DCI Fall Cutbacks..............

[Monster Buck]

They are right. The majors should just avoid the risk of hiring an "unknown quantity" that hiring a current generation regional pilot would entaile. The majors should only hire military or a new generation of MPL candidates who the majors would know there entire training history from day one.

Hey Mr. flame bait ******************************bag, STFU!

 

[SiuDude]

Actually, MPL is a solution to the problem facing the regionals of incompetent F/Os. An MPL F/O will have spent almost his entire training in jet simulators and be ready to transition to a real jet on the line instead of the existing F/Os who have to transition from a seminole to an RJ. The MPL F/O will be going from a 737 or A320 simulator to an RJ, so his transition will be simple.

Hey, that's one of your better flames. Congratulations!

By the way, your "girlfriend' called. He just wishes you'd get off the computer and come back to his side of the cell.

 

[boctal]

The union and company can waive that clause if they agree to something else. Long term, the pilot group will have some tough choices ahead...

You are correct, but if our union agrees to waive this clause, we don't have much of a union (in my opinion). The morale at ASA would be back at pre-contract levels or worse, especially when Skywest, INC is still making money.

Without having my contract handy at this time, doesn't the section listed under Scotts letter pertain to the no furlough clause. I'm normally an upbeat person, but this isn't sounding good at all............I'm thinking this falls cuts are going to hurt..............bad...

Those MOU's pertain to extended COMA's and half month COMA's. The no furlough clause is part of the main body of the contract (Section 1) and was never an MOU.

 

[Papa Woody]

I'd rather have one that at least knows about jet systems and jet handling and can fly at jet speeds.

I got a great idea:

From now on, the Majors should only hire Blacks.

Then there will never again be furloughs, pilot error, passenger complaints, junior manning, disciplinary hearings, or Letters-of-Investigation......

......'cause that would all be RACIST.

 

[silver02ex]

Pinnacle started to offer Reduce line values to get ready for the fall cut back. I'm sure this made the junior guys happy that they may get to keep their job and my guess is the reduce line value will go senior. I noticed YOW was canceled last night. I had a VM asking if i can help with a JM yesterday morning about 2 HS that needed crews.

 

[JumpersAway]

BrownInThePants...........no one wishes to hear your drivel here. Go back to fishing in another thread and leave this one alone.

As I see it, SkyWest will eventually furlough regardless of what ASA does. There is no way they are going to be able to lose the amount of flying they did in Milwaukee and still remain staffed as is. There isn't going to be enough flying to divvy up at the end of this, I'm affaid.

How long before ASA has to meet the cost lock in for our DCI contract?

 

[Skywest Pylot]

As I see it, SkyWest will eventually furlough regardless of what ASA does. There is no way they are going to be able to lose the amount of flying they did in Milwaukee and still remain staffed as is. There isn't going to be enough flying to divvy up at the end of this, I'm affaid.

Maybe if every SkyWest pilot takes an oath of Union Celibacy, the quick upgrade fairy will stop by and make all their wildest dreams come true. It worked last time. BTW. whatever happened to that sweet EMB190/CRJ900 deal with Southwest? Just vote NO, right?

 

[Skywest Pylot]

Quote:
Originally Posted by crj567
What is left to do is to furlough some of these SKYW people! There is no reason ASA should take all the bad news, and they get none.... SKYW is still doing a lot of flying in ATL!

Not possible. Skywest hase clauses in their contract to allow only so many capacity cuts and they have reached that limit. The cuts will have to come from other carriers.

You better take another look at the fine print in that contract. There is a BIG difference between SkyWest Airlines and Skywest Inc. IMO, the big growth days at Skywest Airlines ended when Ron Rebber departed. Jerry and Chip are not go getters and prefer to sit on their 100s of millions without taking risks. The real mover and shaker in the regionals is Republic. If you are sitting in the right seat at SKYW, you better get comfortable. If you are at the bottom of the list, I would have a contingency plan in place.

 

[pipi]

I got a great idea:
 
From now on, the Majors should only hire Blacks.
 
Then there will never again be furloughs, pilot error, passenger complaints, junior manning, disciplinary hearings, or Letters-of-Investigation......
 
......'cause that would all be RACIST.

Are you F...ING STUPID?

And they gave you a pilot's certificate?

Unbelievable.

 

[goahead]

Are you all retarded, a no furlough clause means nothing in the airline industry, NOTHING.

A lawyer and a bunch of selfish senior azzhole's can get around it any day of the week.

I'll take it in the shorts to keep guys on our list at ASA, but I'll bet too many other's won't, not enough real men left in this industry.

 

[Rick]

BrownInThePants...........no one wishes to hear your drivel here. Go back to fishing in another thread and leave this one alone.

As I see it, SkyWest will eventually furlough regardless of what ASA does. There is no way they are going to be able to lose the amount of flying they did in Milwaukee and still remain staffed as is. There isn't going to be enough flying to divvy up at the end of this, I'm affaid.

How long before ASA has to meet the cost lock in for our DCI contract?

I think the news about them breaking away from the Midwest deal could make things harder at ASA. My fear is that if we had some opportunities for 20 RJ's it will be taking by INC for those planes first. When I listened to the last conference call it sure seemed that ASA was taking furloughs for the entire company and not just ASA.

 

[viper548]

As I see it, SkyWest will eventually furlough regardless of what ASA does. There is no way they are going to be able to lose the amount of flying they did in Milwaukee and still remain staffed as is. There isn't going to be enough flying to divvy up at the end of this, I'm affaid.

The planes flying for midwest will be placed with United

 

[boctal]

Are you all retarded, a no furlough clause means nothing in the airline industry, NOTHING.

A lawyer and a bunch of selfish senior azzhole's can get around it any day of the week.

I'll take it in the shorts to keep guys on our list at ASA, but I'll bet too many other's won't, not enough real men left in this industry.

Way to resort to insults when none were directed at you. I disagree with you as there is precedent from previous cases in which no furlough clause's were upheld. I would like to hear your reasoning and examples of why you think management would be able to maneuver around this clause (given Inc's current financial status and the precedent set by the courts) without repercussions. Granted, if it does come to that, the grievance process could take awhile, but I'm sure we could all fly a little "safer" during the process. We're on the same team here and if they blatantly violate our contract, it will be up to us to show them that the management love fest is over. Based upon the various comments of folks I've flown with recently, we have more solidarity amongst our ranks than you give credit for.

 

[crj567]

Way to resort to insults when none were directed at you. I disagree with you as there is precedent from previous cases in which no furlough clause's were upheld. I would like to hear your reasoning and examples of why you think management would be able to maneuver around this clause (given Inc's current financial status and the precedent set by the courts) without repercussions. Granted, if it does come to that, the grievance process could take awhile, but I'm sure we could all fly a little "safer" during the process. We're on the same team here and if they blatantly violate our contract, it will be up to us to show them that the management love fest is over. Based upon the various comments of folks I've flown with recently, we have more solidarity amongst our ranks than you give credit for.

Very simple-

Mgmt's trump card is called "bankruptcy." The parent company can account for the subsidiaries any way they wish. Just post all the profits to Skyw and all the losses to ASA and Bammo! One subsidiary is doing great, the other gets their contract thrown right out in bankruptcy-the WHOLE contract! Totally legal!!

-Ain't justice beautiful?

 

[boctal]

Very simple-

Mgmt's trump card is called "bankruptcy." The parent company can account for the subsidiaries any way they wish. Just post all the profits to Skyw and all the losses to ASA and Bammo! One subsidiary is doing great, the other gets their contract thrown right out in bankruptcy-the WHOLE contract! Totally legal!!

-Ain't justice beautiful?

I don't think it's quite that simple. The bankruptcy court would require information on assets, liabilities, current income, expenditures, executory contracts, unexpired leases, and a statement of financial affairs from the subsidiary. The subsidiaries assets and liabilities are indeed combined with the parent, however subsidiaries do their own record keeping, in which case those documents would be required by the bankruptcy court irregardless of the parent company records. By doing what you described (falsifying) it would be borderline corporate fraud and embezzlement by the parent company. This whole scenario doesn't seem remotely feasible to me for a variety of reasons (including Inc.'s contract with Delta), but if you can offer up a legal explanation as to how Inc. could do this legally, then I'll change my tune. Also, if anybody finds fault in my reasoning, feel free to correct me as I am certainly no expert and am only trying to provide my view.

 

[JumpersAway]

I don't think it's quite that simple. The bankruptcy court would require information on assets, liabilities, current income, expenditures, executory contracts, unexpired leases, and a statement of financial affairs from the subsidiary. The subsidiaries assets and liabilities are indeed combined with the parent, however subsidiaries do their own record keeping, in which case those documents would be required by the bankruptcy court irregardless of the parent company records. By doing what you described (falsifying) it would be borderline corporate fraud and embezzlement by the parent company. This whole scenario doesn't seem remotely feasible to me for a variety of reasons (including Inc.'s contract with Delta), but if you can offer up a legal explanation as to how Inc. could do this legally, then I'll change my tune. Also, if anybody finds fault in my reasoning, feel free to correct me as I am certainly no expert and am only trying to provide my view.

I think the theory of running ASA through bankruptcy makes little sense, but it could be done. Just look at MAIR holdings and the debacle with Mesaba and Big Sky a couple of years back. Mesaba was profitable, Big Sky was not, yet Mesaba was the subsidiary that was taken to the cleaners.

 

[crj567]

I think the theory of running ASA through bankruptcy makes little sense, but it could be done. Just look at MAIR holdings and the debacle with Mesaba and Big Sky a couple of years back. Mesaba was profitable, Big Sky was not, yet Mesaba was the subsidiary that was taken to the cleaners.

EXACTLY!

Whether it makes sense or not is irrelevant. Fact is-it is legal, and it would work-if that were the goal. The MAIR/BigSky scenario is immoral, evil, and totally horrible, but it is what they can do.-Legally.

 

[boctal]

I think the theory of running ASA through bankruptcy makes little sense, but it could be done. Just look at MAIR holdings and the debacle with Mesaba and Big Sky a couple of years back. Mesaba was profitable, Big Sky was not, yet Mesaba was the subsidiary that was taken to the cleaners.

You bring up an excellent point as I had honestly not remembered Mesaba's past bankruptcy when typing my response. While I admit bankruptcy might be a possible avenue, I still don't think it's feasible or even remotely likely that Inc. would stoop to such measures, when both of their subsidiaries are still profitable, only so they can furlough more than the 55 or so that are not protected. All the while they risk losing their contract with Delta. Which reverts back to the original question, with precedent set in the courts in regard to a no furlough clause, what other avenues might the company pursue to get around it? Considering the remote possibility that Inc. could cause ASA to file for bankruptcy, I still find it extremely unlikely the company will be able to violate the clause and it be upheld without resorting to such extreme measures. I certainly appreciate the civilized discussion and debate. I'm sure we can all agree that hopefully this never comes to pass.

 

[waka]

How is this different from the current generation of regional f/o from the "academies" who have never dealt with real weather , high density ATC or real emergencies, plus the biggest thing they have flown is a seminole. I'd rather have one that at least knows about jet systems and jet handling and can fly at jet speeds.

I'd take somebody that was slumming it in a slow Seminole, Aztec or Beech 18 than some MPL simulator "jet speed" wunderkind any day. It isn't the size or the speed of the airplane, it is the kind of experience that counts. Even with a fast track program 0 to regional guy, if he's got some MEI time, he'd be a much better candidate than someone that's never seen a real airplane....no matter how advanced the simulator.

 

[sperfly]

if you read the no furlough part of the contract it says "the company will not furlough except in circumstances over which the company has no control. The term circumstances over which the company has no control includes but is not limited to......."

so technically the company has no control over how much delta cuts our flying. we are losing 20 planes (maybe next spring). what if delta pulls 100 planes from us. would they still not furlough because of this clause. i believe they can furlough anybody they want right now because they have 'no control' over the block hours that delta gives us. this is all my interpretation and would like to hear any others.