No comment on ASA PBS LOA yet?

[Tarzan]

yeah clearly the fight to the bottom is the best solution. It worked out for ever other airline right.

Would you mind showing me where this is concessionary?

 

[aircombat]

Would you mind showing me where this is concessionary?

-10% less pilots
-QOL decrease for most
-longer upgrades
-more stagnation

anything done in attempts to undercut the competition is concessionary to the profession.

 

[sweptback]

-10% less pilots

How did you come up with this number?

-QOL decrease for most

How do you know this? None of us has seen the language of the TA yet!

-longer upgrades

Exactly where are there fast upgrades right now? The economy's in the dumps, you can't blame this one on PBS.

-more stagnation

Keep in mind, after Delta, NWA, and Continental agreed to PBS (or had PBS forced upon them in Bankruptcy), they all went through a massive hiring spree. How was that stagnation?

anything done in attempts to undercut the competition is concessionary to the profession.

From everything I've heard, we have the best PBS system industry-wide. I've even heard that Delta is looking to improve their system with some of our language and work rules. How is that concessionary or detrimental to the profession?

 

[Tarzan]

-10% less pilots
-QOL decrease for most
-longer upgrades
-more stagnation

anything done in attempts to undercut the competition is concessionary to the profession.

I'll call BS on all of them. I asked for concessions. So far, all I see is speculation and nothing about how this degrade our current contract.

BTW, I doubt we'll be able run that much leaner but start doing the math for 180 pilots at second year pay. Include all the taxes and insurance that the company pays on the pilot's behalf. Let me know where you end up.

Undercut the competition? Fall on your own sword, aircombat. Mostly what I see is the fear of the unknown. Can there be issues? I am sure there will be. There is no such thing as an loophole proof contract. But we know we start contract negotiations shortly and we'll be able to address most of the loopholes during talks. I'd rather start now than get whatever the company wants forced on us during contract arbitration and then be stuck with it for however many years until the next.

 

[aircombat]

I'll call BS on all of them. I asked for concessions. So far, all I see is speculation and nothing about how this degrade our current contract.

BTW, I doubt we'll be able run that much leaner but start doing the math for 180 pilots at second year pay. Include all the taxes and insurance that the company pays on the pilot's behalf. Let me know where you end up.

Undercut the competition? Fall on your own sword, aircombat. Mostly what I see is the fear of the unknown. Can there be issues? I am sure there will be. There is no such thing as an loophole proof contract. But we know we start contract negotiations shortly and we'll be able to address most of the loopholes during talks. I'd rather start now than get whatever the company wants forced on us during contract arbitration and then be stuck with it for however many years until the next.

the 10% came from what we have been told that PBS will make us more efficient by. If we are 10% more efficient you can bet that we will carry 10% less pilots. SH said that it will reduce the need for pilots but that is ok because of the huge pilot shortage.
Your right. A lot of this is unknown. The only thing that is certain is that we are voting away peoples jobs and they don't even get to vote on this.

 

[Tarzan]

I doubt they will be able to run 10% leaner but once things start to move again and figuring second year pay of 180 FO's, the company will see $3.7M a year alone in savings. That doesn't even figure in costs the company bears for insurance. Since that is 70/30 split, that is significant as well and once you add in SS costs that the company matches, the amount jumps up there quickly. However, the company won't see a dime until we either have turn over or we grow.

I'd rather have these furloughed guys come back to a health company rather than one just getting along. If this is a means to it, I'm for it. Unless you are ready to concede pay, sick pay and vacation time, this is the best chance we have at helping these guys get back without shooting ourselves in the foot. My biggest concern about this is what if the company doesn't see the savings they think they will? What if we like it and they try to take it back? Then we'll be in concession mode. That is my chief fear of this system.

 

[aircombat]

BTW, I doubt we'll be able run that much leaner but start doing the math for 180 pilots at second year pay. Include all the taxes and insurance that the company pays on the pilot's behalf. Let me know where you end up.

Well if you ran the math that poorly you would end up with a high number. The work is still getting paid out but to a fewer number of pilots. Pilots higher on the payscale. They still have to pay the taxes but not the insurance.
I've heard a number around 12 million a year in savings. I'm sure that is only a fraction of a precent of the airlines overall costs.

 

[Tarzan]

I figured just $23 an hour for 180 guys becaue I am lazy. At min guarantee it still equals 3.7M. I am not sure of the number attached what the company gave for PBS but I've heard around 3M. I understand what you are getting at but less employees for the same amount of work still equals that many less employees to pay. I still think Scott was being overly optimistic with his 10% number but at least it is easy to use right?

I am not sure how they could see 12M in savings unless there was massive growth which I don't think that has shown up in anyone's crystal ball yet. I have heard of other places where the company could save almost twice what you mentioned but it would not be out of the Flight Ops side. A million here and million there and it all adds up to lower cost. I'd love nothing better than have some of the best rates in the regionals and getting flying left and right because our overall costs are the lowest.


Good conversation. We should start with the name calling though to keep in good faith with FI protocol.

 

[JoeMerchant]

If you are an FO and voting yes on this TA I hope you like the stagnation. Growth may or may not come, I’m leaning toward not come. PBS isn’t going to change that. The one thing that is certain is that we will require about 10% less captains so it will be that much longer for upgrade and we would have to grow that much just to break even.

So voting "no" will somehow prevent stagnation? How do you figure that?

 

[JoeMerchant]

Anyone for that matter. We're all getting the feeling that we're trying to be sold something we don't need. So who's getting the "cornhusker kickback"?

The outgoing MEC was the "hardline" group...If they think this is necessary to prevent ASA from getting smaller, then there is probably something to it....I was not a big fan of the outgoing MEC as we all know, but I applaud there effort on PBS.

The problem they have is that they have been saying for years that our costs don't matter....Now all of a sudden, they say our costs do matter...They are a victim of their own message...