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

What do you think will happen to ASA?

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
I was in on that call, and I don't recall JR saying that Joey.

I have a tape of the call..... it was said early on in the call......

He also said that we cannot legally negotiate a single list... which is false. What little faith I had was shattered.....
 
I have a tape of the call..... it was said early on in the call......

He also said that we cannot legally negotiate a single list... which is false. What little faith I had was shattered.....
I know our MEC knows better. Sorry to be uninformed, but when was this conference call?

Our CNC and MEC have recently refocused on scope (thanks in large part to your prodding) and I had hoped based on what I had been told that they finally got their heading set correctly.

You are correct. If JR said this, it is alarming!

Monkey - Excellent post, Sir.
 
Is this the kind of good business sense that sends 30 CRJ-900's to ATL with a crew base. Not to mention the added cost of an infrastructure that is seperate than ours (maintenance, etc.). Seems to me JA is making good of his threats and promises, and that we keep trying the same blind stunts over, and over, and over, and over, again. No, it has gone much farther than rhetoric and negotiating leverage.


Sending a few -900s to ATL is just a way to get in our face. Starting a pilot base without extensive infrastructure is cheap, relatively speaking. A few moving expenses, some pilots being reshuffled, etc. SKYW has always been quick to open and close bases, it's not a big thing to them. They upped the ante, but they haven't gone all-in. They did the same thing when our -700s went to SLC. It was because of DAL's scope, but mgmt played up the "you can get it back if you're cheaper" talk to the SKYW pilots and it worked.
 
All of you guys talking about how the CRJ 200s will be replaced one-for-one with CRJ 900s... I have news for you. They can't.

There is a scope limit of the amount of 76-seat airplanes. I'm sure a Delta pilot can correct me, but it was 30 airplanes initially, with a 3-to-1 ratio for every additional mainline airplane on property. Delta has pretty much awarded every 900 that they have the ability to, as they only have a handful of mainline deliveries scheduled.

I also believe that there is a 200 aircraft limit of the combined total of 70- and 76-seat class airplanes. .



He is correct about everything, execpt on the aircraft deliveries at Delta. Delta is adding 13 757s this year, and in 08 will be adding 4-5 777s and at least 10 737-700s. With the limit of 200 combined total of 70 and 76 seat aircraft, I think the limit will be reached in the next year or two. Will be intresting to see what happens. My guess is Delta will ask for relief on the 200 number, continuing to tie 900s to mainline deliveries.
 
I have a tape of the call..... it was said early on in the call......

He also said that we cannot legally negotiate a single list... which is false. What little faith I had was shattered.....

Sorry, but I do not recall that being said JB. If it was, I sure as hell missed it, and I was awake at the beginning of the call! Your faith wasn't shattered John, it was never there in the first place.
 
Sorry, but I do not recall that being said JB. If it was, I sure as hell missed it, and I was awake at the beginning of the call! Your faith wasn't shattered John, it was never there in the first place.

You're right ASARJMan, I don't have any faith in ALPA anymore. I have watched too many ALPA induced train wrecks. Go over an look at the National ALPA message board. The age 60 trainwreck and USAir/AWA merger trainwreck are tearing ALPA apart. There are guys threatening to cross each others picket lines over there.

JR said the part about "trying to get a better contract to show Skywest" early on. Later in the call, DU (Capt. Rep.) corrects JR, and says we aren't going to go after more just to influence the Skywest election. I have faith in Danny, I just think he is 1 against 3 right now..... he was part of the wrong coalition.....

Danny gets it..... I'm just afraid the others don't.......
 
I know our MEC knows better. Sorry to be uninformed, but when was this conference call?

Our CNC and MEC have recently refocused on scope (thanks in large part to your prodding) and I had hoped based on what I had been told that they finally got their heading set correctly.

You are correct. If JR said this, it is alarming!

Monkey - Excellent post, Sir.

I heard it with my own ears..... Danny was the only voice of reason..... He corrected what JR said about allowing "external factors" to drive these negotiations. Sounded like they didn't agree on things. JR made it very clear that this part of an ALPA national agenda....
 
JR said the part about "trying to get a better contract to show Skywest" early on. Later in the call, DU (Capt. Rep.) corrects JR, and says we aren't going to go after more just to influence the Skywest election. ......

I think you're taking this out of context John. I believe JR meant we will get a good and fair contract. This will show the SKYW pilots what resolve will accomplish is what I sincerely believe JR meant.

As for DU, I again believe you're taking it out of context. DU meant we weren't going after a "sky-high" contract just to influence the SKYW election. But we are going after a fair and just contract with meaningful work rules, pay, and scope. On that the entire MEC/CNC is in agreement, amd the majority of ASA pilots.

Maybe you ought to provide your 'tape' for all to listen to so they can draw their own conclusions on what was said, and the intent it had.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top