ASA to furlough?

[Abernathy]

Yet you all support a union that enabled this portfolio whipsaw.....If you don't like it...hold your union accountable......

We are competing with fellow ALPA members for work....and cost is one the benchmarks used in the competition.....Either demand that your union stop the competition....or compete with everyone.....Those are the two choices....

Joe can you elaborate on ALPAs responsibility for this

 

[79%N1]

Get used to it. Doom and gloom is what 79% does best. I've been put in bad moods many times from his relentlessly miserable posts. If you had believed everything he forecast, ASA should have been done with years ago.

On the same note I do agree with him a little bit on this one. There are plenty of players waiting for Mesa to take a dump, many of which are cheaper than us. Even if Mesa does go away (which I have my doubts) we may not be affected by that at all. But personally I'm cautiously optimistic.

Give me a freaking break....

I give my opinions here like everyone else does. Just because I try to be realistic and read the industry (as my opinion) does not mean doom and gloom. For instance, I have been long saying that I do not see us getting 90's (where I have been right), and I don't see us getting any new bases. So, since I have been right, I'm sorry for not just painting a rosy picture at what you all want to hear. But thanks for agreeing on my other point. Unfortunately, I think it is ASA's current growth plan to wait for Mesa to die, which I don't see happening.

 

[JumpersAway]

Joe, would you support a measure that would allow the Mesa pilots to come to ASA, by date of hire, to end the whipsaw? If a bundle of them ended up tied into our seniority list, and it directly impacted your seniority number, would you embrace it?

I'm not trying to fan a fire here, just curious. Ultimately, the ONLY way to end this whipsaw is to allow pilots to carry their experience from one carrier to another, and not to the bottom where they earn 20k as an FO with 10k hours of experience.

That being said- I concour we need to follow the CI to a T. Everything we can do, from every pilot, is required here. Instead, people are looking for other pilots to take up the slack, because they are too inept, or lazy, to save the gas and put forth an effort. Not everyone is like this- most I'm flying with are truly top notch. However, I've definately flown with my fair share of guys that seem not to care, as long as the check clears.

 

[79%N1]

Speaking of CI numbers, has anyone else noticed incredibly slow speeds? I had a climb speed of 246 to 31000', then a cruise of 253 into the 160 knot head winds the other day. Thought that was a bit suspect.

 

[Abernathy]

Speaking of CI numbers, has anyone else noticed incredibly slow speeds? I had a climb speed of 246 to 31000', then a cruise of 253 into the 160 knot head winds the other day. Thought that was a bit suspect.

I think that's the point.

 

[79%N1]

Yet we have been told for years to not fly below 290 in the climb, nor ever fly below 250 at altitude. I'm just saying........

Nothing like 200 kts ground speed enroute in a CRJ.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Joe, would you support a measure that would allow the Mesa pilots to come to ASA, by date of hire, to end the whipsaw? If a bundle of them ended up tied into our seniority list, and it directly impacted your seniority number, would you embrace it?

I'm not trying to fan a fire here, just curious. Ultimately, the ONLY way to end this whipsaw is to allow pilots to carry their experience from one carrier to another, and not to the bottom where they earn 20k as an FO with 10k hours of experience.

I would IF it was included in a package brand scope deal that ended future whipsaw.....It would require the mainline pilots to get on board....The longer this drags out...the less likely we can pull it off...

Back in 2000 when the ASA and CMR MECs filed the PID...we had a chance...Now it is much less likely...

In the absence of a comprehensive brand scope deal....I support doing what is best for US....

It's time to $h!t or get off the pot for ALPA........

 

[JoeMerchant]

Joe can you elaborate on ALPAs responsibility for this

1. First they sold scope to prop up pay and workrules...At one time all flying was done by the brand carrier...

2. Next they used scope as a remote control to try and control the size of aircraft that were used....This resulted in the wrong sized aircraft being used...

3. Third they encouraged more alter-ego carriers to compete for flying with the mainline scope clauses...4 that were created by mainline scope language are:

Freedom
GoJet
MidAtlantic
Compass

All 4 of these reduced the cost of the competition...All 4 had lower rates and workrules...in addition to lower longevity.....

4. In addition to ignoring "brand scope"....ALPA refuses to deal with transportability of experience and barriers to entry.....Failure to address these issues means that despite all the belly aching on FI....nothing will change when nobody is willing to lay it all on the line and anybody with a couple hundred hours can replace you......

 

[Roger Dat]

I think that DAL would disagree on who owns the gates. Now SKW has right of first refusal, but there are some mean restrictions to it. Call over to DAL's real estates department. I have, and seen how it is structured.

we might own our gate leases, and Delta might own their's, but come 2010, they all expire and what happens then is anyone's guess.

 

[Abernathy]

1. First they sold scope to prop up pay and workrules...At one time all flying was done by the brand carrier...

2. Next they used scope as a remote control to try and control the size of aircraft that were used....This resulted in the wrong sized aircraft being used...

3. Third they encouraged more alter-ego carriers to compete for flying with the mainline scope clauses...4 that were created by mainline scope language are:

Freedom
GoJet
MidAtlantic
Compass

All 4 of these reduced the cost of the competition...All 4 had lower rates and workrules...in addition to lower longevity.....

4. In addition to ignoring "brand scope"....ALPA refuses to deal with transportability of experience and barriers to entry.....Failure to address these issues means that despite all the belly aching on FI....nothing will change when nobody is willing to lay it all on the line and anybody with a couple hundred hours can replace you......

I had a feeling that's what you were referring to. But unfortunately, like you, I don't see a way out of it.

It's like 10 people suing and counter suing each other and all being represented by the same attorney.