Hypothetical question for ASA pilots

Dave Benjamin

an over 40 victim of fate
Joined
Jun 12, 2003
Posts
1,040
Total Time
5300+
A vocal anti-union pilot is advancing a theory that ALPA will be very unhealthy for SkyWest pilots. His theory is that if SkyWest pilots certified ALPA that the ASA MEC would file a single carrier petition to force integration. He further postulates that the petition would be granted and integration would take place with terms unfavorable to SkyWest pilots.

So here's a few questions for ASA folks:

Do you think your leadership would pursue integration if SkyWest pilots certified ALPA? Any particular reason why or why not?

Would you personally hope for integration?

Would integrating be good in the long term as it would prevent the possibility of whipsawing?

I'd appreciate it if we can limit responses to folks that actually fly for ASA.
 

shamrock

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2001
Posts
1,786
Total Time
1 year
ALPA didn't have any luck with getting Comair and ASA combined so I wonder if an ASA/Skywest attempt would meet with the same success.

Based on the arguments here that include hiring numbers in the past few years, I believe DOH integration would to work well for me. That being said, as long as we aren't played against each other I don't really care about being integrated right now. A better choice of bases and better looking FAs would be nice though.

Delta attempted to play ASA and Comair against each other and I won't expect anything different from Skywest (the holding company). As long as we are separate the threat of whipsaw is there. I think ASA has been pretty good so far at not playing into the whipsaw game and will continue to hold the line, assuming there is a a good faith effort by Skywest to do the same. The pilots at Skywest must decide if a union is right for them, but a union vote would likely make many at ASA a bit more confident in your willingness to fight whipsaw.
 

Texx

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Posts
970
Total Time
20mil
Dave Benjamin said:
A vocal anti-union pilot is advancing a theory that ALPA will be very unhealthy for SkyWest pilots. His theory is that if SkyWest pilots certified ALPA that the ASA MEC would file a single carrier petition to force integration. He further postulates that the petition would be granted and integration would take place with terms unfavorable to SkyWest pilots..
>>So here's a few questions for ASA folks:<<

>>Do you think your leadership would pursue integration if SkyWest pilots certified ALPA? Any particular reason why or why not?<<
There have been no talks about a single list at this time.

>>Would you personally hope for integration?<<
At some point I think both side need to look at the option.

>>Would integrating be good in the long term as it would prevent the possibility of whipsawing?<<
Intergration would benefit both the pilots and management. Reduce overhead by reducing double management positions. Pilots, more choices to live, less commuting for some.

>>A vocal anti-union pilot is advancing a theory that ALPA will be very unhealthy for SkyWest pilots.<<

Most people are scared of the unknown. ALPA is more than a contract. How does he know what the pilot group wants?

>>His theory is that if SkyWest pilots certified ALPA that the ASA MEC would file a single carrier petition to force integration.<<

How does he know what we want? He doesn't even know what your pilot group wants. Didn't the last attempt to bring ALPA in fail by a thin number?

>>He further postulates that the petition would be granted and integration would take place with terms unfavorable to SkyWest pilots.<<

This guy seems to know everything. Is his name Cliff Clavin?

This is what it boils down to. After the deal is finalized, reps from both pilot groups should get together and meet. Talk about issues and ask questions about the unknowns to each group such as the issues you have brought up.
The key to being successful is communicating your ideas.
 

piginshlitz

Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2003
Posts
15
Total Time
7500
Texx>>[i said:
Intergration would benefit both the pilots and management. Reduce overhead by reducing double management positions. Pilots, more choices to live, less commuting for some.[/i]
Right. Management cut backs in the airline industry. HA ha ha

ha

ha,ha,ha,ha

hee, hee

ha

ha

haaaaaa
 

Tomct

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Posts
2,062
Total Time
11000+
:cool:I have to agree with Texx. One pilot group is MUCH BETTER than two. With one, NO whipsawing! I don't think any of us want that! One voice makes a lot more noise than separate small ones!
If not this, I surely hope and pray that atleast the pilot leaders of BOTH companies will get together and COMMUNICATE!!!!!! I cannot overemphasize this enough!!! Please guys....Please....COMMUNICATE!!!
 

Gobi Gred

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2001
Posts
152
Total Time
15000
DC has upper management aspirations. Just wish he'd be man enough to admit it and quit acting like he is for the pilots.
 

ArcticFlier

SpdmodehdgmodebugV21/2bnk
Joined
Jun 22, 2002
Posts
901
Total Time
16500
Gobi Gred said:
DC has upper management aspirations. Just wish he'd be man enough to admit it and quit acting like he is for the pilots.

Amen Brother Gobi Gred....................


BTW.................Gojay Hawks.................................



AF :cool:
 

Willy21

Don't ask
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Posts
522
Total Time
4500
Tomct said:
:cool:I have to agree with Texx. One pilot group is MUCH BETTER than two. With one, NO whipsawing! I don't think any of us want that! One voice makes a lot more noise than separate small ones!
If not this, I surely hope and pray that atleast the pilot leaders of BOTH companies will get together and COMMUNICATE!!!!!! I cannot overemphasize this enough!!! Please guys....Please....COMMUNICATE!!!
Tomct is right, whatever one group does the other group needs to do. 3700 pilots is a big number to deal with as opposed to 1700 and 2000. Together we can make a better QOL for all.
 

Ben Dover

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Posts
307
Total Time
noon
Texx said:
This is what it boils down to. After the deal is finalized, reps from both pilot groups should get together and meet. Talk about issues and ask questions about the unknowns to each group such as the issues you have brought up.

The key to being successful is communicating your ideas.
While I agree that's what SHOULD happen, it simply IS NOT POSSIBLE at this time...and here's why.

SkyWest pilots HAVE NO representation! Period!!! The pseudo PILOT representation organization, known as SAPA, is actually a MANAGEMENT representation organization. SAPA was created by mgmt, for the purposes of mgmt, is paid by mgmt, and makes a practice of unilaterally implementing management initiatives upon the pilot group. If it walks like a duck....well, you know the rest.
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
Dave Benjamin said:
A vocal anti-union pilot is advancing a theory that ALPA will be very unhealthy for SkyWest pilots. His theory is that if SkyWest pilots certified ALPA that the ASA MEC would file a single carrier petition to force integration. He further postulates that the petition would be granted and integration would take place with terms unfavorable to SkyWest pilots.
Good questions.

A single carrier petition would be filed by ALPA, not the ASA MEC. ALPA will probably file a petition whether, or not, the Skywest pilots have elected ALPA as their representative.

Both sides of the debate will try to use fear to motivate the SkyWest pilots. The SkyWest pilots will feel damed if they do, and dammed if they don't. If they don't, they will fear ALPA will be cutting deals to benefit the ASA pilots behind their backs. If they do, they fear ASA pilots will be cutting seniority integration deals.

Having one bargaining agent does not necessarily mean that the companies would merge. But, must of the reason for having redundant management teams disappears if the Company does not see a benefit by whipsawing employee groups - one against the other.

Neither the ASA, or Comair MEC, believed there was much of an advantage to be gained by fighting a single carrier petition on the property. There would still have been Mesa, Eagle, ACA, Skywest and Chautauqua in the portfolio. Reducing the portfolio from 6 or 7 to 5 or 6 just wasn't that beneficial. Both the ASA and Comair MEC's came out in support of a merger and even agreed to a date of hire proposal for integration, but it just was not percieved as being worth the fight. Further, until Comair's concessions, the ASA and Comair MEC did work together and presented a unified front to management. Remember that ASA said "NO" to concessions for airplanes - in part to support their Comair brothers.

A single carrier petition on the SkyWest property has a whole different dynamic. ALPA National wants the SkyWest pilots and the Delta pilots probably don't care enough to try to stop ALPA National from doing "the right thing" in this instance.

The future of Delta is anyone's guess at the moment. Based on purely objective data, Delta should be gone in a year. But airlines have a unique ability to survive much longer than it appears they should on paper. I think what happens to Delta is more important to ASA and SkyWest pilots than any other factor in the next 24 months.

~~~^~~~
 

Texx

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Posts
970
Total Time
20mil
~~~^~~~ said:
Good questions.

A single carrier petition would be filed by ALPA, not the ASA MEC.
Well not so fast. For National to do this they would have to be asked by one of the two pilot groups.
 

Texx

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Posts
970
Total Time
20mil
Gobi Gred said:
DC has upper management aspirations. Just wish he'd be man enough to admit it and quit acting like he is for the pilots.
Man this is great! We already have something in common.

We have a base Chief Pilot, CS, that tries to make it look like that he is for the pilots then he pulls this...

A MIL pilot gives the company his orders at the begining of the year for MIL leave with specific dates. Later in the year some of these dates fall on his days off. So the CP docks him 2 days of pay because "he was unavailible to be junior manned."

What is really funny is the CP is ex navy.

See, we have the same problems that you do at Skywest.
 

C.Warrior

Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2005
Posts
14
Total Time
5000+
"the ASA and Comair MEC did work together and presented a unified front to management. Remember that ASA said "NO" to concessions for airplanes - in part to support their Comair brothers."


Too bad Comair did not hold the line to honor your support.
 

Tim47SIP

Serving for the USofA
Joined
Dec 5, 2001
Posts
1,157
Total Time
10,000
Tex

A MIL pilot gives the company his orders at the begining of the year for MIL leave with specific dates. Later in the year some of these dates fall on his days off. So the CP docks him 2 days of pay because "he was unavailible to be junior manned."


CS did exactly what he was supposed to "By Law". He has bent over backwards for us on MLOA and takes care of issues we may have while away. An individuals orders start on a certain date and end on a certain date, period. Any days off or GDO's are gone if they were after the start day or before the return date. This same thing happened to me as I was below mins for the month. He prorated the month and deducted the rest as I left on the 8th of the month. It was no big deal. The only thing the company must pay you for (if you desire) is vacation owed or expenses such as moving which I deffered for my return. It may not seem fair, but it is.
 

goodpilotithink

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
114
Total Time
2700
C.Warrior said:
"the ASA and Comair MEC did work together and presented a unified front to management. Remember that ASA said "NO" to concessions for airplanes - in part to support their Comair brothers."


Too bad Comair did not hold the line to honor your support.
Oh come on. WE held the line and got a much better contract only to have numerous Regional pilot groups stab us in the back. The first time we turned down concessions for growth was a joke. They NEVER thought we would go for it. It was designed to fail so they could put the aircraft with ASA, where they were destined to go no matter what.

They were wanting us to totally strip our contract back to where it was before the strike, knowing full well we would not do it. Now the second time they ask for a "freeze", and that made more sense, since it was apparent no one was going to pass us up .

Say what you will but we have done more to help the pilots who fly small jets than any one. It was a wasted effort in a way because of what the likes of Mesa, Cha. did when we handed them the bat.

Fly Safe
 

Plug

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Posts
465
Total Time
10000+
Dave Benjamin said:
A vocal anti-union pilot is advancing a theory that ALPA will be very unhealthy for SkyWest pilots. His theory is that if SkyWest pilots certified ALPA that the ASA MEC would file a single carrier petition to force integration. He further postulates that the petition would be granted and integration would take place with terms unfavorable to SkyWest pilots.

So here's a few questions for ASA folks:

Do you think your leadership would pursue integration if SkyWest pilots certified ALPA? Any particular reason why or why not?

Would you personally hope for integration?

Would integrating be good in the long term as it would prevent the possibility of whipsawing?

I'd appreciate it if we can limit responses to folks that actually fly for ASA.
Dave,

I think our MEC would pursue integartion due to the fact that we have seen first hand the affects of whipsaw and Skywest management now has a huge whipsaw. Integartion would benefit both groups from the stand point of alleviating the whipsaw and offer more options for crew bases and trip selection.

As you may have gathered I am all for an integration because I like to think the bigger the pilot group the better. Now the "million dollar" question: How would we integrate? Good question and I don't think anyone has the answer right now. We do know that there are 2 extremes Staple and DOH. A staple would result in a winfall for the Skywest group and DOH would be somewhat of winfall for the ASA pilot group so neither is a viable option, but there is PLENTY of middle ground there. So over the next few months lets keep the "Staple vs. DOH" fight to a minimum and actually come up with some good ideas. I look forward to working with the folks at Skywest unless Jetblue or CAL call then Cya. ;-)

Cheers
 

Texx

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Posts
970
Total Time
20mil
C.Warrior said:
"the ASA and Comair MEC did work together and presented a unified front to management. Remember that ASA said "NO" to concessions for airplanes - in part to support their Comair brothers."


Too bad Comair did not hold the line to honor your support.
Yes you are correct but it was not a formal request for single carrier status to the NMB.
 

Texx

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Posts
970
Total Time
20mil
Tim47SIP said:
CS did exactly what he was supposed to "By Law". He has bent over backwards for us on MLOA and takes care of issues we may have while away. An individuals orders start on a certain date and end on a certain date, period. Any days off or GDO's are gone if they were after the start day or before the return date. This same thing happened to me as I was below mins for the month. He prorated the month and deducted the rest as I left on the 8th of the month. It was no big deal. The only thing the company must pay you for (if you desire) is vacation owed or expenses such as moving which I deffered for my return. It may not seem fair, but it is.
The point is and it was not "By Law" that on your "scheduled days off" the company dock you 2.75 hours because you were not availible to be junoir manned. We are speaking of your min days off. I do agree that they are not required to make sure, after your final sch, to give you the required 10 days off per the contract.
 

viper548

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2004
Posts
2,090
Total Time
6800
Texx said:
A MIL pilot gives the company his orders at the begining of the year for MIL leave with specific dates. Later in the year some of these dates fall on his days off. So the CP docks him 2 days of pay because "he was unavailible to be junior manned."
That's messed up! I don't request my mil days until I have my schedule. If i'm scheduled to have the day off, I don't request it off.
 
Top