SKYW profits plunge, still no fourlough?

[Speedtape]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeMerchant
I didn't paint the "partial picture"...you did....The 4 issues I pointed out that were unreasonable on our side were given up after the election....The NMB was never going to give us a release...just like they were not going to release us in '98...You know that....

As you know, releases are hard to obtain--especially when 2 of the 3 members were pro-management. However, something happened both times--maybe each time pressure was finally put on management--by other forces.

I wanted us to get the 900s and grow....I am no longer concerned with having the "best pay"....The rules have changed...and even you understand that.....
I wanted the planes and the growth also. I am not convinced that the planes would have come here--under any circumstance. But, neither of us will ever know. The rules have changed. Unfortunately, our ship is headed for the "Perfect Storm!" Our company really no longer has any identity. We are nothing more than a service provider among many service providers. I hate to admit it, but the race to the bottom will soon begin--or we will be eliminated over time. Collective Bargaining, as we have known it, will no longer exist. Under the best conditions, our Company will probably not exist in 11 years.

This isn't '98 any more....the rules have changed...Your revisionist history is amusing...You do realize that PFT reimbursement was in the first TA before I got involved...Look it up...

It's not revisionist history. PFT was in the first TA before you got involved. But it also fell off the table before you got involved. However, it rose from the ashes in the final hours--water under the bridge!

This isn't '98 anymore....The rules have changed....

I agree, it isn't '98, but there were some parallels, because both sides have a play book that does not change.

I agree--the rules have changed and there is a new world order. Our little boat is peacefully floating, but heading helplessly towards the vortex of a gigantic whirlpool, soon to be drawn into a hellish ride with no control and hopeless "Portfolio Infamy!" It will be death or indentured servitude--neither a favorable option for those of us who have invested our time.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeMerchant
I didn't paint the "partial picture"...you did....The 4 issues I pointed out that were unreasonable on our side were given up after the election....The NMB was never going to give us a release...just like they were not going to release us in '98...You know that....

As you know, releases are hard to obtain--especially when 2 of the 3 members were pro-management. However, something happened both times--maybe each time pressure was finally put on management--by other forces.

The "2 of us" you are referring to were not "pro-managment" at the time....We were very anti-managment....I was making 24K a year at the time and was willing to let the ship burn...More revisionist history on your part.....

I wanted us to get the 900s and grow....I am no longer concerned with having the "best pay"....The rules have changed...and even you understand that.....
I wanted the planes and the growth also. I am not convinced that the planes would have come here--under any circumstance. But, neither of us will ever know. The rules have changed. Unfortunately, our ship is headed for the "Perfect Storm!" Our company really no longer has any identity. We are nothing more than a service provider among many service providers. I hate to admit it, but the race to the bottom will soon begin--or we will be eliminated over time. Collective Bargaining, as we have known it, will no longer exist. Under the best conditions, our Company will probably not exist in 11 years.

The race to the bottom "will soon begin"...Where the heck have you been.....It began a long time ago and has molded my decision making....The fact that you think it "will soon begin" makes me question your judgement...This was a factor in us losing the 900s that we had on order....

This isn't '98 any more....the rules have changed...Your revisionist history is amusing...You do realize that PFT reimbursement was in the first TA before I got involved...Look it up...

It's not revisionist history. PFT was in the first TA before you got involved. But it also fell off the table before you got involved. However, it rose from the ashes in the final hours--water under the bridge!

Wrong again grasshopper...Go look at TA #1....PFT reimbursement was in the first TA...before I got involved...I have a copy if you need one.....

This isn't '98 anymore....The rules have changed....

I agree, it isn't '98, but there were some parallels, because both sides have a play book that does not change.

I agree--the rules have changed and there is a new world order. Our little boat is peacefully floating, but heading helplessly towards the vortex of a gigantic whirlpool, soon to be drawn into a hellish ride with no control and hopeless "Portfolio Infamy!" It will be death or indentured servitude--neither a favorable option for those of us who have invested our time.

Speedtape...or Freeze...

Maybe our union should have anticipated this perfect storm rather than sticking their head in the sand...Too late now....Why are you advocating concessions now?

 

[Speedtape]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedtape
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeMerchant [URL="http://forums.flightinfo.com/images/styles/flight/buttons/viewpost.gif"]http://forums.flightinfo.com/images/...s/viewpost.gif[/URL]
I didn't paint the "partial picture"...you did....The 4 issues I pointed out that were unreasonable on our side were given up after the election....The NMB was never going to give us a release...just like they were not going to release us in '98...You know that....

As you know, releases are hard to obtain--especially when 2 of the 3 members were pro-management. However, something happened both times--maybe each time pressure was finally put on management--by other forces.

The "2 of us" you are referring to were not "pro-managment" at the time....We were very anti-managment....I was making 24K a year at the time and was willing to let the ship burn...More revisionist history on your part.....
Interesting--I was referring to the makeup of the NMB--not the CNC. But, your declaration or testimony is interesting! So, are you pro management now and if so, what caused that defining moment? By the way, I hear that there is an Assistant Chief Pilot opening.

I wanted us to get the 900s and grow....I am no longer concerned with having the "best pay"....The rules have changed...and even you understand that.....
I wanted the planes and the growth also. I am not convinced that the planes would have come here--under any circumstance. But, neither of us will ever know. The rules have changed. Unfortunately, our ship is headed for the "Perfect Storm!" Our company really no longer has any identity. We are nothing more than a service provider among many service providers. I hate to admit it, but the race to the bottom will soon begin--or we will be eliminated over time. Collective Bargaining, as we have known it, will no longer exist. Under the best conditions, our Company will probably not exist in 11 years.

The race to the bottom "will soon begin"...Where the heck have you been.....It began a long time ago and has molded my decision making....The fact that you think it "will soon begin" makes me question your judgement...This was a factor in us losing the 900s that we had on order....
My point of reference was at our property. We have not even seen the tip of the iceberg. However, the table was set when Comair was forced into bankruptcy and we were sold to a new owner. "Questioning Judgement" is your Modus Operandi and claim to fame--and you are proud of it. Maybe, that's not a bad thing in some circles. I have no issue with my judgement being questioned--learning and gaining wisdom is a life long process and score-keeping decisions is counterproductive to both.
The 900's were lost in September '05, when the new owners took title. Our order book and the locked in pricing was one of the reasons we were purchased. The 900's were only used as the carrot on the stick to try and get us to roll.
This isn't '98 any more....the rules have changed...Your revisionist history is amusing...You do realize that PFT reimbursement was in the first TA before I got involved...Look it up...

It's not revisionist history. PFT was in the first TA before you got involved. But it also fell off the table before you got involved. However, it rose from the ashes in the final hours--water under the bridge!

Wrong again grasshopper...Go look at TA #1....PFT reimbursement was in the first TA...before I got involved...I have a copy if you need one.....
Was it still on the table before those final sessions? One of the 3 says it wasn't, along with a few others who should know. I guess he and they are liars? For the record, I am not really interested in re-hashing or dishing anyone for being an opportunist--once again, it's water under the bridge.

This isn't '98 anymore....The rules have changed....

I agree, it isn't '98, but there were some parallels, because both sides have a play book that does not change.

I agree--the rules have changed and there is a new world order. Our little boat is peacefully floating, but heading helplessly towards the vortex of a gigantic whirlpool, soon to be drawn into a hellish ride with no control and hopeless "Portfolio Infamy!" It will be death or indentured servitude--neither a favorable option for those of us who have invested our time.

Speedtape...or Freeze...

Maybe our union should have anticipated this perfect storm rather than sticking their head in the sand...Too late now....Why are you advocating concessions now? I guess they are just not as smart as you--too bad your talent is wasted in words rather than action. It's evident that you have a bright mind.


I advocate survival. "Aligning costs" will be the key to our survival. We are not a free market enterprise. We serve and are controlled by one customer which carries out most of the normal business functions. To make matters worse, we are not that customer's only outsourcer. Our costs will be in line or at the level dictated by the one customer, or that entity will distribute new business elsewhere. In addition, our DCI contract will be challenged by that one customer for it's duration. All the "friendly lawsuits" in the world will not produce a remedy against an aggressive, well-funded, mega corporation that can hire the best legal minds in the world to create legal disputes to decimate those contracts. Bottom line, our costs will be in line and the margins will be squeezed. We can play ball or become DCI's most incredible shrinking airline. In addition, we are owned by a Parent Company that can distribute growth to either of it's 2 companies as it sees fit. Is there any question as to where the growth may go?

Some of these business practices have been practiced similarly in the retail world for years. Sears and Walmart have created massive net worth by exploiting their vendors and dictating vendor margins and costs. It's not a new practice, but it has only recently arrived in our industry.

In conclusion, I only advocate survival--which unfortunately involves "cost-aligning" or concessions, as you call it.
__________________

 

[Speedtape]

Your memory is terrible...those are the tenets of the current MEC...the "no pilot left behind" folks who won the election....The losing coalition said those were unreasonable tenets.....

If I am not mistaken, those so called tenets were based on goals mandated by the pilot group through the surveys and polling. Maybe the pilot expectations were too high? No group ever reaches all their goals. Why did the coalition lose--besides the fact they got less votes? One guess would be that a majority of pilots did not like their platform. But, there were probably a few other reasons.

 

[ohplease!]

Seems to me he is simply pointing out the glaring, obvious TRUTH of the matter. Something many folks around these parts refuse to admit to.

Okay, I must be missing it. What is the glaring obvious TRUTH of the matter? No sarcasm, I just don't get what you are saying. What are you implying by saying that 'many folks around these parts refuse to admit...'?


My memory is kinda vague on this subject, frankly, but weren't a large 70 pay raise, Bfund, and full retro the tenets of an alternative platform to ALPA that was solidly defeated when voted on by the pilot group at ASA?[/quote]
Many folks=alpa hardliner folks that over estimated their position. (in my opinion)

Your memory (and that of many others) along with apathy from the huge majority of the pilot group were (and to some extent) are a big part of the problem. You don't remember things correctly and don't want to "get involved" or are afraid to voice your true feelings in public for fear of somebody talking bad about you or treating you bad (you=generalization of the group).

The numbers that take the time to vote here (most union shops too) are pitiful. Apathy CAN screw up a company.

 

[CFI2766]

Your memory is terrible...those are the tenets of the current MEC...the "no pilot left behind" folks who won the election....The losing coalition said those were unreasonable tenets.....

Thus the caveat that my memory was vague. Not trying to throw stones; I was just focused on other things at the time.

-break-

I dunno, kinda seems silly arguing about something that happened two years ago just for the sake of arguing.

What is your intent in pointing out perceived mistakes in negotiations past?

 

[CFI2766]

MMMmmmkay.


After lengthy reading of the two contenders' posts, I get one message: Speed and Joe both mostly believe that ASA's continued existence or failure will be due to our (ASA's) costs.

Am I getting this right?

If so, I agree.

The bigger question, then, is what to do about it.

 

[sweptback]

The bigger question, then, is what to do about it.

Fire everybody over, say 3 years of seniority with the company.

That's the only way we will become "competitive" with the likes of Compass.

Everything else is just wasting time.

 

[cybourg10]

The bigger question, then, is what to do about it.

Its interesting because that same questions is being asked at other airlines such as XJT, Eagle, AWAC, and many other. How can we be competitive when X Airlines labor cost less? Fee For Departure Airlines operate on fixed rates with little or no ability to generate more revenue, so when one pilot group gets too costly the flying shifts over to someone else until they get too costly and the cycle continues. The only solution that I can that really fixes the core problem is getting all company flying on one list. No more outsourcing, no more whipsawing, and no more coming to labor for pay cuts when a cheap CPA is signed by the CEO. I honestly can not think of another solution to the core problem. That solution creates many more questions though.

 

[Nevets]

Its interesting because that same questions is being asked at other airlines such as XJT, Eagle, AWAC, and many other. How can we be competitive when X Airlines labor cost less? Fee For Departure Airlines operate on fixed rates with little or no ability to generate more revenue, so when one pilot group gets too costly the flying shifts over to someone else until they get too costly and the cycle continues. The only solution that I can that really fixes the core problem is getting all company flying on one list. No more outsourcing, no more whipsawing, and no more coming to labor for pay cuts when a cheap CPA is signed by the CEO. I honestly can not think of another solution to the core problem. That solution creates many more questions though.

Another solution that ALPA is working through the Fee For Departure Task Force is to allow pilots to bid over with their aircraft if their company loses flying to another company. This eliminates the pilot recycling to first year pay and doesn't give the airline that won the bid the advantage of lower cost labor by hiring the furloughed pilots of the other airline at first year pay.

 

[CFI2766]

Another solution that ALPA is working through the Fee For Departure Task Force is to allow pilots to bid over with their aircraft if their company loses flying to another company. This eliminates the pilot recycling to first year pay and doesn't give the airline that won the bid the advantage of lower cost labor by hiring the furloughed pilots of the other airline at first year pay.

What airline management would agree to this proposal? It's great for the pilot, but to take the accrued longevity to another airline would dramatically increase costs and invalidate the cost projections that the winning bids were based on.

How would the specifics of this idea be worked out? It solves a problem for the pilot group, but it does nothing beneficial for the bid winning airline.

 

[Dubya]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedtape
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeMerchant [URL="http://forums.flightinfo.com/images/styles/flight/buttons/viewpost.gif"]http://forums.flightinfo.com/images/...s/viewpost.gif[/URL]
I didn't paint the "partial picture"...you did....The 4 issues I pointed out that were unreasonable on our side were given up after the election....The NMB was never going to give us a release...just like they were not going to release us in '98...You know that....

As you know, releases are hard to obtain--especially when 2 of the 3 members were pro-management. However, something happened both times--maybe each time pressure was finally put on management--by other forces.

Mesa sucks.

The "2 of us" you are referring to were not "pro-managment" at the time....We were very anti-managment....I was making 24K a year at the time and was willing to let the ship burn...More revisionist history on your part.....
Interesting--I was referring to the makeup of the NMB--not the CNC. But, your declaration or testimony is interesting! So, are you pro management now and if so, what caused that defining moment? By the way, I hear that there is an Assistant Chief Pilot opening.

Mesa sucks.

I wanted us to get the 900s and grow....I am no longer concerned with having the "best pay"....The rules have changed...and even you understand that.....
I wanted the planes and the growth also. I am not convinced that the planes would have come here--under any circumstance. But, neither of us will ever know. The rules have changed. Unfortunately, our ship is headed for the "Perfect Storm!" Our company really no longer has any identity. We are nothing more than a service provider among many service providers. I hate to admit it, but the race to the bottom will soon begin--or we will be eliminated over time. Collective Bargaining, as we have known it, will no longer exist. Under the best conditions, our Company will probably not exist in 11 years.

Mesa sucks.

The race to the bottom "will soon begin"...Where the heck have you been.....It began a long time ago and has molded my decision making....The fact that you think it "will soon begin" makes me question your judgement...This was a factor in us losing the 900s that we had on order....
My point of reference was at our property. We have not even seen the tip of the iceberg. However, the table was set when Comair was forced into bankruptcy and we were sold to a new owner. "Questioning Judgement" is your Modus Operandi and claim to fame--and you are proud of it. Maybe, that's not a bad thing in some circles. I have no issue with my judgement being questioned--learning and gaining wisdom is a life long process and score-keeping decisions is counterproductive to both.
The 900's were lost in September '05, when the new owners took title. Our order book and the locked in pricing was one of the reasons we were purchased. The 900's were only used as the carrot on the stick to try and get us to roll.
Mesa sucks.
This isn't '98 any more....the rules have changed...Your revisionist history is amusing...You do realize that PFT reimbursement was in the first TA before I got involved...Look it up...

It's not revisionist history. PFT was in the first TA before you got involved. But it also fell off the table before you got involved. However, it rose from the ashes in the final hours--water under the bridge!
....and Mesa sucks.
Wrong again grasshopper...Go look at TA #1....PFT reimbursement was in the first TA...before I got involved...I have a copy if you need one.....
Was it still on the table before those final sessions? One of the 3 says it wasn't, along with a few others who should know. I guess he and they are liars? For the record, I am not really interested in re-hashing or dishing anyone for being an opportunist--once again, it's water under the bridge.

This isn't '98 anymore....The rules have changed....

I agree, it isn't '98, but there were some parallels, because both sides have a play book that does not change.
But Mesa really sucks.

I agree--the rules have changed and there is a new world order. Our little boat is peacefully floating, but heading helplessly towards the vortex of a gigantic whirlpool, soon to be drawn into a hellish ride with no control and hopeless "Portfolio Infamy!" It will be death or indentured servitude--neither a favorable option for those of us who have invested our time.

Speedtape...or Freeze...

Maybe our union should have anticipated this perfect storm rather than sticking their head in the sand...Too late now....Why are you advocating concessions now? I guess they are just not as smart as you--too bad your talent is wasted in words rather than action. It's evident that you have a bright mind.

It's also evident that Mesa sucks.

I advocate survival. "Aligning costs" will be the key to our survival. We are not a free market enterprise. We serve and are controlled by one customer which carries out most of the normal business functions. To make matters worse, we are not that customer's only outsourcer. Our costs will be in line or at the level dictated by the one customer, or that entity will distribute new business elsewhere. In addition, our DCI contract will be challenged by that one customer for it's duration. All the "friendly lawsuits" in the world will not produce a remedy against an aggressive, well-funded, mega corporation that can hire the best legal minds in the world to create legal disputes to decimate those contracts. Bottom line, our costs will be in line and the margins will be squeezed. We can play ball or become DCI's most incredible shrinking airline. In addition, we are owned by a Parent Company that can distribute growth to either of it's 2 companies as it sees fit. Is there any question as to where the growth may go?
Is there any question that Mesa still sucks?

Some of these business practices have been practiced similarly in the retail world for years. Sears and Walmart have created massive net worth by exploiting their vendors and dictating vendor margins and costs. It's not a new practice, but it has only recently arrived in our industry.

In conclusion, I only advocate survival--which unfortunately involves "cost-aligning" or concessions, as you call it.

In conclusion, I only advocate that Mesa sucks.
__________________

So lets just wrap this up.

Mesa sucks.

W

 

[USCtrojan]

So lets just wrap this up.

Mesa sucks.

W

Well written, concise, trite and with good diction I might add. ;-)

Trojan

 

[Nevets]

What airline management would agree to this proposal? It's great for the pilot, but to take the accrued longevity to another airline would dramatically increase costs and invalidate the cost projections that the winning bids were based on.

How would the specifics of this idea be worked out? It solves a problem for the pilot group, but it does nothing beneficial for the bid winning airline.

The only benefit to management that I can think of right now is that there would be reduced training costs, especially if the company is taking on a fleet type that they do not currently operate. This sort of arrangement was agreed to in principle before by two regionals because of that very reason.

But the whole idea to us pilots is precisely what you mention. The winning airline could not use first year pay in its cost projections for their bids (assuming they were taking over the losing airline's aircraft). It prevents whipsaw and pilot recycling. It may have a deterrent effect and or it will force airlines to compete on service rather than on who has the cheapest labor that decade.

 

[Full of LUV]

By George, I think he's got it!!!!

Fire everybody over, say 3 years of seniority with the company.

That's the only way we will become "competitive" with the likes of Compass.

Everything else is just wasting time.

Don't fret though, it's the same with the LCC's and majors. Hard to compete with VA and Jetblue who's whole pilog group is at 5 yrs or less.