AS Recalls?

[igneousy2]

It is not an artificial time pressure. See my post above. They are actually running out of time.

Now, who is to blame? Well the schedules are run by marketing, period. So they decide when and where the airline goes. After that, flight ops runs around with thier head cut off for a while, trying to figure out how they are going to staff what marketing decides. I don't think there is much communication between the two prior to deciding new routes...at least it never appears that way. So in the end they run out of time if all the stars don't magically align. In this case they already furloughed too many. So now they are caught with their shorts around their ankles wondering how in the world they are going to staff 950 new hours of flying per month by June.

I'm pretty sure the Union is not caving in easy on this one. I actually have a lot more confidence than usual on this one.

I think You're missing my point...the company needs/wants relief from our CBA...THEY have a deadline because THEY decided they wanted to fly to Hawaii from the bay area after furloughing a bunch of their ETOPS qualified pilots this March. The company has two choices, comply with our CBA and cover the ETOPS flying in a less than optimal way...or give us what we want and get their ETOPS-SEA base. There is a deadline but it is only the companies. Additionally, just because we don't get a deal by March does not mean we can't get a deal later. We should not rush an agreement through without "following the proper ALPA protocol." Funny, I seem to remember some members of the MEC and the SEA-LEC in particular raising holy hell about not caving to deadlines imposed by the company(i.e. eliminate 2nd step trading to save junior pilots jobs) but when it would benefit them, they are all of a sudden willing to sweep the "ALPA protocol" aside. This is not a minor issue. This will definetly be a major and PERMANENT (as opposed to an automatic one year expiration) change to our CBA and we should follow the "ALPA protocol" and make sure the TA that results gets a proper public vetting and put up for a vote.

As far as your statement "thank god for LEC's" don't forget that the SEA LEC is the big dog at the MEC as they can (if they choose to invoke it) cast 1 vote for every pilot they represent which I believe is still more than LAX and ANC combined.

Also -- I don't believe our CBA allows PDX to be a co-base.

 

[QCappy]

As far as your statement "thank god for LEC's"

I didn't say that, but I understand now what you were getting at.

 

[igneousy2]

You're right...that was going2baja and I will correct the quote to "thank goodness for LECs"

Sorry

 

[Chief Pilot]

I disagree. I think management knows that it could be mutually beneficial.

I agree with you Cesna, and stand corrected. Most likely management already knows what they intend to do.

Word on the Street is that there is going to be a position bid in early to mid-January to staff properly by April. If management is not getting satisfaction on the SEA ETOPS base, I think a PDX base is the next logical step. Obviously this won't help LAX or ANC, but unfortunately if it goes to a vote, SEA out-votes them all and ends up with an ETOPS base. Personally, I hope that does not happen. I don't live in PDX or intend to move there, but I think in the long run it will be better for the pilots and the company. More recalls with a PDX base, than if SEA gets a base within a base.

CP.

 

[mach none]

OK, no base "owns" the flying. The company can move the flying right now. They can shrink or close a base if desired. They have the ability via the CBA right now. As far as which scenario is best, we are all speculating on a forum without any info. All I can say is we must be careful about what we ask for as there will always be unintended consequences (I am referring to the PDX base or reshuffle or SEA ETOPS). The ETOPS base language could be with us forever.

The Negotiating team and the MEC have all the pertinent information and will get the best deal possible for the betterment of the ENTIRE pilot group. You must remember, the MEC is not out to screw one base over to preserve or enhance another.

 

[QCappy]

All great points, Mach. We shall see what happens in January.

 

[NWaviator]

Anyone look at the 8K that came out today? Looks like some pretty good numbers for both AS and QX load factor wise. I hope that you get some recalls. Good luck.

 

[Green Banana]

I want to know what ALK is doing with 1.3 Billion in CASH and marketable securities? Up 30% in the last 12 months! FUPM!

 

[QCappy]

I want to know what ALK is doing with 1.3 Billion in CASH and marketable securities? Up 30% in the last 12 months! FUPM!

Taking baths in it and rubbing it in your face with a Christmas card with no gift. Take that you peon employee....or not.

 

[Green Banana]

You are not an employee, you get nothing. The real Alaska family got PAY DAY candy bars again!

 

[AK737FO]

Open a PDX base = to expensive, company is shying away from it.

SEA ETOPS base within a base = negotiations. Not enough time.

Grow LAX = to much soft time, not as efficient.

Grow ANC = short term answer to the problem coming in 2.5 months.

Last rumor I heard from the ANC LEC was about 20 new Capt seats in ANC with no reduction to SEA or LAX. That means a recall for some great people we all want back on the line.

Take note that the ANC base is suppose to have 80 F/O's. The BCP said that we actually have about 64 now due to mil leaves and what not. So we need to gain 16 F/O's off the street to get back to what we are suppose to be staffed at, before we even begin to talk about extra ETOPS flying that starts in March.

I think the tide has finally turned.

 

[Snapshot]

They know what they are doing. The last two times they let the pilot group vote, I got $crewed. I have more faith in my MEC to do the right thing than this pilot group.

Who do you think wrote the memo that killed the MOU? Most of the guys that voted it down didn't even bother to actually read it. An MEC officer told them it hurt his feelings and 30 guys lost their jobs.

 

[8v8ter]

Not sure what you mean by "soft time" in growing LAX (honest question). Why is it any easier or more efficient to a get a crew from ANC to PDX, OAK, SJC, or SMF than from LAX. It seems both bases should grow which is what I hope happens rather than the base w/in a base.

Open a PDX base = to expensive, company is shying away from it.

SEA ETOPS base within a base = negotiations. Not enough time.

Grow LAX = to much soft time, not as efficient.

Grow ANC = short term answer to the problem coming in 2.5 months.

Last rumor I heard from the ANC LEC was about 20 new Capt seats in ANC with no reduction to SEA or LAX. That means a recall for some great people we all want back on the line.

Take note that the ANC base is suppose to have 80 F/O's. The BCP said that we actually have about 64 now due to mil leaves and what not. So we need to gain 16 F/O's off the street to get back to what we are suppose to be staffed at, before we even begin to talk about extra ETOPS flying that starts in March.

I think the tide has finally turned.

 

[Old School 737]

I am hearing SLC to be announced early in the new year.

 

[AK737FO]

I don't really know why an ETOPS pairing with ANC pilots is more efficient than an ETOPS pairings with LAX pilots. I'm only passing on what the BCP told me. He said the computer pairing builder / "Sodimizer" said that ANC was more effcient.
I too hope that they grow ANC and LAX rather than a base in a base at SEA.

 

[Rhino]

let your reps know how you feel

Let your LEC reps know how you feel on this ETOPS issue. Either way, there will be a position bid coming soon, probably in January. Close by end of Jan, award by early February, training begins in time to cover the March/April ETOPS routes. I don't forsee an ETOPS agreement in time to affect the upcoming bid...

More ANC ETOPS means Seattle flies more of the "other" ANC flying and perhaps gets some Arctic quals back?

More LAX ETOPS means Seattle flies more of the domestic/Mexico LAX flying, etc.

or... the dark horse is the PDX base. In that case all three bases lose some flying and positions (CA and FO).

Lots of balls up in the air, and I hope our block hours increase to bring back as many of our furloughed pilots as possible, increasing the CA positions too.

Merry Christmas,

 

[unwashed]

I want to know what ALK is doing with 1.3 Billion in CASH and marketable securities? Up 30% in the last 12 months! FUPM!

I am glad I left the Error Group, nothing changes. I hope for the guys on the street (a lot of them friends) get back soon. Merry Christmas and I hope it turns out to be a happy new year.

 

[NWaviator]

Seems that something is in the works for recalls, atleast that is the buzz around ops.

 

[Going2Baja]

I am hearing SLC to be announced early in the new year.

I was told by that guy in Marketing w/ the British accent that SAN & LAS to multiple Island destinations was to also happen.

Also talk of Horizon inner-Island...Huh.

Would be GREAT to see things grow sooner than later! Let's get those guys on the street back ASAP! And making SEA an ETOPS base is NOT the way to do it!

Baja.

 

[Green Banana]

What is an SLC?

Inter-island would be a terrible idea. Ask Hawaiian, Mesa, Aloha (RIP), Island Air, Mokulele, Molokai Air, Pacific Wings, HATS, exc.. There are more airlines than airports there.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

What is an SLC?

Inter-island would be a terrible idea. Ask Hawaiian, Mesa, Aloha (RIP), Island Air, Mokulele, Molokai Air, Pacific Wings, HATS, exc.. There are more airlines than airports there.

So, what you're saying is Alaska Airlines is opening a Hawai'i base?

You read it here, first folks. The cat is out of the bag.

 

[QCappy]

What is an SLC?

SALT LAKE CITY

Have you been drinking too much of that fine American lager again?:beer:

 

[Green Banana]

Ouch, So obvious.
Sadly, all my favorite American lagers are foreign now, but I still look forward to buying you a few cases of choice hops!

 

[igneousy2]

MEC meeting to discuss "SEA ETOPS BASE"...anybody know what the terms of the ETOPS base will be?

 

[Going2Baja]

MEC meeting to discuss "SEA ETOPS BASE"...anybody know what the terms of the ETOPS base will be?

YEAH - Won't happen!

Baja.

 

[QCappy]

MEC meeting to discuss "SEA ETOPS BASE"...anybody know what the terms of the ETOPS base will be?

Many recalls.

 

[igneousy2]

YEAH - Won't happen!

Baja.

I hope you're right -- the only tlhing is the pit in the bottom of my stomach is telling me that they don't need to convine an emergency MEC meeting to do nothing.

 

[Green Banana]

Sadly, I have the feeling it will go something like this,

"Meeting, come to order. New Business, The company says they will be forced to displace 20% of the SEA base if we do not give them a SEA ETOPS base. (Booo). All in favor of a major displacement...(Crickets, Chirp, Chirp)...OK, All in favor of a new SEA ETOPS base? (Here! Here!). Motion Passes. Wham!

 

[tico]

The association will respond to this just like they did during contract negotiations..... with fear and greed tempered with large pilot ego's.... Alaska Airlines always gets exactly what they want, when they want it and at the price they want to pay.......would not count on any recalls in 2010

 

[igneousy2]

What is an SLC?

Inter-island would be a terrible idea. Ask Hawaiian, Mesa, Aloha (RIP), Island Air, Mokulele, Molokai Air, Pacific Wings, HATS, exc.. There are more airlines than airports there.

Not sure Inter-island would be a great idea, however, I do not believe that it is as bad an idea as you make it out to be.

It has never been tried by an airline with deep pockets and their own feed to/from the west coast.

First, if you asked Hawaiian, I don't think they would have many complaints right now. If you have enough traffic to regularly schedule a 767 on an 87 mile leg then your loads must be pretty good.

Mesa has the wrong airplane for the market. It's tough to make money with 50 seat RJ's in any market. Orienstien has said that the proper airplane for the market is the Dash 8-400 which he keeps talking about sending over to Hawaii. For Mesa, I think the Hawaii interisland market is more about losing less for the 50 seaters then they would lose if they were sitting in a dessert somewhere.

Aloha was privately held by a local family who made no secret that they wanted out and would not be investing any more money. They were flying dinosaurs and their only out was to be bought by someone. Aloha was hanging onto the edge by there fingertips when Mesa came to town...Mesa jumped up and down on those fingertips until Aloha finally let go. I don't think a 737-200 could make money in any passenger market in the United States right now.

Island Air was purchased by Charlie Willis as a toy for his son to play with. For some reason his son backed out and Robert Maraucher was hired to be CEO. Rob had enough vision to know that the absolutely perfect airplane for the Hawaii inter-island market is the Dash-8 400. They even got a couple of them. Unfortunately it was done with boat loads of debt and was improperly executed - they were paying the lease on the first airplane for 3 or 4 months before it ever carrierd a revenue passenger. Anyway, Charlie Willis refuses to put anymore money into island air so in the past 6 years they have gone from 3 airplanes to 7 or 8 to back to 3 airplanes today.

Mokulele was doing pretty well as a Part 135 niche carrier until it got into bed with a snake (Mesa) and got bit. They ended up being taken over by Republic which is still operating them today.

Pacific Wings is still doing well in their little corner with their Caravans as far as I know.

Mahalo Airlines would have done well with their ATR-42's had it not been for the CFO who was using the airline as a personal piggy bank.

Discover seemed to be doing well as a 3rd carrier until they were shut down after Hawaiian and Aloha complained about foreign ownership of Discover...apparently they were owned by the Japanese.

Mid Pacific: I was probably 6 or 7 when they were flying but I heard from one of their former pilots years later that they were doing great until management had the briliant (<-NOT!) idea of bringing in some jets.