PSA offered 900's

[nethan]

Declining the 900's is not protecting anyone at PSA. If the 900's don't come on board, then PSA is probably finished. Aside from the pilot group, word at the other PSA facilities (OCC specifically) is that we are growing to 68 airplanes with the option for 20 more. There has been no mention of getting rid of the 200's. If Parker is truly going to get rid of Mesa, CHQ, and TSA, PSA cannot afford to lose the 200's due to all of the additional routes that we will acquire. Dont count on PSA losing the 200's.

Wait... in the first sentence you say if PSA doesn't take the 900s then they are done. Then in the next sentence (well, several sentences) you say that West Managment is trying to get rid of the contract carriers and PSA won't lose the 200s. Which is it? If we aren't going to lose the 200s how are we done?

 

[CRJDog]

Hell why settle for 900's lets get A380's and fly them for our pathetic CRJ-200 rates.

 

[CallmeJB]

...word at the other PSA facilities (OCC specifically) is that we are growing to 68 airplanes with the option for 20 more. There has been no mention of getting rid of the 200's. If Parker is truly going to get rid of Mesa, CHQ, and TSA, PSA cannot afford to lose the 200's due to all of the additional routes that we will acquire. Dont count on PSA losing the 200's.

I'll make you a deal: I won't count on PSA losing the 200s if you don't count on keeping them.

Honestly, is there any proof that these are growth aircraft?

JB

 

[whatfuelpolicy]

Wait... in the first sentence you say if PSA doesn't take the 900s then they are done. Then in the next sentence (well, several sentences) you say that West Managment is trying to get rid of the contract carriers and PSA won't lose the 200s. Which is it? If we aren't going to lose the 200s how are we done?

Done means, no more opportunity for growth, ever. PSA will stay the same as it is now. Maybe a couple of upgrades every now and then, same crappy schedules, CLT-AVL-CLT-FAY-CLT-GSO. Thats a fun day! Oh wait, maybe you would like to continue flying the 200 CLT-XNA when XNA requires an alternate and you have a full pax load and the closest approved alternate is 138 miles away. Maybe you're happy with the schedules.

Ever since HP management took over as "The New US Airways," the word on the street has been Mesa is on their way out. Since PSA and PDT are owned by Airways, why not keep it in the family. PSA potentially could get several western long-haul routes with the arrival of the 900's. I've said it before, long-haul routes could possibly mean another pilot base somewhere other than the east coast. The way I see it, upgrades galore and everybody moves up in seniority due to the addition of more FO's.

 

[nethan]

I was just giving you a hard time man... One of the few times I'm going to get away with it too. I bet I'll see some crazy stupid routings from you next time you have one of my flights!

As I already said, I think we need to get the airplanes, but not for nothing. Management is going to make more money on this deal (20 more paying pax). So should we.

 

[whatfuelpolicy]

I was just giving you a hard time man... One of the few times I'm going to get away with it too. I bet I'll see some crazy stupid routings from you next time you have one of my flights!

As I already said, I think we need to get the airplanes, but not for nothing. Management is going to make more money on this deal (20 more paying pax). So should we.

I figured as such, I was giving you a hard time as well. I agree about the pay for you guys, but without the new planes, there wont be any leverage for pay raises in the future.

 

[Sig]

PSA will stay the same as it is now. Maybe a couple of upgrades every now and then, same crappy schedules, CLT-AVL-CLT-FAY-CLT-GSO.

The fact that they still have stupid overlap on routes a jet should never see... and a Dash8 STILL flying them... I can't understand the mentality of forcing inefficiency to justify the fleet plan.

Retarded.

Maybe... just maybe... this new change will allow both PSA and PDT to do what they do best.

 

[whatfuelpolicy]

The fact that they still have stupid overlap on routes a jet should never see... and a Dash8 STILL flying them... I can't understand the mentality of forcing inefficiency to justify the fleet plan.

Retarded.

Maybe... just maybe... this new change will allow both PSA and PDT to do what they do best.

Holy crap! Haven't heard from you in a while! Where the hell have you been hiding man? Wah dah tah!

 

[Sig]

Wah dah frickin' tippy tah!

What's shakin in Dayton, holmes?

 

[whatfuelpolicy]

Wah dah frickin' tippy tah!

What's shakin in Dayton, holmes?

Not a damn thing! I'm gonna PM you my cell number. Give me a call.

 

[LoveGun]

Whatfuelpolicy,

You are asking me to make career decisions based on "word on the streets" and OCC rumors. That's insane. Anything can and will happen. We have to put together an agreement that has some proctections. PSA management takes advantage of even the smallest loophole, and if there is another merger (Northwest) don't be surprised if your friend Doug Parker throws you out of your CRJ seat in favor of a much stronger pilot group.

 

[Sig]

Hey, Love-

Salient points, all of 'em. Texan/ Butcha don't know who you'ze daintzing with. Whutfyoolpawluhsee been around enough to know whut's whut, and I gar un tee if yew are a captain, you've worked with eem. /Texan.

All points except one: Management will NEVER favor a stronger pilot group when contract carriers shop for work. That's a sad fact.

 

[whatfuelpolicy]

Whatfuelpolicy,

You are asking me to make career decisions based on "word on the streets" and OCC rumors. That's insane. Anything can and will happen. We have to put together an agreement that has some proctections. PSA management takes advantage of even the smallest loophole, and if there is another merger (Northwest) don't be surprised if your friend Doug Parker throws you out of your CRJ seat in favor of a much stronger pilot group.

I dont have to worry about being thrown out of anything, Lovegun. I am not DP's friend, and I know how PSA management operates.
PM me, we'll talk.

Thanks for the back-up, Sig! Sa dah tay!!

 

[Sig]

Dude! Stuff! Yeah! Texan eeyiz whut Texan duz.

And all that, too. C'mon down to the beach. I've had a couple of folks a lot like y'seff on the jumpseat, just plan on the -300 legs into SBY.

And for the rest of this peanut gallery, HE wants nothing less than the best for all of us.

 

[Victor Meldrew]

Jetfo, I have to admire your confidence, however you sound like you have "inside" sources and info. How certain are you that infact these will be growth aircraft - do you have a copy of the proposal?

Again I say it, Parker wants to cut back on the 50's, MESA is gone with the 50's, TSA have some and CHQ, like AWAC have binding contracts that mandate the use (in CHQ case 70's & 50's) for USAir in return for the money they pumped in.

PSA are a WO why not give the 90's to PSA and remove some of the excess 50 seaters? If I was Parker thats EXACTLY what I would do, kill two birds with one stone - less 50's more 90's - simple.

 

[mamba20]

Alright guys, here's how I think this will play out.

This is a pretty big multi million dollar deal and its not going to be put in the hands of a bunch of pilots. Lets look at where the airplanes could possibly go. 1) PDT. I seriously cant see that happening. They would have to train the whole of the pilot group which would costs millions in the end. Not economical. Plus the DHC-8 has a niche market and PDT is making money hands over fist. I heard that the Dash pays for itself after like the 5th of the month or something like that.

2) MESA. I doubt this too. Parker has expressed that when Mesa's contract is up he wants to get rid of them. Not just that but there are complaints about this company daily from passengers, mainline etc. Look at the cancelation rate from these guys. They are lucky they can find their way to the airport. Just ask any of the commuters who rely on mesa (my most sincere and extreme condolences.) They jets arent going to go to Mesa when in the end they will be more expensive to operate with piss poor performance.

3) PSA. Makes perfect sense. Already an established CRJ operator. We have all gone through the 700/900 differences (if you havent you soon will) training and all that would be required is to do IOE on the 900. By far the most economical choice just from a training standpoint. Our operating costs are tiny compared to Mesa who gets paid regardless and our completion factor is much better. No contest there.

Bottom line, the airplanes are going to come here no matter what we vote. This is all smoke and mirrors to try to make it as cheap as possible so that KH Rose, and TK can all get better raises and bonuses. I'm sure these debates between the company and the union are going to get nasty and there will be lots of "the sky is falling!" BS stories going around. We CANNOT buckle and let the scumbads in management pull the wool over our eyes. This company isnt going to tank based on us not taking these airplanes. They are coming here regardless so keep that in the back of your mind. Dont let Rose, KH and TK get a raise without you getting one too.

 

[ThrottleJockey1]

here's a couple of shiny ones...

Vic,
This offer is being presented as expansion (per everyone in the meeting). Why would LCC reduce flying for a WO (meaning more profitable 200's) and not reduce code share types. Parker realizes that other that the cost for airframes (and we know he has the money) WOed is the way to go. The leases on the majority of 200's at PSA are long term. This will be a very interesting month. Piece, Out

 

[WSurf]

Flying the 900's for 50 seat rates? We would have to change your call sign then from 'BlueStreak' to 'BrownStreak'!!!! ;-)

 

[jetfo]

Jetfo, I have to admire your confidence, however you sound like you have "inside" sources and info. How certain are you that infact these will be growth aircraft - do you have a copy of the proposal?

Again I say it, Parker wants to cut back on the 50's, MESA is gone with the 50's, TSA have some and CHQ, like AWAC have binding contracts that mandate the use (in CHQ case 70's & 50's) for USAir in return for the money they pumped in.

PSA are a WO why not give the 90's to PSA and remove some of the excess 50 seaters? If I was Parker thats EXACTLY what I would do, kill two birds with one stone - less 50's more 90's - simple.

I don't know if I have "inside" sources, I do get info directly from the MEC chair and the CPs and I do have a copy of the proposal. Don't ask me to post it because I think it's inappropriate to post internal docs on public sites, I'll leave that for someone else.

But, I can say that the proposal clearly states that these are growth aircraft for PSA! Naturally, protections have to be put in place to make sure that if things change, we will not find ourselves in a worse position than we are in now. As, I have stated before, there is a long term plan in place to switch out the 200s in favor of 700/705/900s, but this deal is not part of it.

 

[khsgt]

Everybody has been bashing us for years (rightfully so) and now let's see what kind of decision PSA makes...looks like they may not have any "moral high ground" anymore