SkyNation
U.S. American
- Joined
- May 11, 2006
- Posts
- 953
Do you think management is sincere in coming to the table to talk about our pay?
Secondly, a union ANY union whether it be ALPA or In-house would continue to allow a company to be successfull, if a GOOD management team is in place. It also would make the campany more successfull if the company continued to grow and remain profitable with a union on property.
Good questions, not sure I agree with your points, however.
Does SkyWest management want a union on property? Obviously the answer has been NO. THe more important question is, why?
Logic tells me that it is because they believe it would cost the company current or future prospects of flying, bogg down processes, hamper their ability to negotiate, all of which will ultimately cost them money. Their job is to minimize costs, maximize profits.
Unionistas and conspiracy theorists tell me that it is purely an issue of pride, and that Ron, Brad, et al just can't stomach the idea of giving up any amount of control to a union. They theorize that it wouldn't cost the company anything, one guy even tried to tell me we'd save the company money by voting in ALPA.
so, in answer to your question. I think Brad is trying to do what has always been done-convince us that we are better off without a union by offering raises and QOL improvements that equal or exceed what pilots at other regionals get using the processes inherent to ALPA.
what I'm most interested in is results. I cite ASA and Comair because they are large regionals who provide feed to DAL. They have a system, a process, a way of doing things. SkyWest does as well. For me and my family, the SkyWest way provides better results and prospects in terms of QOL, pay, growth opportunities, career opportunities, bases, etc.
Last edited: