Latest ASA offer

["GO AROUND"]

Go Around- Bad policy asking us to talk to SKYW pilots about anything. SKYW pilots are making more than ASA pilots. On the W2 I get the hourly is different.
SKYW pilots have better work rules.
Now you just discovered that a good chunk of them like pref. bidding.
NOT A GOOD UNION SELL

I have been listening to two debates. 1 dual qual the other pref. bid.

Here is my take. The group most up in arms is scared of dual qual because it is hard to teach an old dog two tricks (if you catch my drift)
The same group is usually not the best at figuring out computers.

The young "inexperienced" 500 hour wonders you all complain about will have no problem picking up two aircraft and figuring out pref. bidding. Which is why the Union better fight hard to make sure these things don't happen.

CFIT doesn't like it read some of his posts about it. A good chunk like it? That's the first SKW pilot I have heard say he likes it. I or the union is not trying to sell PBS, the company is. But to say that we have to implement PBS in order to get a TA that is stupid. Does the company have a PBS in mind? And how does that get implemented? They probably don't have a clue. You just gonna take a PBS that the company gives you? You can bet it will be the worst out there that benifits only the company.

I don't have a problem with dual qualification. Pay me accordingly for knowing 2 aircraft and pay me the rate for the aircraft when I fly it and I'm fine. But I won't fly more than 50 seats for 50 seat rates. Especially the lowest 50 seat rate out there. That old dog group is about 20 people on the ATR that couldn't pass any CRJ course so it doesn't matter.

I won't have a problem with it either, but I am sure not going to sign off on a system that I don't know about.

The union is fighting hard for those things. You think they would turn down a PBS that was good for the pilots and company?

 

[FORESTGUMP]

Forest, you need to just go over to G0 Vets and get it over with. You would have been PERFECT for Larenzo back in the 80's.

No thanks. I'll keep my 70 left seat with 15+ yrs. right here at ASA. Thanks for the offer though.

 

[Sinca3]

The union is fighting hard for those things. You think they would turn down a PBS that was good for the pilots and company?

Yes they are....this is something the line pilots seem to keep forgetting. I am about the most impatient person around and it is driving me crazy not having a contract after 4 years of negotiations. I trust that the union has my best intrest in mind and there are NO egos in play now. The new MEC is more open and willing to work with the company, but the company hasn't changed their tune!
As for PBS the MEC chair has stated he doesn't want to negotiate PBS. Why I don't know I didn't get that far asking questions. Maybe it is b/c the whole sect. 13 would have to be renegotiated.
Dual qulification seems to be doable to me but again the MEC chair has said that his, the MEC's, research throught the ASA training dept points to safety issues with being dual qualified. Personnaly I think I wouldn't have a problem with it, but there are 1799 other pilots out there! Once again they, the MEC/ALPA local, have our best intrest as a WHOLE pilot group in mind.
I sure wanna take a "drive-by" the GO sometimes.......

 

[atrdriver]

That old dog group is about 20 people on the ATR that couldn't pass any CRJ course so it doesn't matter.

If you think that the RJ is somehow harder to learn or fly than the ATR you are fooling yourself. I came over to the RJ because of the schedules, not because I wanted to fly that POS.

 

[crjskipper]

The union line that the training guys dont think dual qual is safe is bogus. A very few IPs were asked years ago if dual qual was safe - they were very senior and didnt like flying the 50. The 70 had better trips and in general is a better plane. When the question was asked the 70 also had several ADs on it that did make things more complicated. I have spoken to many dual qualified standards pilots and none of them have any issue with it. The sim guys dont like it but most of them havnt flown an aiplane this year.

A female FO on the bus the other day said she would never do it cause it was unsafe - I asked her why and all she said was - because, then - its totally different and unsafe. I have flown the 70 for years and would have no issue adapting back to the 50 - just would suck having to keep my power set all the time during climb.

And I have heard several people also explain that PBS would greatly help us in adapting to DALs crappy schedules they give us. Crew planners have said ASA is about the only DAL regional that doesnt have it and as a result the DAL scedule makes our traditional line construction very challenging.

 

[sweptback]

As for PBS the MEC chair has stated he doesn't want to negotiate PBS. Why I don't know I didn't get that far asking questions. Maybe it is b/c the whole sect. 13 would have to be renegotiated.

I can't speak for the MEC because I'm not on it, but I have heard many times that they would rather do PBS as a side letter rather than part of this contract. All of the contract study has been done for hard lines, and as you said if we agreed to PBS now, we'd have to reopen Sect. 13. Also, the benefit of doing it as a side letter would mean that the pilot group would get something else in return for agreeing to PBS, whether it be extra days off, more per-diem, a pay increase, or whatever else the company wants to trade.

BL suggested that the company conceded on scheduling because they thought that we valued QOL over monetary issues. Management believed that the pilot group would be willing to take a cut in pay to get 13 complete. They misread us, and they would love nothing else than to renegotiate Sect. 13 with their newfound knowledge of our pilot group.

I am against PBS, but I understand that it will probably be a necessity for this airline. I am willing to be open and consider it, but only after this contract gets done. If we reopened 13 to account for PBS, we would still be negotiating this contract in 2010!

 

[ASADriver]

The union line that the training guys dont think dual qual is safe is bogus. A very few IPs were asked years ago if dual qual was safe - they were very senior and didnt like flying the 50. The 70 had better trips and in general is a better plane. When the question was asked the 70 also had several ADs on it that did make things more complicated. I have spoken to many dual qualified standards pilots and none of them have any issue with it. The sim guys dont like it but most of them havnt flown an aiplane this year.

A female FO on the bus the other day said she would never do it cause it was unsafe - I asked her why and all she said was - because, then - its totally different and unsafe. I have flown the 70 for years and would have no issue adapting back to the 50 - just would suck having to keep my power set all the time during climb.

And I have heard several people also explain that PBS would greatly help us in adapting to DALs crappy schedules they give us. Crew planners have said ASA is about the only DAL regional that doesnt have it and as a result the DAL scedule makes our traditional line construction very challenging.

Well said CRJskipper. Dual qualification is not a problem, and while I am not wild about PBS, it is the future and it is more efficient. The more efficiancy we gain in scheduling and training cycles, the more competitive we can be without cutting pay. I think the hardliners are driving negotiations from our side and those of us who are more realistic need to take things back.

 

[John Pennekamp]

You guys keep bringing up this 92% over and over.....NEWS FLASH.....92% isn't terribly impressive for a strike vote. Particullarly when you consider 15% didn't bother to show up.

I'll go out on a limb here and say if the offer (that isn't REALLY an offer...yet)being talked about here the last few days here was put out to the members, it would pass by 60%+.

It IS time for ALPA to start getting something to US to decide on.

just my .02

And naieve sentiment like that is EXACTLY why I'm glad my MEC does not put every proposal out to vote. Weak minded individuals like him with SJS will take whatever they can get to impress chicks with how big their jet is.

Go ask your US Senator why he doesn't put every proposal before Congress to a popular vote.

ALPA is a representational democracy. You elect reps to vote for you, and give up your right to micromanage them. The US Congress is the same way. Get over it!

 

[ASADriver]

BL suggested that the company conceded on scheduling because they thought that we valued QOL over monetary issues. Management believed that the pilot ground would be willing to take a cut in pay to get 13 complete. They misread us, and they would love nothing else than to renegotiate Sect. 13 with their newfound knowledge of our pilot group.

Well that is what a lot of the loudmouths were saying prior to the scheduling section being done. I remember lots of ALPA saying "we aren't asking for big raises, we are only asking for QOL improvements". Then when the scheduling section got done, they changed their line to "we will not take a paycut". Now it is "we want pay raises and full retro". Seems like the hardliners keep trying to raise the demands.

 

[ASADriver]

And naieve sentiment like that is EXACTLY why I'm glad my MEC does not put every proposal out to vote. Weak minded individuals like him with SJS will take whatever they can get to impress chicks with how big their jet is.

Go ask your US Senator why he doesn't put every proposal before Congress to a popular vote.

ALPA is a representational democracy. You elect reps to vote for you, and give up your right to micromanage them. The US Congress is the same way. Get over it!

Yeah well I'm not impressed with Congress either. You answered my question though. This offer would probably pass and the hardliners running the show aren't going to do that. They would rather burn the place down and send a message. How that harms other people is of no concern to hardline union people.