Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

PSA Takes the 900s

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
ex j-41 said:
On another note: 900's are bad for pilot job security. You can haul more people less frequently. Meaning less pilot jobs and reduced hours for those flying. For every 2 900's on property, we could lose 3 200's, and still carry the same amount of people. 33% of pilots could lose their jobs if we vote yes. All the more reason to just say NO!

But if that was true we'd just dump all the 50 seaters now and fly 737s, in fact if it was really true we'd just fly 747s everywhere. True, Albany, NY might get a 747 every 6 months of so but heck we'd be carrying the same number of people, what are people bitching about?

*I* can't imagine why US Air would give PSA 900s and then take away 200s - although maybe that makes sense for some obscure reason. Isn't the PSA rate blended, so if they reduce the 200 flying the overall rate goes up and US Air ends up spending more to get the 900s flown. If anything you'd think they were motivated to give PSA MORE 200 flying to get the 900 rate down.
 
Formatting didn't work...so deleted....

If anyone knows how to take a XLS spreadsheet and post it on here, I've got the payscales worked out and a comparison of other carriers...
 
PCL_128 said:
Congrats? Why would you congratulate someone for losing all self-respect and whoring themself out for pennies on the dollar?

Vote NO!!! Don't sink the industry another inch towards rock-bottom.


PCL-
Please remind us again, how much that check was you sent Gulfstream?
 
Crzipilot said:
Formatting didn't work...so deleted....

If anyone knows how to take a XLS spreadsheet and post it on here, I've got the payscales worked out and a comparison of other carriers...

Have you figured into the pay averaging an additional 10 to 15 70 seaters. Because if you guys pass this TA, then you will most likely be receiving 10 to 15 Q400s along with the deal. That will bring your estimated pay on the 900s down.
 
What I did was....work out the payscales as if the ratio is frozen today. Mind you we still get type increases, and longevity increases and a COLA increase, so it's basically 3 pay raises a year...not much but something.

And uhmm...I seriously doubt q400's would come this way.
 
Crzipilot said:
What I did was....work out the payscales as if the ratio is frozen today. Mind you we still get type increases, and longevity increases and a COLA increase, so it's basically 3 pay raises a year...not much but something.

And uhmm...I seriously doubt q400's would come this way.

You will still be a click below Mesa if this TA passes!!! How you like them apples? You can sugar coat it all you want..... If this passes you will now take the place of Mesa as the bottom feeders!!!! And you have basically screwed everyone in the industry.... Funny Management is offering you folks nothing... And you are jumping around happy like a bunch of idiots...
Has anyone read "Flying the Line".... Wake up!!!! Hello!!!!!!

Good Luck in your choice!!!
 
WSurf said:
You will still be a click below Mesa if this TA passes!!! How you like them apples? You can sugar coat it all you want..... If this passes you will now take the place of Mesa as the bottom feeders!!!! And you have basically screwed everyone in the industry.... Funny Management is offering you folks nothing... And you are jumping around happy like a bunch of idiots...
Has anyone read "Flying the Line".... Wake up!!!! Hello!!!!!!

Good Luck in your choice!!!


...And compare what you will be making on this airplane to what mainline makes on the 90 seaters. PSA would be WAY behind. I said it before I will say it agian: 90 seats is 90 seats regardless of whether the side of the fuse says "express" or not. Don't be F'ing stupid.

Again: If management wants you to have the airplanes you will. Don't think the rate of pay means a thing, because it doesn't.
 
Wsurf...sorry but your wrong......we won't be a click behind mesa.... If you'd post factual information, you wouldn't hear from me/us/whomever...get it straight...

If anything what I see is your hoping PSA passes it up.. So PDT can have jets. Say all you want, regarding how "PDT" will vote , how you'll do this, that etc........It all changes when it's in your lap....
 
for all you guys that work at Pimp Suit Airlines. make sure you are not going to not say yes to vote no only to maybe not agree to say yes to vote no later on. as long as you follow that logic you should be alright in the long run
 
According to APC, Mesa's 900 hourly rates are higher than PSA's current 700 rates...for both captains and FOs. Now granted PSA has slightly better workrules (meaning higher W2s), but hourly rates lower than Mesa are lower hourly rates all the same.

The CA wage is bad enough, but the current FO rates at PSA is vastly inadequate IMO for a 90 seat aircraft. The decision is your pilot group's alone, but it can and will have ramifications for the rest of the industry.

Good luck!
 
Crzipilot said:
Wsurf...sorry but your wrong......we won't be a click behind mesa.... If you'd post factual information, you wouldn't hear from me/us/whomever...get it straight...

If anything what I see is your hoping PSA passes it up.. So PDT can have jets. Say all you want, regarding how "PDT" will vote , how you'll do this, that etc........It all changes when it's in your lap....

Here lies the true issue. No faith in the rest of the industry. So, Lets take it up the rear, before anyone else gets the bigger shiny jets. So when you guys vote this in and take this contract, you continue the bad faith and the spiral downwards. This doesnt change if it were to fall in my lap. I will always vote for a reasonable payrate and QOL, over a bigger shiny aeroplane. WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This kind of thing goes all the way up the latter to the MAJOR airlines. Upgrade as fast as you can, so you can work for substandard wages in your final job with United, Us Airways, America West or whoever. Its not going to stop until we take a stand together. I can Brag how AWAC will turn down everything they throw at us, but thats only going to get me pride and self respect. Unfortunately, Its not going to help this profession until we can all make a good choice together. I know this is going to fall on deaf ears so... Rant over.
 
thanks you WO fags, once again your did us in the a$$. REMEMBER we got you the god damn 200s in the first place. JESUS MESA RETARDS you guys SUCK!!!!!!
 
Crzipilot said:
If anything what I see is your hoping PSA passes it up.. So PDT can have jets.

You are crazy, mang. When it comes to spending large chunks of change Doug is cheaper than half priced Ripple, and he won't do something that stupid. The acquistion and operating costs of expanding his regional fleet on his dime prohibits something as loopy as training all of us. Besides... lemme check... my 50 seat jet rate at my longevity alone is 2.25 more an hour than yours. The jet payrate in my contract. The one signed in 2002, when we had Dash 8s and you had Dorniers- remember? You're actually the cheaper labor! Whooooops!

Don't play into a crackhead whipsaw. YOU are getting the planes- get that into your increasingly paranoid head - for a reason. They can control the product! Now can they control the pilot group at will? Only if you let them.

When it comes to how this will play out, you are your own worst enemy, not me.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom