ASA parking planes???

[Speedtape]

Does Speedtape always refer to himself in the 3rd person?

Sometimes, he does.

My question for you, Mr. McNugent:

Who is that masked man in your avatar and who is he suppose to be? Enquiring minds want to know!

 

[Speedtape]

There has been change and improvements on all concourses. Is it perfect, yet? Let's just say it is a work in progress! However, no one can say that it's not better most of the time today, as compared with even some of the time a little over a year ago.


I live on 'D'. It is well below a 'work in progress' with regards to operational effectiveness, much less efficiency. Frankly, I'm amazed that ASA/Delta hasn't had a fatality of a paying customer because of the incompetence of gate agents and rampers on D. It is an accident waiting to happen.

There may very well be improvements elsewhere, but the current state of the ramp on D is well below where it was left when ASA was responsible for ramp ops at the very end. Granted, summers past were a disaster everywhere in the 'hood, but 'D' worked, and worked well just before mother Delta took over.


Could ASA have achieved its current success with the prior managerial team in place? I highly doubt it.

I don't live on "D," but I have parked there several times in the last few weeks. Everything went well--but I know that can depend on the day of the week, time of the day, and whether there is an NBA chamionship on the TV.

 

[McNugent]

Sometimes, he does.

My question for you, Mr. McNugent:

Who is that masked man in your avatar and who is he suppose to be? Enquiring minds want to know!

Oh that's just "Whipsaw Man". Skywest management brings him out to promise their pilots free pizza, ice cream and airplanes every couple years when the ALPA drives start.

 

[CFI2766]

Coupla points:

Speedtape wrote:

3. I am not sure where you get the "antagonizing Skywest pilots" idea. I have made no such statement or have that predjudice.

Welll, here:

We are working with Skywest--D-0! How should we join with our fellow Skywest pilots? They don't have any organizational structure that is not management controlled. Maybe, we could give them a 15 year contract like Eagle gave their mangagement--with ALPA's help!

I am somewhat in the dark here, being as I work for ASA and not Eagle, but I really don't get the sense that anyone at Eagle is currently all that happy with their long-term contract. By you stating that "...'we' could give them a 15 year contract like Eagle gave their management..." you certainly seem to be taking a jab at the SKYW guys. (emphasis added for clarity)

We know, based off of the SKYW Inc. offer for XJT, that management of SKYW isn't above trying to whipsaw two different pilot groups. At some point in the future, it would be prudent to plan for that happening between ASA and SKYW. Wouldn't it be a lot easier to defeat that tactic if there was a positive working relationship between the two pilot groups? It could very well be that they ARE better off without ALPA at the moment. I suspect that this might not always be the case moving forward.

 

[USCtrojan]

Coupla points:

3. I am not sure where you get the "antagonizing Skywest pilots" idea. I have made no such statement or have that predjudice.

Welll, here:

We are working with Skywest--D-0! How should we join with our fellow Skywest pilots? They don't have any organizational structure that is not management controlled. Maybe, we could give them a 15 year contract like Eagle gave their mangagement--with ALPA's help!

I am somewhat in the dark here, being as I work for ASA and not Eagle, but I really don't get the sense that anyone at Eagle is currently all that happy with their long-term contract. By you stating that "...'we' could give them a 15 year contract like Eagle gave their management..." you certainly seem to be taking a jab at the SKYW guys. (emphasis added for clarity)

We know, based off of the SKYW Inc. offer for XJT, that management of SKYW isn't above trying to whipsaw two different pilot groups. At some point in the future, it would be prudent to plan for that happening between ASA and SKYW. Wouldn't it be a lot easier to defeat that tactic if there was a positive working relationship between the two pilot groups? It could very well be that they ARE better off without ALPA at the moment. I suspect that this might not always be the case moving forward.

Only one way to kill whipsaw--ONELIST. Yes I'm for it. Always have been. It's not good for any pilot short term, good for all pilots long term. I don't think you'd ever get support from mgmt for merging Companies. But I believe you would for merging Seniority lists. I can live with it either way, but I believe it's in the best interest of both pilot groups to be one so there is no chance of whipsaw EVER.

Trojan

 

[CFI2766]

Speedtape,

You wrote:

There were two junior pilots on the MEC. I heard that the most Junior guy developed the formula. If that is true, then how can you blame the senior pilots.

Very clever wording. You were careful not to equate 'junior' to being an FO. It's a fact that FOs were screwed in the distribution of the signing bonus. Myself, as well as every other FO I've spoken with, believes that this was handed to us by pilots on the seniority list and negotiating committe who are captains.

No logical, rational, impartial human being would find that a recently-upgraded captain with the company less than 5 years should have received a bigger portion of the payout than the number one FO on the seniority list. This distribution was a perversion of just/fair thought. (Longevity, up to the five years of negotiations, should have been considered. To make different slices of the distribution based off of captain/FO status should not. [The tired chant of 'industry standard' doesn't cut it when discussing 'fair'. Industry standard is synonymous with saying "Well, since other people did it, it's okay for us to... Would 'industry standard' -SYNONYMOUS- have been fair if you were Jewish and happened to be at Auschwitz in 1944? How about if you were black, and at Tuscaloosa trying to go to school in 1963? George Wallace was only doing what other people did and wanted, and voted, him to do, right? -INDUSTRY STANDARD-])

It's my suspicion that the most junior guy in the room contributing to the planned distribution certainly had 4 stripes on his shoulders. Unless all involved were to acknowledge their parts in this 'distribution', there is no way to know.

Food for thought: Not a single one of the signatures I've seen on my copy of the contract (which is in my flight kit, not on a shelf at the house...) has the title of 'First Officer'. Why is that?

Your pay was protected at 60% of Captain pay. The rest of the regional industry is something far less.

It is not my job as an FO to 'chip in' for Captain pay. Clearly, there will be captains who feel that they should be paid more. (Granted, we ALL should.) For you to tacitly suggest that I should be grateful for ALPA in keeping the 60% ratio speaks volumes about your priorities.
My 1.95% is the same ratio of pay that every other pilot, regardless of shoulder-boards, contributes at ASA. I should receive the same amount of negotiating effort that every other pilot, regardless of shoulder-boards, receives at ASA. (Not to be ignored, especially in the time of $4.10 gas, I would not-so humbly suggest that 1.95% of my hourly rate has a much higher impact on my life than 1.95% of what a captain makes.)

 

[CFI2766]

In case I caused any confusion with my last post:

There is not an educational institution in Alabama, nay, the world, that is of higher quality than THE University of Alabama.

It should be pointed out that administration of the university wanted nothing to do with George Wallace and his grandstanding, and had in fact already planned to quietly admit the two students without fanfare- just like every other student at the university.

ROLL TIDE!

 

[CFI2766]

Does Speedtape always refer to himself in the 3rd person?

Hmmm...Me thinks 'The Speedtape' to be something other than simply a line-flying pilot at ASA. I also believe 'The Speedtape' would have additional credibility if he acknowleged any affiliations he might have.

 

[sweptback]

No logical, rational, impartial human being would find that a recently-upgraded captain with the company less than 5 years should have received a bigger portion of the payout than the number one FO on the seniority list.

Not this argument again!

Does the junior captain not have a bigger paycheck than the senior FO? Why should the FO have a larger signing bonus check then?

That senior FO chose QOL over pay by bypassing the upgrade! He'll say the money's not worth it when he has 19 days off a month and all holidays off, but when it comes bonus time he changes his mind?

What's funny is that you take this up as an issue even though you were a very junior FO at the time of signing! If you're that pissed off, you need to come to more LEC meetings, or maybe volunteer your time for the union.

 

[CFI2766]

[

quote=sweptback;1631299]Not this argument again!

Does the junior captain not have a bigger paycheck than the senior FO? Why should the FO have a larger signing bonus check then?

Just because the argument has been made before, it's not less valid. Once again, let's recap:

Did the captain suffer more under the prior contract than the FO? Welll, clearly, no. Thus, there is no justifiacation for the irrational thought that the captain should have received more in the bonus. Captains and FOs should have received the same amount, adjusted for the duration that the individual was at the company, during the negotiations.

(It was wrong to divide it between captains and fos, and it was wrong to split the 'shares' of the bonus into slices representing years prior to the contract negotiations.)

What's funny is that you take this up as an issue even though you were a very junior FO at the time of signing!

It's funny to you that I was wronged? It's acceptable to you that I, as well as other FOs were treated unjustly, simply because we were junior?

This speaks clearly about your intentions and value system. I would suggest that your attitude, when turned against yourself, would be highly irritating to you.