Latest ASA offer

[ASADriver]

Hey MrDudley. Why don't you ask BL why he won't return to the table? Until then anything said at these "unofficial" meetings does'nt count. If you really have some balls, contact one of the MEC officers, or a CNC member. They'll talk to you. Or even one of us P2P Reps.

Hoser
P2P

I'm not MrDudley, but I believe the company did come to the table. It is
ALPA that is holding out for more. I talked to one of the negotiating members and he verifiied that the offer was made. He said it was declined because of pref. bidding. Why can't ALPA at least be honest and say they don't like the deal because of pref. bidding. What's with all the lies and secrets. There isn't an offer, well wait, there is an offer, but we don't like it, well wait, it isn't an official offer, well wait we aren't really sure anymore. ALPA is looking silly here.

 

[PCL_128]

There is an offer from the company. Even the CNC has verified it. They don't like it because of PBS, but there is an offer. The pilots did vote to strike, and they deserve to be kept in the loop as to what the current offer is.

I hate to speak up here since this is really an ASA matter, but you are misunderstanding the difference between a formal offer and a "supposal." Pinnacle management came to us with a "supposal" last year also. It is not considered an offer under the law. The entire purpose of a supposal is to circumvent the Section 6 bargaining process and "suppose we were to offer this, what would you think?" Under Section 6 negotiations, any formal offer cannot be removed from the table once it has been made. That would be considered bad faith bargaining by the NMB. However, a supposal made in an informal session isn't constrained by these rules of bargaining under Section 6. The company is merely trying to gauge what your MEC and CNC are willing to accept. I can guarantee if the CNC had showed some willingness to take the offer, then management would have promptly removed it from the table, come up with a slightly less appealing offer, and then formally submit the new offer in front of the mediator. They are trying to figure out just how low the CNC and MEC are willing to go without actually submitting anything formally at this point. Your CNC and MEC were smart enough not to take the bait. You should thank them and be happy that they are smarter than some of the rank-and-file that would like to see everything put up for a vote. You elected these reps for a reason: to represent and bargain on your behalf. Let them do their job.

 

[atlcrashpad]

I'm not MrDudley, but I believe the company did come to the table. It is
ALPA that is holding out for more. I talked to one of the negotiating members and he verifiied that the offer was made. He said it was declined because of pref. bidding. Why can't ALPA at least be honest and say they don't like the deal because of pref. bidding. What's with all the lies and secrets. There isn't an offer, well wait, there is an offer, but we don't like it, well wait, it isn't an official offer, well wait we aren't really sure anymore. ALPA is looking silly here.

According to the Official Company web site for contract negotiations, there has not been an offer lately. WTF do you say about that?

 

[~~~^~~~]

PCL - 128, good points.

 

[Scope out RJ's]

You and I agree on a lot. But, there are a couple of mistakes in your facts which you might want to consider.

When have facts gotten in the way of the rjdc doing business?

First, it was ALPA, not Delta, that objected to our MEC negotiating scope, or even participating in negotiations which involved our pay and working conditions. Here are the letters from Duane Woerth which explain to Delta Management that they can not enter into negotiations with the ASA pilots. Delta says they are willing to negotiate with whoever ALPA sends to the table.

That's right. You worry about scope at your carrier, and we'll worry about ours! Why you can't seem to understand that comprehension is beyond any normal thinking! What you fail to exclude (as usual) is the FACT that DL's negotiations are between Delta ALPA and Delta management!

http://www.rjdefense.com/alpaletters.pdf

This denial of our representational rights set us on a course for the scope problems we have now. Following these letters we wrote ALPA what would happen (whipsaw) and filed grievances over ALPA's refusal. ALPA refused to hear the grievances forcing us to take the matter to Court, giving birth to the RJDC to fund the litigation.

A lot of good that has done for you. If you had half a brain ( and you don't ) you would retreat from your already career ruining persuit! Your group has etched a mark in the tree of aviation that I wouldn't go around beating my drum about!

No, I do not feel the ASA pilots share in the "responsibility" for ALPA's scope failures. Our MEC did a lot (particularly in the early days of this fight) to represent our interests. ASA pilots have taken the matter on, funding and fighting, for our representational rights. I'm very proud of my support for the RJDC and feel it is the best hope of saving our union.

Before you go hi fiving your success you should consider that 90% of your claims were summarily tossed out of court! Your being proud of the constand flaim bait and "lack of real facts," is what has killed your fight from the start!

Most of what you write, especially your last two paragraphs are right on the money. You are correct that this industry is likely to see a couple of regional airlines fail and ALPA is pleased to let this happen. You also very correctly point out that we probably need our own Counsel (not a Northwest Airlines Pilot on Medical Leave) advising our MEC. I would volunteer to pay a special assessment to fund our own Counsel.

Maybe this is where you should be sending your hard earned $$ instead of that toiled called the rjdc!

Our MEC and CNC have a tremendously difficult and important task ahead of them. My crystal ball tells me we are about 10 miles in trail of Mesaba, but I really hope & pray that I am wrong.

Regards,
~~~^~~~

Only time will tell!
scope out!

 

[FL990]

I talked to one of the negotiating members and he verifiied that the offer was made. He said it was declined because of pref. bidding. Why can't ALPA at least be honest and say they don't like the deal because of pref. bidding. What's with all the lies and secrets.

What lies and secrets...he told you they declined the "offer" because of pref bidding. Sounds like the only one that looks silly here is you.

Look, They spent YEARS working on section 13 of this contract and mgmt came in and tried to eliminate all of that work in one swoop!! NOT GONNA HAPPEN. Polling has shown that the majority of pilots are sceptical about pref bidding. The best thing for us to do is finish the contract with its current section 13, THEN go back and work on pref bidding.

And as someone else on this board has said, these so called "offers" are not official until they are made in contract language, infront of the NMB.

 

[Crash Pad]

Giving credit... I thought this thread had gone to crap on the middle pages that discussed woman and scabs... It is resiliant, however, who wants to take a high low on how many pages. Let me help it.

90 seaters on the ramp for northwest... Could management know we are getting the flying and trying to settle the contract in a hurry?

 

[CFIT]

90 seaters on the ramp for northwest... Could management know we are getting the flying and trying to settle the contract in a hurry?

Say again.....
Care to elaborate?

 

[ASA_Willy]

Profit margin v. profitability

Good point - you are right - its not the absolute numbers - its the profit numbers in relation to the cost structure - that is in fact the point I was trying to make with my figures. (Don't look at the absolute numbers - look at the profit numbers in relation to the cost numbers). A good non-airline example that also illustrates your point is oil company profits. Their percentage profit hasn't gone up but the price per barrel has - its the producer's price increase that is giving them the huge profit numbers - they are not gouging the public by charging more (in the sense of increasing their profit margins).

But nonetheless every business (and private individual) needs to hang on to some money to weather through the droughts, some money to improve and update infrastructure, and some "play" money available to take advantage of industry opportunites. Its hard to do that on a 7% profit margin with the volumes (cash flow) we are currently looking at, the vunerabilities we have to forces outside our control (fuel price, terrorism, etc.), and the increasing downward pressure on ticket prices as the number of players in our industry increases providing more choice for the customer.

Man, it's tough to keep up with this thread, since Willy has a job and a life, but I can't let you get away with the above so easily. You have a nice way with words, but have completely misrepresented my point. It is NOT about profit against the "cost structure". It IS about profit compared to investment.

You and Joe Merchant talk about profit margin as if it had some magical quality. But you can't talk about profit margin (which isn't even what your original numbers actually showed) as the key indicator of the company's financial well-being. The numbers you were throwing around are return on expenses, which is nice to know, but your 5% "profit margin" is only meaningful in comparison to similarly structured businesses. You can't be profitably in the long term without a positive return to expense ratio, but it is not the definition of profitability. A thin margin makes it tough going, but profitability is all about return on investment. In other words, am I making a good return on the capital I have tied up in the business?

If you want to do a snapshot of ASA's profitability, how about discussing the owner's return on investment? Skywest Holding paid $425M last year for full ownership and you say the 2nd qtr profit was $45M ? That is a quarterly ROI of over 10%, which annualizes to an incredible 42% ROI. Now that's some profitability. If Willy could get that kind of return on his investments, he would have quit working long ago! And if a new pilot contract really did cost $23M/yr (I can't vouch for that number), it would only reduce the ROI to around 36%. A big drop, but hardly a financial disaster.

So please don't get on here and try and make folks nervous about the company's profitability. Your "profit margin" and "cost structure" talk is all smoke and mirrors. We can make plenty of money for the owners, even if the pilots do get a raise. There is certainly a lot of risk in the airline business, but for now ASA is a real money maker for its owners. So far this venture has been very profitable for the gang out in St. George.

 

[atrdriver]

If you want to do a snapshot of ASA's profitability, how about discussing the owner's return on investment? Skywest Holding paid $425M last year for full ownership and you say the 2nd qtr profit was $45M ? That is a quarterly ROI of over 10%, which annualizes to an incredible 42% ROI. Now that's some profitability. If Willy could get that kind of return on his investments, he would have quit working long ago! And if a new pilot contract really did cost $23M/yr (I can't vouch for that number), it would only reduce the ROI to around 36%. A big drop, but hardly a financial disaster.

In other words, at a profit number of 45 million per quarter, Skywests investment will be fully paid for in 2 1/2 years.