Flexjet Recalls Two Flight Attendants, Janitor

[jonjuan]

Exactly. It's a scope issue, pure and simple. The problem is, the passengers all have signed off on this. They know about it when they buy into the programs. If they have no-charter clauses, they pay more. Simple-simple. Some ballsy individual at Flex actually made note of the fact on the company forum (Bluebelly) that we were booking a ton of charter over the holidays. He must've hit a nerve because none other than Dave Gross himself saw fit to hammer out a response stating, in effect, that it was more cost-effective to have fewer pilots on property and to rely on charter during peak demand than to have a bunch of idlers hanging around in hotels and on standby during off-peak times.

Well, sure it is. And it all looks fantastic until one of these operators bends metal or, worse yet, kills somebody.

Or until one of the frax bends metal or, worse yet, kills somebody. Then what? (knock on wooood).

 

[Dooker]

Or until one of the frax bends metal or, worse yet, kills somebody. Then what? (knock on wooood).

It could happen, sure. But historically it seems a lot more likely to happen with smaller charter outfits. I can name a few right off the top of my head: that Challenger in Montrose a few years back (icing), Gulfstream in Houston (wrong navaid tuned), Lear 45 in TEX this past winter (never should have been on the approach in the first place), Challenger in TEB four years ago that was so out of CG it couldn't even rotate. All of them were charter. A big part of what we're supposed to be selling is safety, and I think the record supports the fact that well-rested, well-trained crews flying well-maintained aircraft are waaaaaay safer than a lot of what you find out there in the charter world.

 

[Boxer]

Yeah, what he said.

 

[GSXR600]

I guess the only way out is for the costumers to refuse charter aircraft at all times. But there are a lot sweet talkers in the company that convince the costumer to take the charter aircraft because the next one is 1000 miles away!

 

[smartelephant]

Exactly. It's a scope issue, pure and simple. The problem is, the passengers all have signed off on this. They know about it when they buy into the programs. If they have no-charter clauses, they pay more. Simple-simple. Some ballsy individual at Flex actually made note of the fact on the company forum (Bluebelly) that we were booking a ton of charter over the holidays. He must've hit a nerve because none other than Dave Gross himself saw fit to hammer out a response stating, in effect, that it was more cost-effective to have fewer pilots on property and to rely on charter during peak demand than to have a bunch of idlers hanging around in hotels and on standby during off-peak times.

Well, sure it is. And it all looks fantastic until one of these operators bends metal or, worse yet, kills somebody.

These "idlers" he speaks of once had good paying jobs at other companies but chose to join the Flexjet family because they actually believed the crap HR sold them in the interview. What a bunch of morons(me). "Oh, don't worry about layoffs" the head lady once said. "We see that as an absolute last resort. We're proud of the fact that we've only had to furlough once(post 9/11), and we brought them back within 3 months." Learning to not believe someone is a hard lesson to learn. But, since I've had 10 months to think about it, I feel the point has sunk in(sad music starts to play in the background while the chocolate ice cream comes out of the freezer). Whatever.

 

[RP170]

These "idlers" he speaks of once had good paying jobs at other companies but chose to join the Flexjet family because they actually believed the crap HR sold them in the interview. What a bunch of morons(me). "Oh, don't worry about layoffs" the head lady once said. "We see that as an absolute last resort. We're proud of the fact that we've only had to furlough once(post 9/11), and we brought them back within 3 months." Learning to not believe someone is a hard lesson to learn. But, since I've had 10 months to think about it, I feel the point has sunk in(sad music starts to play in the background while the chocolate ice cream comes out of the freezer). Whatever.

We all got the same BS story from NetJets too in the interview. It would have been nice to have known that RTS was writing contracts that you could basically wipe your a$$ with. That's how poorly constructed they were. Unfortunately, now we are looking at recall dates several years from now, if ever.

If I only knew then what I knew now, I'd currently be sitting in the left seat of an Allegiant MD-80 making $137/hr effective in May, doing all day trips out of one of their domiciles that I live in.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[SDCFI]

Layoffs are one thing, but what about this CAFO crap Flex is getting away with? I'm not one so I can't confirm this, but I heard that if a CAFO is paired with a true FO but they don't actually fly (airline last day for ex.) they only get FO pay even though they're the Captain of record. I think it's a b/s idea to begin with but if this is true then I have lost all respect for the waterview, not that I had much to begin with these days. Supposedly there's one person who refuses the CA trips out of protest, if everyone here had those kind of ballz this would be a better place.

I also heard TC tow the company line that not working overtime days won't do anything to help get people back. Thanks, but I think I'll still turn them down. Perhaps if we all turned down OT and shady CAFO deals we WOULD get some of our comrades back.

 

[Ref]

Layoffs are one thing, but what about this CAFO crap Flex is getting away with? I'm not one so I can't confirm this, but I heard that if a CAFO is paired with a true FO but they don't actually fly (airline last day for ex.) they only get FO pay even though they're the Captain of record. I think it's a b/s idea to begin with but if this is true then I have lost all respect for the waterview, not that I had much to begin with these days. Supposedly there's one person who refuses the CA trips out of protest, if everyone here had those kind of ballz this would be a better place.

I also heard TC tow the company line that not working overtime days won't do anything to help get people back. Thanks, but I think I'll still turn them down. Perhaps if we all turned down OT and shady CAFO deals we WOULD get some of our comrades back.

It probably doesnt matter what he says about overtime anyway. I would bet there are more than enough people begging for as much as the company will give them.

 

[dime line]

Layoffs are one thing, but what about this CAFO crap Flex is getting away with? I'm not one so I can't confirm this, but I heard that if a CAFO is paired with a true FO but they don't actually fly (airline last day for ex.) they only get FO pay even though they're the Captain of record. I think it's a b/s idea to begin with but if this is true then I have lost all respect for the waterview, not that I had much to begin with these days. Supposedly there's one person who refuses the CA trips out of protest,

if everyone here had those kind of ballz

this would be a better place.

I also heard TC tow the company line that not working overtime days won't do anything to help get people back. Thanks, but I think I'll still turn them down. Perhaps if

we all turned down OT and shady CAFO deals we

WOULD get some of our comrades back.

Kinda sounds like a "union"

 

[ArtVandalay]

I can tell you this, if I were a CAFO, and they asked me to be captain for a day or whatever, I would tell them to F themselves. You either make people captains or F/O's. This, I use you when I need you crap has to stop. I encourage all you CAFO's to refuse captain days because no matter what BS the CP tells you, it is for THEIR benefit, not yours.

 

[glasspilot]

Why not refuse the FO days? Wouldn't that be better?

 

[Pacific]

Layoffs are one thing, but what about this CAFO crap Flex is getting away with? I'm not one so I can't confirm this, but I heard that if a CAFO is paired with a true FO but they don't actually fly (airline last day for ex.) they only get FO pay even though they're the Captain of record. I think it's a b/s idea to begin with but if this is true then I have lost all respect for the waterview, not that I had much to begin with these days. Supposedly there's one person who refuses the CA trips out of protest, if everyone here had those kind of ballz this would be a better place.

I also heard TC tow the company line that not working overtime days won't do anything to help get people back. Thanks, but I think I'll still turn them down. Perhaps if we all turned down OT and shady CAFO deals we WOULD get some of our comrades back.

Absolutely agree on the CAFO thing. It's a bad program. No Captain pay for a .299 check either. Only Captains do that check, so shouldn't it pay Captain pay??

 

[GSXR600]

It probably doesnt matter what he says about overtime anyway. I would bet there are more than enough people begging[/COLOR] for as much as the company will give them.

True statement!

 

[unclepetey]

The ironic thing is that they did ask two FAs to come back as contractors. My buddy went to Waterview to get a new ID a few weeks ago.

I don't know about the janitor.

 

[jonjuan]

Total BS. No way fr would have furloughed a janitor. He has too much respect for them.

 

[Dooker]

Has anybody actually ever bothered to pull Bombardier's SEC filing or whatever its Canadian equivalent is and looked to see what they actually pay our management? I'd do it myself, but I'm just too lazy.

 

[EatSleepFly]

Has anybody actually ever bothered to pull Bombardier's SEC filing or whatever its Canadian equivalent is and looked to see what they actually pay our management? I'd do it myself, but I'm just too lazy.

They don't have to report what they pay Flexjet's management.

 

[Dooker]

Actually, found an article in the Dallas Morning News from back when they signed Reid in '08 and he agreed to forfeit his $750,000 salary. With performance stips and Bombardier stock options and everything else thrown in it could easily be worth double that, I'd imagine.

 

[Dooker]

Actually, found an article in the Dallas Morning News from back when they signed Reid in '08 and he agreed to forfeit his $750,000 salary. With performance stips and Bombardier stock options and everything else thrown in it could easily be worth double that, I'd imagine.

Which seems kind of high when you consider that Gary Kelly at Southwest got paid $1.2 million this past year ... but then what do I know?

 

[realityman]

Same crap is happening at NJA. During the busy days they are just outsourcing the flying to EJM or other charters. They can do this up to 44 days per year!!!!! Makes it much more difficult for any of us to ever get recalled. Just like scope is the real threat to the major airlines, outsourcing flying via charter is the huge threat to fractional pilots.

RP, I am truly sorry to know that you're furloughed from NJ's. Been down that road myself. I know it doesn't help, but I do have some understanding of it. And I'm currently actively involved with ways to help the furloughed folks, limited though they may be. Truly, I would not want to trade places with you right now.

That being said, you're only telling part of the story. True, they can charter when they need to, but you left out the part about them having to recall pilots if they do charter.

Furthermore, EJM is no threat to us. Yes, they can charter out 44 days a year without penalty. But that's how it's ALWAYS been here. We have ALWAYS needed to charter to EJM, and other operators, during our busy times. Yes, that means when we had EVERYONE working here. we still chartered. The business model simply won't work without being able to do some chartering. At least, not the way our contracts were set up with the owners (guaranteed response times and all). Prior to 2009 after the furloughs were announced, no one seemed to have a problem with us using charter during the busy days.

But the real question is, if there are 44 days in a year when we need some extra lift, does it make financial sense for the company to keep people on staff who they really only need for those 44 days, but otherwise don't need for the other 321 days of the year (paying full salary, benefits, training costs, etc....), or is it more sensible to charter out on those days?

And while 44 days sounds like a lot, keep in mind that if they need to charter just ONE flight on any given day, then that day counts towards the 44, and brings us closer to triggering a required recall. Should we not reach the 44 days (or 11 in any quarter), then I guess things are still slow and the extra pilots just aren't needed yet. It's incredibly sad for those on furlough, but it's the reality.

However, the fact remains that even fully staffed, we needed to be able to charter. It's been done since day one of this company, and companies such as EJM have proved no threat to us because of it.

Plain and simple, you will be back when we sell more aircraft. There's no other way around it. Has nothing to do with the charter days. If we have 16 owners on one plane, and they all want to fly at the same time, we will have to charter. The only way to bring you back is if some of those owners buy ANOTHER SHARE in another plane.

Good luck to you.