CHQ is all jet

[super ed]

Metro,

I forgot to add that "There is no need for you to get angry, but perhaps with a little more exposure, you may begin to understand the issues a little."

Hope I didn't knock you off that high horse you are sitting on.

Super

 

[AAflyer]

Metro,

Sorry I'm not sitting at my computer with clenched fists and smoke steaming out my ears. I haven't yet entered the realm of the jaded, burnt-out airline pilot.

When I finally do join your ranks, after I've been walked on, spat at, beat up, and starved, then maybe we can see eye-to-eye



Slapstick,

If you haven't done the above then maybe you should bite your tongue until you have entered the realm of the jaded. I once sat with your time in this business, and asked friends how they were all bent around the axil at age 30. I would never let that happen to me, foolish people. Just wait.

Maybe you will be the ONE who can put this all aside and not get emotional, but considering how quick you were to judge Metro and say your piece of mind, I don't give you too long.

AAflyer
The "JADED" Flyers club (motto; Who pissed in your wheates)

 

[MetroSheriff]

Metro,

Aren't you the working for a company that operates under some other companies code? Don't you do it for a lot less?

I humbly suggest that those living in glass houses should not cast stones.

Super

In a manner of speaking, yes. However the big difference is that we are owned by the company whose code we fly. We are actively seeking to find a solution to division between the mainline and DCI.

The same cannot be said for the contractors. They are being used to prevent the cooperation between the pilot groups.

 

[slapstick]

I really do agree with some of what Metro is saying... and I hate seeing pilots p!ssed at other pilots. I just fell into the same trap. But don't you see that mgmt loves this? You turn pilots against each other, then you have found a way to channel their anger and hostility away from those who are really responsible for our anguish. kinda like voting? ;-)

I would think that contract carriers will continue to undercut each other because this is capitalism. No one ever promised that competition would breed ethical business practice and satisfied labor groups. CEO's didn't become CEO's because of thier compassion for the workers.

 

[MetroSheriff]

I really do agree with some of what Metro is saying... and I hate seeing pilots p!ssed at other pilots. I just fell into the same trap. But don't you see that mgmt loves this? You turn pilots against each other, then you have found a way to channel their anger and hostility away from those who are really responsible for our anguish. kinda like voting? ;-)

I would think that contract carriers will continue to undercut each other because this is capitalism. No one ever promised that competition would breed ethical business practice and satisfied labor groups. CEO's didn't become CEO's because of thier compassion for the workers.

Make no mistake. It is not the pilots with whom we should be upset. The companies are the ones who are doing the undercutting. All the pilots can strive to do is work together toward a common goal. That goal being to eliminate the attractiveness of outsourcing by raising the standards of each contract, and if possible, secure contractual rights (scope) to the feed they provide. In theory this would help eliminate the threat of whipsaw.

What I don't like to see is pilots who brag that they are providing feed to 4 different carriers. They make it sound like diversification is a positive. It isn't. It serves only to undermine the contract gains that the existing carriers have fought so hard for.

 

[Corbon]

If CHQ stood up for what was right than AMR would never think of going to them. Instead they roll over and play b1tch AMR and is all over them. So YES you can blame the other pilot group. It's the pilots that make up the union, and the pilots who can make things happen if they are unified

So what do you want us to do? You seem to piss and moan about us all the time, but I have yet to hear what we can do to make you happy. After all, it's your world. We're just living in it.

 

[Eric]

Hey guys. Metro, I like your avitar or whatever it's called!

I'm hoping to ask some questions and get some clarification on a few things.

If you'll look to the left, you'll see I'm fresh into this game (go easy, I'm just trying to learn), and I'm not sure where I should stand on these issues.

Metro, I'm all with you about unity being the key to bargaining power, and I too would like to see better salaries, working conditions, etc. It seems to me you should be upset with your management (even though I don't think it will help). From their perspective, this seems to make good sense. They get someone who I'm assuming is doing it cheaper and won't collaborate with the other WO's when contract negotiations come up.

To me, trying to stop management from looking for the lowest bidder seems to create an artificial environment. Management will pay you as little as possible, up to as much as they can afford depending upon how well you negotiate. It's all about cometition isn't it? If you own a Chevy, and it breaks, do you vow allegiance to Chevy and take it to the dealer (assuming no warranty), or the local mechanic that charges half of what the dealership charges?

Another thing that confuses me is when people talk about 'Our Flying'. It seems this issue exists in two forms: scope within a company and between competitors. In a deregulated environment, is there really anything such as 'Our Flying', or does it go to those who compete best on price and service?

I admit, I haven't had the chance to read 'Flying the Line, vol 1 or 2', but I plan on it. Somebody correct me if this doesn't seem right, but this is what I've gathered:

Unions are there to protect the labor groups from getting walked on. I hear talk of raising the bar, and this seems like a good thing to shoot for if the airline is profitable. It seems like some people remove themselves from the business side of things though, and forget it is a business.

Is Skywest the enemy? This is another thing that confuses me, and I hope they aren't because I really like the routes and bases. Do they cheapen the profession, or keep it from operating in an artificial enviroment?

I apologize for the lack of flow, a specific point, or even well defined questions, but at my point in the game, I don't know much. All I garner is what I read. Metro is screaming the loudest, and I wonder if this is how the majority feels.

I don't mean to attack anyone, I'm just looking for more opinions. Feel free to PM me if you'd rather not turn this into a flame war.

Thanks
Eric

 

[super ed]

Metro, Crunch,

Again I say "Those that live in glass houses should not cast stones."

The pilots at CHQ, skywest, and aca have no more power to command more from their management than you do. If you guys would get more then you wouldn't be taking my flying, just like if you worked for less CHQ wouldn't be taking the flying that isn't yours in the first place(although you think it is).

To quote you again Metro "There is no need for you to get angry, but perhaps with a little more exposure, you may begin to understand the issues a little."

You are both Hypocrites. Quit bad mouthing someone while you are doing the exact same thing. Research the facts and then get back to me Jacka$$es.

Super

 

[MetroSheriff]

The pilots at CHQ, skywest, and aca have no more power to command more from their management than you do. If you guys would get more then you wouldn't be taking my flying, just like if you worked for less CHQ wouldn't be taking the flying that isn't yours in the first place(although you think it is).

Super

You are correct. It is not our flying. It belongs to DAL. DAL is allowed to use other carriers for a certain % of block hours with certain size a/c IAW the DAL pilots PWA. As an employee of a wholly owned subsidiary, my only interest is in seeing DAL succeed. It would be nice if we could keep the allowed feed in house with w/o carriers. The growth provided by keeping DAL feed in house would be more than enough to get every DAL pilot back to work.

I would prefer to see our mainline brothers back at work before offer career enhancement to pilots at CHQ, ACA et al. EVEN IF IT COST ME SOME SENIORITY, the strength gained from unity and a common goal would far outweigh the short term stagnation. The more subcrators that get into the stew, the worse off we all are in the long run.

If that makes me a jacka$$, then so be it.

 

[MetroSheriff]

To quote you again Metro "There is no need for you to get angry, but perhaps with a little more exposure, you may begin to understand the issues a little."

Super

Perhaps if you are going to quote me, you could be fair and use the whole paragraph rather than taking my statements out of context.

Thank you for your consideration.

 

[Brother Francis]

Here's a hypothetical question:

Suppose CHQ (TSA, Mesa, SKW, ACA, etc.- pick your favorite) were to get a CBA that met or exceeded that of the WO's in all respects so that pilot compensation were no longer an issue. If the contract price were still below that of the WO's so that mainline management still chose to contract the flying vice keep it with the WO's, would the contractor's pilots still retain their whore status, and why?

 

[Brother Francis]

BTW, Metro Sheriff, I agree the guy who started this thread whacked a hornet's nest with a stick.

 

[MetroSheriff]

Here's a hypothetical question:

Suppose CHQ (TSA, Mesa, SKW, ACA, etc.- pick your favorite) were to get a CBA that met or exceeded that of the WO's in all respects so that pilot compensation were no longer an issue. If the contract price were still below that of the WO's so that mainline management still chose to contract the flying vice keep it with the WO's, would the contractor's pilots still retain their whore status, and why?

Great question. Whore is a very srtong word. I was dead wrong for using it in the first place and you will notice that it has since been edited out. Further, it has been taken out of context in that I used it with reference to the management of the contract carriers, CHQ specifically, not the pilots. Whether or not low pilot compensation is the MAIN reason they are able to provide the service cheap enough to make this whipsaw attractive to DAL I don't know.

I know the problem. What I don't know is the solution.

I think there is only one way to prevent it. That is if DAL negotiated language that required the outsourced feed to w/o carriers. Subsequently, if DAL wanted to expand the feeders, they would have to do so by way of a purchase and subsequent integration rather than subcontracting. Of course given the current climate it won't happen soon. It will be a long and formidable process. DAL is proud of their portfolio and will fight like hell to keep it. Unless there is a way to sell it to management in such a way that they can keep the cost structure in tact. Further, it MUST be structured in such a way that it benefits the DAL pilots. It is there flying to begin with. The fact that all this expansion is going on at their expense and in direct violation of their PWA is abhorrent.

The fact that a non w/o contractor is bragging about this growth is equally abhorrent, and the source of much of the acrimony in this thread.

Hornet's nest is right.

 

[Cornelius]

When are CHQ's negotiations for a new contract supposed to start? Just an observation, but if CHQ is underbidding everybody out there, the pilots may be in for a big surprise when management won't agree to anything the pilots want as far as improvement. I don't know how teamsters are with CHQ but at Lakes they don't do a whole lot for us and unfortunately we've been going through negotiations for ever. CHQ is much bigger and affiliated with the top dogs so maybe the IBT and the mediator will take it more seriously.

Now, if CHQ is making a lot of money, then CHQ pilots may get a decent new contract but I wouldn't expect too much. CHQ is going to have to operate at minimum operating costs in the future.

This post is not meant to rattle anybody, just a question and an observation.

 

[What'sit2U]

Just curious... theres a lot of talk about so and so flying "Our Routes" or that flying "belongs" to ABC. Just wondering, since deregulation, how does one take possession of a route? Is it an I was here first so it belongs to me? Just wondering.