Future Prospects Ahead for Legacy ASA

[Nevets]

New contracts with UAL will be for erjs. I'd say the crj2s are going to go away on the UAL side...

Nothing restricts the company from this. They can get new CPAs on either aircraft. They can also do away with either fleet. Of course that is if they wanted to or what the mainline wants. Neither the FAA or the pilot's contract force the company to make new contracts with the ERJs or make the CRJs on UAL go away.

 

[Speedtape]

If you can’t see the benefits of one list then you really are lost and have been blind to the effects of the whipsaw from years past.
Please list the specific benefits in this specifice instance. I am not opposed to one list. I am opposed to the naieve notion that we need or can buy it. When, and if, it becomes viable and financially rewarding to the Parent, then the INC MGMT will make it happen. I'm not sure that will happen, as the majority of the SkyWest pilots don't want to see it happen. To be honest, I'm not positive that the ASA pilots and the XJet pilots will be able to come together on one list. It sounds like it could be a long time.

I do agree that giving dual qual won’t have any effect on obtaining a merger. That would have to be something that ALPA strongly pushes for, and for selfish reasons that will never happen.
It's safer to operate the 200 separately. That's why it was done 12 years ago.


It’s also funny how you talk about more pay with ALPA. That is not the case if you are stuck as an FO at a shrinking ALPA carrier. Combine that with the dues that you have to pay ALPA and you are losing big dollars.
The cause of the problem you are now addressing is the state of the economy. If the economy is good, then hiring and advancement takes place at good rates, and everyone is happy. It has nothing to do with ALPA. When you signed on, ALPA was on the property. Dues are a part of gaining the benefits. If you didn't have ALPA, and the ALPA negotiated contract, your rules and pay could change over night. The rules and pay that existed when you started, were the result of improvements through several contracts and the efforts of the pilots that were here before you.
Or you could also factor the lost dollars from this whole regional/whipsaw machine that was designed solely to break ALPA, then you are talking about career losing dollars.
I am not sure what you are saying above, so I can't respond.


The people on this board often mistakenly think that pilot pay is a good judge of an airlines success or demise. In reality a better correlation can be seen between an airlines success and if they have ALPA on property.
I think that the rates of pay that can be negotiated are based on a Company's ability to pay (and the degree of it's success.) It is a fundamental consideration in collective bargaining. My Company has been quite successful over the years, and my negotiated pay rates are reflective of that success. I am not sure what your point is in your last sentence as it makes no sense to me.

Hope this helps.

 

[Speedtape]

1. Agree
2. Management has already said vacation low will not survive. Is your money on them on that too?
Everything is negotiable. I am quite sure that Vacation Low will be modified to some extent. I don't think it will go away completely.
3. What??? Your premise may be wrong anyways. Let me guess. Your not on reserve and it's been a decade or more since you've been on reserve and when you were it was worse so everyone else has to suffer as well?
Your guess is partially right. I have not been on Reserve for a long time and yes it was worse. In fact, at one point, most line holders had Reserve days built into their lines. In addition, "Ready Reserve" was every pilot coming in on his last leg of his pairing until he could run to the crew bus. In the past, downturns in the economy meant growth at ASA. However, that changed several years ago because our breathern at mainline voiced complaints to their MGMT during the merger that all misery should be shared. And, so it was. Unfortunately, now we can't grow unless mainline is growing. That means that there is stagnation in advancement like mainline endures. To your point--Your misery is caused by the economy and the stagnation that occurs in this industry when the economy is in the basement. There is no advancement as a result. I, nor any other pilot can change that. The Reserve rules have improved tremendously since the contract in 2007 and then some minor improvements with the PBS side letter. Is it Eutopia? No, it's still Reserve with some improvements. However, a Reserve is not a Lineholder. We can't fix the economy, and we can't fix your seniority. However, as a fellow pilot, I am willing to use negotiating capital to try and improve it. But in reality, it is what it is. It's the last line of defense in protecting scheduling integrity. Reserve at this Company is better than most others, but it is still Reserve. Don't blame me, for if I was King, everyone would be a lineholder. However, PBS has produced more lines, less Reserves, and less open time. Those are the facts.
4. Ya, 50s going away. Good for you since you don't fly one and it's too good for you so you never want to fly one again.
Yes, I agree with this message. In our industry, I have the seniority to exercise that option and I am not ashamed of it.
5. We get it. It's all about only you.
No, but it's not about YOU either! Get it?
6. One list will alleviate a bit of it. One less regional to shuffle.
You and I have very little control or say so in that matter. When, and if, it becomes economically rewarding, then INC may orchestrate that. Personally, I don't see that happening as there are legal protections that they have in a Corporate law perspective with less exposure, that they wouldn't have. In addition, mergers in this industry are costly because of the labor issues in achieving one list. Delta/NWA was the extreme exception, whereas USAir and the NWA/Republic merger are the norms. Most likely, the ASA/Xjet contract and single list will probably be the norm. It may never get done! Why would anyone want to add to the cluster by trying to integrate a 3rd pilot group? My guess is that the MGMT could care less if we get one contract or combine the list as the only reason it is going forward now is because of XJet scope. MGMT is already getting the cost savings they wanted.

Last paragraph: your premise is wrong again. Pay has nothing to do with dual qual. There are many airlines that have dual qual on the 757/767 and yet have two separate pay scales. Dual qual is just to decrease training costs. Everything else depends on what you get in negotiations. Skywest pilots don't get to negotiate so they got stuck with their subpar deal that management imposes on them. Anyways, apparently they are safe enough for the FAA along with everyone else who operates those two fleet types along with the 75/76 and DC9/MD80, etc.
Sorry, I disagree with you on several points. The convention that SkyWest uses and that most likely will be proposed, has most everything to do with pay. Dual Qual will increase training costs to some degree--think about it. Yes, everything else depends on what you get or don't get in negotiatons. It's interesting that you communicated that SkyWest pilots got stuck with Dual Qual and related pay and rules. So which is it?
SkyWest pilots do very little cross flying of the equipment, so that helps keep it safer. You reference 757/767 but there is a major difference. Those 2 planes were designed in the beginning for dual qualification as the cockpits and visual sight perspective were a major design priority early engineering. However, only one version of the 767 is common to the 757 and and crews are limited to those that are common. No carrier operated the DC9 and MD80, as the type is different. In fact, at Republic, pilots that flew the DC-9 10/30 series could not fly the DC9 50. The CR2 and the CR7 were not designed at the same time for a common type, and the cocpit and sight perspectives are quite different, as are several of the major systems. Certification of the 700 was delayed for several months because the number of differences were far too many to combine the type with the CR2. In one week, suspciously, those differences were suddenly reduced to about 137, barely fitting in the requirement. Many parties were suspect of the certification. As a result, the FAA and respective Companies of Comair and ASA felt it was safer to operate the aircraft separately. In practice, SkyWest pilots do very little cross flying. From information from friends there, what little that is done does not happen within the same pairing and rarely within the same month. All pilots are paid the lower rate for vacation, training, and sick leave. The overides are only paid for actual block time flown. An yes, the major reason is to save payroll costs.


Like is said, we get it. You'll throw anything out there and make up false premises to justify why it isn't good when in fact it's just you looking out for no one else than just you and the hell with everyone else.
You are incorrect about throwing out false premises. I certainly don't want to take a pay concession in changing an established practice for someone who is trying to do a seniority grab, nor would about 400+ other pilots. You would probably like others to sit on Reserve for you also? Why should we cannabilize our work group, pay and rules? You can't fix your Juniority, so don't try to grab other pilot's seniority. Bid what you can fly. It is safer to fly the CR2 separately and that is why it was done. Only since we were purchased by INC, has it become an issue. And it is an issue because they want to save payroll costs by imposing their scheme.

Peace out!

 

[Speedtape]

I have a bridge for sale.....wanna buy it?

No, if you have one, it's all yours!

 

[aircombat]

Speedtape, most people on this board know how selfish you are. You aren't fooling anyone. The sad thing is like so many other ALPA supporting baby boomers before you, you will end up shooting yourself in the foot. Your only solace will be that you hurt more people junior to yourself.

It's also obvious how blind you are to anything that doesn't fit your agenda so I will be asking you for specific examples of your rants.

First you say that Skywest pilots would have a say if we merge all 3 lists. How do you figure?

Also I want examples of how ALPA airlines are growing more than their non union counterparts.

I still want an example on how PBS brought us growth like you advertised. Seems like it's allowing the company to shrink us just like I said from the very beginning.

You say that dual qual decreases safety so much. I'm sure you have some examples.

 

[IBNAV8R]

I'd have to agree that a mixed fleet is not as safe. Flying a -200 and a -700, while similar, land and ground handle very differently. The disparity of operations grows damn-near every day with each new BS AD. Of the runway excursions we've had, I'd suspect at least some are due to -200/700 differences.

I've actually refused several -200 equipment downgrades in situations that would be normal ops for someone who flew it exclusively. To the co's credit, I never heard anything more about it. (I suspect because they don't want the FAA getting wind of that argument)

I would also agree that the motivation behind the Brad Holt Override is to save the co. money in soft time. My guess is INC. would fight integration tooth and nail just to keep mixed-fleet flying on the Skywest side.

 

[Speedtape]

Speedtape, most people on this board know how selfish you are. You aren't fooling anyone. The sad thing is like so many other ALPA supporting baby boomers before you, you will end up shooting yourself in the foot. Your only solace will be that you hurt more people junior to yourself.

It's also obvious how blind you are to anything that doesn't fit your agenda so I will be asking you for specific examples of your rants.
Actually, I am very open minded about contract improvements--ones that are good for you and me. That is my agenda. I don't cosider Dual Qual a contract improvement but a wedge that will be devisive. And, I don't really see it getting much traction, but I am certainly willing to discuss, debate, and have discovery on the issue. Rants? If you feel insecure about discussing relevant issues and choose to make rant allegations against those with opposing views, then color me a ranter. I feel very comfortable arguing the points and request that you engage in meaningful dialogue instead of hurling false charges to try to brow beat those who don't agree with you with your emotional and elementary tactics.

First you say that Skywest pilots would have a say if we merge all 3 lists. How do you figure?
Quite simply, most don't want on your list. They do have an influence in the matter. JA apparently does not want them on your list either, or it would have happened. When was ASA purchased?

Also I want examples of how ALPA airlines are growing more than their non union counterparts.
Who made that statement? Capacity cuts are the current name of the game, not growth. Even Southwest is somewhat stagnant except for the purchase of Airtran. It's the economy and has nothing to do with union or non-union. Virgin may be the only airline out there that is adding some capacity, and I am not sure that is wise in today's economy.

I still want an example on how PBS brought us growth like you advertised. Seems like it's allowing the company to shrink us just like I said from the very beginning.
I didn't advertise anything. PBS put us in a competitive position with the other DCI carriers because it is a staffing tool. At this point growth will not be from a result of the current state of the economy but the failure of other regionals in our industry. A large majority of the pilots I talk to like PBS and would not return to line bidding because they have more control over their schedule.

You say that dual qual decreases safety so much. I'm sure you have some examples.
I said that it is safer to operate the CR2 separately. That is why it was implemented that way 10 or so years ago. Talk to a number of instructors and see what they tell you. It mitigates risk and is a better practice for Threat Management. The airplanes operate differently and have quite different characteristics. You would understand that if you had flown both. There are at least 400 or more pilots that have and can answer that question for you.

Until later.

 

[Speedtape]

I'd have to agree that a mixed fleet is not as safe. Flying a -200 and a -700, while similar, land and ground handle very differently. The disparity of operations grows damn-near every day with each new BS AD. Of the runway excursions we've had, I'd suspect at least some are due to -200/700 differences.

I've actually refused several -200 equipment downgrades in situations that would be normal ops for someone who flew it exclusively. To the co's credit, I never heard anything more about it.

I would also agree that the motivation behind the Brad Holt Override is to save the co. money in soft time. My guess is INC. would fight integration tooth and nail just to keep mixed-fleet flying on the Skywest side.

Thanks for your response! Assuming you are a SW pilot, do you think the majority of your pilots desire a merger and list integration? It's ok to be honest. Honestly, I am not sure that combining ASA and XJet is a great idea and it still may never happen with a common contract and seniority list. From what I hear, we are years away from that happening.

 

[aircombat]

Thanks for your response! Assuming you are a SW pilot, do you think the majority of your pilots desire a merger and list integration? It's ok to be honest. Honestly, I am not sure that combining ASA and XJet is a great idea and it still may never happen with a common contract and seniority list. From what I hear, we are years away from that happening.

Of course SW pilots don't desire a merger. Like previously pointed out. Non union companies reap all of the benefits from their ALPA counterparts. And of course JA wouldn't want a merger either. What manager would want scope protection, yet it does exist. The point is that if we wanted, and we should want, a merger is possible. We wouldn't need SW pilots approval.

 

[aircombat]

I said that it is safer to operate the CR2 separately. That is why it was implemented that way 10 or so years ago. Talk to a number of instructors and see what they tell you. It mitigates risk and is a better practice for Threat Management. The airplanes operate differently and have quite different characteristics. You would understand that if you had flown both. There are at least 400 or more pilots that have and can answer that question for you.

I never said that dual qual wouldn't affect safety at all. And I'm sure that 10 years ago that excuse was used just like you use it now. But now, just as in back then, we all know the real reason. Maybe a little pay but mostly it's your ego that you are so concerned about. Other companies have dual qual. Were are the accident examples. And FWI I have been between nearly every seat from the ATR to 900.