Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Spirit closing DTW pilot base

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
It's not the crews, I'm not harping on my brothers and sister fight crews. It is the gate agents. They are the most unhelpful group in the entire Spirit system and that is IF you can find one.



Add that to the fact that FLL gate agents are told by mgmt to be "too busy" to run the CASS check for offline jumpseaters! Just wait until NK's reciprocal jumpseat agreements are lost with other carriers and and THEN try commuting to FLL. At that point, commuters will essentially be in a position of servitude to the company. Move to base (which may be closed a year later forcing another expensive move- just look at ACY, CLE, MYR, EWR etc) or get lost. The company could care less about the jumpseat issue as it yields no revenue, and the ONLY thing the investors care about is the bottom line. Do not forget that MESA is on the board of directors, a fact the company likes to conceal.
 
Isn't closing a base considered a break of status quo during negotiations? If they close DTW, what's to stop you guys from not picking up open time? Seriously, is ALPA pursuing this?
 
Isn't closing a base considered a break of status quo during negotiations? If they close DTW, what's to stop you guys from not picking up open time? Seriously, is ALPA pursuing this?

Guys have already stopped picking up open time. That's why they're starting to cancel more flights. Yup!! Lets step over a $100 dollar bill to save a dime. "It works on paper!"
 
Isn't closing a base considered a break of status quo during negotiations? If they close DTW, what's to stop you guys from not picking up open time? Seriously, is ALPA pursuing this?

No, the status quo refers only to changing of the contract terms.
 
Isn't closing a base considered a break of status quo during negotiations?

Technically, it could be. However, you'd have to prove that the company had no legitimate business purpose for closing the base other than trying to break the union. If the company could demonstrate some sort of financial need, then it wouldn't be considered breach of status quo. I would imagine that the company could easily find some way to show financial need for closing the domicile.
 
Technically, it could be. However, you'd have to prove that the company had no legitimate business purpose for closing the base other than trying to break the union. If the company could demonstrate some sort of financial need, then it wouldn't be considered breach of status quo. I would imagine that the company could easily find some way to show financial need for closing the domicile.

Technically, ALPA's Assistant Director of Representation says that it is not. I wish it were, but when Bruce York and company give a fact, I tend to believe them.
 
Looks like USA 3000 is hiring Airbus pilots for its DTW base. Just a consideration if you absolutely don't want to move or commute...
 
Technically, ALPA's Assistant Director of Representation says that it is not. I wish it were, but when Bruce York and company give a fact, I tend to believe them.

That's somewhat surprising, but if Bruce and friends say so, then I believe them.
 
PCL you got to understand that there is alot of angst over the closing of the DTW base. While I can understand the dissappointment and anger over the closure in 55 days or so, they are going to try to prevent it by any means they deem necessary. The ONLY problem that I see is somehow the pilots that are DTW based thinking that FLL pilots had ANYTHING to do with such a closure. The oldest trick in the book - DIVIDE AND CONQUER.

Spirit pilots MUST stay united to produce a contract that is worth voting in.
 
The Business model in JC's letter that said we have to keep the competition guessing. Nice model or mission statement. Tell that to my pregnant wife and my mortgage broker in DTW. Yes it is great here you want to why because it is home I don't pass judgement on your home. Well I have to call the bank and tell them I need to keep the competition guessing guerilla stlye. Love ya JC and Benny thanks

Don't forget to tell Herb thanks as it seems he has his fingers touching everything over there. Nice to negotiate a satellite base during the middle of contract negotiations.
 
Don't forget to tell Herb thanks as it seems he has his fingers touching everything over there. Nice to negotiate a satellite base during the middle of contract negotiations.

Since you're hiding behind internet anonymity, why not tell us just what HL failed to do for you.

It's easy shooting darts from the sidelines.

Rep-ing a bunch of pilots is not an easy task and I don't envy HL one tiny bit.

BTW, the satellite base LOA has a nuclear button.
 
Nothing that isn't stopping them already

Am I mistaken, or didn't Delta get an injunction forbidding pilots from not picking up open time (sic)? I'd say that's stopping guys from not picking up open time, though I'm not familiar with the ins and outs of Spirit and their open time.

What would you suggest that ALPA do?

Investigate every avenue to keep DTW open. ALPA pays a lot of lawyers a lot of money for good advice, maybe in the end nothing can be done about it, but I know if I were at Spirit I would be comforted that ALPA at least 'looked into it'.
 
They HAVE genious.......support your elected reps.

Vote-Volunteer-or Shut Your Hole / that is how I have always looked at it anyways.
 
They HAVE genious.......support your elected reps.

Vote-Volunteer-or Shut Your Hole / that is how I have always looked at it anyways.

The "Mary's" at spirit don't have the guts to get into the fight. They want to stand around and carp about their leadership.
 
ALPA pays a lot of lawyers a lot of money for good advice, maybe in the end nothing can be done about it, but I know if I were at Spirit I would be comforted that ALPA at least 'looked into it'.

Bruce York, the guy that Enegma mentioned, is the Director of ALPA's Representation Department (ie. one of the head attorneys). If he and his department have already looked at it, as Enegma said, then you can trust their judgment.
 
Bruce York, the guy that Enegma mentioned, is the Director of ALPA's Representation Department (ie. one of the head attorneys). If he and his department have already looked at it, as Enegma said, then you can trust their judgment.

Wow, I think my posts have been taken much differently than I intended. Let me try to rephrase.

Has Spirit's MEC indicated they think closing DTW is a violation of status quo? If not, have they cited why it's not a violation (precedent)?

I'm not questioning ALPA's integrity, I'm just curious if the Spirit MEC thinks it might be possible to keep the base open, with or without concessions in negotiations.
 
Bruce York, the guy that Enegma mentioned, is the Director of ALPA's Representation Department (ie. one of the head attorneys). If he and his department have already looked at it, as Enegma said, then you can trust their judgment.

Pardon the ignorance, but what is the purpose of the "status quo" clause? It apparently has no "teeth".

If a base was economical before negotiations - why isn't it economical during negotiations? In this regard, the clause would have purpose - no major [economical] changes during negotiations!
 
Pardon the ignorance, but what is the purpose of the "status quo" clause? It apparently has no "teeth".

If a base was economical before negotiations - why isn't it economical during negotiations? In this regard, the clause would have purpose - no major [economical] changes during negotiations!

The company, nor the union, can control outside economical factors. The law was never intended to bind a company's hands against making decisions necessary for the ordinary running of the business. The law is intended to keep the company from changing the conditions of employment (pay, work rules, scope, etc...) during negotiations, and to keep the union from engaging in premature work actions when a solution via negotiations is still possible.
 
The company, nor the union, can control outside economical factors. The law was never intended to bind a company's hands against making decisions necessary for the ordinary running of the business. The law is intended to keep the company from changing the conditions of employment (pay, work rules, scope, etc...) during negotiations, and to keep the union from engaging in premature work actions when a solution via negotiations is still possible.

Exactamundo...........
 
anyone care to enlighten us who were not able to attend or listen to the meeting yesterday?

Technical difficulties from what I gather for "listening in" or watching via internet.

Anybody actually at that meeting care to give a brief synopsis of what went on?
 
The company, nor the union, can control outside economical factors. The law was never intended to bind a company's hands against making decisions necessary for the ordinary running of the business. The law is intended to keep the company from changing the conditions of employment (pay, work rules, scope, etc...) during negotiations, and to keep the union from engaging in premature work actions when a solution via negotiations is still possible.

So the law does provide some "binding"? Could one not argue that a domicile closure affects pay and/or workrules; and therefore constitutes some "binding"?

I'll try a different approach to my original question. If the law (RLA?) prevents the company from changing the conditions of employment during negotiations; what is the purpose of the "status quo" clause? (Note: I am "piggy backing" on a previous post that got me thinking - I have neither read nor heard of the clause before that post).
 
So the law does provide some "binding"? Could one not argue that a domicile closure affects pay and/or workrules; and therefore constitutes some "binding"?

Not unless the contract specifically states that the company's pilot domiciles will be x, y, and z. If the contract doesn't address a specific issue, then the law allows for "management's rights." Basically, that means that the company is free to conduct business in a manner that it feels is necessary as long as it doesn't violate the contract. If the company feels that closing the base is best for business, then nothing in the RLA prohibits that unless the CBA requires that that base remain open.
 
Now i wonder if the DTW closure does have to do with TPG buying Midwest. The deal also involves Northwest, and give them the right to buy Midwest from TPG in the future. TPG other option, is to resell their stocks once they go through whatever they have in mind.
I don't know exactly what's cooking here, but it is really odd that this deal is going through at the same time Spirit is closing the DTW pilot base.

My take is that the next step will be to close the DTW base, scale down the flying there, focus on the flying at out of FLL. This was a deal made with Northwest in order to be able to go through with the Midwest buyout. What's in store next ? A merge with Spirit operation or make a quick buck with the resell of Midwest.

It just shows what these big private equity firms are all about. As long as they can make money, they'll do whatever it takes at the employees' expense. So let's stop blaming each other, we had absolutely no control over it. Let's all stick together and fight for a real contract. After all this is the only thing we can get from them, as long as we fight together.

By the way, Midwest is also ALPA with the most junior captain hired in 1998. Pretty scary......
 
Last edited:
The Cactus people I have talked with say Bill Franke pulled the same base closure stunt when they were in contract talks. Any Cactus people please chime in.
 
The Cactus people I have talked with say Bill Franke pulled the same base closure stunt when they were in contract talks. Any Cactus people please chime in.


And, Ford and Harrison (anti labor law firm employed by many airlines, including Spirit) pulled a base closure at ASA if I understand correctly.

Also, NK VP Ops Carlsen closed down HNL and SEA when he was a NWA manager.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom