Go Jet Airlines, a reasonable option or a way to the blacklist?

[lowlycfi]

Geez, another one of these threads. I'll take the over on the 10-15 page prediction.

Yes! I won!

 

[Freight Dog]

I'd still like to hear from nwa_contrails and other GoJet bashers on this thread to please reply to my posts with reasonable and rational arguments.

Guys?

 

[acaTerry]

FAST upgrade is your number one priority---the rest is nothing--get your time and you WILL move on to a place where fighting for a good contract will matter.

...until the next GoJets, Freedom, whatever comes up, runs your reputable carrier to the ground and you are reading threads like this, with replies like lookin4better telling you to screw the other guy, it's OK, you'll move on....the cycle continues...

 

[acaTerry]

GJ is pref hiring TSA. 10 already here, with more in different classes according to hr. By the way I'm still undecided, don't like both.

Ah the plan worked perfectly!!! HKs master plan to bust up TSA pilot group by alter-ego, then bringing the TSA pilots over after having eaten them from the inside out....just like cancer!!! BEAUTIFUL!!!!

 

[RiddleEagle18]

You know its amazing that our unions havent learned from the original Continental, Freedom, Open Sky(British Airways alter ego) and Gojets etc. How ever you feel about the issue, same airline, different airlines what ever. The point is every contract signed from here on out should have a provision stating that any flying done for this company or any holding company that is set up by our company will be done by (insert pilot group name). If a holding company aquires (insert airline name) the pilot seniority list will be merged.

Skywest aquisition of ASA would have forced a merger of the pilot list taking away any possibility of whipsaw. TSA could have set up GoJets to get around the american scope issues but the pilots would have been on TSA master seniority list like RAH. Once delta gets done with the NWA aquisiton Mesaba, Comair, and Compass would be forced to merge seniority list.

 

[Freight Dog]

Very true Riddle... but as you may or may not know about negotiations, how much negotiating capital are you willing to spend to ensure that?

Yeah, we were all pretty ticked off at Mesa for "lowering the bar." Hell, that bar sagging so low at Mesa is what ultimately cost me a nice, cush 6 figure Boeing job in Hawaii - they came in and undercut the crap out of us and ultimately put us out of business. But in the end, they bit the bullet and spent a sh*tload of negotiating capital to squash Freedom being a separate list. Was it worth it? What's their opportunity cost? Time will tell... it just might be that they've forever earned the "Mesa Sucks!!!!" at least on Flightinfo...

TSA pilots didn't want to spend negotiating capital to ensure that GoJet pilots were on the same list as TSA pilots. Right or wrong, the decision was made and lawsuits were filed. Can you see the opportunity cost of those decisions?

Yes, Skywest and ASA should be on the same list. Yes, TSA and GoJet should be on the same list.
Yes, Republic did it right by uniting all their carriers, but what did it cost them?

Look at American Eagle... how many of you GoJet bashers were around when they were getting whipsawed among themselves (Simmons, Wings West, Executive, Flagship) before they put an end to whipsaw by accepting a 16 year contract with no-strike clause? 16 year contract!!!

These decisions aren't easy, and to many people, sacrifices might not be worth it at the time. TSA/GoJet situation is the perfect example of it.

To get back to the original point - RiddleEagle, I see you are an FO on a CRJ. How much would you be willing to give up to achieve that scope? Would you be willing to stay an FO on that RJ for 5 more years? Would you be willing to forego payraises? What about work rules? Would you be willing to give up any duty rigs if you have them? What would you give up to ensure you get an ironclad scope that will prevent any sort of a whipsaw in the future? If you're not willing to give up any negotiating capital, are you happy with the status quo? Which is the less of two evils?

Something to think about...

 

[theo]

Very true Riddle... but as you may or may not know about negotiations, how much negotiating capital are you willing to spend to ensure that?

Yeah, we were all pretty ticked off at Mesa for "lowering the bar." Hell, that bar sagging so low at Mesa is what ultimately cost me a nice, cush 6 figure Boeing job in Hawaii - they came in and undercut the crap out of us and ultimately put us out of business. But in the end, they bit the bullet and spent a sh*tload of negotiating capital to squash Freedom being a separate list. Was it worth it? What's their opportunity cost? Time will tell... it just might be that they've forever earned the "Mesa Sucks!!!!" at least on Flightinfo...

TSA pilots didn't want to spend negotiating capital to ensure that GoJet pilots were on the same list as TSA pilots. Right or wrong, the decision was made and lawsuits were filed. Can you see the opportunity cost of those decisions?

Yes, Skywest and ASA should be on the same list. Yes, TSA and GoJet should be on the same list.
Yes, Republic did it right by uniting all their carriers, but what did it cost them?

Look at American Eagle... how many of you GoJet bashers were around when they were getting whipsawed among themselves (Simmons, Wings West, Executive, Flagship) before they put an end to whipsaw by accepting a 16 year contract with no-strike clause? 16 year contract!!!

These decisions aren't easy, and to many people, sacrifices might not be worth it at the time. TSA/GoJet situation is the perfect example of it.

To get back to the original point - RiddleEagle, I see you are an FO on a CRJ. How much would you be willing to give up to achieve that scope? Would you be willing to stay an FO on that RJ for 5 more years? Would you be willing to forego payraises? What about work rules? Would you be willing to give up any duty rigs if you have them? What would you give up to ensure you get an ironclad scope that will prevent any sort of a whipsaw in the future? If you're not willing to give up any negotiating capital, are you happy with the status quo? Which is the less of two evils?

Something to think about...

Freight Dog, you have to stop posting. You are ruining the exhilerating high of brainlessly bashing GoJet. You are making enemies of all ALPA zealots who think they can have everything their way simply by employeeing intimidation, scare tactics and just plain shouting. If you don't stop soon we will never have another good GoJet bashing session....Jeeez..stop it already.

 

[siucavflight]

Mesa sucks.

 

[CX880]

You know its amazing that our unions havent learned from the original Continental, Freedom, Open Sky(British Airways alter ego) and Gojets etc. How ever you feel about the issue, same airline, different airlines what ever. The point is every contract signed from here on out should have a provision stating that any flying done for this company or any holding company that is set up by our company will be done by (insert pilot group name). If a holding company aquires (insert airline name) the pilot seniority list will be merged.

Skywest aquisition of ASA would have forced a merger of the pilot list taking away any possibility of whipsaw. TSA could have set up GoJets to get around the american scope issues but the pilots would have been on TSA master seniority list like RAH. Once delta gets done with the NWA aquisiton Mesaba, Comair, and Compass would be forced to merge seniority list.

******************** that we make more than TSA and it's an infinitely better operation. No thanks. TSA had their chance. If they didn't want the flying then someone has to fly it. The sad part is they totally got screwed by their decision for a NO. We make more with a better contract. Bad managment!!!!!

 

[~~~^~~~]

You know its amazing that our unions havent learned from the original Continental, Freedom, Open Sky(British Airways alter ego) and Gojets etc....

I'm not sure you know the history here. ALPA did try to keep the flying on the TSA list and tried to force a single carrier petition and lost. In losing, a terrible precedent was set, that an airline could justify an alter ego operation for the express intent of circumventing a scope clause.

Many pilots do not understand why scope matters on every level.

To fix this through collective bargaining will take giants of men. Right now there is not the political will to get that job done. However, the more "regional" pilots who make it to the majors, the better for changing the course of the unions.

 

[great cornholio]

You know its amazing that our unions havent learned from the original Continental, Freedom, Open Sky(British Airways alter ego) and Gojets etc. How ever you feel about the issue, same airline, different airlines what ever. The point is every contract signed from here on out should have a provision stating that any flying done for this company or any holding company that is set up by our company will be done by (insert pilot group name). If a holding company aquires (insert airline name) the pilot seniority list will be merged.

Skywest aquisition of ASA would have forced a merger of the pilot list taking away any possibility of whipsaw. TSA could have set up GoJets to get around the american scope issues but the pilots would have been on TSA master seniority list like RAH. Once delta gets done with the NWA aquisiton Mesaba, Comair, and Compass would be forced to merge seniority list.

TSA did have that in the CBA. I forget the exact wording in the CBA but it was there. Althought to get around that HK formed TSA Holdings and then "sold" TSA Airlines to TSA Holdings and then TSA Holdings formed Gojet. So since the CBA didn't specify TSA Holdings HK was able to get around it as seen by the NMB. As its been said the NMB has seen it as a seperate operation, but that doesn't mean that it was wasn't achieved in a shady way by HK.

 

[BoDEAN]

Does Go Jets allow you to continue to hold your seniority number at another airline while on furlough?

 

[CX880]

TSA did have that in the CBA. I forget the exact wording in the CBA but it was there. Althought to get around that HK formed TSA Holdings and then "sold" TSA Airlines to TSA Holdings and then TSA Holdings formed Gojet. So since the CBA didn't specify TSA Holdings HK was able to get around it as seen by the NMB. As its been said the NMB has seen it as a seperate operation, but that doesn't mean that it was wasn't achieved in a shady way by HK.

What is your point? Nobody is debating the existence of GJ. In order for TSH to fly CRJ7s you need a seprate certificate than TSA.

 

[Flyer1015]

CX880, your pathetic attempts of justifying GoJets is getting really old. The bottom line is still that GoJets was an alter-ego carrier, formed initially as NO union, and simply to bust the TSA pilot group. Anyone taking jobs at GoJets should have known what they were getting into. And use common sense: union carrier laying off, holding company of said carrier forms non-union GoJets, GoJets non-union carrier hires pilots, while union pilots at TSA continue getting laid off.

 

[RiddleEagle18]

Sorry i didnt respond I kinda forgot that i posted on this thread.

I know the background of TSA and GoJets I was offered a job with TSA before I took my current job and i did alot of research on the company and the issues surrounding it. I also understand all of the setting up of the holding company. Thats why I mentioned that exact wording in my post.

I also understand all of the GoJets pilots thinking my post was directed at them it wasn't. Im saying that this division within the pilot groups would have never existed had scope been ironclad from the start. It would have forced TSA holdings to bring the aircraft on to GoJets(needed for legal reason with AA) but flown by 1 single unified list. Even GoJets pilots can't argue that would have been a bad thing. Everyone employed by GoJets now would still have been hired just on to 1 seniority list.

I think scope is often overlooked by pilot groups and quite frankly I believe that it is the most important issue in our contracts.

As far as what would I be willing to give up? Im not sure thats much of an issue for other groups. Let me explain. The negotiating capital required to pull freedom, eagle, and republic under their respective single pilot list was required because those different groups were already separate before the contract was signed. So yes it would be hard for TSA to bring it all back under one list.

What im suggesting is lets say another pilot group comes up for contract negotiations that doesnt already have an alter ego or separate pilot group set up. To get all flying done by this company or any holding company written into the contract should not require as much concession.

To answer your question more directly I believe scope is so important I would absolutely give up a few dollars of pay to secure that. If you have ironclad scope it would solve alot of the us versus them issue that keep pay down at the levels they are now. Solve scope and you would instantly solve many other issues around the industry. Once scope is solved the pilot groups can begin to solve other issues within the profession instead of fighting each other.

Unfortunately it started with the outsourcing of RJ's. I think most mainline pilot groups really regret that now. So what im suggesting now is lets make sure we learn from our mistakes and try and get ahead of Management on this. I think the biggest scope issues facing us ahead are Holding companies.

 

[siucavflight]

^As much as I dont like to say it, I believe that your user name disqualifies you from having any logical thought.

 

[ALIMBO]

^^^^You are so right my friend!

 

[CX880]

CX880, your pathetic attempts of justifying GoJets is getting really old. The bottom line is still that GoJets was an alter-ego carrier, formed initially as NO union, and simply to bust the TSA pilot group. Anyone taking jobs at GoJets should have known what they were getting into. And use common sense: union carrier laying off, holding company of said carrier forms non-union GoJets, GoJets non-union carrier hires pilots, while union pilots at TSA continue getting laid off.

GJ was formed so TSA pilots could fly CRJ7s, they said no. Everything else you said abovove is just factually untrue. All of that would be true if GJ was still a non union airline offering no work rules. In reality, it's union with way better work rules and management/employee relations than TSA. What happened in 05 is of no consequence to current and future GJ pilots. Please get over it

 

[Flyer1015]

=

All of that would be true if GJ was still a non union airline offering no work rules. In reality, it's union with way better work rules and management/employee relations than TSA. What happened in 05 is of no consequence to current and future GJ pilots. Please get over it

GoJets is uion now, but initially you were a non-union alter-ego that grew at the expense of a union carrier. People don't forget. You think a girl forgets a rapists who raped her, even if it was back in 2005? No, she doesn't. She will remember, she will always remember.

 

[CX880]

=

GoJets is uion now, but initially you were a non-union alter-ego that grew at the expense of a union carrier. People don't forget. You think a girl forgets a rapists who raped her, even if it was back in 2005? No, she doesn't. She will remember, she will always remember.

I know how outsiders like to bash on these boards. Tell me how GJ has screwed you over, personal case, please. Don't tell me about a TSA example because they did that to themselves, GJ was formed with their input, you can't blame someone in class at GJ right now for what happened in 05.

Plenty of airlines have "raped" fellow pilots and the industry in general. I can think of a few that have survived, particularly one where people would kill to get a class date. I'm sure the pilots applying are not thinking about how the place was started as long as it's a decent place now. As long as it's not struck work, I'm not a union henchman, so who cares where I find work. Please.