SkyWest IAH Base, What If ?

[CFIT]

Well, what is Skywest sick call policy? My understanding is that out of the three Inc companies, Skywest airlines has the most liberal sick call policy. Whatever it is, you can safely assume it wouldn't be worse in a union contract.



Like I said, no one has explained to me why the difference between shuttle America and Skywest. The only difference I see is that Skywest has turned down unionization on three separate occasions. Maybe the CAL MEC are in communication with the duly certified agent of the shuttle America pilots and have come to some sort of behind the doors gentleman agreement? I dont know, just guessing.

First of all, there is no gaurantee that our sick leave policy would remain the same after voting in a union, it could just as easily get worse.

Second, there have been 4 union votes at SkyWest, but I'm sure the next one will go ALPO, hopefully in house.

Finally, if the CAL MEC is letting Shuttle lift by some "gentlemen's agreement then then ALPO is corrupt, again hoping for an in house shop.

 

[SpyFlysDOTs]

First of all, there is no gaurantee that our sick leave policy would remain the same after voting in a union, it could just as easily get worse.

Second, there have been 4 union votes at SkyWest, but I'm sure the next one will go ALPO, hopefully in house.

Finally, if the CAL MEC is letting Shuttle lift by some "gentlemen's agreement then then ALPO is corrupt, again hoping for an in house shop.

Re: Second...How can you be so certain?

 

[nimtz]

No, but you're still waiting for an answer along with all the others who have pointed out the disparity in treatment, threats, intimidation, etc., directed at Skywest pilots when compared to Republic pilots. Is there a double standard out there? Why?

Maybe it's because Uncle Jerry is so giddy he's opening a base in IAH ASAP? Maybe it's because a vast majority of the new 'large RJ' operation will be done by Skywest? Quite frankly this is all noise until the arbitrator weighs in.

The process is quite simple young grasshopper. We go to arbitrator to defend our scope. Decision comes before Jan 1. If we lose, we lose and the battle goes to the contract. Have a great time flying that shiny big jet to the garden spots of IAH and EWR.

If we win there are two options:
1) Sismek blinks and cancels plans
2) Sismek says screw it sue me and moves forward

If we win my money is on option 2 being the likely course. At which point I don't give a flying **** if you belong to NAMBLA or The Shiners, SA and Skywest pilots would be violating what was fought and won in abitration. Union or not won't matter, you will be scum either way in that scenario...

 

[Nevets]

First of all, there is no gaurantee that our sick leave policy would remain the same after voting in a union, it could just as easily get worse.

Second, there have been 4 union votes at SkyWest, but I'm sure the next one will go ALPO, hopefully in house.

Finally, if the CAL MEC is letting Shuttle lift by some "gentlemen's agreement then then ALPO is corrupt, again hoping for an in house shop.

Point being, you would no longer be an at-will employee even with a strict sick call policy such as XJT's. The gentlemen's agreement is just some made up guess on my part. I have absolutely no idea why the difference other than the obvious union versus non-union.

 

[BID]

Arbitrators paid for by big business. In this case, I believe Continental Airlines. I fear, but am hopeful of the outcome.

 

[vtech]

Maybe it's because Uncle Jerry is so giddy he's opening a base in IAH ASAP? Maybe it's because a vast majority of the new 'large RJ' operation will be done by Skywest? Quite frankly this is all noise until the arbitrator weighs in.

The process is quite simple young grasshopper. We go to arbitrator to defend our scope. Decision comes before Jan 1. If we lose, we lose and the battle goes to the contract. Have a great time flying that shiny big jet to the garden spots of IAH and EWR.

If we win there are two options:
1) Sismek blinks and cancels plans
2) Sismek says screw it sue me and moves forward

If we win my money is on option 2 being the likely course. At which point I don't give a flying **** if you belong to NAMBLA or The Shiners, SA and Skywest pilots would be violating what was fought and won in abitration. Union or not won't matter, you will be scum either way in that scenario...

All Noise.

No response to the question, "Why the disparity between Skywest and Republic?" Just more spewing of misdirected hostility.

What would the Republic pilots be? Would they be scum too?

 

[nimtz]

All Noise.

No response to the question, "Why the disparity between Skywest and Republic?" Just more spewing of misdirected hostility.

What would the Republic pilots be? Would they be scum too?

*back to post for answer*

"If we win there are two options:
1) Sismek blinks and cancels plans
2) Sismek says screw it sue me and moves forward

If we win my money is on option 2 being the likely course. At which point I don't give a flying **** if you belong to NAMBLA or The Shiners, SA and Skywest pilots would be violating what was fought and won in arbitration.Union or not won't matter, you will be scum either way in that scenario..."

Look I'm not one wielding a pitchfork about this right now. I certainly do not support a jumpseat war. All this bomb throwing is a waste of bandwidth until the arbitration ruling.

I'm terribly sorry you feel so threatened by a few nasty words that have been thrown around the internet and by a hot headed (literally) union rep. As far as I'm concerned, both SA and Skywest have equally played a role in helping to gut this career in the last decade. There is that better!?!

 

[vtech]

I'm not threatened by anything you've written. I'm just trying to figure out the misdirected hostility.

What role did mainline legacy pilots decision to bargain away jobs which were going to be performed by some pilots somewhere have to do with the career being gutted in the last decade? If you want to call the pilots who took those bargained away jobs "scum," that's OK. But you ought to at least acknowledge that those jobs would not have existed if the mainline legacy pilots hadn't bargained them away.

You calling those pilots "scum" says way more about you than it does them.

You have a nice day.

 

[nimtz]

I'm not threatened by anything you've written. I'm just trying to figure out the misdirected hostility.

What role did mainline legacy pilots decision to bargain away jobs which were going to be performed by some pilots somewhere have to do with the career being gutted in the last decade? If you want to call the pilots who took those bargained away jobs "scum," that's OK. But you ought to at least acknowledge that those jobs would not have existed if the mainline legacy pilots hadn't bargained them away.

You calling those pilots "scum" says way more about you than it does them.

You have a nice day.

Any pilot that agrees to go to do the flying if CALALPA wins abitration becomes the before mentioned scum. In my book they will be no different then the Freedom Air heroes of yesteryear. This issue is not about the last decade. It is about an enforceable scope clause being broken. I'm deeply sorry you think I called you scum. If the arbitrator goes with ALPA don't become scum, okay?

Uncle Jerry told you guys as far as he knew the IAH flying is legit and legal. If the arbitrator says otherwise, then your pilot group should have the balls to explain to Uncle Jerry he was mistaken and refuse to do the flying. If it is flown and the excuse is 'what are we supposed to do we have no recourse' do you expect me to accept that?

 

[ehaecker]

I've heard about the J/S issue as well. AFAIK, SKW called the CAL CP, and had positive space approved and the SKW guys got to where they were going anyway.

As far as guys doing this flying becoming "scum"....what about the junior guys that are FORCED to do it, should it come to that? Are they scum too? I can understand the hostility towards the guys that voluntarily BID to go ti IAH...but what about everybody else? The way SKW works, crew members from nearly EVERY base flow through multiple bases in any given 4-day trip. Say someone makes every effort to stay away from IAH, but is on reserve in say, ORD (vs holding a line in IAH). Said person gets called out on a trip that starts and ends in ORD, but flows through IAH on days 2 and 3. Are they scum, too? Where do you draw the line?

I'd sure like to know, so that I can at least know at what point I become scum even though it is completely out of my hands. Thanks.