CRJ-700s at PSA

[N93]

What is the story on the CRJ-700-s at PSA. Supposedly they are built into the US Airways schedule in May that is loaded in Sabre but I don't think they have any yet. What is the story?

 

[skeezer]

At least one aircraft is built and others are one the way however..... we have no agreement on staffing them with J4J pilots and we have no pay rates. Our union is meeting in DC tomorrow with mainline management types to have a discussion about this issue. The mainline MEC (last anybody has officially heard) still wants 100% furloughed mainline guys to staff them, so I beileve our union is telling them to kiss our a$$es we want 50/50. That appears to be the big holdup. Mainline MEC trying to f@ck us again.

Skeezer

 

[NoName]

would it be possible for PDT to pull a "PSA" and agree (mec only of course) to a 70 seat bargain rate and get the 70 seaters?

 

[skeezer]

My guess is no. PSA already has a CRJ program in place so adding the 700 will barely cost Airways any more cash since it is a common type and all anyone will need is differences.

Skeezer

 

[Swaayze]

skeezer,

Sorry, but I'm about tired of people blaming everyone else for their situation. I usually stay out of these, but just a quick response:

I still fail to see how the mainline MEC has screwed anyone with the j4j program. Your pilot group approved it! And, these are airplanes you'd have never had on the property if scope had not been relaxed by the U MEC, and if your group hadn't agreed to participate. (Don't bother with pointing out how scope needed to be changed, we know).

Anyway, it's last call for PSA FOs from the mainline furloughees, so you will already get 50% of the seats in the 700s, even if the 100% ratio is maintained. Of course, there will be utter shock if the mainline MEC doesn't roll over again and allow 50%.

Now, lest you think I'm a "typical" mainline guy, I spent plenty of time in a WO situation with AE, and I know both sides of the story. I'll be a commuter pilot (don't take offense, that's just what us old farts call 'em, no malice or ignorance here) again soon with any luck, so I get to experience it all over again.

Hopefully PSA will thrive (without being bought by JO) and PDT/ALG folks will salvage their careers, just as the rest of us are trying to do.

 

[Smoking Man]

PSA did agree to J4J but that only called for 50/50 staffing.

The Mainline MEC and Mgt agreed to LOA 84(?) (PSA was not included in this decision, it was made for us )
In LOA 84 is where the 100% staffing language on 70 seaters at a wholly owned is contained. Also in the same letter if 70 seaters are placed at an affiliate carrier the staffing is 50/50. Nice double standard.

 

[328dude]

Smoking Man:

The information you speak of is in LOA 83. Not 84. Neither of which the MEC signed.

Show me where the mec signed either document, and I'll buy you a carton.

 

[Smoking Man]

Sorry if I did not make that point clear, we did not sign loa 84 it was agreed to by U mgt and U alpa not us.

 

[skeezer]

I still fail to see how the mainline MEC has screwed anyone with the j4j program. Your pilot group approved it!

Ok, I had a longer response to this but I will just stick to the points to hopefully avoid a big pissing match.

1. Our pilot group did NOT approve this, our MEC did.

2. J4J pilots to whom I am senior, are sitting in the left seat while I am stuck in the right...thats crap.

3. If we hire lots of FOs off the street it is good because we can employ more people, but that does me no good due to #2. FO time after a point is just a waste of my life.

4. Mainline MEC agreed to staff the -700's at 100% here but 50/50 at MESA. Nice, real nice.

5. If you want to look at a good "jets for jobs" program look at what United is doing. The regionals get more aircraft, furloughed guys get jobs, and nobody's seniority is stepped on! YAY!

In conclusion, every single FO here at PSA is getting hosed because mainline furloughees are overstepping their company seniority. Our careers are being stifled because of the Mainline MECs arrogance. IMHO. I do have sympathy for the mainline furloughees, however I have no sympathy for taking advantage of another group of people.

I want to add that I have flown with several J4J pilots here at PSA and all have been outstanding people to fly with and just good peeps overall. They were put in a hard situation and I can understand why they are doing what they are doing. I hold no ill feelings towards them, just the Mainline MEC.

Skeezer

 

[Lance501]

Fact:

PSA pilot group did not get to vote on their current working agreement
PSA pilot group did not get to vote on LOA 81 (J4J)
PSA pilot group did not attempt to recall any MEC members after the injustice and then voted them in for another term.

I guess your MEC really does speak for you. I suppose I'm just tired of hearing about how PSA was led into something they didn't want when they continue to follow the same dictatorship to this day without rebellion.

 

[skeezer]

Re: Fact:

PSA pilot group did not attempt to recall any MEC members after the injustice and then voted them in for another term.

First off, there was an attempt to recall the PIT FO rep but that fell through in part because of some shady stuff that I do not condone.

Second, my pilot reps (DAY) do a dang fine job trying to allow us to actually vote on our future so recalling them does no good. Since I cannot recall or even vote for my MEC chairman, and/or the reps from other bases there is not much to be said and/or done.

Peace

Skeezer

 

[N93]

US Airways used to operate many 70 seat jets. They actuall had about 80 from the 63 seat F28 to the 74 seat BAC-111. Over the course of the years US Airways abandoned those aircraft. Now they have decied to bring them back but were restricted by the CBA scope language that maintained they must be operated by pilots on the US Airways seniority list. US Airways management elected to pull down 30% of the capacity, park airplanes and layoff pilots. They now want to bring that capacity back and instead of placing the aircraft on their operating certificate as in the past, they want to outsource and do it cheaper. There are 1800 pilots whose flying is being replaced and the MEC secured maybe only half of that and with less contracual benifiit and seniority. Who own's that flying? that is the grand question and only exists because of the short sighted nature of ALPA and pilot in general. While many at PSA see Mainline furloughees as taking their jobs, there are an equal number of furloughees who see the scope relaxation as corporate charity from the Mainline at their expense allowing flying to be replaced while a furlough is in place. Just as you would say 50/50 or nothing an equal argument of place on the RJ's on the mainline ceritficate or shut the whole thing down exists. Just as theier is a perception of job stealing on one side an equal argument can be made on the other side. What some see as an invasion, others see as a job give away.

Unfortunately due to the short sighted nature of all pilots ALPA allowed this seperation and subsequent decades of whipsawing take root in the 60's. What is the answer? a revolution. As long as everybody is at each others throat and protecting their own but with no thoughts of the long term or placing themselves in anothers shoes it will never happen. If it ever becomes the trade union, fraternity, or brotherhood it was meant to be maybe there is hope. No level is immune to the"i have mine attitude" although the perception that greed and self serving representation exists at the majors is a fallacy. Just look at the PSA contract. First officer are subjected to a pay scale of slave wages, Reserves are subjected to harsh reserve lines with 10 days off and hot reserve. While the guys who negotiated the contract got their TOS 90+ an hour they subjected the masses to poverty and poor quality of life. The company knows historically that 85% of the seniority lists doesn't make it past 5-6 years so they had no problem handing a decent living to a handful knowing that the bulk will be barely getting buy. How does this happen? Pilots are their own worst enimies and only look out for themselves. Until we change our nature, we are all screwed.

 

[Swaayze]

Don't worry, I really don't do pissing matches.

I guess I need to reread all the documents. I've honestly lost track of what's been agreed to with so many different rounds of concessions. I certainly wasn't aware that Mesa gets to fly the large SJs at 50/50 while you guys are required to give up 100%.

By default, your pilot group signed on. We all know about membership ratification issues, and I'm more familiar with the inequities of that and/or roll call voting than you'd imagine. But, if you don't want to participate on the available terms, then don't.

As I said, I think this discussion is a moot point, as I highly expect the mainline MEC to allow 50% staffing for all (more) large SJs in the very near future.

 

[Dashcaptain]

I read how you guys will not give into the 100% deal and just get a little frustrated. Allegheny and Piedmont are the only two WOs to have all unions with concessionary contracts and all we are getting is smaller fleets and a really nasty and forced merger. That is what is real nice!! All we see are these shiny new jets surrounding us with no chance of seeing them here. We have to give up many years at our airlines to see the cockpits of them. It is real tough to watch while we make less money until they close our shop. I am not trying to make anyone mad, just making a point at how ugly this mess is turning out to be. I hope all works out for you guys!!

 

[LearLove]

The E-170 was up here in SYR today. Got to walk around it and see inside. Real nice. O yeah, forgot to mention the large pool of hdy fluid pooling under the gear wells. When I looked up into the well everything was covered with hyd fluid.

 

[boeingdriver213]

The E-170 is having some teething problems at U. U was not expecting to be the launch customer with all the associated pain involved with a brand new aircraft, but they are. Embreaer has people all over the place trying to smooth out the launch of the new aircraft, so I don't think it will take too long to get things going smoothly (I hope!) As for the challenges facing the U wholly owned carriers, we exist in an industry that favors management right now. They know many pilots, mechanics, and flight attendants are, and have been out of work for a long time, are desperate to find work of any kind, and are willing to take the low wages offered by management. Until there is a true recovery in this industry, the ball is in managements court, and all the whining and moaning and finger pointing won't change a thing. With the advent of these new 70-110 seat "regional aircraft", airline management has found a way to lower labor costs while getting the larger aircraft they say they need. If it's a Boeing, Airbus, or MD, it's gonna cost more to crew than a Bombardier or Embreaer, because they are "regional aircraft", and pay "regional wages". Hope we are all still around to see the eventual recovery of this industry......

 

[BFE]

Re: Fact:

PSA pilot group did not get to vote on their current working agreement
PSA pilot group did not get to vote on LOA 81 (J4J)
PSA pilot group did not attempt to recall any MEC members after the injustice and then voted them in for another term.

I guess your MEC really does speak for you. I suppose I'm just tired of hearing about how PSA was led into something they didn't want when they continue to follow the same dictatorship to this day without rebellion.

Let me ask you a simple question since you cannot get over this vote; similar to John Kerry not being able to get over Florida.

Assuming the PSA pilots were able to vote on the J4J issue only to have it fail. And assuming we could therefore be in the same shape as ALG & PDT. And later you hear that your reps were bound by a confidentiality agreement and could not tell you all the facts of the airline. What would you do or say to that? What if your reps had credible information that if the agreement was voted down we would be out of jobs but yet they send it out to the pilot group for a vote and watched it die.

 

[blzr]

Instead, this vote translates to giving a 120 year old man cpr while he's having a heart attack. Just prolongs the agony.

At Piedmont, the pilots were allowed to vote. We all got to think of the implications if it failed, and voted yes to j4j. Psa bypassed the voting process, yes I know it is LEGAL, and their MEC voted it in for everyone.

When I saw the article in the crew room in CLT, I knew it was time to find another job.

But who are we kidding, PDT has 25+ year captains, They'd make toooooo much money for Siegel to dish out.

 

[blzr]

Chech this out

I guess PSA does have the 70 seaters after all..


Airline cutting service at SRQ


By RICH SHOPES



[email protected]


US Airways is cutting service at Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport as part of a nationwide push to use regional jets in some secondary markets.

The change, scheduled to happen on May 2, won't affect ticket prices but it could make the wait longer as passengers try to book flights on planes with fewer seats than US Airways' Boeing 737 planes.

The airline is replacing flights from Sarasota-Bradenton with PSA Airlines, a regional jet service that it owns. PSA's Bombardier CRJ regional jets seat only 70 passengers while the 737s seat 144.



PSA, based in Dayton, Ohio, will run three daily flights from Sarasota-Bradenton to US Airways' hub in Charlotte, N.C., the same number of flights US Airways now operates to Charlotte.

The shift also could mean a loss in revenues for Sarasota-Bradenton International.

The airport, also known by the designation SRQ, earns money on fees based on the size of aircraft and the frequency of landings. It also makes money on purchases at concession stands as passengers wait to board their flights.



Airport Executive Director Fred Piccolo, who's predicting gains in passenger counts in coming years, said the move to regional jets could benefit Sarasota-Bradenton in the long run.

Unlike US Airways, PSA has promised not to curtail service in the slow summer months from three to two daily flights, Piccolo said.

Also, PSA will adopt an earlier flight schedule that could lure more business passengers. US Airways' earliest flight now leaves at 1:20 p.m. PSA's first flight would take off at 7:25 a.m.



"Maybe I am being optimistic, but having flights at one, three and five doesn't bring you any business passengers," Piccolo said.

He conceded that the change likely will mean smaller landing fees charged to the regional jets, but again he said the difference would be minor: "It could go from $100 to $75.

"I don't know that passenger counts will be going down," Piccolo said. "With a better schedule, the flights could be fuller, say from 85 percent (full) to 90 percent.



The move by struggling US Airways, which last week restructured a $1 billion federal loan to give it flexibility to shed assets, is part of a nationwide plan.

"We placed an order last spring for 170 regional jets to bring us more flexibility in certain markets. That's why we brought in a 70-seater aircraft," said US Airways spokeswoman Amy Kudwa. "We're just now taking delivery of those regional jets."

Kudwa, who would not reveal how full its Boeing flights have been at Sarasota-Bradenton, acknowledged that the change to regional jets will save money for the airline, which emerged from bankruptcy a year ago.

 

[328dude]

First one was flown in yesterday. 1 tommorrow and another one later next month.