DoJetMX
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2004
- Posts
- 53
I was one of the guys that had to put those Spirit Of LaGargabge stickers on 401. Seems so long ago.House_X said:I just parked next to 401 (aka spirit of LGA...or as we say "la-gaaa")
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I was one of the guys that had to put those Spirit Of LaGargabge stickers on 401. Seems so long ago.House_X said:I just parked next to 401 (aka spirit of LGA...or as we say "la-gaaa")
All obvious business decisions aside pertaining to the DoJets in Indy, I am all for the NO FURLOUGHS (MX and Pilots alike), more service, and more revenue !! As for the MX, well there WERE a large group of us that knew the plane well, and could keep it moving. Oh well, in another life. Now I have to get to know the CRJ.Twotter76 said:I always thought that it would have made more sense to keep the DoJets for Indy and use them on short haul routes - no furloughs, more service, more revenue - everyone wins. Especially if the maintainence issues with those planes are being resolved (ie short engine life). But what I do I know, I just drive...
So I guess it's a definite maybe.jarhead said:Wednesday, August 4, 2004
New carrier may join Delta
Midwest Air Group would fly regional jets
By James Pilcher
Enquirer staff writer
surplus1 said:Different equipment, operational difficulties, more cost for no particular advantage. The overall welfare of the Company is what benefits Comair pilots over the long term, not short term growth for a few pilots.
I would be glad to fly the FRJ. I am not management. I have zero say in the decisions management makes. THey will look out for the bottom line. They arent going to get them because pilots want them or not. I am just saying I would be happy with more airframes. Sure lets get more 70's. Is there something that says we have to chose between the two? If you think by us getting the FRJ's that we would be skipped over for future 70 deliveries, I can see your point.
agonyairfo said:I personally would be happy to see Comair get the Dornier. I don't know that it makes good business sense. Growth is good from my limited perspective though. I can understand fear from current comair fo's worried about junior manning into the frj, but i doubt that would happen. They would need to hire the number of pilots it would take to staff the FRJ's. I doubt they would train more new hires in the CRJ and junior man CRJ fo's into the FRJ. Thats two training events where they could get away with one. New hires will go into the frj. Now as far as the captains are concerned, where looking at about 150 right? I dont think there would be that much difficulty in finding volunteers from the current fo ranks (new hires not having the company time and very likely no where near the total time). A new hire now (with no additional growth and based on attrition of 10 pilots a month, which is very high compared to now) would take almost 6 years to upgrade. Add to the fact that there are quite a few fo's who already put a couple years in the right seat at other carriers, and there will be some upgrade antsy people.
I read about a frj/crj swap of 1.6 or 1.8 frj's to a new crj. I can understand Bombardier wanting to get rid of new crj's, but why the heck would they want used frjs instead. I would think they could get 1 1/2 brand new frjs for one crj. Now that there used, I would think it would be 3 to 1 for it to be a competitive offer. Think about a trade in. You go to the BMW dealer and offer him a 97 Saturn and a 96 Hyundai for a new Beemer. Ok the crj is not the BMW of airplanes, but you get my point.
That's fair and I have no problem with it.FurloughedAgain said:Surplus,
I could not possibly disagree more.
Another airplane does mean more pilots and it does buffer those on the junior end of the list, but that doesn't mean that it strengthens the pilot group. If a new ariplane is turns out to be the wrong airplane for the Company there will be the "buffer" you mention for a short term, only to result in an overall weakening of the Company, which in turn will lose (for the pilots) not only the buffer but more. That doesn't strengthen the pilot group and I see it as shortsighted.I dont care whether this management team wants to buy CRJ700s or DornierJets, or Saab 340s, or Metroliners, or Piper Apaches.
Another airplane means one thing: 10 more people on the senority list. It strengthens the pilot group and provides a buffer for those on the junior end of the list.
If in fact management intends to pursue that aircraft, it follows that we will have to negotiate for appropriate compensation. I'm not against that and fully recognize that we would have to do it for whatever "new" equipment management might decide to operate. That however, is not the same as wanting management to pursue the acquisition of aircraft that are not beneficial to the Company. Apples and oranges.No, I dont advocate concessions in order to "purchase" the Dorniers. I do, however, believe that it is more than appropriate to negotiate a competitive payrate for that aircraft if management intends to pursue it. Then, simply let them do their job.
Closing your eyes and praying for success sometimes results in unanswered prayers. You should know that too. As a trade-unionist the welfare of the Company is definitely your business for it equates to the welfare of the pilots in our union. In fact that welfare is job number one of the trade- unionist. I agree that we can't run the company and should not try, however to just close our eyes and pray for success does not strike me as a wise course of action. A trade-unionist that relies on closed eyes and prayer isn't doing his job.As a trade-unionist it is none of my business how management chooses to run the company. But if they say they want to pursue new aircraft, all I can do is close my eyes and pray that they are successful.
-Mike
Like you, I would also be happy with more airframes but I will be a lot happier if they are the right airframes. No, there is nothing I know of that says we have to choose between CR7's and FRJ's. I don't have a crystal ball. I also don't know if we would be "skipped over" for future 70's if we operate the FRJ.agonyairfo said:I am just saying I would be happy with more airframes. Sure lets get more 70's. Is there something that says we have to chose between the two? If you think by us getting the FRJ's that we would be skipped over for future 70 deliveries, I can see your point.