Notes on Atkin's visit to ASA crew lounge...

[~~~^~~~]

* As far as the 8% goes, he is talking adding 4.5% profit sharing (which would have been 4.6% over the last 6 months if anyone is splitting hairs) so the net change is -3.5%.

* I'm a fleet watcher - ASA was in line for 22 airframes under the previous order from Bombardier. 5 of those have gone to SkyWest and 17 are still up for grabs. We have something like 12 ATR's that are going away and Mr. Atkin has said before that he would like to swap those in such a way that it causes a minimal disruption (displacement) at ASA.

* This is the first time I've ever seen the President of our Parent Company in our crew lounge talking one on one with pilots (without the minons, handlers, or a room full of V.P.'s to stack the deck). Jerry Atkin's patience is impressive, as his his forbearance. Call me a suck up, but when a guy goes from an operation with a couple of Navajos to a market cap of 1.6 Billion he has my respect. Yet - I saw pilots call him a liar, say that they did not trust him, or management, then when he asked them for examples Pilots said "D'uh I dunno, no reason I guess." That is down right stupid. If pilots are going into a meeting with someone like that and are fool enough to open your mouth, pilots and your pilot group are best served if you have something intelligent to say. Someone could have mentioned how the 18 month deal for a 70 seat pay rate got passed over at SkyWest, or mentioned some of shennanigans Scott Young, Gary Hall, Nelson Debardeleben or Goat Boy have pulled - but no - people opened their big mouth and sounded like misinformed idiots.

* Jerry Atkin is holding the line on pass benefits at ASA - you can bet nobody else would. Brian LaBreque can afford to buy his tickets. (Perhaps we should make this part of our contract - it is compensation as far as I'm concerned)

* Today we got a message from our Crew Planning Manager with his personal e-mail address saying he wants reduction of sit times, less deadheading, pure lines and better distribution of block times. The memo included an explanation of the new tools they are going to test to accomplish these goals. He put his personal e-mail address at the bottom of the page! This is not the ASA I've worked at for for years.

I don't know how the issue with the training department's costs can be resolved. We ask a lot and get a lot from our IP's. They also have the power to shut this airline down (what if no one completes a training event for a couple of months - not a failure, just an incomplete?)

This deal is far from over, but Jerry Atkin impressed me in the crew lounge. The acceptance of an ASAP program and what appears to be a sincere attempt at fixing our schedules go a long way to impress me.

 

[Going2Baja]

Jerry is a stand up guy. Pres of SkyW at 24 - think about it! I bet you a dollar that he would reply if you send that email as well. I know for a fact that he answered his phone if you called his extension and would talk to you if he had the time.

Good luck - Baja.

 

[Mercyful Fate]

Be glad that Jerry is running the show now. The man knows this business, and hasnt lost touch with reality. Sounds like regardless of what happens, some of the thinking from the ASA guys will never change. Jerry has a huge task of turning this thing around, and it isnt going to happen overnight. Be patient guys....

 

[Tim47SIP]

Help!

Someone please explain something to me. I understand that in order to bid on an RFP that our CASM needs to be in the competitive arena. I have also read here that since BL threw in all of the 70 seat IP's, our 70 cost is to high to compete but our 50 seat cost is just right. HOW can you take out the IP costs and lower a CASM and still have to pay those individuals? Is our CASM made up of the total costs of the company or is it the cost to fly the aircraft minus the infrastructure to support the aircraft? I dont see how we can take the IP's out of the equation when they are part of the infrastructure??

Just trying to get smarter concerning this subject. Thanks.

 

[sweptback]

Someone please explain something to me. I understand that in order to bid on an RFP that our CASM needs to be in the competitive arena. I have also read here that since BL threw in all of the 70 seat IP's, our 70 cost is to high to compete but our 50 seat cost is just right. HOW can you take out the IP costs and lower a CASM and still have to pay those individuals? Is our CASM made up of the total costs of the company or is it the cost to fly the aircraft minus the infrastructure to support the aircraft? I dont see how we can take the IP's out of the equation when they are part of the infrastructure??

Just trying to get smarter concerning this subject. Thanks.

The IPs would be counted as a separate training or management item, rather as a direct cost of airplane operation. The costs would still have to be accounted for, but it would be in a different category. Just an example of how numbers can be manipulated to show whatever you want them to.

 

[rjcap]

Someone please explain something to me. I understand that in order to bid on an RFP that our CASM needs to be in the competitive arena. I have also read here that since BL threw in all of the 70 seat IP's, our 70 cost is to high to compete but our 50 seat cost is just right. HOW can you take out the IP costs and lower a CASM and still have to pay those individuals? Is our CASM made up of the total costs of the company or is it the cost to fly the aircraft minus the infrastructure to support the aircraft? I dont see how we can take the IP's out of the equation when they are part of the infrastructure??

Just trying to get smarter concerning this subject. Thanks.

Here is another way to look at it.

If you have 32 or so 700's how many 700 IP's do you need to satisfy training needs ??

Our IP's are paid based on the a/c they can hold seniority wise. Since the majority of all the IP's can hold the 700 that is what rate they are paid on. Its not based on need but what a/c they could hold if they were on the line. This is a skewed method of determining the 700 cost by including these IP's.

I have come across another issue that I am not clear on. While reviewing the Skywest 200 payrates my interpretation was that they are greater then the 200 rates at ASA. Adding the profit sharing to that rate would inflate the total rate above what our 700 pay rates are. If this is the case then how is ASA's 700 rates above the flat rate ( 200 and 700 ) at Skywest??

There are many questions about all this "concessionary talk" that are not clear. Unfortunately, BL's handling of the contract issue since the acquisition of ASA by Skywest has further angered and confused the pilots.

 

[~~~^~~~]

RJ Cap - you are correct. The difference appears to be the way costs are allocated at ASA. The fact that other airlines use non seniority list IP's for ground and sim training surely has a lot to do with it. Delta had $300,000 pilots being trained by $50,000 IP's. Here we have $60K Captains getting paid by $120K IP's. It has to skew the numbers.

I don't look forward to the change because we have a very good training department here. You get what you pay for.

 

[DrunkIrishman]

Go Around-

Being in a similar boat I definately sympathize with you. I too need upgrade for the pay. More airplanes would get me that opportunity. However, when you say that you will not work for Mesa wages you actually contradict yourself. Taking this round of paycuts puts the whipsaw back on the Skywest pilots. What's to stop us in our race to Mesa wages causing you to "walk away?"

Pilots negotiate for pay, not for airplanes and equipment. ASA made a profit and continues to do so; we deserve fair remuneration, not a concession!

 

[HoserASA]

From another thread on flightinfo (CMR thread):

To refute your point, check this: AWAC just installed a 2-4.4% hourly wage increase our union negotiated as part of our original concession to United. We have an annual wage adjustment clause that compares the average of the six largest independent regionals to our pay year by year, and puts us at the avg. +2% if we're not at or above there already. Not trying to brag but our group does feel a little better these days. Every RJ group out there could have something similar.

Also, our MEC passed on word that Pinnacle's MEC is refusing to negotiate work rules changes and pay cuts, and no TA involving concessions will be given to the pilots to vote on. Mesaba is threatening to strike and will do so in the face of a forced 20% pay cut.

Hoser

 

[HoserASA]

Jerry says he wants an 8% cut on the 70. Apparently he's using three low regionals as an average instead of what AWAC uses, six largest! Maybe Jerry ought to raise the 50 rate to match SKW if he wants the cut in 70 rates. It's gonna get interesting.

Hoser

 

[JoeMerchant]

Call your status rep. He'll have the real info and not a bunch of management propoganda designed to intimidate you.

Yeah, he'll have the ALPA propaganda designed to make you believe that ALPA is doing a good job.......

 

[JoeMerchant]

Sounds like 50 too many to me.

Heaven forbid you should actually listen to both sides and make up your own mind instead of letting ALPA think for you....

 

[79%N1]

stfu........please

 

[PCL_128]

Heaven forbid you should actually listen to both sides and make up your own mind instead of letting ALPA think for you....

Well, considering the fact that you somehow got elected to an LEC office, maybe you're right. I certainly wouldn't want you to be doing anyone's thinking.

 

[Tim47SIP]

Jerry says he wants an 8% cut on the 70. Apparently he's using three low regionals as an average instead of what AWAC uses, six largest! Maybe Jerry ought to raise the 50 rate to match SKW if he wants the cut in 70 rates. It's gonna get interesting.


Mark, would you really go for this? I know you did not specifically state that both airframes could be the same, but you are sort of implying it. If you look at total pilot costs at Skywest with their blended rate versus our lower 50 seat rate and a higher 70 seat rate, I would agree that they may be very close to each other as far as total compensation. I just don't think that we need to go there. I feel we need to keep the rates separate, but that is just me.

PS Miss our ATR days, I did have a lot of fun and learned allot on those trips. Tim.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Well, considering the fact that you somehow got elected to an LEC office, maybe you're right. I certainly wouldn't want you to be doing anyone's thinking.

PCL, nobody should do anyone's thinking. I have always advocated listening to BOTH sides, asking tough questions of BOTH sides, and making an informed decision based on the information you get from BOTH sides. I have been through enough ALPA training to know that ALPA wants you to think the way they tell you to think and you are not supposed to question ALPA, especially not in public. That is dangerous.

Tell me PCL, what do you think of the new NWA TA and the creation of yet another alter-ego carrier? How about the fact that it will use the old ACA/IAIR certificate? Do you think ALPA will take care of those IAIR pilots and let them work for this new alter-ego carrier? Do you even think it is an alter-ego carrier? How is Brand Scope working out for the PCL and Mesaba guys? How is the new Fee For Departure Task Farce doing?

 

[PCL_128]

Tell me PCL, what do you think of the new NWA TA and the creation of yet another alter-ego carrier?

I hate it. I think the TA is a disaster, and even the NWA Council 20 reps agree. There is a big divide on the NWA MEC about this TA. I tend to side with Council 20 in their belief that they could do much better than this TA. Creating yet another carrier that can be sold off and whipsawed is a bad idea.

How about the fact that it will use the old ACA/IAIR certificate? Do you think ALPA will take care of those IAIR pilots and let them work for this new alter-ego carrier?

They are buying the certificate, not the airplanes. I don't think it would be reasonable to expect NWA to bring in the former Indy pilots simply because the certificate was bought. The Eastern Airlines certificate is still floating around somewhere. If NWA had bought that and used it to start NewCo would you expect them to call all of the former EAL pilots back? Sorry, you're just being ridiculous there. ALPA has no standing in getting the Indy pilots those jobs.

Do you even think it is an alter-ego carrier? How is Brand Scope working out for the PCL and Mesaba guys? How is the new Fee For Departure Task Farce doing?

The Fee for Departure Task Force is new, so it will take time to see results. However, I believe they will work hard and find some possible solutions. There are some good people on the task force.

As for brand scope, you'll get no argument from me there. The NWA Negotiating Committee had an opportunity to negotiate some real brand scope and they blew it. They think they have saved jobs, but in the long run they have only lost more. If the NWA pilots approve this POS, then that's their decision. You won't hear me complaining about how it affects me, and you won't find me sending checks to the RJDC. As much as I think this TA sucks, it is ultimately the decision of the NWA pilots, just as DAL's scope is the decision of the DAL pilots. They are free to decide what to do with NWA flying, even if it negatively affects XJ or 9E. That's just the way it works when you fly for a feeder. It's about time that you woke up to reality and realized that.

 

[HoserASA]

Mark, would you really go for this? I know you did not specifically state that both airframes could be the same, but you are sort of implying it. If you look at total pilot costs at Skywest with their blended rate versus our lower 50 seat rate and a higher 70 seat rate, I would agree that they may be very close to each other as far as total compensation. I just don't think that we need to go there. I feel we need to keep the rates separate, but that is just me.

PS Miss our ATR days, I did have a lot of fun and learned allot on those trips. Tim.

Bad grammar on my part Tim. I meant that if 700 rates were reduced, then 200 & ATR rates should increase to match SKY's 200 rates. But, when you factor in SKY's bonuses, their 200 & 700 are above our rates easily, way above on the 200. Agreed, we need to keep the rates separate.

Hoser

 

[Big Fat Tony]

I hate it. I think the TA is a disaster, and even the NWA Council 20 reps agree. There is a big divide on the NWA MEC about this TA. I tend to side with Council 20 in their belief that they could do much better than this TA. Creating yet another carrier that can be sold off and whipsawed is a bad idea.



They are buying the certificate, not the airplanes. I don't think it would be reasonable to expect NWA to bring in the former Indy pilots simply because the certificate was bought. The Eastern Airlines certificate is still floating around somewhere. If NWA had bought that and used it to start NewCo would you expect them to call all of the former EAL pilots back? Sorry, you're just being ridiculous there. ALPA has no standing in getting the Indy pilots those jobs.



The Fee for Departure Task Force is new, so it will take time to see results. However, I believe they will work hard and find some possible solutions. There are some good people on the task force.

As for brand scope, you'll get no argument from me there. The NWA Negotiating Committee had an opportunity to negotiate some real brand scope and they blew it. They think they have saved jobs, but in the long run they have only lost more. If the NWA pilots approve this POS, then that's their decision. You won't hear me complaining about how it affects me, and you won't find me sending checks to the RJDC. As much as I think this TA sucks, it is ultimately the decision of the NWA pilots, just as DAL's scope is the decision of the DAL pilots. They are free to decide what to do with NWA flying, even if it negatively affects XJ or 9E. That's just the way it works when you fly for a feeder. It's about time that you woke up to reality and realized that.

PCL, please don't apply logic and reason when responding to John. It really knocks him off his insane rants. He has a constant flow of lies and distain that only truth and honesty can disrupt. He is that pissed off little kid that sucks up to mommy that no normal kid will play with. The exception being his fellow short bus riders named Ford, Ashcraft, and washed up Cooksey. Please remember this when responding to this malcontentious douche bag.

 

[Capi_Cafre']

That being said, I don't like the attitude I see on here about "only the MEC speaks for me." I am plenty intelligent, and independent minded enough to speak for myself. If I want to go to a meeting to hear what a CEO has to say, I will do so. If I have questions, I will ask them. The MEC may speak for me in negotiations, but I speak for myself when on the line or in a meeting. I don't, for the life of me, understand people who are willing to give up their voices and defer to someone they don't even know, just because that group was elected into power. Use your brains, and speak up if you have something to say!

www.I just don't get it.com