Skywest TA??? Pay??

[Jeepman]

I'm sure that both UAL & DAL would love it if this TA passed. They would suddenly let us fly 90's sit back and laugh!!!


The good news is that someone is taking a poll on the SAPA site. Last count (124 pilots) 60% were rejecting it. Let's hope more pilots reject this. If this does pass I for one sure don't care to be the #1 on time airline. I'll need all the App D I can get to make up for lost wages!!


I would also like to add good uck to the Chataqua guys with thir strike. We need to slam on the brakes on this race to the bottom!!

 

[FLYNKED]

O.K. lets take a quick look at how things are here at SkyWest since 9/11. Zero fuloughs, zero paycuts. As far as all of this talk about management screwing us in 18 months, we don't have a unioun on property because there is no history of management screwing us. As far as same pay for 70s and 90s we haven't even ordered any and its not as easy as just changing our current order, there's a line kids. And windycity I would love for you to get a job with any other carrier because we can do just fine without ya.

 

[ADG]

I would love to know just how much more the company receives for flying a 70 seat RJ compared to the 50 seat?

Anyway, my vote will be a big fat NO!

Regarding the TA, it is just awful. When I read the darn thing, I felt like I was reading a high school research paper. Everything was so negative, but thank goodness for all the citations otherwise I don't think I would of believed the industry was in such a mess!

I will not be part of a group that will lower the already pathetic wages regional pilots receive. Even if it means no extra jet flying or loss of flying. I would just prefer to not have it.

"you can buy a lot with a buck or two"

ADG

 

[skypine27]

The current "poll" on the SkyWest site is 60 % NO vs 40 % YES.

However, only 150 pilots out of 1450 have voted in this informal poll. And it's those 1300 idiots who don't read the message board with that "Duh, Im just happy to have a job. Duh, I'd fly for free. I love flying. Duh, I can't belive they actually pay us for this! Isn't this so much fun!!" attitude that always vote yes to stuff like this.

This TA is unfortunately going to pass by about a 80% yes vote, and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. Except maybe give a brain to all the genius Yes-Men we have here. But, as we all know from watching the Scare-crow in the Wizard of Oz, that it wont happen.

 

[skypine69]

"because there is no history of management screwing us"

Give it time young grasshopper....and you too will get to experience management screwing you.

There is a point where this job is no longer worth doing. I think we are just about there. I am not going to fly airplanes for 5 bucks an hour just so I can keep doing it. It has to do with principal, pride, and your feeling of self worth. I have spent too much energy, time, and money to get to this point to let someone tell me that I am worth such a little amount of money. I have too much responsibility to accept less than I am worth. Yes I am a professional and everytime I get in the cockpit I operate the aircraft as such, there will become a point where I will not get back in the aircraft. All you CFIs out there who are having wet dreams about my job can have it at that point. You will quickly realize why what we are saying is valid and you will also walk away.
VOTE NO!!!!!

 

[Heavy Set]

Surplus 1,

Well written - I agree with your analysis. And, although I agree with the General from time to time, I am NOT a Delta pilot - despite my best efforts to join the team in the past...

I hope the Skywest guys out there heed your advice and vote no - I agree that management gains everything in this case... I still can't believe that people would accept agreements that are NOT PUT IN WRITING.... You need to cover your a$$ nowadays...

 

[surplus1]

I can't believe it!! Surplus1 actually agrees with me!! Maybe I was right the whole time and he just didn't see it? Maybe I actually do understand the inner workings of this industry and can see through the smoke and mirrors? Or maybe this is an obvious problem that anyone could see? I think the latter.

Now don't get carried away over one li'l attaboy. You do handle the smoke and mirrors fairly well .... unless the smoke is coming from your own tribe and the mirrors reflecting your own desired images. (Sorry, I couldn't resist).

On this issue you are on target and I have to give credit where due. Now if I could just get you to apply the same logic on the other stuff we could maybe take one more step in the right direction. Let's not try in this thread though, it's important and I wouldn't want to highjack it.

Regards

 

[surplus1]

Surplus 1,

Well written - I agree with your analysis. And, although I agree with the General from time to time, I am NOT a Delta pilot - despite my best efforts to join the team in the past...

Oooops, my bad. Apologies, I shouldn't have presumed. If that was your desire, sorry you didn't get there. It's been a good team in the past, just added a lot of young masterminds in recent years that have yet to reach the age of reason. They'll get there though. Good people most of them ... just frustrated and a little confused.

I hope the Skywest guys out there heed your advice and vote no - I agree that management gains everything in this case... I still can't believe that people would accept agreements that are NOT PUT IN WRITING.... You need to cover your a$$ nowadays...

I hope they do too, but candidly I see the glass as half-empty. For some strange reason airmen always seem to find it necessary to repeat the mistakes of history rather than learn from them. Nevertheless, I still have to hope for the alternative is truly scary.

Fly Safe and thanks for the kudos.

PS. Who are you with?

 

[Cardinal]

Does it strike anyone else as odd that the Skywest bunch on the boards seems to be most gung-ho against this TA? The quandry is that they are the least well-equipped of the UAX carriers to actually fight it without a real union in place. The pilots elsewhere seem to have forgotten that unity, and therefore strength, comes from within the individual pilot, not from some magical force in Herndon. Sigh.

 

[surplus1]

The following is a repost of comments I made in the "aca update" thread. The situations are so similar that I thought it was worth saying again here.
________________________________


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by neflyguy
A common theme I've seen here, 'if the MEC and the negoatiating comitte have brought this back it must be a good TA.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No one can tell you all what to do or what is best and I'm not trying, but you hit the nail on the head with that one.

Your union, and I'm not talking about the ACA group, I'm talking about ALPA, has a concessionary mindset right now. It is focused on the needs of the majors (like everything else in ALPA). If "the majors" have to take concessions, then of course YOU have to take concessionS too, because that is in "their" interest.

Negotiations have taken place because somebody has decided that they should take place. As soon as that decision was made concessions were a foregone conclusion; there was no reason to negotiate at all if concessions were not the intent of the eventual outcome. Therefore the outcome should be no surprise.

Whom do you think recommended to your MEC that concessions were a "good idea"? Any chance it was the same people that "recommended" the Mesa contract? Who "recommended" what happened at ALG/PSA/PDT? Who "recommended" the 16-year Eagle contract? Who is there in the road shows (besides ACA pilots) "recommending" that you should take the deal? Will they be affected by it?


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Blueridge Just a word of caution for all those thinking that this TA will guarantee us continued profitablity and expansion.

This TA guarantees us one thing and one thing only. We will make less than we would have without the TA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



BINGO! You are 100% correct.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure UAL has to pick us to affirm the TA but so what. It does not say that UAL has to expand us or even to keep us at our current level. UAL could very well use us at half our current capacity or less.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Your batting average is still 1,000. What is the "purpose" of these concessions again?

Do you really believe that this is going to make UAL "pick you" when otherwise it would not?


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This TA does not bring back those who have been furloughed nor prevent anyone else from being furloughed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Right again, so who is it going to "help"? Is this actually going to protect your job? How?


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This TA does not allow us to revisit the necessity of pay cuts if by chance the company winds up doing better than expected. We'd have to wait five painful years to do that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



You got that right too (except the wait will be more than five years). That translates to at least six to seven (counting negotiating time) to maybe get back to the numbers and rules you have today, minus the impact of COL increases that will undoubtedly occur in the interim.

Same question as before ... what is the true purpose of these concessions? Who are they going to "save" and from what?


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember too that we are fighting for the business of a carrier that is in bankruptcy. There is no guarantee that they will emerge successfully. What happens if UAL accepts our bid but subsequently liquidates?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Another accurate statement, followed by a very pertinent question. I like the way you think.

If your TA is approved and UAL tanks or simply gives its business to a competitor, what happens next? Your Company will look for business elsewhere, and the most likely "elsewhere" will be ..... Delta ..... where your new "concessions" will likely force the other Delta Connections to match or better your concessions or the ones in the new SKYW TA or the AWAC agreement.

Bottom line .... little by little we are all being led like lemmings down the primrose path to making more and more concessions to profitable companies, none of which have so far benefited one single regional pilot and none of which is likely to do so. Meanwhile we race merrily along undermining each other, giving up our seniority to furloughed mainline pilots, sabotaging the negotiations at ASA and COEX and CHQ and benefiting whom? Management ... and a "labor union" with little if any concern for the welfare of its second class members.

BRAVO.

I wish you luck, but this is one regional pilot (an outsider at ACA), who does not comprehend the madness. We all seem caught up it the willing rush to poverty and our own detriment, without logic, without reason, and with no visible or even promised benefit. That brings us right back to square one ......
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This TA [and all the others] guarantees us one thing and one thing only. We will make less than we would have without the TA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Emphasis supplied)

S - E - N - S - E - L - E - S - S.

 

[surplus1]

Does it strike anyone else as odd that the Skywest bunch on the boards seems to be most gung-ho against this TA? The quandry is that they are the least well-equipped of the UAX carriers to actually fight it without a real union in place. The pilots elsewhere seem to have forgotten that unity, and therefore strength, comes from within the individual pilot, not from some magical force in Herndon. Sigh.

You're thinking in the right direction, Cardinal. Although they do not have an officially recognized union that may actually be to the advantage of the Skywest pilots. They have no conflict of interests, they have no contingent of experts from the Herdon mainline intelligencia "recommending" that they should do this or pressuring them to support their "big brother" or coercing them to accept J4J. In that respect they are blessed.

Nevertheless, they appear to be determined to emulate the folly of the foreign "union". Ludicrous.

The tragedy is that if WE the "regionals" ALL had the collective courage to say NO, both to management and to Herndon, we could stop this slide into further mediocrity dead in its tracks.

 

[General Lee]

The management at Skywest enjoys the fact that they do not have to deal with a pilot union, and has so far enjoyed a good relationship with their pilots. But, this agreement or TA is asking for too much, and I hope the pilot group can see this before it is too late. What they vote for could become the "standard" in future agreements---just to "stay competitive." If they vote YES, many airline CEO's will use that phrase to their employees, and then ride off in their limos to the company management bash at the Four Season's. The rest of you will be waiting patiently in the drive-thru lane at Arby's listening to the local 80's station.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Rogue5]

"Unable..."

I don't take the issue of voting down this negotiated deal lightly: I would (and do) do a lot to help this company prosper and grow, I do think management and the pilot group have a great relationship and would hate to see it negatively affected, I am happy at first glance with the absence of a pay-cut (hell, looking around at this industry I'm happy to have a job), but after mullling over this thing for a few days I just can't feel good about giving a yes vote.

The TA is workable with some adjustments. I think a basic aspect of any work agreement is that if you do more work (or are more productive), you should get paid more.

After hearing kudos for months now about our on-time performace, cash in the bank, and benifits to be reaped with our third code-share, I think the we deserve just a bit better. As they say, time to put your money where your mouth is...

And I don't like the smell of the "don't worry, we'll renegotiate in 18 months" implication. I think the good faith that has existed between SAPA and management deserves more respect than that.

 

[maddog805]

We should link this thread to the SAPA board. Does anyone know how to do that?

 

[skypine27]

Yeah, I belive you would just cut and paste this link into SAPA reply message:

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18360&perpage=25&pagenumber=3

 

[English]

Does anyone else think surplus1's responses are always too long, or am I just attention deficit?

 

[General Lee]

English,

I would have to say yes, but it does show that he has experience in this industry. I value his opinions, even though they ramble a bit. But, he probably thinks the same of me.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Cappy]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again...

Why does everyone seem to accept that mesa and other regional carriers who agree to fly for less than industry standard put undue pressure on the profession and the contracts of their competition, but when I point out the same effect at aai, luv, or jetblue, my comments are dismissed as the rantings of an "arrogant a-hole Delta pilot."

I fail to see the difference.

And yes, the race to the bottom is most certainly underway.

And it is a perfect opportunity for managements to use this Mesa induced fear tactic and scare us all imto concessions when we are all (regionals) making money! Think abut it...they need concessions because they are making money?

I could go on all night but have others things to do. I tell you this, in all the years I have been in this business I NEVER could have imagined what we are seeing now in ANY pilot group...especially an ALPA carrier.

 

[Pee_nuss]

Im personally voting yes. In the current state of affairs in the industry this contract isnt that bad. The term is 18 Mos. How many CRJ-700's do you think we will see on property in the next few months? I'd bet my right nut a max of 20 at the MOST rosy outlook. A very small group would be affected. Word on the street was that if we wanted a pay increase for the larger aircraft, they would want a hit on the 50 seat pay. However, looking at the paperwork, the 50 seat pay on the 70 seat aircraft would put us as the fourth highest pay among the regionals. I dont think we as skywest pilots are in a position in this economy to be fighting for a cutting edge contract.

The united deal is not done, just remember that boys, we could get the same amount of flying, we could get more, less or nothing at all even. Then it wouldnt matter what kind of 70 seat rates we had, we wouldnt have the aircraft, and most of us probably would be on the streets.

Its not like this is a American Eagle contract, the thing lasts till the end of 2005, we wont have the planes yet, and hey, if the economy rebounds, im the first one in favor of cutting edge rates, but until then, im just glad im not getting a pay cut.

Peace out

P Nuss

 

[roblawton]

The fact is that this TA maintains CURRENT pay scales for ALL pilots. I was going to say that the only concessions are on paper, since we have NO AIRCRAFT larger than 50 seats. But the fact is that SkyWest could impose any pay scale the company would like, not just on new jets but on all aircraft, so there really are no "concessions" at all, paper or otherwise. As usual, our management has chosen not to do that, but rather to ask the pilots' consensus. Our management has my greatest respect for that reason. I just hope that our pilots can reach a consensus that is reasonable.

IF we get some of those aircraft, THEN we can negotiate better pay scales for them in 18 months, IF the market will support better pay.

 

[hawkowl88]

vote no

roblawton,

What part of this don't you understand?

Vote yes=your pay stays the same

Vote no= your pay stays the same

Vote yes= we get bigger planes (whoopee $hit! batman!) your pay stays the same.

Oh we can renegotiate in 18 months for industry standard.

Oh crap!! I forgot we set the industry standard by ratifying this POS TA. Your pay continues to stay the same.

VOTE NO! & Vote often.

 

[Skyward]

Originally posted by Pee_nuss

Im personally voting yes.

The race to the bottom is in full swing!

 

[trip]

vote yes and we will be stuck with a 50 seat scale for the rest of our days at SKYW. In 18 months we will have a few 70 seaters but when we renegoiate our pay we might see a dollar or two raise if we are lucky. The 50 seat scale will stick like glue.

 

[Pee_nuss]

The race to the bottom is in full swing!

You and your buddies will be in line to join skyward!!!


If you even consider the rest of our "contract" the bottom you are sorely mistaken. So are you telling me what we have now is the bottom? Not much changes...


Plus maybe we will be at the bottom, but we have never furloughed.

 

[General Lee]

Pee_Nuss is obviously an FO with a narrow view of the situation--he wants that fast upgrade, regardless of the cost. I predicted that it might pass if all the FO's wanted quick upgrades and the junior Capts wanted better schedules and more domicile choices. Only the senior or mid level Capts would see the light. If this passes it will set the new standard and the other regionals will ask for it too.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Pee_nuss]

As in my previous post general,

The likely hood of us getting more than 10 70 seat aircraft is unrealistic. For the 70 seat pay to increase, 50 seat pay will decrease. I just dont see that as a win win. Sure, the company made money last year, but remember that was on a insulated pay for departure basis. The money we made was on the backs of bankrupt carriers. The bubble will pop, and if the company can't compete, we may all be working for mesa in 18 months anyways.

Except for the few senior pilots who will be flying the 50 seat at a lower rate, because they want a higher scale for the 70's that never came to be. Just be careful guys, its a tough economy, and I honestly think that SAPA did the best they could. I think the next TA will be much worse.

 

[Skyward]

Not the rehash the whole thread, but agreeing to this TA would set a bad precedent. I’m surprised that anyone would agree to this without a fight. Nuss, you’re rolling over for no reason. SkyWest is making money, why on earth would you agree to a concretionary contract. By doing this you’re leading the way to the bottom, at least Mesa put up a small fight.

By the way; we may have guy on furlough, but when they come back it will be to a good contract. We're not participating in the race. Let me know who wins.

 

[skypine27]

"I think the next TA will be much worse"

Then vote NO to that one too. And if the one after that isn't good enough, vote NO again.

I'd much rather vote NO to the next 10 TA's SAPA comes up with then agree to this terrible one. It doesn't cost us 1 cent to vote NO. Let those SAPA guys actually "earn" their 105 hours of pay a month.

 

[AWACoff]

Does it really matter whether you vote "yes" or "no"? You don't have a union. Even if you had a union, I'm sure Skywest would roll over just like AWAC did (yeah). There are too many people running scared. As far as the statement about where would Mesa get aircraft from...there are plenty of airplanes already in United colors that they could pick up from carriers they would put out of business (Skywest, AWAC, ACA). It certainly wouldn't take 5 years to rub out a small name on the side and paint in Most Easily Suckered Airlinepilots.

 

[George Jetson]

Your union, and I'm not talking about the ACA group, I'm talking about ALPA, has a concessionary mindset right now. It is focused on the needs of the majors (like everything else in ALPA). If "the majors" have to take concessions, then of course YOU have to take concessionS too, because that is in "their" interest.

....

Whom do you think recommended to your MEC that concessions were a "good idea"? Any chance it was the same people that "recommended" the Mesa contract? Who "recommended" what happened at ALG/PSA/PDT? Who "recommended" the 16-year Eagle contract? Who is there in the road shows (besides ACA pilots) "recommending" that you should take the deal? Will they be affected by it?

...

Bottom line .... little by little we are all being led like lemmings down the primrose path to making more and more concessions to profitable companies, none of which have so far benefited one single regional pilot and none of which is likely to do so. Meanwhile we race merrily along undermining each other, giving up our seniority to furloughed mainline pilots, sabotaging the negotiations at ASA and COEX and CHQ and benefiting whom? Management ... and a "labor union" with little if any concern for the welfare of its second class members.

Mr. D (I mean Surplus),

While your messages are certainly well written and prophetic, I must say that I sense an enormous amount of paranoia in what you write, especially with respect to your opinions about Herndon. I mean no disrespect with what I am saying here, but everything that you write has to do with how ALPA is screwing over the regional pilots and how there is some Wizard of Oz who controls everything. Get over it dude. ALPA National deals with national issues and supplies each individual MEC's with resources and tools. You know that.

ALPA National is not forcing concessions down ACA's throats. Give me a break. ACA is dealing with their predicament on their own. ALPA National didn't suggest concessions. If ACA votes no and they don't lower their costs, then they will watch their UAL flying go to Mesa, etc. Ask the Bain Group about it. It's a horrible situation...and I am glad I don't have to vote on their TA.

Fortunately my airline is negotiating for increases (contrary to what you said above)...not being led down a path like lemmings, as you say. There is no harming of seniority as you say either...and our situation has nothing to do with ALPA. Both the FTA as well as the flying opportunities we've secured over at Commutair and Skywest for our furloughed pilots.

I'm sure you'll write a long drawn out esoteric email full of rhetoric lambasting me for supporting my MEC and ALPA National. I eagerly await it. In the meantime, I will support my fellow ACA pilots and friends and hope that they can maintain their status as UAX carrier. What a pickle they are in....it sucks.

GJ