Adios MESA at IAD - UAL Axes MoU

[Morgoth]

Russ,

I hope so too. Like I said, time will tell. I think SkyWest management would be very foolish to not give the pilots a well-deserved raise for giving them the "ace" I believe they requested during the last negotiations.

However, I find it interesting that most of the guys who seem to be in favor of UPA are a relatively small minority of very vocal RJ guys, mostly in SLC it seems. I have yet to hear of many EMB pilots at SkyWest in favor of UPA. In fact, no offense but there seems to be a vast gap in attitude between most RJ guys and most EMB guys. Some of my good EMB friends even refer to SkyWest RJ guys as "mainline SkyWest."

It just seems that a lot of UPA proponents have an axe to grind with SkyWest management. I recently heard one SkyWest EMB captain say that a lot of their EMB guys transitioned to the jet because their egos would no longer fit in the Brasilia. Makes you wonder.

 

[Gobi Gred]

I'd be willing to bet that when the time comes, management will tell us that they can't separate the pay scales for the fifty and seventy seater since we could feasibly fly both on a given trip. It would be too difficult and besides you are actually overpaid for the fifty seater is what they'll say. I'm also sick and tired of this pilot group talking like we negotiate a "contract". We don't have a contract! Without legal representation, management can do whatever they please.

 

[Morgoth]

Gobi,

I think management would be signing their death warrant if they did that. The pilots would unionize immediately and the amicable relationship management now enjoys would be over forever.

However, don't fall into the trap of thinking a contract will prevent management from doing whatever they want. It won't. Ask any UAL pilot. It's called "force majeur" (among other things). Contracts are violated all the time, and companies just say "grieve it." That takes time and money, and sometimes years to resolve.

In any event, I think SkyWest management is smarter than that. It would actually be fairly simple to differentiate between 50- and 70-seat pay on a single trip. It could be as simply as a software change to payroll's software. In any event, I don't think that's an argument that management could win.

 

[Russ]

There is a gulf between the EMB and RJ pilots for sure. That gulf cost us a union vote a few years back. Now as the RJ is the larger of the two fleets hopefully that can be overcome. The backing is no longer confined to SLC as it once was, a large percentage of RJ captains and a growing number of RJ FOs are in favor, at most domociles. My belief for the differences between the two fleets is seniority. The Brasilia crews tend to be fairly new to the company (SAN aside) and have not had opportunity to see the steady degradation of the relationship with SGU along with many givebacks in the form of bennies and now pay. The Bro guys are seeing reasonably quick upgrades, especially if in IAH and are content with the process.

 

[Morgoth]

Now as the RJ is the larger of the two fleets hopefully that can be overcome.

Does that mean forcing the will of the RJ guys on the EMB guys who do not want a union? It seems that will only serve to deepen the resentment and divisiveness already at work. RJ pilots at SkyWest are already seen as arrogant and self-important by their EMB counterparts. My question is this: If UPA does become the collective bargaining agent for SkyWest (and as you said, the RJ is now the larger of the two fleets on the property), what's to keep them from shafting the EMB guys in favor of the RJ?

And, by the way, there are quite a few senior EMB guys on the west coast in FAT, PDX, and SMF to name a few. They choose to stay in the EMB for QOL purposes and to avoid commuting, among others.

 

[Russ]

The pilot population as a whole will elect or reject UPA, not RJ pilots. If UPA is voted in, it will represent you as it will me. It is not a matter of shafting EMB pilots if the majority of pilots desire UPA versus SAPA. If you feel UPA is not for you, then vote no. I am sorry if you feel disenfranchised but the majority of pilots at SkyWest are RJ pilots. Not bragging, far from it, the EMB is more of a mans aircraft than the CRJ will ever be.

I am very aware of the demographics of the Bro fleet as I was on the aircraft till just a few years ago, based on the coast doing UA flying. I have friends in most if not all of the EMB domociles.

 

[Morgoth]

I think it would be interesting to know the breakdown percentage of pro/con UPA opinion based on equipment type. Specifically, I'm curious why so many RJ pilots (senior and junior) are pro-UPA, and so many EMB pilots (again both senior and junior) are reluctant to say the least. I truly don't think it has much if anything to do with experience or lack thereof.

 

[jayme]

I'm curious why so many RJ pilots (senior and junior) are pro-UPA, and so many EMB pilots (again both senior and junior) are reluctant to say the least.

Please state your sources. If you talk to 10 RJ pilots and 10 Brazilia pilots, that doesn't amount to anything. I'm on the 120 and I'd like to see upa voted in. Over half of the EMB pilots I talk to like the idea of UPA. But I'm not about to state that MOST brazilia pilots want to see a union at SkyWest, because HOW THE HELL WOULD I KNOW! THERE ARE ABOUT 650 OF THEM!

 

[Morgoth]

Please state your sources. If you talk to 10 RJ pilots and 10 Brazilia pilots, that doesn't amount to anything. I'm on the 120 and I'd like to see upa voted in. Over half of the EMB pilots I talk to like the idea of UPA. But I'm not about to state that MOST brazilia pilots want to see a union at SkyWest, because HOW THE HELL WOULD I KNOW! THERE ARE ABOUT 650 OF THEM!

My sources are the pilots I talk to on a daily basis, not to mention the ones I fly with. Also, my observations of attitudes and discussions of different RJ and EMB pilots in various crew lounges.

But, as you'll notice, I never once said that most Brasilia pilots are against a union. I'm just stating my personal observations and the opinions of those I work with.

 

[surplus1]

Strega7,

Ah, so you did see that.....I would like to forget that, and it really doesn't even hurt me whatsoever, but it will hurt my friends still at regionals. That decision really affected the whole regional industry. It was HUGE.

[emphasis supplied]

General,

You're dead right on that one. Glad you have the courage to tell it like it is.

originally posted by reno....We gave management a temporary bone. We'll see in the next few months what they give back. In the mean time we still kept 100% of our pay and we secured a deal with UAL while our current pay is higher than our competitors and will be even better before '05.

I guess time will tell.

You're right, time will tell. It will tell that you didn't "give them a bone", what you really did was let them take you to the cleaners.
You seem to think that you "secured a deal with UAL" because of what you did to yourselves and to the rest of us.

The truth is you did not secure anything except lower wages for yourselves, and opened the door to the concept of "bidding for growth". Your actions led the way, forced AirWiskey to take a hit on their contract, and caused ACA do essentially they same (it was their management that saved them by saying no to UAL). You started the "low bid process" on carriers like Comair, put pressure on the Horizon contract, undercut the ASA, Mesaba and XJT negotiations, helped CHQ to take less than they might otherwise have been able to get, etc., etc., ..... all with the idea that you could "get something" that your management obviously already had ... a deal with UAL. [Maybe you didn't notice how long (after your decision) it took them to announce the "success" generated by your "vote". [The miraculous hour or two.] You can believe all the fiction you want to, but the actual events are there for all to see.... you paid for something they already had, and you hurt ALL the rest by doing it.

I won't be surprised if you rejoice again should you wind up getting the 700's from CMR and ASA, or forcing them to accept your low ball bid in an effort to keep their equipment.

The General is right.

originally posted by The GeneralYes you did--because you were one of the first to say, "Hey, we'll take expansion over pay." After your agreement, others followed or will follow, and the next thing you know your managment will NOT be able to give you that raise because it will not allow them to be competitive. >>>>>> you will get that much needed expansion, and everyone else will pay for it because you were the ones to start it. You should have atleast gotten some sort of raise for that 70 seater---even $5 an hour more..

The General is right again, Reno. You believe you will get better 70-seat rates in 18 months. Sure, by the time everyone else has been forced to "match" what you "achieved", you will learn the fiction of your 18-month dream. By the way, I believe the moon is made of green cheese too.

What you're far more likely to "get" is the lower 50-seat rates the others all may have to "negotiate" (with few exceptions) by then. Then you'll be able to claim that you got a "raise" for the 700s, because they pay more than the 50's (and less than everyone else got before your "deal".

Like it or not, reality is that your actions as a group substantially lowered the bar for everyone operating small jets with 70-seats and gave birth to the concept of "bidding for growth". The trickle-down effects are still coming.

What's ironic is that Mesa gets all of the flack. The truth is that while the Mesa agreement makes no one proud, they at least have the excuse of being under intense pressure from an alter ego. You were not under any "pressure" at all, you just let your beloved management pull the wool over your eyes. Too bad we can't both be the "fly on the wall" at their private cocktail parties.

If you could just say that you did what you felt was in your best interest and you didn't consider or care how it would affect others, I could maybe deal with that. Pretending that you didn't hurt anyone and you didn't take, in effect, a pay cut, is just plain baloney and it sticks in the craw.

Like you said Reno, time will tell. Meanwhile this pilot has no empathy with your groups' position and nothing to thank you for.

 

[NYRANGERS]

Now PSA is trying to negotiate the same pay rates for the 50 and 70 seater! It seems the union line is pro growth over pay rates. I'd like to see a pay comparison of Mesa and PSA, I'll bet it's not the far apart. I wonder where PSA management got the idea that this could work???????

 

[DrinkSweetTea]

PSA 50 seat rates are lower than Mesa rates already.

 

[46Driver]

Now PSA is trying to negotiate the same pay rates for the 50 and 70 seater! It seems the union line is pro growth over pay rates. I'd like to see a pay comparison of Mesa and PSA, I'll bet it's not the far apart. I wonder where PSA management got the idea that this could work???????

NYRANGERS,
Its a vicious cycle. The only way to get hired at a career airline is to have PIC time - and the only way to get PIC time is for your carrier to grow. 5000 hours as copilot in a CRJ means nothing on a Southwest resume, a FedEx resume, a JetBlue resume, etc..... Until the majors change the hiring standards, expect regional FO's to choose growth at any cost.

Not baiting, not flaming, just stating the obvious.

 

[NYRANGERS]

NYRANGERS,
Its a vicious cycle. The only way to get hired at a career airline is to have PIC time - and the only way to get PIC time is for your carrier to grow. 5000 hours as copilot in a CRJ means nothing on a Southwest resume, a FedEx resume, a JetBlue resume, etc..... Until the majors change the hiring standards, expect regional FO's to choose growth at any cost.

Not baiting, not flaming, just stating the obvious.

That may be so, but there are only a finite amount of jobs at Southwest, FedEx, and jetBlue. As pilots "lowball pay rates to get growth, where do you think the growth is comming from. I should say, at who's expense? At some point there will be a big majority of flying at these "lowball airlines" and the growth for Delta, America West, Continential, etc...will stagnate and reduce for atleast a generation of pilots.

So, you will end up flying 70, 90 or bigger seaters, at low payrates with nowhere to go. There will be no need to get PIC turbine time quick. Other than another stripe and a few extra dollars, it may not be worth it in the long run.

Jetblue may hire a few hundred a year, Southwest as well and FedEx maybe 100-150 for a while. These companies don't have hughe retirement numbers comming up over the next 20 years. You have to figure ASA/Comair have around 4000 pilots Chautauqua a few thousand, Mesa (too many), PSA, ALG,PDT 1000, etc, etc.....there will be thousands of pilots trying to get a few hundred good jobs a year. Many will not get these jobs as they become less and less abundant, and all they will have to look forward to is flying a big airplane at a lower rate than they deserve.

My point is, if you want PIC time to move on, we should all hope the major airlines grow. Don't lowball payrates thinking of only growth.......because there may be nowhere to go with all the PIC turbine time.

Regards,

NYR

 

[JTrain]

NYR

-While I agree with nearly 100% of what you just said, as well as the points that my fellow ACAer -46driver had been making, it is easy to write such things when you're in the big leagues (you being furloughed, aside). There will never be a shortage of pilots, despite the ads all the fancy academies are running. Competition for flying jobs will always be fierce. However there will always be an abundant supply of bright-eyed, bushy-tailed recruits ready to sacrifice and scrape their way up the aviation career ladder in hopes of landing that job with their dream major. In a sense we will always be our own worst enemy, and regardless of how eloquently you put it, we'll always whore ourselves out in the name of advancing our career.

I wish there was a way we could educate that next generation.....pass along what it's like and despite the fact that if you go to work for a questionable B1900 operator in the name of getting PIC, there's no guarantee you'll ever make the 'majors', people will still be (blindly???) following their ambition. But flying has this mystique....short of being an athlete or a rock star, people are willing to accept minimal remuneration and pump thousands of dollars into it. Check out the back pages of the latest ALPA magazine.....they devout an article to a similar theme to what we're discussing and their attempts to educate up'n comers.

I try to do my bit to spread a similar message as you.....at ACA I'm a reasonably senior RJ FO and if this Independence Air thing pans out I'm seriously contemplating going Airbus FO and making this my final career stop. I don't have an hour of PIC let alone a type for being here nearly 3.5 years. But I had a discussion with an FA at my base who is working on her ratings......her idea, to go from 250tt when she'd get her commercial to "airline ready" was to 'volunteer' her services to a cargo operator. I laughed.....but it wouldn't be so funny if it wasn't so serious.
At this very moment, you could in theory make a recruiting trip to virtually any flight school in America and probably clean out the place even if you offered them say, 1 peanut butter and jam sandwich a month as salary. People I know outside of aviation constantly express amazement at how little pilots at my level (regional) make, but the thing is, pilots have shown they're willing to accept the mediocre pay and work rules and you can't blame mgmt one bit for exploiting it. It will only be to our chagrin to discover how bogus this career really is once we're deep into it...

JT

 

[46Driver]

JTrain,
You can't bid for the Airbus - I'm bidding for the Airbus! And I'm in the same boat as you - not a single hour of PIC jet (but helo hours out the wazoo - which means nothing to FedEx, JetBlue, SouthWest, etc....) Finally, ACA is my final stop now that we have the Airbus. Not starting over if we go bankrupt and no plans to go anywhere if we hit it big.

 

[KingAirKiddo]

[emphasis supplied]

General,

You're dead right on that one. Glad you have the courage to tell it like it is.



You're right, time will tell. It will tell that you didn't "give them a bone", what you really did was let them take you to the cleaners.
You seem to think that you "secured a deal with UAL" because of what you did to yourselves and to the rest of us.

The truth is you did not secure anything except lower wages for yourselves, and opened the door to the concept of "bidding for growth". Your actions led the way, forced AirWiskey to take a hit on their contract, and caused ACA do essentially they same (it was their management that saved them by saying no to UAL). You started the "low bid process" on carriers like Comair, put pressure on the Horizon contract, undercut the ASA, Mesaba and XJT negotiations, helped CHQ to take less than they might otherwise have been able to get, etc., etc., ..... all with the idea that you could "get something" that your management obviously already had ... a deal with UAL. [Maybe you didn't notice how long (after your decision) it took them to announce the "success" generated by your "vote". [The miraculous hour or two.] You can believe all the fiction you want to, but the actual events are there for all to see.... you paid for something they already had, and you hurt ALL the rest by doing it.

I won't be surprised if you rejoice again should you wind up getting the 700's from CMR and ASA, or forcing them to accept your low ball bid in an effort to keep their equipment.

The General is right.



The General is right again, Reno. You believe you will get better 70-seat rates in 18 months. Sure, by the time everyone else has been forced to "match" what you "achieved", you will learn the fiction of your 18-month dream. By the way, I believe the moon is made of green cheese too.

What you're far more likely to "get" is the lower 50-seat rates the others all may have to "negotiate" (with few exceptions) by then. Then you'll be able to claim that you got a "raise" for the 700s, because they pay more than the 50's (and less than everyone else got before your "deal".

Like it or not, reality is that your actions as a group substantially lowered the bar for everyone operating small jets with 70-seats and gave birth to the concept of "bidding for growth". The trickle-down effects are still coming.

What's ironic is that Mesa gets all of the flack. The truth is that while the Mesa agreement makes no one proud, they at least have the excuse of being under intense pressure from an alter ego. You were not under any "pressure" at all, you just let your beloved management pull the wool over your eyes. Too bad we can't both be the "fly on the wall" at their private cocktail parties.

If you could just say that you did what you felt was in your best interest and you didn't consider or care how it would affect others, I could maybe deal with that. Pretending that you didn't hurt anyone and you didn't take, in effect, a pay cut, is just plain baloney and it sticks in the craw.

Like you said Reno, time will tell. Meanwhile this pilot has no empathy with your groups' position and nothing to thank you for.

Ditto.

 

[General Lee]

Don't get me wrong, I don't DISLIKE the Skywest guys---I just think most of them made a bad decision---and they were looking at the short term gains versus long term affects. But, they will get some growth which will yield upgrades for some of them....


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[bluestreaking]

PSA 50 seat rates are lower than Mesa rates already.

That's funny, everytime I see the Mesa 50 seat payrates posted, they are about $4-$5 per hour less than PSA.

 

[KingAirer]

kingairer to the rescue~!

Did someone say payrates??

PSA MESA
1. 49.44 52.19
2. 53.56 53.82
3. 54.53 55.44
4. 58.55 57.11
5. 60.32 58.79
6. 62.09 60.51
7. 63.61 62.16
8. 65.45 64.16
9. 67.58 66.13

FO
1. 20.60 20.88
2. 25.75 27.97
3. 27.81 31.20
4. 32.31 32.54
5. 33.31 33.51
6. 34.04 34.29
7. 34.59 34.75


I used 2nd year of contract rates for each airline