessionary package after we've hit rock bottom? Five years is too long regardless of who wanted what.

Eight-teen months is a long enough period is get a clearer picture of the future and short enough that it's not that hard of a kick in the pants. SKW's deal is grrreat!!! They'll be flying 70 seaters at their current rate while we're flying them for less than our current 50 seat rate, if you look at the numbers. SKW's MGT will not renege because of the threat of ALPA being voted in. Our MEC's line of BS concerning why they weren't slick enough to get that is aggravating.

Vote no because the next TA, if any, will be a pill more easily swollowed.

Tailwinds...

 

[tarp]

DoJetJock,

I am voting "no" for the right reasons. Unlike an FRJ FO who will only gets his pay frozen, I will be taking a 7.5% pay cut if this TA goes through - notice how the company and the MEC agreed and accept a TA that even divides the pilot's reaction by seat!!!

So you sit in BOS or CVG doing 6, 7, 8 leg days in the mighty Do-jet. You think that you are overcompensated by ACA to do that? You are going to give concessions like going back to a $1.50 per diem when a $1.60 doesn't even cover road expenses! You are going to give up your carry-in, carry-out monthly transition conflict so that you get paid even less to be beaten up by Scheduling. You are going to smile and say "yes, may I please have another" when you are told that you are working till midnight on the day before your vacation and that your report time is 0600 on your first day back from vacation? You agree that ACA is such a well-oiled machine that there is no other avenue for them to save 9 million dollars from the bottom line except by taking it out of your salary?

Maybe I shouldn't have left the Dork - CVG looked like a prison to me - maybe I was wrong and you guys have discovered country club living?

My salary has no effect on ACA's negotiations with United or Bain. They could have bid any number they wanted without concessions. Do you have any idea how paltry a sum $9 million is in a company the size of ACA? But taking somewhere between 7.5% and 20% (I'm counting all the workrule changes that removes about 5 weeks of soft money from my pay!) hurts me a great deal.

I don't know how CVG traffic is moving, but I've just flown the past two weeks on the CRJ (United side). Here are my statistics:

Total flight legs: 26
Legs w/ full aircraft (50 pax): 22
Legs with 48 pax: 2
Legs with 47 pax: 1
Legs with 36 pax: 1

Get the picture. How can I be flying 98% full loads and anyone in our food chain is losing money? If I'm flying full loads and management is doing their job (i.e. not giving away the seats), then how can they not pay me and make a profit?

Were you here for the Charter Flying TA? What a crock! Company asked us to give them everything - MEC highly endorsed it so that we could assure many jobs in the Charter department. Well we voted it down. The company still ran Charters and why did the company fail at attracting Charter business - not because pilots couldn't work 16 hour days - because they had no planes allocated and too many breakdowns (maintenance problems). Why do we continually have MX problems at ACA - because it is a low-budget operation that doesn't have enough qualified people or the equipment to do it right. Have you looked at our airplanes and our competitors? Why do we have speed tape and unpainted parts on a plane that is being rolled out into revenue service? Are we that pressed that we can't even wait for a coat of blue paint to be applied to an engine cowl or a fairing?

I'm not falling for this stuff. My reasoning is firmly based in what I see every day not words spoken by my management or the MEC. I vote NO!

 

[46Driver]

Tarp,
They have been dividing us for a while - remember when they took away United benefits for the Delta side - but the United side gets everything? Yet, now they come to the Delta side and ask for concessions to help United.....
Also, you really can't reduce a FRJ or J-41's F.O.s pay more than what it already is - they would be on food stamps (I am CRJ FO pay frozen so I will taking the same 7.5% hit as you.)
The bottom line - from what I understand - is not the only thing the BAIN corporation is looking at. It seems to be a line by line comparison of expenses - and thus compared to our competition of MESA, we are overpaid. Basically, BAIN is whipsawing every expense line by line to get a greater overall reduction in expenses than just a simple bottom line bid. If you are a management or a consultant, it is genius, evil, but genius - if you are labor, it sucks.
As for load rates, I remember hearing a while back that United would have to have load rates of over 100% to break even due to ticket prices being so low. Unable to raise them because the competition is either making a profit (Southwest, AirTran) or is in better shape and can afford to bleed longer until United dies (Delta, American, Northwest, etc...)
That being said, I don't know how I am going to vote. I do know that I am in graduate school now because the future is not very bright...

 

[PSA]

ACA PILOTS

The hurt that you are going through is understandable but if you don't sign your going to make your lives a living hell. Concessions are the name of the game and yes MESA is to blame for much of our contractual hell but think about the consequences you face if so say "no." Mesa is a herpe that refuses to go away, whats worse is they allowed Freedom to put down roots in their own backyard giving life to a whole new labor tactic.

It sucks but you have got to stay competitive. Help us and the other regionals keep MESA from growing.

 

[surplus1]

Re: ACA PILOTS

The hurt that you are going through is understandable but if you don't sign your going to make your lives a living hell. Concessions are the name of the game and yes MESA is to blame for much of our contractual hell but think about the consequences you face if so say "no." Mesa is a herpe that refuses to go away, whats worse is they allowed Freedom to put down roots in their own backyard giving life to a whole new labor tactic.

Based on your profile and assuming it is accurate, you appear to be a furloughed or active USAirways pilot. If that is the case, you should acknowledge that your illconcieved scope clause is responsible for the creation of Freedom, not the Mesa pilots. Mesa's dilemma subsequently forced them to accept yet another onerous invention of ALPA and the UMEC ... the Jets for Jobs protocol, which steals their seniority and that of every other carrier coerced into accepting it.

It sucks but you have got to stay competitive. Help us and the other regionals keep MESA from growing.

Just how is the ACA pilots gutting their contract going to help anyone to keep Mesa from growing? Who is the "us" to whom you refer? IF ACA, and SKYW follow ARW by gutting theer contracts and low-balling their pay, what other regionals is that going to help?

The exact opposite is true. It will hurt the only good regional contracts left. It will undermine the current negotiations at ASA, COEX and Chautauqua. It will do NOTHING for ACA or SKYW other that lower their pay, which is all it will do for ARW.

Maybe we should be telling the ACA pilots that if they give up their contract, it will NOT help UAL, it will NOT stop Mesa from growing, and it will do NOTHING for them, over and over again and pray to God they hear the warnings and say NO.

If they do get the "United deal", what good will it do ACA pilots? If the get any 70-seat jets they will also have to agree to United's version of Jets for Jobs (still not public) and the new jobs will go to furloughed UAL pilots. Maybe it will be 50% of the Captain positions, which means they will have to give up their seniority, or maybe UAL will demand ALL of the Captain positions, which means they give up their seniority again.

Since Mesa has already "agreed" to jets for jobs, if ACA, ARW and SKYW do not, then Mesa will get all those jobs anyway.

Wake up ACA guys and smell the Coffee, your ALPA advisers have hoodwinked your MEC and they are taking you to the cleaners. The reason is all too obvious.

Why should ACA pilots gut there contract so they can try to "get a deal" from UAL and then give up their seniority so that the new aircraft can be flown not by ACA pilots, but by furloughed United pilots? What is the logic of that?

 

[JTrain]

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.

Some more interesting tidbits....

-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.

-5 years is just way way way too much. The economy is already showing signs of rebound, to lock in for 5 years would be stupid.

-I wouldn't object as much to taking a pay cut, if I didn't see so much inefficiency and waste around me on a daily basis. I could insert many of my favorite ACA pissing $$$$$$$ -1000s of it- down the drain, however that would take all night. Once that changes, maybe yes, then I'd think about a pay cut to preserve our current operation. But for now, no freakin' way!!!

I personally would rather sacrifice my career here at ACA than vote Yes to this TA. I've already thought this thru and thru - envisioning a worst case scenario where ACA were to tank after this TA fails, UAL were to dump us and give all their work to Mesa-type operators, and DAL were to cut us loose -something that is not too improbable- this company would be in a world of Ch. 11 hurt.

Again, I also apologize for the way many of my fellow Blue Ridgers are letting themselves be intimidated by management threats. 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

 

[Skull-One]

You know, if just a couple of carriers refuse to cave in then this concessionary wave would end. Heck, even Mesa might be able to turn things around somehow if the rest of us can hold the line.

Gawd, this industry is just crumbling...

 

[46Driver]

I am still up in the air on which way I am going to vote but I can assure you that there is no jets for jobs. If there was, the TA would fail miserably. No way, no how, I am going to sit as an F.O. for the next decade while somebody comes in from outside our company and takes a captain spot.

 

[PSA]

Why should ACA pilots gut there contract so they can try to "get a deal" from UAL and then give up their seniority so that the new aircraft can be flown not by ACA pilots, but by furloughed United pilots? What is the logic of that?


-The logic is this; MESA will under cut your package and your corporation will be forced to furlough....maybe not today, tomorrow, or next month but you will lose your job. Furthermore your precious stock options that the USA TODAY once upon a time once headlined.......they'll be pennies on the dollar when your compnay declares Ch. 11 (UNABLE TO COMPETE). Wake the .... up we are in this together, sign it or disappear, this isn't rocket science, it is however reality.

 

[sideshow]

I guess PSA was one of those people that told Comair NOT to strike because ASA and Skywest would take all of their flying and they would lose their job. If I'm not mistake the strike happened and Comair seems to be hiring. I suppose Mesa will be taking over every regional contract there is. Hell, I don't even know why United got rid of them in the first place, or Trans States.

 

[surplus1]

I am still up in the air on which way I am going to vote but I can assure you that there is no jets for jobs. If there was, the TA would fail miserably. No way, no how, I am going to sit as an F.O. for the next decade while somebody comes in from outside our company and takes a captain spot.

I know there is no Jets for Jobs in the ACA TA. Jets for Jobs is contained in the UAL agreement. The UAL agreement specifies that any UAX carrier that operates regional jets with more than 50 seats must provide employment opportunities for furloughed United pilots. UAL management has already agreed to that.

If you and your fellow pilots do not know this, don't take my word for it, for God sakes ask someone you can trust. If your MEC doesn't know this I can't even imagine why not. If they haven't told you ....... well I won't way it.

If you get the UAL deal for 70-seat jets, there is no doubt whatever that the UAL MEC will implement its agreement. The exact meaning of "job opportunities for furloughed United pilots" is unknown. However, if you believe for 10 seconds that the UAL MEC will not demand, as a bare minimum, the same deal that the USAirways pilots got, you had better think again. Do not be surprised if they demand the equivalent of what the American pilots are trying to do to Eagle - 100% of the Captain slots.

If you believe that ALPA will not fully support the UAL pilots in such an effort, at your expense, think again. They did it for USAirways and they will do it more readily for United. Sure you can reject it, but not if you want the UAL 70-seat deal. Remember, Mesa has already accepted Jets for Jobs with AAA. There is no logical reason to believe they won't do it again.

You are not going to get 70-seat jets for United unless you agree to their version of Jets for Jobs. Mesa will get them anyway and you will have taken a big hit for NOTHING. When the ALPA and UAL MEC sits down with United to work out the details of the "hiring opportunities" do you think they are going to invite your MEC to participate? If you do, you're dreaming. They will cut whatever deal they can and you will have to live with the results.

Mesa has always been at or near the bottom of the barrell, but ACA has been near the top. If you agree to this TA, the only thing you guarantee is the continuation of the downward spiral in regional compensation. If your TA is ratified, along with ARW (already done) and SKYW and you all accept Jets for Jobs (if one of you does the others will too .... just like USAirways) the regionals are all done. You'll still be flying and so will we, but we will all be doing it for peanuts. Delta will immediately demand the same thing from Comair, the ASA negotiations will be trashed, the chances of COEX and Chautauqua improving their contracts will be history, Mesaba will not get a dime. Comair will be forced to make similar concessions in compensation and so will Horizon, already the highest paid.

Jets for Jobs will appear on the Delta property in a heartbeat. The end result is the 70-seaters will go to the mainline and be flown by mainline pilots. No, they won't be operated at the mainline, but the mainline pilots will be on your list and they will get at least 50% of the Captain positions just like they did at USAirways. That is super seniority no matter what ALPA chooses to call it.

ALPA believes that's the way it should be and ALPA will support that effort by UAL just as they supported it at AAA. They will also support a similar effort at DAL.

I admit self-interest readily. I don't want my pilot group's contract to be gutted and I don't want Jets for Jobs in any format. Both will happen whether I like it or not, if all 3 of you (ARW, ACA, SKYW) agree to this. ARW has already rolled. If we cannot stop the slide now, the race to the bottom is over and ALL regionals will be there together, right along with Mesa ... at the bottom and with J4J on top of it.

At ACA your J-41s are going. You seem to think that if you do this and you get CRJ-700s from UAL it will stop or slow the furloughs. Ask yourselves this question. If you get the 70-seaters and 1/2 of the slots go to UAL pilots, how many furloughs will that prevent?

I think we ALL deserve better and I also think we can keep what we have. I do NOT believe this is really necessary. If we all stand together we can do it just as effectively at the top as we can at the bottom. The only way this downward spiral can be stopped is if ACA rejects the TA and SKYW does the same. Comair will hold its ground, but we cannot do it alone and we can't do it only with Horizon.

ASA and COEX and Chautauqua all have a chance to improve and so does Mesaba, but once you folks and SkyWest both give in, the game is over for the regionals and mediocrity will be assured for at least another 10 years. Do the problems at the majors require that? Will it solve the mega airline's problems? I don't think so. What little we can "save" is a drop in the bucket compared to their needs.

ALL the regional jet operators are making money (for the majors) and for themselves, with the present pilot compensation rates. The difference between current rates and the proposed new rates will do nothing to improve conditions at any of the large major airlines. However, it most definetly will destroy everything that regional pilots have been trying to do for themselves.

It is easy to slide downhill to the bottom. The climb back up to where we are today will take much longer than the 5-year contract you are voting on now. Think about it.

I wish you the best and I pray that you will see things the way they really are.

 

[sideshow]

The UAL agreement specifies that any UAX carrier that operates regional jets with more than 50 seats must provide employment opportunities for furloughed United pilots. UAL management has already agreed to that.

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.