No comment on ASA PBS LOA yet?

[aircombat]

Tarzan, why no comment on the research you requested about our expenses. Is it because my math was a little off? I realize that and apologize. I was doing it in my head and I ended up with a way to conservative number. Really our expenses would be over $800 Million, however that might also be a little conservative. Either way it will save the company around 1% or less.

 

[Tarzan]

Having to work more is concretionary for a lot of people.

I’m not really seeing how this LOA makes our PBS industry leading. For the most part concerning PBS it just says, your getting it. Maybe with vacation being the exception, and I haven’t heard anyone say that no other airline has vacation language, the rest has nothing to do with PBS or is simply inconsequential. If this went to section 6 and came out with no vacation language I don’t really foresee a yes vote. Also your beloved PWG is going to be credited at least 108 hrs a month, really have no input, and have the ability to get paid weekends off.

Beloved huh? Go volunteer/ apply for it. If you want DNs number, I'll find it and send it to you. I don't know what you're talking about exactly but the trainers will have that for a month. The PWG that works on the bid runs will probably get a week to do that stuff. By all means, go talk to Newie.

The aspects that make this LOA industry leading are:
Done outside Sec 6 and bankruptcy giving the pilot group ALL the leverage.
Includes hard language on a limit of four day trips.
Gives veto power to pilot group on bid run solutions.
Getting language that at least gives access to and building trips to and make suggestions.
Using a system that did exist a couple of years ago. It is good enough that the Delta pilots are looking at going after this system as well.

Looking outside the nuts and bolts of the PBS, ALPA was able to secure increases and not decreases in a concessionary environment. Go to the road show and take look. Those guys have spent a year working on the stuff and researching what other pilot groups said didn't work. This wasn't thrown together on a whim.

 

[USCtrojan]

Tarzan, why no comment on the research you requested about our expenses. Is it because my math was a little off? I realize that and apologize. I was doing it in my head and I ended up with a way to conservative number. Really our expenses would be over $800 Million, however that might also be a little conservative. Either way it will save the company around 1% or less.

While I find a few of your points valid, the vast majority of your posts grasp at the unattainable. You basically want 25 years of seniority with 4 years of service, or however long you've been here. ASA is not a money tree, its a working business in a cut throat industry. The only way your gonna get what you want, is by..... 1) Seniority, 2) Rapid and extensive growth, or 3) You go into business for yourself and start your own airline. Good luck with that last option.

Trojan

 

[aircombat]

Tarzan, I do thank you for offering something better than just “I like the language“. I don’t think I have much of a chance to become a member of the PWG. Since they are appointed by the union I’m suspecting that the union members will appoint themselves. Then they can get paid for union work and PWG pay as well.

Beloved huh? Go volunteer/ apply for it. If you want DNs number, I'll find it and send it to you. I don't know what you're talking about exactly but the trainers will have that for a month. The PWG that works on the bid runs will probably get a week to do that stuff. By all means, go talk to Newie.

The aspects that make this LOA industry leading are:
Done outside Sec 6 and bankruptcy giving the pilot group ALL the leverage. I don’t know if I would say ALL the leverage. A union member once told me that we only have leverage if we threaten to strike.
Includes hard language on a limit of four day trips. This could come back to bite you. What if the other 40% are day lines. Just saying it doesn’t guarantee an increase in 3 days.
Gives veto power to pilot group on bid run solutions. It’s my understanding with PBS for just about all the pilots there should be only 1 solution. It would just leave wiggle room for people that leave a vague or default bid. Those people will be left with junk anyway and then if the PWG doesn’t like what the company comes up with it will come down to a coin toss.
Getting language that at least gives access to and building trips to and make suggestions. Non binding
Using a system that did exist a couple of years ago. It is good enough that the Delta pilots are looking at going after this system as well. Do you mean they want the program that we will be using. Because there is little in this LOA about PBS. The only real positive is the vacation and you didn’t even mention it. Don’t worry I got your back. Just because it’s better than Delta’s PBS doesn’t make it industry leading.

Looking outside the nuts and bolts of the PBS, ALPA was able to secure increases and not decreases in a concessionary environment. Go to the road show and take look. Those guys have spent a year working on the stuff and researching what other pilot groups said didn't work. This wasn't thrown together on a whim.

 

[aircombat]

While I find a few of your points valid, the vast majority of your posts grasp at the unattainable. You basically want 25 years of seniority with 4 years of service, or however long you've been here. ASA is not a money tree, its a working business in a cut throat industry. The only way your gonna get what you want, is by..... 1) Seniority, 2) Rapid and extensive growth, or 3) You go into business for yourself and start your own airline. Good luck with that last option.

Trojan

I don’t know what I have stated that is unattainable. I have been pointing out that you guys are trying to obtain the unattainable. Growth from PBS is unattainable. Forcing a merger is the only hope for growth. Why don’t we get to vote on that.
Remember the current system favors the senior.

 

[USCtrojan]

I don’t know what I have stated that is unattainable. I have been pointing out that you guys are trying to obtain the unattainable. Growth from PBS is unattainable. Forcing a merger is the only hope for growth. Why don’t we get to vote on that.
Remember the current system favors the senior.

I totally agree on the OneList issue. That is our best scenario for job security and an end to whipsaw. What can we do to get it? I've spoken to the newly Captain Rep and FO Rep and they seem for it too. Problem lies in what we have to give up to get it. At the very least we need to have dialogue with the SkyWest pilots. I don't believe we have any contact with any SAPA reps.

Schedules should favor the Senior folks. Are we to award in reverse order? More days off and first pick in Seniority order. I don't know many people who oppose this.

Trojan

 

[aircombat]

I totally agree on the OneList issue. That is our best scenario for job security and an end to whipsaw. What can we do to get it? I've spoken to the newly Captain Rep and FO Rep and they seem for it too. Problem lies in what we have to give up to get it. At the very least we need to have dialogue with the SkyWest pilots. I don't believe we have any contact with any SAPA reps.

Schedules should favor the Senior folks. Are we to award in reverse order? More days off and first pick in Seniority order. I don't know many people who oppose this.

Trojan

The real problem lies in what we will have to give up if we don’t get it. You’ll still lose alpa if we shrink to nonexistence. Every day that we lose a pilot there could be one less alpa member. Nothing says that we will lose alpa if we merge, but it is a risk. Everything is about balancing risk and it is far riskier for us to not merge.

I don’t know why we would have to start a dialogue with Skywest pilots or SAPA. They don’t really have representation so we would have to deal with Inc directly. Waiting for Skywest to get representation is a bad idea as well. We would lose a lot of leverage. Unfortunately they would probably seek representation from alpa at the first sign of us forcing a merger.

Every day we operate in this fashion the union loses face. To allow a non union company to prosper while the unionized sister company lays off seams against everything a union is about. We will continue to be made an example of until we actually stand up and decide to do something about it or wither on the vine.

No company can prevent a union. At the very worse we would have to revote under a combined list.

I’m not going to even comment on the “award in reverse order” comment. I don’t even know were you got the idea that I think like that.

 

[USCtrojan]

The real problem lies in what we will have to give up if we don’t get it. You’ll still lose alpa if we shrink to nonexistence. Every day that we lose a pilot there could be one less alpa member. Nothing says that we will lose alpa if we merge, but it is a risk. Everything is about balancing risk and it is far riskier for us to not merge.

I don’t know why we would have to start a dialogue with Skywest pilots or SAPA. They don’t really have representation so we would have to deal with Inc directly. Waiting for Skywest to get representation is a bad idea as well. We would lose a lot of leverage. Unfortunately they would probably seek representation from alpa at the first sign of us forcing a merger.

Every day we operate in this fashion the union loses face. To allow a non union company to prosper while the unionized sister company lays off seams against everything a union is about. We will continue to be made an example of until we actually stand up and decide to do something about it or wither on the vine.

No company can prevent a union. At the very worse we would have to revote under a combined list.

I’m not going to even comment on the “award in reverse order” comment. I don’t even know were you got the idea that I think like that.

I don't have a problem with losing ALPA if there's OneList. I believe OneList should be our top priority, dam the rest. All other statements you made regarding losing ALPA I agree with assuming OneList. I don't mind having to sacrifice to get OneList, but I am 1 of 1600.....

We have to start somewhere regarding OneList. That start is beginning a dialogue with SkyWest pilots. So far, there's been none to my knowledge. I don't believe mgmt wants us talking because it can only benefit the pilot group as a whole (divide and conquer). We have to find a way to benefit everyone and that can only happen with dialogue. We take that information and we go to mgmt with it.

If Jerry decided to merge the lists, there would be a representational vote. There would be a little bit of time ALPA would advertise why we should have them and the Company would advertise why we should remain Union free.

"Remember the current system favors the Senior." How else would you build a system?

Trojan

 

[aircombat]

I don't have a problem with losing ALPA if there's OneList. I believe OneList should be our top priority, dam the rest. All other statements you made regarding losing ALPA I agree with assuming OneList. I don't mind having to sacrifice to get OneList, but I am 1 of 1600.....

We have to start somewhere regarding OneList. That start is beginning a dialogue with SkyWest pilots. So far, there's been none to my knowledge. I don't believe mgmt wants us talking because it can only benefit the pilot group as a whole (divide and conquer). We have to find a way to benefit everyone and that can only happen with dialogue. We take that information and we go to mgmt with it.

If Jerry decided to merge the lists, there would be a representational vote. There would be a little bit of time ALPA would advertise why we should have them and the Company would advertise why we should remain Union free.

Again I don’t know why you think it is necessary to open a dialogue with the Skywest pilots. They have no representation. We would be dealing directly with Inc. I’m sure that a dialogue would start once they knew what our intentions were. I do agree that management would be strongly against this. That’s why waiting around for a miracle, or pretending they will give us growth out of the kindness of their own heart even though we are more expensive than Skywest, is a big mistake.

If you think that we could create a merger that would benefit everyone you haven’t witnessed many mergers. There will be no shortage of people that believe that they should be senior to you, even though they were hired well after you. Most of their reasoning will be around accomplishments that their management has made, thinking that it should directly reflect upon themselves. That’s why it would be good if we could do this without their voices being heard. Like I said since they have no representation they really don’t have to be in the picture.

I’m not saying it would be easy to do but waiting around until we grow weak will only make it harder.

"Remember the current system favors the Senior." How else would you build a system?

Trojan

I wouldn’t build a system. The one that we have now works just fine. Maybe you could add a 3 day min to it.

 

[aircombat]

Here is what we should do.
1). Vote no on this LOA for many reasons.
2). Express our intentions to the union that we want a merger since they don’t seem to want to find out how many people are interested in that
3). The union will be able to use PBS and the threat of a strike as leverage for a favorable merger
4). We actually have a chance at growth.