Frontier reaches TA with pilots

[F9 Driver]

Open Climb wrote:
"My conclusions/fears:

(1) the Company could reduce the fleet size of mainline all it wants until they reach the 28 small jets limit. What would keep them from bringing 26 small jets online and reducing the number of Airbus to 15? (Remember, the job protections don’t kick in until “once the limitations above are met”}

(2) if we wind up with more airplanes than we need, the Company could park Airbusses (what is the plural of Airbus, anyway?) and be under no obligation to park small jets. They don’t have to reduce the small jet population below 28 airplanes (exception #2) AND they don’t have to reduce the small jet population if it would create “significant adverse cost or financial liability” (exception #1)."

My conclusions:

(1) I guess I'd have to wonder why they would want to. I mean how f'd up would things have to be if we had gotten rid of 40+ airbusses and replaced them with a bunch of small jets? Do you actually see them doing this or are you just looking to poke holes and play "what if?" Lots of things "could happen."
(2) See above. If things are that bad there will be a whole new band of morons in charge if the asylum on Tower, and I'll be doing something else.

 

[OpenClimb]

My conclusions:

(1) I guess I'd have to wonder why they would want to. I mean how f'd up would things have to be if we had gotten rid of 40+ airbusses and replaced them with a bunch of small jets? Do you actually see them doing this or are you just looking to poke holes and play "what if?" Lots of things "could happen."
(2) See above. If things are that bad there will be a whole new band of morons in charge if the asylum on Tower, and I'll be doing something else.

I picked the reduction to 15 Airbus as an example. They wouldn't have to get rid of 40+ Airbusses to get my attention or raise my level of concern. I would think we would want a provision saying that NO AIRBUSSES would be parked or no-one would be furloughed so long as small jet flying is in progress. Of course this is probably asking for too much, but I would think the current provision allowing ALL Airbusses to be parked is also asking for too much.

Lots of things COULD happen with a bunch of loopholes in the contract. If the pilot group is comfortable with this, then so be it. I just think it's important to make an informed decision.

As to your point #2, RE: things that bad... What's bad or good depends entirely on whether you want to be a new hire small jet pilot or if you want to preserve a job as a Airbus pilot.

RE: the suggestion that I'm just trying to poke holes in things--don't you think the Company will do exactly this? If they're not going to take advantage of every loophole in the contract, then let's close the loophole. If they object to closing the loophole, then that ought to be a clue as to their future plans. The continued well-being of the Frontier [Airlines] pilot group depends on considering the full extent of the exceptions, exemptions, limitations, etc. of the contract.

If the Company isn't going to park Airbusses in favor of additional small jets, then let's firm that up as a requirement in the contract instead of allowing a bunch of exceptions.

 

[yaks]

Will the DC be a cash deposit into an account invested in a diversified portfolio and managed by an independent broker, or a bunch of company stock thrown into a Frontier "managed" account for which the pilots will be charged exorbitant management fees? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[F9 Driver]

Fidelity account with a selection of funds like our 401K.

No Frontier stock (unless its owned by a fund.)

 

[F9 A319]

"It won't be good for ANY negotiations at EVERY airline."

and

"1.5% is HALF of what you need for a COLA. This thing will continue to devalue and degrade the profession. Vote No."

Whether I vote yes or no for the TA, my responsibility to the "industry" or my "fellow pilots" at other carriers will not be a consideration. My job is not to drive rates up, fix work rules at any other carrier or, quite frankly, worry about another carrier's profit/loss or how happy/unhappy their pilot group is.

I made a decision long ago not to base my happiness or lifestyle on what others made. Lots of people make more in total compensation - I don't care.

For those who feel each contract is an opportunity to increase rates, retirement, etc., for everyone else look how well it worked pre 9/11. It was going to change regardless. For those that feel it is every pilot's responsibility to take care of the industry, look what happened at Frontier 1's pilots and UAL or TWA and AA, the list is a long one.

Everybody's in this together until they need to step over your still warm body to get to their seat.

also

"The original F9 guys will be shaking their heads wondering "WTF happened? This used to be a halfway decent job." FAPA will negotiate J4J at the new alter ego, "Rabbit", and the Bus drivers will be making $45K a year in the left seat of an E-199 1/2 that seats 139 pax."

Ya know we started at 50k / year and it was a way decent job. The odds were against us then just like the odds are for us being acquired now. I don't care. All of this will happen or not happen whether I scream and yell, bang my head on a wall, fly fast or slow or peacefully plan to make the best of whatever happens to come my way.

It's all good.

Good luck storming the castle, don't wear yourselves out...

 

[Shrek]

WOW.............sound pretty defeated bud.........

While you clean up your spilled milk let the rest of the pilot group pick up your slack and try to negotiate a better deal. Don't worry you will reap all their hard work.

 

[F9 A319]

It's not defeat, it is victory.

When I was young I thought acceptance was identical to defeat, turns out it is the answer.

Airline management has a long history of doing what they do, pilots do too. That's OK as long as you realize that it all started before you or me and will continue until they can figure out a way to get pilots out of the cockpit, long after you and I are gone.

Some folks get excited, hell I got excited years ago, but nothing really changes.

There needs to be people willing to "rescue" the profession, sadly it is more than likely too late. I wish I could have been a Captain in the 50s, 60s and 70s. It seems unlikely now, but it doesn't defeat me - I accept it and the great years I got.

I think there are more important things in the world than 2-5 dollars an hour or 10-50 cents for per diem. Retirement would be nice but look at the poor ba$tards that had it stolen from them after they retired. $hit happens, it can be a drag or an opportunity to learn something new and /or be something new.

I've done my part, please go pick up my slack and let me reap the benefits of your hard work - and Thank you.

 

[Shrek]

Don't get me wrong - I understand you points and they do have thought behind them. My point is that it seemed like you were laying down to management not working with them. Believe me when I say I have lived the other way around and it is a bad place to be. Being at each other's throats for years on end and everybody loses in the end.

BUT and a big but.......being greedy during contract talks and having realistic future goals are not the same thing. And I admit - I am on the outside in this but it seems that with all the hard work to grow the airline to where it is today is worth something in my book. Does it mean - 300/hr and a 80 hr guarantee?!! nope.

But it also doesn't mean a below average first year pay rate and a pay freeze for a "Cost Neutral" contract.

In the end it will ripple through other properties but I really do wish F9 crews the very best in whatever you decide. And if you decide to vote this TA in - don't rip yourselves apart from the infighting that might result. Own it and move on.

I have a personal stake in their future as well.......not me but close friends and I wish them and you the best...........be safe.

 

[StaySeated]

I spent some time stuck in various places over the weekend thanks to old-woman-winter and reviewed the TA.

In my opinion, it is good. Not great, but definitely not bad. We can go on and on about scope, bottom line is, we could have the best scope language ever written and it would not be worth d1ck. Scope is worthless, by the time the blue book contract is printed the company has already figured out a way to beat the language. Scope has NEVER worked, and I have said a million times that the entire section should just be removed from every contract.

I evaluated compensation and here are my raises for the next five years as an FO. Once they started lynx, my aspirations of upgrading died and my logbook updating began.

14%, 5.6%, 6.8%,7.8% and 2%.

When I include the DC plan the numbers become

16.6%, 9.3%, 9.5%, 11.8% and 7.5%

I think we have outpaced inflation.

The scheduling section is truly as good as it gets. In terms of flexibility you just can't beat our options. Hold your breath if they cram pref bid next year, but for the time being Section 5 is pretty much unbeatable in the industry.

Insurance still sucks, and it looks like we no longer have loss of license coverage.

I still have some questions that will be brought up at the next roadshow, but the TA is "good". (except for the hats )

 

[embdrvr]

I guess when they start parking your Airbuses you can go get the $50/hour captain job at Lynx. If it has a picture of animal on the tale it should be flown by a Frontier pilot. Those Q-400's will be replacing some of your shorter legs. And the RJ's will be taking away some of the medium length legs.
You'll be left with the longer legs that can't be flown with an RJ (yet).
Take a look at what happened to the rest of the industry.
You're next on the chopping block if you go along with it.
Why not aspire to be like SWA? They manage just fine without RJ feed and they offer their pilots a decent living. Even JetBlue pilots managed to keep the RJ flying in house. There's no reason you guys can't do the same. It's not like JetBlue doesn't face a lot of competition