glasspilot
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 17, 2004
- Posts
- 1,622
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.
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[/COLOR] for as much as the company will give them.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
There's one in every crowd....how comforting that you have been "down that road" yourself....doesn't stop you however from being management's apologist de rigeur.
Outsourcing is always a threat, no matter how much it may help the bottom line! Charter is a form of outsourcing. Of course during the go go times it was used primarily for overflow, but now the geniuses have realized it looks better on their quarterly spread sheets to permanently obfuscate the true cost of doing business. So now it has become something much more than just a contractually dictated backstop for busy days.
Frac flying is a new industry that before this current economic crisis had never experienced "hard times". American management style is to immediately engage in knee jerk "cost cutting" to protect themselves from criticism (and potential loss of bonus) . It's only later that it becomes obvious that much of who or what was cut was actually needed. The status quo however dictates that face must be saved at all cost; consequently the initial mistakes will never be admitted openly and the company limps along with half measures; never mind the obvious safety implications!
Charter is cheaper for many reasons. Mostly for the same reasons that has the Majors struggling and the Regionals growing.....until it's all pushed too far and we find ourselves at night over KBUF again.....followed by another session of official government hand-wringing, I'm sure.
Realityman,
Sooooo sorry to have impinged on your god given right to hijack any thread and make it exclusively about an internal NJA issue.
Right you are. You were just busy putting a NJ furloughee in his/her place about a finer point of your CBA and did not mean any of your comments in a wider context for the rest of us bottom feeders in the frac industry. How could I have missed that, must be the effects of that negativity bubble.....
Let me try to help. My post was meant not just as a direct commentary on all things NJA.
Last I checked, this thread was begun as a very funny take on the all too common dysfunctions of most management in the fractional industry. Several comments were made about the surreptitious effect that outside Charter can have when management is not constrained by a CBA such as yours. My comments about charter being the "new normal" in the industry (NJA notwithstanding) stand and I don't really care how many "green" days are visible on your crackberry.
You point out, correctly that charter is not very good for the bottom line at NJA for the long term. However if I may be so bold, if it is no threat then why is it addressed in your CBA at all? Afterall we all know that decisions in the aviation industry are always based on the long term health of the company and never on short term interests of the management team and what is best for their bonus structure. Right?
Reread your initial post and see if you don't detect the same nauseatingly condescending tone associated with so many of the intelligence insulting memos many of us are blessed with from the puzzle palace.
Realityman,
Quite correct, I did quote your entire post but I responded to your tone of condescension rather than to your specific, NJ only, CBA talking points. My mistake for assuming you had any interest in participating in the broader discussion of industry developments/trends beyond just lecturing one of your own.
If your posts are meant to be taken solely as NJ specific posts then why do you insert them in a thread clearly not just about NJ?
Last but not least, since when has there been a contract that actually completely eliminated any threat no matter how well written or intentioned. At most it can postpone the day of reckoning. Just ask the average UAW worker...
Outsourcing flying jobs is a huge threat, no matter if it's to a Regional or Charter. At the core, it's about others doing your job for less, plain and simple. If your contract protects you for now, that is a good thing, but don't forget, it will become amendable at some point in the future. If you have trouble understanding this reality, you are not as intelligent as you think you are.
Lastly about the name calling: Seems to me you dish at least as well as you have taken.....
Because as you said, it comes down to management being able to do things cheaply. Okay fine. But remember one important point (and this excludes NJ's), with the exception of Flight Options, all the other frac players, from big to small, are non-union. Why is this important? Because none of them, NOT ONE, has a legally binding contract. If the management of any of those fracs decides they need to operate cheaper, they simply will. What, in reality, is to stop them from walking in one day and saying, "Hey everyone! Good news!! Starting right now, you're all taking a 25% pay cut, and we're eliminating 401K matching as well as requiring all of you to contribute more towards your own health insurance premiums. Oh, and you're all going to be working an extra two days every month. Have a nice day.". In fact, the mighty NJ's management did EXACTLY THAT with the non-union employees at our company.
One more time, we are not an airline! Our work can't just be moved to charter or smaller operators. Not as long as the clients actually own shares of planes in the frac's fleets.
As for scope being ironclad, I agree. It's not completely ironclad. But I think it's as good, or better, than any industry contract out there. Quite frankly, if BK wanted to start a completely separate frac company, call it Worldfrac, and start selling shares in that company while not selling anymore at NJA, and selling current NJA clients shares in the new company when their contracts expire, I suppose there's nothing we could do about it. I agree that it's impossible to eliminate every possible contingency in scope language. But it's better than no protection at all.
Officially the goon/realityman thread. wtf are these guys even talking about?? The thread is too long for me to waste time on, can someone summarize real quick for me?
It's really a matter of degrees, while it's unlikely that a frac can survive with no planes of their own, it is possible to get customers to accept that they fly on "others" some of the time as long as they see that "their" plane exists somewhere. Over time you can increase that percentage without too much resistance from the owners. It is happening all the time and it is becoming the "new Normal". Customers accept it for the most part and the few that don't are just coddled by a no charter clause. The end result is that furloughs are extended longer than necessary and that is a threat to anyone who finds him/herself in that unfortunate position.
Post containing creative swearing will be deleted and you can be suspended or banned from FI.. please.. keep it G rated.. thanks
Just for that expect no less than a 3 hour repo leg today, followed by a 45 minute live leg.I couldn't agree more.
I find the the use of the "C" word, with so many sitting, uncrewed aircraft, quite offensive.
Hung