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

FlexJet / Flight Options / SkyJet

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
Let 'em pony up then. Talk is cheap. DAC doesn't have a chance at buying XO unless they very seriously overpay. It just simply isn't going to happen. I would say there is a much better chance of XOJET buying DAC. The owners of XO could buy Ricci ten times over with the change in their pockets. And, it's my understanding they currently have no interest in selling. But, money talks, so let's see if Ricci puts his money where his mouth is. I wouldn't hold your breath.

If XO is loosing money the relative size of their respective portfolios doesn't matter. XO's parrent may just be trying to rid themselves of a losing investment.

As far as the pilots go. Remember what he tried to do to the CA guys? McCaskill/Bond is a "grey area" and all that. The only difference is this time he doesn't have a union standing in his way to enforce the Act.
 
If XO is loosing money the relative size of their respective portfolios doesn't matter. XO's parrent may just be trying to rid themselves of a losing investment.

You make more than one assumption not in evidence. You could say the same about DAC couldn't you?
 
You make more than one assumption not in evidence. You could say the same about DAC couldn't you?

KR has stated publically that he intends to build a critical mass to compete with NJ, so it's very difficult to believe that he's gonna sell half his operation to XO.

And yes I'm making an assumption about XO's profitability. But why else would they sell?
 
And yes I'm making an assumption about XO's profitability. But why else would they sell?

Your assumption is correct. They hemorrhage $$. There is no way they will ever be profitable with their pricing.

I am sorry to guys at XO who may be reading this, but the realities over there are grim. DAC will be only serious customer to pick up the 300 fleet.
 
No one here is rooting for the failure of anyone's employer. That being said, my "rumor" source also stated back in December that XO was bleeding cash and that their investors are pulling the plug in the coming months and more recently an announcement, one way or another, may come by the end of March. Anyone else hearing this?
 
I understand the intention of McCaskill/Bond. But just like any rule or law that is tested or even broken, you need someone to step up and enforce it, or in this case pay someone to fight to enforce it. Sadly for the XO jet guys, I just don't see that happening. If KR wants to send the equipment over to the Flex side, I would think even the teamsters would not have anything to say at this time since presently Flex is a separate company....kind of.

Just my 2 cents on this issue.
 
You make more than one assumption not in evidence. You could say the same about DAC couldn't you?

The only company in DAC's portfolio that loses money is Flops. It's set up that way for a reason.

I remember when rumors of KR taking over RTA everyone at RTA denied it was going to happen. Same thing at Flex. Lately there has been rumors XO is next. If I was a XO employee I would be worried.
 
KR has stated publically that he intends to build a critical mass to compete with NJ, so it's very difficult to believe that he's gonna sell half his operation to XO.

And yes I'm making an assumption about XO's profitability. But why else would they sell?

True. KR originally stated back in September, when he bought Flexjet, that he intends to take on Netjets. XOJet is just a bump in his road to achieving that goal and they just happen to have some 300's that he wants, which would actually go to FLOPs based on his latest vision fleet plan.
 
I spoke to an XO crew recently. They said everyone is jumping ship.

True...to SWA, DAL, AA, UAL, and very good corporate jobs. Everyone that's left has gone to much better jobs. Something everyone would do given the opportunity. The ship is not sinking, however.
 
some 300's that he wants, which would actually go to FLOPs based on his latest vision fleet plan.

Actually I don't think that is correct I think guys are misunderstanding the brand setup. The slides show 300's under the FLOPS brand, but would still be flown by Flex pilots just marketed under the value brand and the 350's marketed under the Flexjet brand at least that's my understanding. Remember KR said 300 pilots will always fly the 300.
 
Actually I don't think that is correct I think guys are misunderstanding the brand setup. The slides show 300's under the FLOPS brand, but would still be flown by Flex pilots just marketed under the value brand and the 350's marketed under the Flexjet brand at least that's my understanding. Remember KR said 300 pilots will always fly the 300.

It's true that he and the slide show indicated that. But that being said, he definitely has his sites set on those 300's, regardless of who flies them within DAC.
 
So who is going to get thrown under the bus? FO and their in-house union tried it before. Here is the emails with the initials only.
Capt. EM’s letter and My Response

Fellow Pilots,

I received the following e-mail from Capt. Ed EM. The following are his comments and my response.

June 20, 2008

To: MS, Chairman
Master Executive Council

Fr: EM, Beechjet Captain

Mr. S,

I have patiently watched the negotiation game between company and the IBT for these two years from the shadows – having made no verbal or written statements to either party – until today. My philosophy regarding unionism is well known amongst my fellow pilots, and is as sacred to me as yours is to you. My respect for those that choose unionism is exactly the same as for the members opposed to the union philosophy. Regardless of my position, you are charged to represent me.

You might imagine my dismay when I read BT’s letter today referencing the company’s comprehensive proposal and how the union negotiating committee may be holding the negotiations hostage until the RIF pilots are re-instated. If this is true, I want you to know that I am strongly opposed to this position. Admittedly, I don’t have the entire picture, but the few pieces of the package presented by Mr. T today are VERY encouraging to me. And, it is far more information than I have been able to garner from the negotiating committee.

Yes, I am opposed to harboring un-productive employees. Yes, I favor merit reward systems. Yes, I want to make a lot of money doing what I love – flying. And, I believe we should be compensated commensurate with the industry, but that doesn’t necessarily ONLY include NetJet wages. NetJets income is based substantially on income from mid and large cabin aircraft that provide considerably better operating margins than does a BeechJet. We know that we must be competitive with companies in the same category. Let us not jeopardize our future by being un-realistic.

In the summer of 2001, I was the chairman of the compensation committee at Travel Air. Nine other motivated and highly qualified pilots served with me – including one current distinguished committee chairperson. During that period of negotiating with the company, we were charged with improving three compensation topics: PAY, DOMICILE, and SCHEDULE. These were the “hot buttons” of the day. They still are. From my vantage point, I see that the company may have addressed all three, but the negotiating committee appears to be stalling.

The company’s managers felt the need to downsize the workforce as many companies are doing in this disappointing economic climate. Downsizing is perhaps the most horrific task for any manager, but I expect management to make the hard decisions and execute. The entire organization is vulnerable if management is weak and indecisive. And yes, many of the recently terminated employees were my personal friends, but if they were un-productive, they jeopardized my job and yours.

Mr. S, I want to reward the IBT for its efforts through this strenuous period, and I want to do it soon. Please! - I encourage you to drop the topic of RIF pilots and meet the managements request to get the proposal to the pilots for a ratification vote in July. What is the M.E.C. position?

Please post this letter to the union website and respond.

Respectfully submitted,

EM



Capt. M,

I want you to know I received many emails subsequent to BT’s most recent e-mail that published management’s “Comprehensive Economic Proposal.” Only a very few messages were similar to yours. I will take this opportunity to respond to you, but I hope the few other pilots with the same opinions as yours will view this as a response to them as well.

As I stated in my most recent Chairman’s Message, the Union has been and remains ready to enter into a partnership with a management group ready to restore Flight Options to its industry leading status as a provider of the highest quality customer service with loyal pilots dedicated to its success at the core of the operation.

That being said, I wonder if you would want me to take the position you advocate, relative to the 70 terminated pilots if you, yourself, were among them. Management alleges that these pilots productivity was the basis for their terminations. The Union does not acknowledge that our pilots have any significant control over their productivity while at work. Our pilots do not make schedule decisions and they certainly are not authorized to perform aircraft maintenance, although I am aware that some very few have done so inappropriately. However, pilots do have a federally mandated responsibility to document maintenance discrepancies, where and when they find them. I know you are aware of this responsibility as a result of your own experiences.

Therefore the only way a pilot could increase his or her productivity would be to intentionally overlook maintenance discrepancies. Again, from your own personal experiences, I suspect you appreciate this fact as well. We have repeatedly questioned management about their unrealistic measure of productivity. They have clearly stated they have no advice to give our pilots about how to improve their productivity. They have also stated they do not want our pilots to overlook maintenance discrepancies, again a fact I am confident you appreciate.

As you suggest, I do understand that in tough economic times furloughs may become necessary. But they should be furloughs not terminations and they should be carried out in seniority order. To develop and enforce some unsubstantiated, artificial criteria, such as productivity, as a basis for the recent terminations is a slap in the face to every pilot employed in aviation.

The members of this Union that I represent will not desert our fallen brothers and sisters. That’s what people of honor and character do; they look out for each other when times get tough. They support each other when others attack them and their families. This Union will not, as you seem to be suggesting, grasp for the “30 pieces of silver” management is dangling in front of our noses, while simultaneously abandoning some 70 pilots whom we also represent. I am disappointed you admit you do not share this same honorable point of view.

If we were to follow the course of action you advocate, a job at Flight Options for those of us who have not been selected for special favors by management would not be worth having, no matter what we are paid. We would be forever known collectively as the group of cowards who abandoned our principles, deserted our friends and slunk away to count the meager recompense we scraped from the dirt after management tossed it at our feet. The very sight of a Flight Options pilot would incur the disdain of our fellow pilots at other carriers. You, personally, may not be troubled by such a contemptuous existence, but the vast majority of the Flight Options pilots have determined not to condemn themselves to such a fate.

No sir, I will not lead the Flight Options pilots down the path you suggest. The rest of us will work through this matter together–with or without you, like we have done since the Union was voted in two years ago. We will bring our brothers and sisters back in good order and we will finish the work of negotiating a Collective Bargaining Agreement that benefits us all, you included.

Capt. MS, Chairman

Flight Options Pilots’ Master Executive Council
 
zudu2y6y.jpg
 
You seem to have it all figured out...

The only company in DAC's portfolio that loses money is Flops. It's set up that way for a reason. Yes, of course. Flops has been losing money for years in the off chance Netjets would make a large Bombardier order and pressure Bombardier to divest. Pure genius!

I remember when rumors of KR taking over RTA everyone at RTA denied it was going to happen. Same thing at Flex. Lately there has been rumors XO is next. If I was a XO employee I would be worried. There have been many, many rumors over the years. Far more have proven untrue than true. The current rumor is that XO is buying select Flight Options assets, and Ken will buy the whole thing back later when the union is a distant memory. By your "logic" maybe Flight Options pilots are the ones who should be worried? Just ask an RTA or Flex pilot. You guys are screwed.
 
Wow, that came across as really agenda driven.

Really? Well, If you think my agenda is to try and get some of your loud mouth brethren to stop needlessly scaring people about loosing their jobs, then you would be correct. My sarcasm was pretty obvious, but if you think I have some other agenda, I'd love to hear your paranoid theory.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top