(1) Jerry has the power to merge the Companies, which would likely result in decertification any time he wants to. The fact he has not should tell you something. SkyWest and the SkyWest pilots benefit too much from ASA's subsidiary position to want a change to the status quo.
Yes, the fact that Jerry has shown no desire to consolidate the two companies to realize obvious 'synergies' is quite disconcerting from the point of view of an ASA employee. Additionally, couple this with the payroll expense savings that SKYW would likely realize with the possibility of removing ALPA and putting the suprefluous SKYW 'student council' at the helm of the pilot group to create a reasonable expectation that Jerry has something else in mind for ASA than our long term health as a going concern.
Our subsidiary position seems to be more of a subordinate, second in line, hind-t!t sucking, red-headed stepchild. The eventual coming of a recovery of the airline business and the attendant redistribution of resources (new aircraft and hiring) will clearly identify what ASA's value to SkyWest, and Delta, will be. Growth for ASA, over the inevitable loud objections of the entrenched, though relatively junior SKYW pilots, would be a very good sign for ASA. Ignoring ASA, despite recent, sustained, dramatic improvements in the quality of our operation, would evaporate the goodwill amongst the pilot group that is the backbone of the current turnaround at ASA.
...problem would be seniority integration. The SkyWest pilots do not want to give up the windfall they obtained at your expense. As United implodes and Delta expands on the West Coast, the SkyWest pilots may again be in the cat bird seat as Delta seeks to realign its regional feed regionally.
It wouldn't be a problem for the ASA guys/gals: We are relatively more senior than the SKYW folks.
-flippant sarcasm-
Seriously, A combination of the two lists would benefit the ASA pilot group initially, and in time benefit the SKYW group with more stability and truly collectively bargained improvements to their working agreements. It would be extremely difficult, though, to create a situation where the average SKYW pilot, with upgrade expectations that are different than just about anyone else in the industry, could feel like a combination would be a net positive.
(2) Save your insults. My position on one list has not changed. To make
real progress you have to start with what is reasonably attainable. Compass is an unique opportunity that just does not exist at the other regional carriers because of:
- Bilateral flow agreement*
- Low relative longevity*
- Concurrent seniority*
- Single Representational Structure*
- Training Agreements
- Growing to directly replace mainline DC9 flying
- Politically attractive equipment
- * avoids pretentions of better than staple SLI
- * avoid mainline fear of better than staple SLI
It is precisely because it is an ALPA alter ego that it needs to be fixed with one list. It makes sense to repair what you most recently broke - before it gets worse.
I'd like to see the other DCI carriers on board too, but those carriers present many more complicated issues than the majority of ALPA's members care to confront. The SLI issue is much easier at Compass and that is the issue which was the deal breaker because it was not dealt with up front in 1999... and before you start on the technical arguement, I cite the example of the Delta/NWA SLI where even they are trying to resolve the issue by every means possible
BEFORE falling back to a PID. That is the power of political reality.
As is, there is more support for using MEC funds to throw a wedding reception for Michelle Burns and her life partner than trying to tie the knot with Compass. I'm peeing up a rope and hoping for the principle of absorbtion to overcome gravity.
(3) Dropping the A plan retirement demand and scope that binds the parent company are a few of the ideas that you promoted.
~~~^~~~
