ASA Negotiations

[Crash Pad]

Hey I got a couple of quick questions for the Union camp. I have heard that "management" is starting to put the screws to us... something about taking 90 seaters. Again I am more than willing to support the Union and even go on strike but I do have some questions.

1. Step one in any negotiation is to make sure you have something the other party really wants. Does the pilot group have that?

2. The SKYW pilots make more than the ASA pilots... Why haven't we just asked for the SKYW contract?

If someone with union understanding could answer those questions I would really appreciate it.

Thanks

 

[ASADFW7]

The union has not asked for the Skywest contract because that would be admitting that we do not need to pay 2.1% of our pay for a negotiating team and union representation.

Do not believe that the 90's are not coming to ASA. If they are based in ATL they will be allocated to ASA. If they are allocated to SLC they will go to Skywest.

-We are still getting 6 GE ex ACA 50 seaters this year. That is from Scott Hall from a direct question asked Friday. Yes I know he can not tell the truth, but that is a better source then this board.
-We are still losing 15 pilots per month.
-We are running a new hire class this month, but may not next month depending on staffing.

-There will be no displacement bid from SLC to ATL as there will be the same number of 70 seat positions created in ATL. No pilots will be displaced. All 70 pilots from SLC will go directly to ATL 70 positions. They however can bid for vacancies between now and the base closure.

-Who is motivated to get the contract done? I say the company is more motivated, however we are close to the end. Economics of future income are not based upon past earnings. Economics of future contracts, aka other carriers are based upon industries costs.
The answer to what the pilot group wants has come from interviews, questionaires, by telephone and paper. However many of those were done years ago.

I am not willing to go on strike.

 

[atlcrjdriver]

Why wouldn't a portion of the CR9s come to ATL. DL needs them to feed central and south AMerican markets out ATL more than they would out of SLC. With that said, their is nothing to stop JA from opening a CR7/9 virtual SKW base out of ATL to fly these A/C.

Be very careful of what you wish for...

Fly Safe...

 

[FL990]

The union has not asked for the Skywest contract because that would be admitting that we do not need to pay 2.1% of our pay for a negotiating team and union representation.

The answer to what the pilot group wants has come from interviews, questionaires, by telephone and paper. However many of those were done years ago.

Both of these statements are incorrect. The union has not asked for a Skywest contract because it doesn't support the one pay rate concept. Doing so opens pandoras box for larger and larger aircraft but at the same rate, much like what mesa does. The companies margins go up and cost per seat mile go down for each seat they add to the aircraft. If they can keep us at the same rate for the larger planes, than it is just that much better for them.

People need to understand why MGMT is pressing so hard for a pay cut. There bonuses are based off of profitability. The higher our profits, the more padding that goes in there pocket. Yep...in other words, the money will go out of our pockets and into theres. Did anyone read the story in the star telegram about the American Airlines pilots recently. They are in an uproar right now over MGMT bonuses. Back when this all started after 9/11, they were the first ones to come out and take a huge cut. Now, there managers are making huge bonuses...and the pilots, they are still working on decreased wages....it is unethical and wrong and it must stop. WE CAN NOT GIVE IN TO THE CUT AND THAT IS WHY I AM WILLING TO STRIKE!!!!!!

The second statement quoted above is also incorrect. ALPA polling conducted as of very very recently (past several months) indicates a strong support for a strike vote. Polling that was conducted within the past 8 months was done to determine the goals for the contract and it indicated little to no change from previous results. It should also be noted that ALPA did move substantially on the compesation portion of the contract while MGMT still wanted as much as 13% from certain sections of the pilot group. THIS is why negotiations have come to a halt. We must have a strong showing on this vote. Though it may not be understood, the likelyhood of striking will DECREASE with a strong showing. This will push MGMT to move some. It should also be noted that right now, MGMT has no idea what our resolve is. They are guessing! They have not done polling. If we show them we are serious, they will come up on there offer.

 

[FL990]

Why wouldn't a portion of the CR9s come to ATL. DL needs them to feed central and south AMerican markets out ATL more than they would out of SLC. With that said, their is nothing to stop JA from opening a CR7/9 virtual SKW base out of ATL to fly these A/C.

Be very careful of what you wish for...

Fly Safe...

If this concept is true, why are they not opening an ASA 50 seat base in SLC. We are cheaper on the 50's....why are they not threatening to take 50 from skywest and move them to ASA. NOPE, they are closing the SLC base all together.

I am not saying that it won't happen...I am not a prophet...but i think it is highly unlikely. Bottom line is...they will say anything that they think we will buy. The very reason THEY claim they are closing SLC is because of redundancy...why would they go and open a Skywest base in ATL and create the very thing they eliminated in SLC. They (MGMT) want YOUR money. They want it bad enough to lie and threaten you with your livelyhood. If they take them, they take them. There will be other aircraft in the future. We can't play concessions for growth. No pilot group HAS EVER WON doing that!!!!!

 

[Bizjet]

If this concept is true, why are they not opening an ASA 50 seat base in SLC. We are cheaper on the 50's....why are they not threatening to take 50 from skywest and move them to ASA. NOPE, they are closing the SLC base all together.

I am not saying that it won't happen...I am not a prophet...but i think it is highly unlikely. Bottom line is...they will say anything that they think we will buy. The very reason THEY claim they are closing SLC is because of redundancy...why would they go and open a Skywest base in ATL and create the very thing they eliminated in SLC. They (MGMT) want YOUR money. They want it bad enough to lie and threaten you with your livelyhood. If they take them, they take them. There will be other aircraft in the future. We can't play concessions for growth. No pilot group HAS EVER WON doing that!!!!!

Great post. I wonder why some can't understand logic. They are greedy enough to bait the hook but if we don't bite they will be nothing for them to reel in.

 

[John Pennekamp]

The union has not asked for the Skywest contract because that would be admitting that we do not need to pay 2.1% of our pay for a negotiating team and union representation.

Do not believe that the 90's are not coming to ASA. If they are based in ATL they will be allocated to ASA. If they are allocated to SLC they will go to Skywest.

-We are still getting 6 GE ex ACA 50 seaters this year. That is from Scott Hall from a direct question asked Friday. Yes I know he can not tell the truth, but that is a better source then this board.
-We are still losing 15 pilots per month.
-We are running a new hire class this month, but may not next month depending on staffing.

-There will be no displacement bid from SLC to ATL as there will be the same number of 70 seat positions created in ATL. No pilots will be displaced. All 70 pilots from SLC will go directly to ATL 70 positions. They however can bid for vacancies between now and the base closure.

-Who is motivated to get the contract done? I say the company is more motivated, however we are close to the end. Economics of future income are not based upon past earnings. Economics of future contracts, aka other carriers are based upon industries costs.
The answer to what the pilot group wants has come from interviews, questionaires, by telephone and paper. However many of those were done years ago.

I am not willing to go on strike.

Not to kill your credibility, but ALPA dues are 1.95%, not 2.1%.

Also, it's interesting that you will believe and spread what Scott Hall says, but not the MEC you pay money for.

It's funny how an anonymous forum like Flightinfo can turn any kool aid drinking management hack into a bona fide prophet!

 

[atlcrjdriver]

I am not getting into a pissing match over where the CR9s are going. A wise old Cpt once said don't believe it until you see it. What is very true is that DL will dictate where they want these a/c to be flown, not Skywest Inc. DL says I want them out of ATL for these routes at this rate, I don't care which group does it. You figure it out...
How Jerry and the boys will do the logistics, your guess is as good as mine.

With that said, I agree that concessions for growth is a no win scenerio. However, our rates for current and future a/c must be in line with industry standard. A 70 is a 70 no matter if it is flown by CHQ SKW or CMR. I came here because of QOL and no commute. If you can improve upon my QOL with merger protection, I will be fine with that.

Fly Safe...

 

[Crash Pad]

A lot of neat stuff. Someone please help me out with these two questions.

1. Step one in any negotiation is to make sure you have something the other party really wants. Does the pilot group have that?

2. The SKYW pilots make more than the ASA pilots... Why haven't we just asked for the SKYW contract?

Is the consensus on #2 that we don't want more money but rather a staggered payscale.

 

[ohplease!]

Not to kill your credibility, but ALPA dues are 1.95%, not 2.1%.

Also, it's interesting that you will believe and spread what Scott Hall says, but not the MEC you pay money for.

It's funny how an anonymous forum like Flightinfo can turn any kool aid drinking management hack into a bona fide prophet!

1. still toooo much for what we're getting!
2. Just because we pay them too much doesn't mean they're any more believable than anyone else.
3. I don't see any of you posting your real names either.

 

[FL990]

A lot of neat stuff. Someone please help me out with these two questions.

1. Step one in any negotiation is to make sure you have something the other party really wants. Does the pilot group have that?

2. The SKYW pilots make more than the ASA pilots... Why haven't we just asked for the SKYW contract?

Is the consensus on #2 that we don't want more money but rather a staggered payscale.

Answer to #1:

the only threat we have as a pilot group is a work stoppage. That is what we have, ultimately, that they want. If we conduct a strike vote and it has a good showing (we need better than 90% yes), mgmt will most likely back down some. It will still go all the way to the end, but ultimately, they will not let it go to a strike and will give just enough to avert it. However, once the contract is done, if we ARE to expensive, then the shift may occur over time. My personal opinion is that what we end up with will not be enough to justify a huge shift in aircraft...but I do not know for certain.

#2:

pretty much correct...we must have separate pay scales, even if there is only a slight difference. To fly all aircraft for the same compensation is opening pandora's box, which once opened, can never be undone...it would ultimately lead to flying 90+ seat aircraft for 50 seat wages just like mesa...we cannot do this.

 

[ASADriver]

Answer to #1:

the only threat we have as a pilot group is a work stoppage. That is what we have, ultimately, that they want. If we conduct a strike vote and it has a good showing (we need better than 90% yes), mgmt will most likely back down some. It will still go all the way to the end, but ultimately, they will not let it go to a strike and will give just enough to avert it. However, once the contract is done, if we ARE to expensive, then the shift may occur over time. My personal opinion is that what we end up with will not be enough to justify a huge shift in aircraft...but I do not know for certain.

#2:

pretty much correct...we must have separate pay scales, even if there is only a slight difference. To fly all aircraft for the same compensation is opening pandora's box, which once opened, can never be undone...it would ultimately lead to flying 90+ seat aircraft for 50 seat wages just like mesa...we cannot do this.

How do you know they won't let it go to a strike? Seems CMR went on strike for a long time. What if they do start shifting aircraft? Who cares if there is a single rate - Delta, United, UPS and others have single rates for different size aircraft.

 

[surplus1]

How do you know they won't let it go to a strike? Seems CMR went on strike for a long time. What if they do start shifting aircraft?

Remember - CMR pilots didn't go on strike against Comair, it was against Delta. At the time, Delta had lots of money to throw away, or at least they thought so.

Your situation is very different. Skywest can't take a $700 million dollar strike. In fact the can't take ANY strike that lasts more than a few days.

Who cares if there is a single rate - Delta, United, UPS and others have single rates for different size aircraft.

You are comparing apples to oranges. UPS didn't lower their 747 rates to 727 rates. They raised the 727. UAL and Delta both negotiated in BK. Besides, they have more than two airplanes. The circumstances are very different. Your analogy is flawed.

 

[FL990]

Remember - CMR pilots didn't go on strike against Comair, it was against Delta. At the time, Delta had lots of money to throw away, or at least they thought so.

Your situation is very different. Skywest can't take a $700 million dollar strike. In fact the can't take ANY strike that lasts more than a few days.



You are comparing apples to oranges. UPS didn't lower their 747 rates to 727 rates. They raised the 727. UAL and Delta both negotiated in BK. Besides, they have more than two airplanes. The circumstances are very different. Your analogy is flawed.

Thank you!

I couldn't have said it better myself

 

[JoeMerchant]

Both of these statements are incorrect. The union has not asked for a Skywest contract because it doesn't support the one pay rate concept. Doing so opens pandoras box for larger and larger aircraft but at the same rate, much like what mesa does. The companies margins go up and cost per seat mile go down for each seat they add to the aircraft. If they can keep us at the same rate for the larger planes, than it is just that much better for them.

1. That Pandoras Box has been open for a long time. Good luck getting it closed.

2. Mesa has separate rates - so much for separate rates being a good thing.

 

[FL990]

1. That Pandoras Box has been open for a long time. Good luck getting it closed.

2. Mesa has separate rates - so much for separate rates being a good thing.

ONLY FOR CAPTAINS...not FO's...they have one rate for the jet on the FO side and it is substandard at best.

There captains rates for the 900 are less than ours (overall) on the 700 and they fly them with 90 seats, not 76 like we will if we get 900's.

The pandoras box I am referring to is on an individual company level. Once opened at that company, it can never be undone.

If we do, they will keep getting bigger and bigger planes and we will be flying them for what would have been 700 rates...ie mesa..(there 900 pay should be there 700 pay...etc etc etc.

 

[Tomct]

Nicely said FL990, you have had some excellent posts on this topic. It blows me away that some of these people can't see the logic in keeping separate rates. We MUST hold that line and not BUY our growth. We know that in the end we will end up getting the aircraft anyhow.

Joe, why do you look for all of the negatives? We get the box closed by showing with 95%+ STRIKE VOTE! If you were ANY kind of asset to our MEC, you should know this, but I am seeing the reason that you are now on the outside looking in!! You disgust me with your thinking on how we have NO POWER to make things better here at ASA!!

 

[~~~^~~~]

Joe:

I'm thinking a strong strike vote sends a message. What does a 71% vote do? What are you trying to achieve?

We all know the vote will be over 50%. Crew Scheduling has guaranteed a majority strike vote and Gary Hall is probably good for another 5 to 10% of the Captains that know what he is all about. For those who really know the situation the scope section the Company has not responded to should guarantee a 100% strike vote and this is before we get to the issue of compensation.

So Mr. Atkin will get the message that ASA pilots want to strike. His plan to transfer aircraft to his Company, Skywest, will be reinforced by this vote. If the vote is 51%, or 99%, it really makes no difference.

If you think you can talk folks like me (who have been looking forward to a strike vote for years) into voting against a strike, then you at least have a plan. But how would Jerry Atkin react to that? I dunno, but I believe the plan is to shrink and stagnate ASA (loading us up with expensive 50 seaters) until our old airplanes and senior expensive flight crews are such a liability that the plug can be pulled on ASA without any tears being shed.

Jerry never wanted the ATL operation. He likes the gate space, but he can fly Skywest through these gates.

I'm just thinking we die a slow painful death, or we fight back with scope language that at least protects our jobs. Sure this might be Eastern, Continental again, but I always thought the Eastern pilots made the ethical decision. And if the Eastern pilots would not have stood firm Eastern would have lasted, what, another 6 months? Lorenzo was going to do what he was going to do, the strike simply moved the clock up.

If Atkin merged the operations, my opinion would be 100% different. But my crystal ball (which has been pretty good in the past) indicates with him keeping ASA separate the "merger" will be the steady transfer of ASA's desireable equipment to Skywest while ASA gets loaded up with garbage before she is scuttled. Jerry has scuttled airlines before. At least he has the class to say the folks he let go were good people.

~~~~/\~~~---^~~~ (Fins on the run from a much bigger Utah shark)

 

[JoeMerchant]

Good points Fins - I appreciate and do understand where you are coming from. If you were running things I would be much more trusting of ALPA. You have a much better grasp of the industry and scope than most of the decision makers do, which worries me.

Let me try and explain my reasons for opposing our current strategy. As you, I am most concerned about scope. The only protection we currently have is the Delta Connection agreement that Skywest signed as part of the ASA purchase from Delta. In other words Jerry was able to accomplish something that ALPA was unable and unwilling to do - actually "scope" some DCI flying. That Delta connection agreement guarantees us the same level of ATL flying beginning in '08 that we have in '07 provided our costs are in lines with our DCI competition. I wish we weren't competing for the flying, but we are. The advantage we have is the DCI agreement that Skywest signed with Delta.

If you can show me that what we are asking for keeps us in line, and keeps the protection of the DCI agreement in tact, then I am willing to change my mind and back off. Maybe the union could publish the open items and compare each of the open items to the competition along with what has already been agreed to and how that ranks with the competition. Also I would like to see the ALPA costing data that shows how much our proposal would add per year to ASA's costs. I know they have that data, and I know that management already has it also - so there isn't any reason to keep it secret. If what we are asking for is reasonable then there shouldn't be a problem in releasing it - maybe it will change some minds to vote yes.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Nicely said FL990, you have had some excellent posts on this topic. It blows me away that some of these people can't see the logic in keeping separate rates. We MUST hold that line and not BUY our growth. We know that in the end we will end up getting the aircraft anyhow.

Joe, why do you look for all of the negatives? We get the box closed by showing with 95%+ STRIKE VOTE! If you were ANY kind of asset to our MEC, you should know this, but I am seeing the reason that you are now on the outside looking in!! You disgust me with your thinking on how we have NO POWER to make things better here at ASA!!

How do you KNOW that we will get the aircraft anyhow? The simple fact of the matter is the higher the costs, the less likely we are to get more aircraft and the higher the likelyhood of losing aircraft. The fee-for departure contracts are a major obstacle to effective pattern bargaining. Even ALPA realizes this as they have formed a "fee-for departure" task force. While I don't expect them to do anything about, at least they admit it is a problem.

The recent DAL and NWA negotiations show that a high strike vote doesn't get you what you want. Both DAL and NWA had strike votes in the 90s. In the end they both came closer to what management wanted than what the union wanted.

The fact is, whether it us or DAL or NWA or Mesaba or CMR - we are at a huge disadvantage when it comes to playing this game with management. Unlike management, if we lose we have to start all over again at the bottom. No other job, especially management, has this basic lack of leverage. The biggest leverage people have in jobs is the willingness to walk away. Since 911, every single pilot group, at least 50%+1 has decided that it would be worse to walk away and start all over again. In fact, guess which pilot group was the closest to actually saying NO to the concessionary contracts since 911? The CMR vote was the closest and they are attacked repeatedly for causing the slide. No other group has said NO, and no other group has had as close a vote.

 

[JoeMerchant]

ONLY FOR CAPTAINS...not FO's...they have one rate for the jet on the FO side and it is substandard at best.

There captains rates for the 900 are less than ours (overall) on the 700 and they fly them with 90 seats, not 76 like we will if we get 900's.

The pandoras box I am referring to is on an individual company level. Once opened at that company, it can never be undone.

If we do, they will keep getting bigger and bigger planes and we will be flying them for what would have been 700 rates...ie mesa..(there 900 pay should be there 700 pay...etc etc etc.

I agree that it is a problem FL990. However I don't think it is one that ASA can solve by ourselves. The answer has to come across company lines from a truely national ALPA. You can't support a building from only one corner of the foundation, it must be supported at all four corners.

I am ready to draw the line in the sand when and if we can prevent other ALPA and Teamsters groups from simply walking over our line in the sand and taking our flying.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Good points Fins - provided our costs are in lines with our DCI competition. I wish we weren't competing for the flying, but we are. The advantage we have is the DCI agreement that Skywest signed with Delta.

If you can show me that what we are asking for keeps us in line, and keeps the protection of the DCI agreement in tact, then I am willing to change my mind and back off. Maybe the union could publish the open items and compare each of the open items to the competition along with what has already been agreed to and how that ranks with the competition.

John,

There is something you seem to fail to grasp. I say seem because I truly believe that you are just a contrarian and would oppose ANYTHING that our current leadership does.

However, for arguments sake, I will assume that for whatever reason you just don't comprehend.

When you discuss managements claims that we have to be the "2d lowest cost operator in the portfolio" you are making 2 assumptions:

1. They are telling the truth. To my knowledge, no one, including our union leadership, has actually seen the documents (contract) that set forth this requirement. I am told that it has been requested and management has refused to provide the contract for MEC review. In my mind, this calls into question the validity of the claim that this language actually exists. In fact such nebulous and difficult to quantify requirements (2d lowest????) seem incredibly sophmoric for a contract between to entities (DAL and SKYW, Inc.) with what I assume to be a tremendous amount or legal horsepower at their disposal. It seems to me more likely a negotiating tactic summoned from the bowels of a bada bing used car saleman type fresh from the junk lot just outside the gates of Ft. Sill, Ok. (Ala Bryan "just look at the rims on this baby" LaBreque).

2. Even if this ruse was the real live deal proven by presentation of the entire contract between DAL and SKYW. Payrates and work rules account for only a small part of the overall cost of providing lift to DAL.

WE ARE ALREADY LOW COST!!!!! ASA runs on a shoestring. We all know that.

Need a GPU for each gate...Nah, we've already got one for the C Concourse. Same thing goes for aircarts etc etc etc. Delta handles baggage in ATL compared to SKYW people handling their in their big hub (SLC).

They save money.

Personnel: rather than hire professionals to handle HR and associated admin like payroll and benefits, or flight ops admin and support like scheduling and dispatch, ASA hires the lowest qualified people for least money they can. The promote unqualified people from within and we all suffer.

But again, they save money.

Middle management...do I need to go there. The routinely and repeatedly hire unqualified airline industry retreads and rejects like Scott Hall, Scott Young etc, and pay them just enough to be be good little yes men, rather than spending the money it would take to bring in proven, reliable leaders that would tell them what needs to be done and make it happen.

And again, they save money.

Rather than address any of the systemic and structural issues that continue to plague "the worlds best regional airline" the allow the status quo to persist.

And yet again, they save money.

So we operate on a shoestring and they rake their money in from DAL. They know they only have to get the sheep from point A to point B. Forget quality, forget customer satisfaction. As long as we aren't splattering airplanes and passengers all over the southeast, these morons get to keep counting their record profits and getting fat bonus checks and little pats on the head from Grinstein or Atkin or whoever their current puppet master happens to be at the moment.

Now they want even more?????

ENOUGH!!!

You John, can buy into it. I however do not.

If this place was in desperate times I would be the first to say we need to bleed to save the company. That's not the case.

They have the stick right now and their playbook calls for them to use the opportunity to beat us over the head with it.

So I say NO!!!!

No Brian, No Jerry. You may not line you pockets with my kids college money.

My fellow pilots and F/As keep this cash machine you call an airline running. On a daily basis, it is because of us and in spite of you that this place doesn't implode.

I don't buy your bullsh1t. If you say you have a contractual obligation to DAL...PROVE IT. Publish the contract and then show me were we aren't ALREADY the cheapest DCI carrier.

Till then they can sell their sh1t sandwich to you John. Cause I don't buy it. Not for a minute.

 

[sweptback]

I don't buy you bullsh1t. If you say you have a contractual obligation to DAL...PROVE IT. Publish the contract and then show me were we aren't ALREADY the cheapest DCI carrier.

Till then they can sell their sh1t sandwich to you John. Cause I don't buy it. Not for a minute.

This quote above is what I don't understand about the anti-ALPA guys. They are convinced everything ALPA puts out is BS and want to see hard proof about it and how it might affect us in the future. However, they swallow whole whatever the company puts out in the way of scare tactics! Why wouldn't you want to see some proof on the specifics of the DCI contract, especially seeing as how you're convinced it affects us so much?

 

[Crash Pad]

This quote above is what I don't understand about the anti-ALPA guys. They are convinced everything ALPA puts out is BS and want to see hard proof about it and how it might affect us in the future. However, they swallow whole whatever the company puts out in the way of scare tactics! Why wouldn't you want to see some proof on the specifics of the DCI contract, especially seeing as how you're convinced it affects us so much?

Well in my experience management lies less. Comair, Mesaba, AWAC, ACA, Coex, etc... have all had one thing in common a decent contract. Now they all have a second thing in common... they are getting there balls kicked in.

CHQ, MESA, and the non-union SKYW... all seem to be growing. Which means pay is better (when you upgrade), schedules are better, equipment is better, etc....

I don't need proof to see that ALPA is lying to me all I have to do is look around.

Give me the SKYW contract... boot the union... I'll take my raise with a smile and chuckle as the senior guys try to get back on the 50 for a better schedule.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Well in my experience management lies less.

You must not have a lot of experience. Or you a a flame baiting troll.

Well in my experience management lies less. Comair, Mesaba, AWAC, ACA, Coex, etc... have all had one thing in common a decent contract. Now they all have a second thing in common... they are getting there balls kicked in.

Comair and Mesaba are bankrupt and MANAGEMNT is using the law to fcuk them over.

ACA had idiotic MANAGEMENT that tried in vain to implement a fundamentally flawed business plan and fell flat on their a$$. Imagine that.

Coex MANAGEMENT is trying to bully them into an unneccesary round of concessions by threating to use CHQ. Chq can't do all that flying and won't and everyone knows it.

CHQ, MESA, and the non-union SKYW... all seem to be growing. Which means pay is better (when you upgrade), schedules are better, equipment is better, etc....

Pay is worse for the remainder of your career. As for the works rules and schedules, they suck from day one. The notable exception here is SkyWest. Of course the benefits they enjoy are a result of contracts negotioted during good times by UNION carriers. They will be gone on a whim and pen stroke change to the "POLICY MANUAL" once Jerry is done with his whpsaw job on the ASA pilots.

As far as equipment being better, and RJ is an RJ is an RJ. So I'm I not quite sure what the fcuk. Quite frankly I don't think you do either.

I don't need proof to see that ALPA is lying to me all I have to do is look around.

I would challenge you to provide one example of how our local leadership has lied to you the line pilot.

Conversely, explain to me all the forthright truths our bennevolent management has bestowed upon the ASA pilots.

Give me the SKYW contract... boot the union...

What good is their "policy manual" if it is not legally binding. Especially once the threat of whipsaw is employed against them if the ASA pilots cave for the growth you hope for by giving in to management extortion tactics?

I'll take my raise with a smile and chuckle as the senior guys try to get back on the 50 for a better schedule.

It's this type of self-centered horsesh1t that leads me to beleive you are nothing more than a management troll trying to spread fear and dissension among the ranks. Go ahead, try your divide and conquer. Maybe it will work and maybe it won't. One way or the other I think your time would be better spent doing your job and running a better airline.

 

["GO AROUND"]

Well in my experience management lies less. Comair, Mesaba, AWAC, ACA, Coex, etc... have all had one thing in common a decent contract. Now they all have a second thing in common... they are getting there balls kicked in.

CHQ, MESA, and the non-union SKYW... all seem to be growing. Which means pay is better (when you upgrade), schedules are better, equipment is better, etc....

I don't need proof to see that ALPA is lying to me all I have to do is look around.

Give me the SKYW contract... boot the union... I'll take my raise with a smile and chuckle as the senior guys try to get back on the 50 for a better schedule.

AWAC still has a better than decent contract and their balls are not being kicked.

 

[joesmiley]

Beg to differ. Whats good about being displaced from all of your major domiciles forcing the WHOLE pilot group to move?

AWAC still has a better than decent contract and their balls are not being kicked.

 

[Crash Pad]

Pogue: I think management is telling us that if we get too much in the new contract we will not grow. I believe them based on the previous examples.

Better equipment: RJ is an RJ is kinda like saying an airplane is an airplane. The E170 is nicer than the CR2... the CR7 is nicer than the CR2... a new CR2 is better than an old one etc... Don't worry though if a C172 paid more I would fly it... New and better aircraft are a product of growth which was my original post.

If I upgrade I make more. Career you say... Hey I'm gone when I get my time. I don't care to be a regional lifer. More power to all that do... I fly with a lot of captains who have really enjoyed the last 20 years at ASA.

Union lies:
1. Picketing is a worthwhile way to move negotiations forward
2. Billboards are a cost effective way to move negotiations forward
3. We need a union to get the best contract possible. This is a big one illustrated by Mesa, CHQ, and SKYW
4. If we raise the bar the standard will increase. See Comair: Raising the bar just makes it easier for other ALPA carriers to slide underneath.

Those are a couple common union lies. Tell me the one about the strike vote margin rule. I think the Union version is... If we get a 100% strike vote managment will settle the contract. If we get a 75% strike vote managment will see weakness and never settle the contract. What are you Union guys talking about. 51% gets a strike.

I think I should take a minute to discuss the self-centered "horsesh1t". First year pay is self-centered, seniority bidding is self-centered, the fact that a 20 year captain makes 40 bucks more than a junior guy on the same equipment is self-centered.

The top 20% of the company gets all the benefits of any Union contract while the bottom 80% eat a fat d!ck hoping to one day be in the top 20%.

You Union types crack me up. I'll go on strike even though if ASA deep sixes I'll have to start over at 4 dollars an hour because you hacks can't negotiate first year pay to make us able to switch airlines whenever we get annoyed... way to go smart guys.
Want more... In this negotiation the pilots have nothing the company wants. You walk into a room with nothing to give and you get screwed all there is to it. You threaten, walk in circles on your day off, put up a billboard, and change the location of the next meeting to Orlando. Well sh1t if that isn't getting anything done.
SKYW could go on strike tomorrow. All they have to do is get together as a group and say don't come into work tomorrow. No railway labor act, cooling off, etc... that is walking into a room with power.

I'm not management. I've got nothing to lose. I don't even take much of a cut in an airline switch.

 

[D'Angelo]

Pogue: I think management is telling us that if we get too much in the new contract we will not grow. I believe them based on the previous examples.

Better equipment: RJ is an RJ is kinda like saying an airplane is an airplane. The E170 is nicer than the CR2... the CR7 is nicer than the CR2... a new CR2 is better than an old one etc... Don't worry though if a C172 paid more I would fly it... New and better aircraft are a product of growth which was my original post.

If I upgrade I make more. Career you say... Hey I'm gone when I get my time. I don't care to be a regional lifer. More power to all that do... I fly with a lot of captains who have really enjoyed the last 20 years at ASA.

Union lies:
1. Picketing is a worthwhile way to move negotiations forward
2. Billboards are a cost effective way to move negotiations forward
3. We need a union to get the best contract possible. This is a big one illustrated by Mesa, CHQ, and SKYW
4. If we raise the bar the standard will increase. See Comair: Raising the bar just makes it easier for other ALPA carriers to slide underneath.

Those are a couple common union lies. Tell me the one about the strike vote margin rule. I think the Union version is... If we get a 100% strike vote managment will settle the contract. If we get a 75% strike vote managment will see weakness and never settle the contract. What are you Union guys talking about. 51% gets a strike.

I think I should take a minute to discuss the self-centered "horsesh1t". First year pay is self-centered, seniority bidding is self-centered, the fact that a 20 year captain makes 40 bucks more than a junior guy on the same equipment is self-centered.

The top 20% of the company gets all the benefits of any Union contract while the bottom 80% eat a fat d!ck hoping to one day be in the top 20%.

You Union types crack me up. I'll go on strike even though if ASA deep sixes I'll have to start over at 4 dollars an hour because you hacks can't negotiate first year pay to make us able to switch airlines whenever we get annoyed... way to go smart guys.
Want more... In this negotiation the pilots have nothing the company wants. You walk into a room with nothing to give and you get screwed all there is to it. You threaten, walk in circles on your day off, put up a billboard, and change the location of the next meeting to Orlando. Well sh1t if that isn't getting anything done.
SKYW could go on strike tomorrow. All they have to do is get together as a group and say don't come into work tomorrow. No railway labor act, cooling off, etc... that is walking into a room with power.

I'm not management. I've got nothing to lose. I don't even take much of a cut in an airline switch.

Youve hit the nail on the head on that one. Those are the things unions truly thrive off of. Anger, Fear, and lies. They always love to distort reality. Picketing and chanting dont do a thing. Its a waste of time and money.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Pogue: I think management is telling us that if we get too much in the new contract we will not grow. I believe them based on the previous examples.

That is what they are telling us. I don't buy it. It is just as much in their best interest to grow as it is ours. Growth creates a more junior workforce, reduces csm, and creates greater economies of scale. Don' think for a moment that management doesn't want to grow just as much as you...maybe more. Just don't buy into the scheme that YOU need to finance it for them.

Better equipment: RJ is an RJ is kinda like saying an airplane is an airplane. The E170 is nicer than the CR2... the CR7 is nicer than the CR2... a new CR2 is better than an old one etc... Don't worry though if a C172 paid more I would fly it... New and better aircraft are a product of growth which was my original post.

SJS talking here. If it doesn't pay more who gives a sh1t. New and better aircraft don't mean a thing to the pilots if they don't pay more.

Tell me the one about the strike vote margin rule. I think the Union version is... If we get a 100% strike vote managment will settle the contract. If we get a 75% strike vote managment will see weakness and never settle the contract. What are you Union guys talking about. 51% gets a strike.

I you can't comprehend the importance of unity and resolve in dealing with management, than I can't explain it to you. It seems fairly intuitive to me, but if you are that naive then I can't help. Think what you like. You either get it...or you don't.

SKYW could go on strike tomorrow. All they have to do is get together as a group and say don't come into work tomorrow. No railway labor act, cooling off, etc... that is walking into a room with power.

And a goose could fly out of my ass. You are right. Thats all they have to do. Since it is not going to happen, not now, not ever until they get together collectively. Therefore any mention of it is irrellevant and about as useful as tits on a nun.

I'm not management. I've got nothing to lose. I don't even take much of a cut in an airline switch.

Perhaps I'm wrong about you. Maybe you are not a management troll. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps you are just a junior and terribbly naive pilot. As fellow pilot and employee, you have a right to your opinion and your opionion is every bit as important as mine.

I think you are being a bit myopic and very naive. I don't say it to insult you but to try to give you some perspective. Take it for what it's worth.

I would challenge you to look beyond the pale a bit. Talk to some who have been around the company and industry a bit longer and have seen all this before. They know what it takes to get what we deserve.

Whether or not you beleive it, the union (at the local level) is nothing more than your fellow pilots working hard to improve your life and secure a decent contract for long term.

They are not here to secure growth at any cost so that the puppy mills can drain their nuts into our pilot group with a bunch of youngsters with a sense of entitlement looking to get their time and move on.

If that is what you think we should negotiate, then you are going to clash with those who want to make this a better place to work. Your choice then should be to recall your leaders and fill the MEC with time builders who want to sell out for growth. As a member that is your right to try.

I kinda think you might fall a little short of a majority consensus.

We'll see.