AFELLOWAVIATOR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2002
- Posts
- 411
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
Chautauqua or ASA
- Thread starter Sphrynxlla
- Start date
- Watchers 26
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
sf340flyer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2002
- Posts
- 124
"AFELLOWAVIATOR" Did CHQ not hire you or did you fail initial training at CHQ?? Pull your head out of your a$$. We are just like you, we show up to work push our levers and eat our peanuts and then go home. By the way our union went to Bedford and told him to go into CVG, just so comair and chq could get into message board fights.
Get at F***in clue, and by the way you can have my jumpseat anytime. I wouldn't kick you out of my airplane cause you're a jack a$$. I know everyone just wants to get home.
Get at F***in clue, and by the way you can have my jumpseat anytime. I wouldn't kick you out of my airplane cause you're a jack a$$. I know everyone just wants to get home.
Last edited:
He thinks that along with voting yes on the contract, you also checked a box that said;
___ Yes, I want CHQ to move in and take Comair flying.(even though it is not
Comair's flying, Delta allows them to fly those routes)
___ No, I don't want any Delta flying because it may upset them.
You are never going to convince him otherwise so let the thread die. I am sure it will resurface very soon.
___ Yes, I want CHQ to move in and take Comair flying.(even though it is not
Comair's flying, Delta allows them to fly those routes)
___ No, I don't want any Delta flying because it may upset them.
You are never going to convince him otherwise so let the thread die. I am sure it will resurface very soon.
AVDAD
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2004
- Posts
- 43
You all are living my dream so grow up!
Man I tell you, I would love to see what management thinks of threads like this. They probably laugh their a$$es off.
In stead of pi$$ing everyone off and stirring $hit you should be finding ways to get on common ground and support each other. Some of you sound like spoiled, jealous litte brats. Get a life. Go take up golf. Get away from your computer for a while. I would trade places with any of you in a heart beat. I would shake the hand of everyone I met wearing wings, look them in the eye, tell them who I was and help them in any way I could.
Are we there yet?
Mommy, he hit me!
My daddy can whip your daddy.
Mommy, come wipe me.
Most of your problem is all you do is sit around and bitach. No outside life what so ever. The next time so one starts p$ssing and moaning about airline envy try to come up with something positive to say, change the subject, your killing yourself and your not smart enough to know it.
Chill, find some common ground and live longer,
I'd fly with any of you and buy the beer to boot!
Man I tell you, I would love to see what management thinks of threads like this. They probably laugh their a$$es off.
In stead of pi$$ing everyone off and stirring $hit you should be finding ways to get on common ground and support each other. Some of you sound like spoiled, jealous litte brats. Get a life. Go take up golf. Get away from your computer for a while. I would trade places with any of you in a heart beat. I would shake the hand of everyone I met wearing wings, look them in the eye, tell them who I was and help them in any way I could.
Are we there yet?
Mommy, he hit me!
My daddy can whip your daddy.
Mommy, come wipe me.
Most of your problem is all you do is sit around and bitach. No outside life what so ever. The next time so one starts p$ssing and moaning about airline envy try to come up with something positive to say, change the subject, your killing yourself and your not smart enough to know it.
Chill, find some common ground and live longer,
I'd fly with any of you and buy the beer to boot!
AFELLOWAVIATOR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2002
- Posts
- 411
OK, no one here is going to at least acknowledge that I may, just may, have a point. It has long been common for one group to take the momentum from anothers contract gains and run with them. Cha would of gotten plenty of flying if they had held the line, but instead, they went against a long held established tradition of patern bargaining and we will all pay for their mistake.AVDAD said:
Sphrynxlla
Stare at them
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2003
- Posts
- 77
Cracker
Member
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2003
- Posts
- 88
When it comes to the mindset of CHQ pilots, NDM's previous post articulates those thoughts very well. I didn't feel like quoting it again, but afellowaviator, just check it out and understand this. Everyone at CHQ and everyone who reads this post understands 'your' point perfectly clear. We are also saying that we feel you are completely wrong.
Just sit back, reread the CHQ posts, read our current contract, crossreference it with our old contract, write down all the improvements and the concessions that 'supposedly' took, read every article about how 9/11 destroyed the airline industry, and how the airline industry is still recovering (if you want to call it that). I am going to make the assumption that you have been paying attention the outside world and managed to peal yourself away from the monitor to realize what we at CHQ had to do for 'us' to survive and prosper. And we are doing very well from my seat.
We have been succesfully defending our contract and position in the airline industry for the past several years and it gets a bit tiring to have to rewrite it over and over to fellow aviators like yourself. But, hey if you haven't figured it out yet...this post is just hot air.
We get your point, bud. It's just incorrect, that's all. No worries mate... I'd still drink with ya.
Just sit back, reread the CHQ posts, read our current contract, crossreference it with our old contract, write down all the improvements and the concessions that 'supposedly' took, read every article about how 9/11 destroyed the airline industry, and how the airline industry is still recovering (if you want to call it that). I am going to make the assumption that you have been paying attention the outside world and managed to peal yourself away from the monitor to realize what we at CHQ had to do for 'us' to survive and prosper. And we are doing very well from my seat.
We have been succesfully defending our contract and position in the airline industry for the past several years and it gets a bit tiring to have to rewrite it over and over to fellow aviators like yourself. But, hey if you haven't figured it out yet...this post is just hot air.
We get your point, bud. It's just incorrect, that's all. No worries mate... I'd still drink with ya.
Strikefinder
Captain Backfire
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2002
- Posts
- 114
Reposting from previous episode of "I hate Chautauqua"
AFA was on another CHQ bashing crusade a while back, and I posted this in response to his assaults (the thread was "Chataqua 2 yr upgrade?" [sic]). He never responded to it then, and it basically makes the relevant point so I'll repost it for all of your perusal and dissection.
Any comments?
-----------------------------------------------------
As it's been said on numerous occasions, I believe that the vast majority of the people at CHQ made the decision to accept our current contract under the auspices of being whipsawed by our own parent company's creation, Republic. It wasn't the fear that we'd "lose growth" as much as the fear that the creation of an alter-ego carrier with lower pay rates (not to start a flame war here, but PSA rates for those that are wondering) would provide our parent company the opportunity to take the flying that we already had away from us and give it to a lower cost carrier. Though none of us will ever know for certain, I think it's reasonable to believe that had we turned down the contract, the mediation board would not have allowed us to start the cooling off period for some time (as it was nearing the holiday season, and historically the mediation board does no release pilot groups to strike during this time), and given the opportunity to get Republic (in it's prior form) off the ground could have led to our battling and existing entity making lower wage rates than we do (and you do). Had our flying effectively been transferred to Republic at their wage rates, you'd have been pretty greatful to be battling our wage rates.
Don't think it could happen? Read up on your history of Frank and the Continental folks and how well striking worked for them. Just because you go on strike does not guarantee higher wage rates, or even a job at all. ComAir was positioned incredibly well when their strike went on, something we didn't share because of other airline contracts being signed at wage rates significantly lower than what we agreed to. Besides Mesa, TSA signed a contract extension of lower wage rates and horrible work rules, PSA agreed to horrible CRJ rates, Air Wisconsin and ACA agreed to concessionary rates (the latter of which was admittedly reversed by their cancellation of their United contract, but at the time we still had to bargain against it), Piedmont/Allegheny agreed to poor CRJ rates (which never materialized for them, though), and we still find ourselves ahead of Pinnacle, Mesaba, and CoEx's current contract. Meanwhile, our work rules significantly improved and I still believe are among the best in the industry. We were the first airline to sign a non-concessionary contract post 9/11, and so far for all the talk about sticking it to the man, I've yet to see anybody pony up and do better. I hope CoEx and ASA do, and if I actually see ComAir +X%, I will hands down congratulate you. We'll see. I love to be proven wrong.
As far as the hatred goes, I can't help how you feel. I'm very happy here, and though I might disagree with the way other pilot groups decide to deal with their own contract negotiations, I don't take it personally. And even if you want to give me the nth degree every time I see you at the airport, you're always welcome in my jumpseat unless you've crossed a picket line, and even then, it's business, not personal. It's funny, though, how all the claims that have been made to me since our contract was signed about how sorry I'll be haven't seemed to materialize for me. Only time will tell, but something tells me that won't change any time soon.
AFA was on another CHQ bashing crusade a while back, and I posted this in response to his assaults (the thread was "Chataqua 2 yr upgrade?" [sic]). He never responded to it then, and it basically makes the relevant point so I'll repost it for all of your perusal and dissection.
Any comments?
-----------------------------------------------------
As it's been said on numerous occasions, I believe that the vast majority of the people at CHQ made the decision to accept our current contract under the auspices of being whipsawed by our own parent company's creation, Republic. It wasn't the fear that we'd "lose growth" as much as the fear that the creation of an alter-ego carrier with lower pay rates (not to start a flame war here, but PSA rates for those that are wondering) would provide our parent company the opportunity to take the flying that we already had away from us and give it to a lower cost carrier. Though none of us will ever know for certain, I think it's reasonable to believe that had we turned down the contract, the mediation board would not have allowed us to start the cooling off period for some time (as it was nearing the holiday season, and historically the mediation board does no release pilot groups to strike during this time), and given the opportunity to get Republic (in it's prior form) off the ground could have led to our battling and existing entity making lower wage rates than we do (and you do). Had our flying effectively been transferred to Republic at their wage rates, you'd have been pretty greatful to be battling our wage rates.
Don't think it could happen? Read up on your history of Frank and the Continental folks and how well striking worked for them. Just because you go on strike does not guarantee higher wage rates, or even a job at all. ComAir was positioned incredibly well when their strike went on, something we didn't share because of other airline contracts being signed at wage rates significantly lower than what we agreed to. Besides Mesa, TSA signed a contract extension of lower wage rates and horrible work rules, PSA agreed to horrible CRJ rates, Air Wisconsin and ACA agreed to concessionary rates (the latter of which was admittedly reversed by their cancellation of their United contract, but at the time we still had to bargain against it), Piedmont/Allegheny agreed to poor CRJ rates (which never materialized for them, though), and we still find ourselves ahead of Pinnacle, Mesaba, and CoEx's current contract. Meanwhile, our work rules significantly improved and I still believe are among the best in the industry. We were the first airline to sign a non-concessionary contract post 9/11, and so far for all the talk about sticking it to the man, I've yet to see anybody pony up and do better. I hope CoEx and ASA do, and if I actually see ComAir +X%, I will hands down congratulate you. We'll see. I love to be proven wrong.
As far as the hatred goes, I can't help how you feel. I'm very happy here, and though I might disagree with the way other pilot groups decide to deal with their own contract negotiations, I don't take it personally. And even if you want to give me the nth degree every time I see you at the airport, you're always welcome in my jumpseat unless you've crossed a picket line, and even then, it's business, not personal. It's funny, though, how all the claims that have been made to me since our contract was signed about how sorry I'll be haven't seemed to materialize for me. Only time will tell, but something tells me that won't change any time soon.
AFELLOWAVIATOR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2002
- Posts
- 411
Very good points. I would counter a few. Republic was thrown at you becuase it worked at Mesa. From the outside, it looks like you just fell for an elaborate scheem that could of never worked if you just said F#ckyou to mgt. Just look at where Republic is now. They are just now getting airplanes, and they do not even have an operating certificate yet. Your MEC should of seen this.Strikefinder said:
Post 911? It was just last year that we said hell no to mgt. when they wanted us to give concessions. We already work cheap, even if we are amongst the highest paid RJ drivers.
There is nothing I or any one else can do about what has happened. It will just be more difficult to raise pay and QL issues now that Cha, Mesa et all have signed the contracts they have signed.
JS? You may not think it, but I never bring this up when I have a Cha jumpseater. I consider it a nutral place.
Strikefinder
Captain Backfire
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2002
- Posts
- 114
I agree to a point that Republic might not have actually panned out had we told the company to take a flying leap. On the other hand, keep in mind that the original Republic Airlines plan was to operate EMB145s, and was originally meant to be certified in SDF under a different FSDO; many of the issues that have taken the past year for us to work out for Republic includes the decision to make it an EMB170 operator, the switch from USAir to United, and the movement of the operation back to IND and the IND FSDO. I think it's very possible that as a 145 operator in SDF for USAir, it could have gotten off the ground much more expediently.AFELLOWAVIATOR said:
Furthermore, I stand by my claim that the NMB may or may not have released us to strike. Remember, we had our "strike vote" almost two years before our new contract was ratified (the failure of the first TA, under the IBT bylaws, is an automatic strike authorization. The second strike authorization was technically irrelevant), and we had not even nearly been released at the point that we signed our new agreement. And it's worth noting that while the QOL issues had improved in our second TA, the pay we were able to negotiate actually went down. All other things being equal, we had little reason to believe that continuing negotiations would result in significantly increased payscales.
And either way, we're looking back on the whole thing in hindsight now. Even if I'm willing to admit that Republic, under the above circumstances, could not have been operational in time to properly whipsaw us, I don't think there's any way we could have known that at the time. We all made a decision at the time based on the evidence available, and though I might, knowing what I know now, approach the matter differently if faced with it again, if I were presented with the same information we had at the time, I think we would have acted in the same manner we did when we signed the second TA. Though this particular part of it may or may not have been the best thing to do in the end, it invariably means that there was a lot to think about other than preserving "growth". I'm frustrated at how wantonly you proclaim that that was the single defining reason why we Chautauqua folks "sold out" everybody else in the industry. It's much more complicated than that, and I'm very disappointed if you can't understand that.
I strongly believe that our management will come to the pilot group soon and ask for concessions because of the USAir and Delta situations, and I can say with extreme confidence that we will refuse to amend our contract under nearly any circumstances, including the potential loss of growth, furloughs, or downgrades. Why is it that we can stand up now, when not before? Because we have scope that we did not have during the end of our last negotiations. Should this happen, I think this will once and all put to rest the idea that the people here will do anything, at any price, for growth. You must understand that our management's plan was to gain that growth that you feel we stole from you, whether with us or without us. They admittedly outwit us, and the only thing we could reliably do to stop it was scope Republic out of the picture. I still believe that our interest in keeping the flying on our seniority list did not only benefit us, but every other pilot at every other airline that would have otherwise been competing at rates near our OLD contract.AFELLOWAVIATOR said:
There is a time to be judicious and a time to be tough, and the trick lay in knowing the difference. They did outsmart us with Republic, but we all hope that the provisions we've sucessfully negotiated will help us win the next battle, having removed the biggest obstacles to it.
I'm glad to hear it. You commented that there are a number of ComAir pilots who don't like Chautauqua pilots, and if that's truly the case, I'm disappointed. I don't harbor any ill will toward anybody that hasn't crossed a picket line, and again, despite protestations that you've made yourself about how much I'd regret the contract I voted for, you're completely off. I'm really happy here, and most of the people I fly with are, too. I understand your concerns about the "bar" and the state of the industry, and I share them. It's a complicated mess, I'm afraid, and like everything else in life, there will be ebb and flow to all of it. Everyone's conspiracy that we'll all be flying for $5.95 an hour is ridiculous. But there will be times where we will all cut our losses and retreat to fight another day. That's what I believe happened to us, and we all need to put it behind us, rather than log onto computers and bash each other all day (that goes for the people from Chautauqua, too). Let's find something more constructive to talk about, shall we?AFELLOWAVIATOR said:
AFELLOWAVIATOR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2002
- Posts
- 411
Fair enough.. I'm actually pretty fortunate to be in the position I'm in. A lot of our pilots have been furloughed two and three times in the last ten years . I am in the top 3rd of our list and make a good living. I know mgt. is the real problem here. We ALL work too cheap. I just hope we can bring the wages up to where they should be. Mgt. saw this oportunity years ago abd ALPA seems to of been blind sided by it.Strikefinder said:
I guess I should apologize for my words. I should of been a little more respectful. I guess I let my frustrations get the better of me.
MetroSheriff
Hittin' the road...
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 854
AFELLOWAVIATOR said:
AFA- I guess this falls into the category of "you made your decision, now deal with it." If you are not happy with the outcome of not getting more growth for not giving concessions, you have nobody to blame but yourselves. If you are happy with the outcome, zip it and be thankful you have what you wanted. I have many friends at Comair. They tell me how miserable the cockpit can be when many Captain's b!tch constantly about other airlines and pilot groups out there. Pilots have way too much time on their hands while enroute. If your focus during that time is on letting things fester and not on "what are we going to do on our layover tonight", that's a sad way to live life. (even worse for the F.O. who has to listen to it knowing they will be stuck on reserve a lot longer with soft days off. Then they start festering and the cancer spreads...)
AFELLOWAVIATOR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2002
- Posts
- 411
Here is the problem. If CHQ did not compete with Comair for flying, this would not be an issue PERIOD!! YOU talk about pay and QOL and never mention companies like Indy Air, JetBlue, and Airways. All of which have lower or around the same pay. Where were you when ACA agreed to pay cuts before going on their own? Where is your complaining when JetBlue 190 rates are below CHQ 190 pay rates???? HMMMMMMMMM. So don't tell me how CHQ is bringing down the industry when so many others are paying less. It comes down to how it affects you. You may hate the competition, but quit whining about lowering the bar.
AFELLOWAVIATOR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2002
- Posts
- 411
CMR was not owned by Delta when Delta built Concource C.AFELLOWAVIATOR said:
1994 - Comair opened the innovative 53-gate Concourse C at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, the largest ever designed exclusively for a regional airline. The concourse was equipped with many of the same amenities as a major airline hub facility, including a food court, specialty stores and duty-free shopping. The concourse was part of terminal expansion projects at the airport by Delta totaling over $400 million.
AFELLOWAVIATOR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2002
- Posts
- 411
Yes, it was part of Delta's expansion. No surprise there. Comair financed it and built it. As you said, we were not owned by Delta in 1994.FDJ2 said:
This whole argument is stupid. If you want to beleive Delta paid for Concourse C, go ahead, but as a 10 year employee who was hired at the time it was opened I am telling you you are wrong. Geez.
Last edited:
AFELLOWAVIATOR, you need to brush up on CMR history, because that did not come from a news article, but rather CMR's own website. In 1994 Cmr opened concourse C which was constructed by Delta airlines.AFELLOWAVIATOR said:
http://www.comair.com/about/history/
Last edited:
AFELLOWAVIATOR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2002
- Posts
- 411
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
