OFFICIAL! SkyWest In IAH

[George Jetson]

Why would it be such a HOT issue then at COEX to have to interview at SkyWest for a job.

Like 2 ships passing in the dark....

The hot issue isn't whether or not our furloughed pilots have to interview for these jobs. Its the very fact that CAL management is outsourcing more flying with furloughed CAL/XJT pilots. I'm not worried about our furloughed pilots and SKYW. They will fit in just fine at SKYW just as they have Commutair. We are all just pilots...nothing sets us apart. People who engage in a petty "my airline has the best pilots" argument are simply immature (Not directed at you). When Commutair furloughed a chunk of guys back in the summer of 2001, we hired a bunch of them with no interviews. Our recruiting team flew up to Albany and hired many pilots on the spot. Arguing amongst pilots is not productive. Skywest pilots just have to understand where we are coming from here. It is frustrating to see flying going away, especially with pilots on the street.

GJ

 

[easy spirit]

Okay, I don't want to beat this horse too badly here but what is the Hot issue? Ealier you said it was having to interview (being subject to SkyWest's minimum hourly requirements..that's it), now you say it's CAL's Mgt outsourcing flying with XJT pilots on furlough?

I take it that it's both?

I got to go now and resurface my garage floor. I can only put it off for so long

 

[Bluto]

Interviews

It's funny how these discussions work. Less than a week ago many Skywest advocates were concerned that CALALPA would try to "abrogate" the seniority system at Skywest by limiting Houston flying to only furloughed or current XJT pilots. Interviews for our furloughed pilots is a hot issue for a number of reasons. One of the many reasons for this is that these interviews could be used to benefit XJT pilots out of seniority order.

This is a very different situation from the DAL and UAL pilots who have interviewed with Skywest. In all likelihood, this will be a temporary job for the XJT furloughs who will have to return to XJT when recalls occur (as is the case with CommutAir). My guess is that this is a temporary benefit to pacify the xjt pilots who could suffer long-term from having another carrier operating on their former routes and from their primary hub.

Now, I agree that CAL owns the flying and contractually they can give it to anyone they want. However, it seems clear that having Skywest perform this flying is a blatant affront to xjt pilots while there are over 400 furloughs on the street. CAL/XJT management is well aware of the impact of this action. This is why they went to the trouble of allowing a "preferential interview" at all.

Of course, all this is just my opinion, based on conjecture and rumor so take it for what it's worth.

 

[George Jetson]

Okay, I don't want to beat this horse too badly here but what is the Hot issue? Ealier you said it was having to interview (being subject to SkyWest's minimum hourly requirements..that's it), now you say it's CAL's Mgt outsourcing flying with XJT pilots on furlough?

I take it that it's both?

No. The HOT issue amongst our pilots is exactly what I said. Management's outsourcing of our jobs with pilots on the street. I never said it was pilot's having to interview because quite frankly, they won't. Period.

GJ

 

[mckpickle]

Yes that is why we are upset because flying that we could be doing is going to another airline while we have people on the street. That flying could be done by us facilitating growth at our own company.

Another question. And this isn't meant to start a fight but I think we have a right to know.

What happened with the Comair RJ's that got transfered to SKywest durring the strike. Did Skywest fly those aircraft while Comair was on strike, and if so what routes.

Also, what is in your contract about flying struck work? Kind of something we think about since we are in heavy contract negotiations.

Thanks

 

[Russ]

Yup, we still have a number of the Comair aircraft, POS's that they are. I imagine Comair gets at least a small amount of satisfaction over the junkers they gave us. I can't remember the dates accurately enough to answer your second Q. No we didn't fly struck work. That was a huge issue for us and management said they wouldn't require us to do so. The whole issue if I remember was around for awhile because of the fuzzy language from the Comair MEC (or whomever ) as to what struck work was. Same city pairs or flying into simply one of the cities that Comair served. Seemed pretty clear, but the language and scope of what the MEC was trying to impose was ambigious.

 

[embdrvr]

That flying could be done by us facilitating growth at our own company.

Another question. And this isn't meant to start a fight but I think we have a right to know.

What happened with the Comair RJ's that got transfered to SKywest durring the strike. Did Skywest fly those aircraft while Comair was on strike, and if so what routes.

Growth that could be facilitated if all the EMB's weren't parked or sold. Coex pay rates for the EMB are far less than SkyWest according to the info available on the web. I bet this turboprop flying will not be long term otherwise it would be cheaper for COex to do it themselves.

Ya don't hear a whole lot of CMR people complaining and isn't that more of an issue between CMR and SkyWest who seems to have a pretty good labor record on the whole?

 

[JBcrjca]

And this isn't meant to start a fight but I think we have a right to know.

Not trying to start a fight? It looks to me like you are trying to start an argument because the question about the ex-Comair planes is totally irrelevant to this situation. CAL and Xjet aren't on strike, so I don't see any connection to SkyWest getting the IAH contract.

But as Russ said, no struck work was flown by SkyWest crews. Some Comair crews referred to the airplanes as 'captured', but I guess it depends on how you look at the timing. Since the airplanes were parked, Comair returned some of them to Bombardier in Montreal. At that point, as I understand it, they were put on the open market. They were up for grabs by any airline that could pay for them, and SkyWest did acquire a few. It was a way to speed up the SkyWest delivery schedule, but no additional routes were started with those particular ships. I don't recall the dates that they entered service, but our pilot group was assured that flying them didn't make a struck work issue since they were on the open market. Maybe someone else has more details?

But the main point should be this...there is no similarity between the Comair strike and what's going on now between Xjet and SkyWest. Let's let the issue die right here please.

 

[Bluto]

Coex has been in contract negotiations for the better part of a year. A strike is possible in the not-too-distant future. I think his question is perfectly relevant, considering how closely XJT and SkyWest will be operating together. As you suggest, I consider the Comair issue dead. However, don't you worry about what could happen in the event of a strike at XJT with SkyWest operating out of Houston?

 

[MTorbust]

Mckpickle: You lose credibility fast if you imply Skywest or our pilots did anything but take the high road on the Comair deal.

Bluto: I actually would not worry if Coex struck and Skywest were in IAH. I was a witness to the whole deal and our MGT would not touch (the true definition of) "struck" work with a ten foot pole - and it was offered.