Psa !

[RUhiring?]

I get tired of hearing that this use to be mainline flying. If we cannot fill up a Dornier on a route, then why should the company be forced to fly a mainline jet?

Who said a mainline jet has to be a F100 or bigger?
They could have just as easily put the CRJ200 on the U operating certificate and made it another bid option for mainline pilots.

 

[RUhiring?]

When a mainline pilot starts to complain about how years ago the Express companies started taking "their" flying I like to ask:

How many mainline pilots lost their jobs when some of "their" original flying was transferred to the Express companies?

Their answer is always NONE.

Who is "their" referring to?
I would never say that mainline jobs were not lost in the transfer.

Although some might add "that there could have been many more "mainline" jobs if the Express companies hadn't taken "their" flying.

Which is pure speculation at best.

I see that you are only using recent events as your basis. What about in 1992 when a lot of the mainline flying was transferred to Express? That meant that the company did not have to recall any of the 302 pilots on furlough, and made it so that they didnt' have to hire any new pilots either. Pilots that could have come from the Express carriers.

I guess the Express guys are perfectly happy being where they are and don't care to move on to higher paying jobs someday.

 

[Treme]

whoa whoa whoa WHOA!!!

I seem to remember back in 1995 or was it 1996 that a little company called Jetstream International bought brand-spanking new high-speed turboprops (bought and paid for by USAir Group Inc.) and started flying such "feeder" routes as PIT-BHM, PIT-CHS, PIT-EVV.

Not ONE of the pilots who were furloughed from US Airways during that time was given the opportunity to fly that equipment. Millions of dollars of US Airways money was spent buying airplanes that those furloughed pilots were not eligible to fly.

And as long as we're splitting hairs...

"All flying performed by US Airways will be flown by pilots on the US Airways system seniority list EXCEPT..."

The EXCEPT is what allows you to exist. Were it not for the EXCEPT you would not have a job. The clause states that US Airways pilots own the US Airways flying, with the exception of certain flying that they PERMIT to be flown by subsidiaries and codeshare affiliates.

All i've got to say is that with 1800 pilots on the street there is a whole HECK of a lot of "EXCEPT" out there.

I dont agree with J4J either. That is why I havent taken one of the positions, nor do I intend to. It could have been done differently. It could have been done in such a way so as not to disturb your existing seniority list. That much I will give you.

But the minute one of you guys starts shooting your mouth off about entitlement when guys who were hired in 1987 are sitting on the beach watching you salivate over a shiny-new regional jet I can't help but get a little irritated. Some of those guys were flying for that airline before you started high-school!

Not only that but now you want to strip them of the right to vote and/or hold office -- essentially preventing them from having any say in their career at PSA???

Funny that you should mention a "Unified Front". There was a time when there was a movement by the junior guys at US Airways called "A Unified Front". That movement was established to apply political pressure to the MEC to establish a 100% flowthrough during a time when the airline was hiring 100 pilots per month.

Guess you guys were too busy complaining about "Dad" to notice.

 

[d328pilot]

if it were not for that "except", you would be making management fly a 757 from allentown to PIT. and you would be out of a job too....

Last time i checked, we are part of the U group too. The money was the U groups....not the U pilots money. there is more to the company than just the mainline pilots....if you dont think that, then cut off all express feed and see what happens to the company. we depend on each other. One is not better than the other. The fact is that this is all a result of us being treated like 2nd class pilots. I know the junior pilots there are not the problem. The senior guys are. I just hope everyone will be able to get along.

 

[RUhiring?]

I think we would all be a lot happier if US Airways Express did not exist. In that I mean that there should only be one seniority list from the A330 to the D328, and all the planes should have US Airways painted on the sides of them. But unfortunately somewhere along the line.....back in the early 70's, or maybe even the 60's, the first (codeshare) commuter airline (Allegheny commuter) was established. From that we now have the current situation.

It stinks, but it's what we have.

 

[d328pilot]

agreed

 

[NCFlyer]

whoa whoa whoa WHOA!!!

I seem to remember back in 1995 or was it 1996 that a little company called Jetstream International bought brand-spanking new high-speed turboprops (bought and paid for by USAir Group Inc.) and started flying such "feeder" routes as PIT-BHM, PIT-CHS, PIT-EVV.

Not ONE of the pilots who were furloughed from US Airways during that time was given the opportunity to fly that equipment. Millions of dollars of US Airways money was spent buying airplanes that those furloughed pilots were not eligible to fly.

Since I don't fly for PSA I may be going out on a limb here, but I'll bet that PSA would have done for the furloughed U pilots the same thing that mainline did for the wholly owned pilots when U sarted hiring again in the late 1990's. That is any mainline pilot was welcome to apply, go through the interview process, and try to get on with PSA and give up their DOH at mainline if hired.

But the minute one of you guys starts shooting your mouth off about entitlement when guys who were hired in 1987 are sitting on the beach watching you salivate over a shiny-new regional jet I can't help but get a little irritated. Some of those guys were flying for that airline before you started high-school!

While that may be true, it can also be said that there are many pilots with us that were flying while those with 1987 hire dates were still in high school. Just in my case I had already been flying 9 years by 1987. In fact with our wholly owned date of hire, we would still be employed at mainline.

Not only that but now you want to strip them of the right to vote and/or hold office -- essentially preventing them from having any say in their career at PSA???

Can you say "conflict of interest"?

What interest are these pilots going to serve?

Their mainline interest and their desire to be recalled ASAP or their "career" interest at PSA?

Funny that you should mention a "Unified Front". There was a time when there was a movement by the junior guys at US Airways called "A Unified Front". That movement was established to apply political pressure to the MEC to establish a 100% flowthrough during a time when the airline was hiring 100 pilots per month.

Why is it I have heard more about this so called "Unified Front" in the past 6 months than I ever heard between 1998-2001?

I guess the Express guys are perfectly happy being where they are and don't care to move on to higher paying jobs someday.

Yes, there are a number of Express pilots that are very happy where they are. Nothing wrong with that. In my case I make a comfortable living, need only 20 minutes to get to work, am gone only 8-12 nights per month, and spend none of my time commuting to/from work or in a crash pad. Life doesn't get much better than that.

 

[JBL]

BTDII,

Good post. A few thoughts if I may...

First, I can't argue that IF the jets simply "replaced" the 328's and the deliveries stopped there, you would be correct in your statement. You are thinking worst case...as I would expect any pilot to do. It drives my wife nuts! I too read the article in the paper summarizing the potential gloom and doom of the SEC filing. Let's not go for eachother's throats over a big "if". Hell, this whole industry is nothing but a heaping pile of "what if".

Meanwhile Mesa and others were already flying RJ's, why did'nt you try go after their current fleet like you went after ours. I freely admit I'm not fully up to speed on the J4J agreement, but isn't Mesa participating? I thought they were authorized to fly additional jets over the scope limit for the same deal as PSA.

Whats worse is that our MEC knew how bad of a deal this was and did'nt even try to negotiate anything better or at least more fair. I can't speak for those guys, but I do know that there were only a few pilots who were fully briefed, thus making them the most qualified to make the decision. Give a proposal to 300+ pilots and you'll get 300+ opinions. This is the reason we elect people in the first place, to make timely decisions with the welfare of the group in mind, based on information sometimes not made available to those whom the decision will affect. This is basic politics...I know you know this. My point is that if you were to ask these same individuals who voted yes if this deal was a "bad" one, I'll bet they would all say no. I think the rub here was the lack of member ratification. A valid beef, but elected officials ARE empowered to make decisions for the group. If we don't like their decisions, we vote them out next time around.

Staying at 25+planes is better than giving your job away. There is no gaurantee that we would have doubled our fleet when j4j was agreed to. So Yes when it came time to decide, I would have choose to take my chances on the 328. Again, IF. I totally agree that there are "no guarantees". Remember when Airways was gonna get 400+ Airbus's? I do, I think that's why I got hired. For everyone's sake, I hope all 60 RJ's DO get delivered...then again we could wake up tomorrow and find out in the paper that we're all out of work. Point?...consider, but don't react based on "what if's".

Since the planes are coming to our property, what gives the Mainline pilots the right to those Captain seats? Just because they were Mainline pilots is not good enough. Okay...this is a simple fact...NOTHING PERSONAL. USAirways ALPA negotiated scope protection just like PSA did. USAirways management agreed to it. It specifically limited the number of RJ's that could be flown in blue paint. That is what gave mainline ALPA the power to negotiate the J4J agreement. The RJ ball was TOTALLY in the pilot's court. Good or bad depends on which side of the fence one is sitting on. The choice was, let mainline buy PSA jets and fill half the seats with furloughees or say no and (here's an "if" for you) potentially lose your flying to contract RJ's and eventually cease to exist. Sound far fetched? Just look at what's happening at PDT and ALG. Hopefully it won't go that far, but it does raise an eyebrow. I've got friends over there just waiting for the hammer to drop. As far as Captain seats go...again, the ball was in mainline's court. Without J4J, those seats don't exist. Before you begin to accuse me of an inappropriate relationship with my mother , let's play another "if". Let's say Airways does turn around, PSA gets all 60 airplanes, and guys start getting called back. Now look at PSA. 2.4 times larger than before, a ton of true newhires filling those right seats, and warm & fuzzies all around. It could go either way...time will tell friend.

Let me give you this example. Lets say that ALG, PDT, and PSA were to all of a sudden start to furlough and lose planes at an alarming rate. Then Mainline starts getting Dash 8's, 328's, and RJ's ( or retired F100's for that matter - added by JBL). With those planes they start flying PIT to CRW all day long, obviously doing Express type flying. Would Mainline give us the same Props for Jobs deal? Let alone with half the Captain seats? I think you and I both know the answer to this. Man, you nailed that one!! I totally agree. This goes waaay back. One seniority list should have been agreed to by both parties long ago to avoid this type of sh!t. It was discussed in '94 when I started....just never happened.

Then to top it off, and this is where most of my anger toward the Mainline guys comes from, I get some of you guys talking about how in the next 5 years it'll be the ones that are on furlough now who'll be incharge of the MEC and things will change. Stuff like that drives me crazy... It should drive you nuts! You have my permission to kick the next yahoo who spouts off like that squarely in the stones. I can say beyond a doubt that those types are the minority and will never aspire to what they preach. As far as the "old b@stards" and the "I got mine now go get yours" attitude, I can say from experience that those few are just ignorant of the world around them. That is NOT the prevalent attitude at mainline. There was a real animosity for the mainline guys when I was at PSA the first time around...it hasn't gone away I see. They are not the enemy. Remember, mainline ALPA has one duty...to protect the interests of mainline pilots. PSA ALPA is tasked with the same duty for its' members. First it was "those mainline guys scoped me out of higher paying equipment", now it's "those mainline guys are stealing our jobs". It is simnply a union doing it's job. Some will say ALPA has positioned us to collectively fail. Maybe, but that's a debate for another time.

But before I go I just want to say that I am 100% for a Unified Front Between Mainline, ALG, PDT, and PSA... Let's stop it right there. We all (Usairways group pilots) need to agree to those words and move on. That's the ONLY way we'll still be around to launch verbal grenades at eachother on the message boards 10 years from now .

B.

P.S.- Billy Joel...nice.

 

[BTDII]

JBL,

Back at ya, great post. And that goes for everyone else. These discussions are needed so that both sides can learn to maybe and hopefully work together. To all of you who will come to PSA under J4J, I just ask that you be mindfull of the feelings of those around you and I'll try to do the same.

JBL said, "I freely admit I'm not fully up to speed on the J4J agreement, but isn't Mesa participating? I thought they were authorized to fly additional jets over the scope limit for the same deal as PSA. "

BTD says, "What I was trying to get at was that 100% off the RJs that would be flown by the WO's are subject to J4J while only "new" RJ's above the 70 already being flown by contractors are subject to J4J. If we the WO would have been able to replace our fleets with RJ's then any planes over our current fleets be subject to J4J, that would have been more fair to all involved. Or Mainline should have at least went after the current contracted RJ's just as they will now have acces to our entire fleet. Thats really all I was getting at when I said, "Meanwhile Mesa and others were already flying RJ's, why did'nt you try go after their current fleet like you went after ours." in an earlier post. At the very least if the WO's were guanteed to replace our fleets without being subjet to J4J anything extra I would be glad to just give you guys 100% of the seats just so long as we were "guarnteed" replacement first. But to late now I suppose.

Anyway, thanks to all for joining in. Take Care and be safe.

 

[FMR_RGNL_PLT]

Just out of curiosity...............

What was the argument that the Airways mainline pilots used for NOT giving wholy owned pilots a flowthrough agreement back in the 1990's?

Back then, when hiring was booming, why wouldn't the mainline pilot group NOT want quality, experienced, whollyowned pilots moving up?

Where did they prefer future Airways pilots come from? Was it a bias by the former military guys to get more of them into the compay?

I would really appreciate some info on this from those who know.... It seems like it would have been a win-win situation for the mainline guys to give the wholly owned guys flowthru......

It would certainly simplify things now for everyone!!!!!!

 

[d328pilot]

"Back then, when hiring was booming, why wouldn't the mainline pilot group NOT want quality, experienced, whollyowned pilots moving up?"

The answer: because in their mind, there is no such thing as a quality, experienced WO pilot. It is an oxymoron to them.


(not intended to bash anyone. but after you hear "they are just express" so many times, it really starts to make you mad.)

 

[USAirways1149]

BS

Mike you're full of bovine-fecal-matter.

The fact is that when Letter of Agreement 79 was ratified (interim small-jet agreement) it was approved by over 85% of the pilot group.

85% of the group agreed not only to allow the company to contract another 35 airplanes, but also to establish a bidirectional flowthrough with the wholly-owned regionals.

The MEC asked the company to pay for their expenses as a part of those negotiations. Expenses such as flightpay loss, hotels, etc.

The company refused.

The Pittsburgh Captain Rep at the time (John Davis) led a roll-call vote to terminate negotiations if the company failed to pay these expenses. He didn't want any further RJs regardless of WHO flew them. His answer to ANYTHING the company wanted, for that matter, was to throw a "global list" of several dozen demands back at them.

The flowthrough fell apart due to bad politics. The LINE PILOTS voted to do the right thing.

Before the situation could be corrected the UAL merger was on the front burner and the company would not negotiate at all for RJs - they were busy with other matters.

The kind of GARBAGE that Mike is spewing does nothing more than further divide the pilot groups and frankly I expect more of an ALPA volunteer. Granted I was only there a bit more than 3 years, but I never NEVER heard another crewmember act in a disrespectful manner towards any of our Express brothers.

I will grant you that there were a FEW (a minority) who did not know who the wholly-owneds were or what they flew. That was the exception to the rule and 9 times of 10 were very senior captains who commuted from Montana and barely knew who the president of the US was!

You want to be mad at somebody? Be mad at ALPA. The line pilots at US Airways tried to do the right thing.

 

[328dude]

Cry me a River

 

[blzr]

JBL

What was that stuff you were saying abour MAINLINE ALPA and PSA ALPA?? Are there two different addresses? is Duane Woerthless president of PSA ALPA too?

The Mainline MEC negtiated LOA83 I believe it was.. Without PDT and ALG being involved. They sent it to our MEC's and It was lughed at. Basically, it said you furloughees would get 100% of the seats. What's in it for us? Nothing, so we turned it down. Came to find out that Mainline Mec got Woerthless to sign off on it without our concent. Is that taking advantage? I think so. We pay dues too and also deserve fair representation.

 

[JBL]

You are correct. ALPA is ALPA. In "theory" they are able to negotiate for and represent seperate pilot groups under the same corporate umbrella. Nice theory, right?

Maybe I should have used the terms "PSA pilot group" and "mainline pilot group" instead of tagging them as seperate ALPA's. The fact of the matter is, anytime a major and any of it's "subsidiary" carriers are represented by the same union it's dicey at best. I've heard the term "conflict of interest" more than once regarding this issue. We all have seen it upclose, firsthand and have formed our own opinion about it. I'm guessing most of us have come to the same conclusion.

As to the contents of LOA83 (I don't know which one it was either), I understood it to be confidential when it was being shopped around to the WO's. By that, I mean that there was surely more to it than "...you furloughees would get 100% of the seats. What's in it for us? Nothing..." I guess it's out for all to see now at PSA. PSA signed on, gets RJ's, and half the seats go to the furloughees. Maybe the LOA in place now had earlier versions that were presented to your MEC's and some additional negotiations took place to create the LOA that exists today. I have no idea.

B.