What's the problem with GJ?!?!

[Dumbluck]

If your not rated in one of the above aircraft, "the animosity caused by you being on the aircraft constitutes a safety of flight issue."


that is one of the best most proffesional statements I've read, (maybe not the reason for denial)

Not to Hijack the thread, but a couple of times while trying to JS, I've heard the Captain of the flight, ruthlessly tear a js'r a new hole. uncalled for and completely unproffesional. when I say uncalled for I mean swearing and name-calling if it had happened in a bar there would've been punches thrown

 

[SkyBoy1981]

As far as the "THIS is where you mainline folks failed to secure your own jobs by standing up and demanding scope to keep your jet flying"

Let me play GJ pilot:

"You didn't take this pay and these work rules so now your regretting right"?

Sound familiar?

You're comparing apples to coconuts. TSA does have scope preventing alter-ego's from taking their flying. The formation of G0-Jets is a clear and blatant violation of TSA pilot's contract with management. You're comparing that to regional jet pilots that took away mainline flying. So tell me where YOUR contract was broken? Oh wait...it wasn't...because there was never anything in your contract to limit it to begin with. So my question is, how can you hold RJ pilots at fault for taking your flying when you never restricted it to begin with? There is a very clear difference here.

 

[Terry Hunter]

You're comparing apples to coconuts. TSA does have scope preventing alter-ego's from taking their flying. The formation of G0-Jets is a clear and blatant violation of TSA pilot's contract with management...

Pardon the confusion, if the GJ action has an ounce of illegitimacy, wouldn't ALPA be waiting on the court steps to file a protest first thing in the morning? I'm not clear on why ALPA is not pursuing legal action, or are they?

I'm sorry that TSH exploited this loophole in the TSA scope. Fight TSH mgmt, you must; not GJ pilots.

 

[h25b]

The formation of G0-Jets is a clear and blatant violation of TSA pilot's contract with management.

Well you may think so, but this TSA pilot knows otherwise... Please read and if you have a problem with that take it up with him. I mean, heck, he works there ???

h25b- that info. has been posted on here by myself and several others a long time ago. YOU ARE RIGHT. It does say Trans States Airlines, Inc. Which I along with many others here thought was the company we worked for. I had no idea there was a f'n Trans States Holdings. They don't tell you that sort of thing in the interview.

 

[SkyBoy1981]

Well you may think so, but this TSA pilot knows otherwise... Please read and if you have a problem with that take it up with him. I mean, heck, he works there ???

I see. Well...if they indeed do not have the language in their contract that ALPA has been leading everyone to believe that they have, then I would have to agree that TSA's pilot group is at fault for that. I really haven't seen any hard evidence that shows one way or the other.

 

[fuelflow]

The TSA MEC, not the pilots through a vote, ratified the contract in 2000 with the weak scope in it.

The real crime was when the MEC extended the contract for 2 years around 2003, again with no pilot vote, understanding full well what happened with Mesa/Freedom and Chautauqua/Republic. They are fighting a losing battle and have convinced the TSA pilots that they will win.

 

[h25b]

I see. Well...if they indeed do not have the language in their contract that ALPA has been leading everyone to believe that they have, then I would have to agree that TSA's pilot group is at fault for that. I really haven't seen any hard evidence that shows one way or the other.

I guess we can only go with what someone on the inside says. If you haven't already come to the conclusion that ALPA hasn't a clue, then you're too far gone for my to save you now.. They're just following the standard ALPA playbook. Draw everyone out until the last possible moment, throw the regional pilots to the wolves, and collect as much revenue in dues as possible.

Here's another person that sees clearly... Read below....

The TSA MEC, not the pilots through a vote, ratified the contract in 2000 with the weak scope in it.

The real crime was when the MEC extended the contract for 2 years around 2003, again with no pilot vote, understanding full well what happened with Mesa/Freedom and Chautauqua/Republic. They are fighting a losing battle and have convinced the TSA pilots that they will win.

 

[BoilerUP]

Here's another person that sees clearly... Read below....

I can't believe you are giving credibility to anything fuelflow says by saying he has "clarity" on the issue. You are blaming the pilot group and union leadership for this "failure", when it wouldn't be an issue if TSA management had some basic ethical practices and beliefs toward their employees.

TSA could have easily given the Go Jet flying to the hard-working Trans States ALPA pilots that helped earn the profits to get Go Jet started in the first place...but they chose not to. TSA management offered ALPA a contract extension which amounted to concessions on an already outdated CBA to secure the Go Jet flying, and this extension essentially offered seniority integration and job protections to Go Jet pilots. TSA ALPA wisely told them to pound sand. If TSA pilots had approved this POS concessionary contract extension, it would have further validated the regional whipsaw, emboldened management throughout the industry, and TSA pilots would have been called worse than Mesa pilots had ever dreamed.

This is not a slippery slope argument, this is fact.

Just because HK and his cronies used a loophole in a CBA doesn't make his actions right or ethical, even though they might be legal. TSA pilots have every right to fight the existance of Go Jet, as it is a major threat to their jobs and will be used as as a whipsaw (it already has been). Go Jet pilots accepted employment knowing this. The outcome of the Single Carrier Petition will solve this issue once and for all.

And we're all still waiting to see details of Go Jet's current pay agreement and IBT contract negotiations.

 

[tjsatter]

And we're all still waiting to see details of GJ's current pay agreement and IBT contract negotiations

.

There is no current pay "agreement" They are paid whatever the company feels like which is less than the TSA pilots get for the same work in a 50-seater. For starters they get block rather than block or better. For United flying into ORD this alone typically makes a 10% difference +/- in pay. They have worse bennies, less days off, less vacation and they are employed at the will and whim of management: they can be fired at any time for any or no reason.

There is no IBT contract negotiations. The premature recognition was rescinded and anything further is on hold pending resolution of other issues. The single carrie thing before the NMB for starters.

As time goes on it seems clear that the contract the "Holding" company was trying to bypass was the TSA/CBA. The thing with AMR/APA was extra gravy.

tj

 

[h25b]

I can't believe you are giving credibility to anything fuelflow says by saying he has "clarity" on the issue. You are blaming the pilot group and union leadership for this "failure", when it wouldn't be an issue if TSA management had some basic ethical practices and beliefs toward their employees.

Let me give you some advice... Never leave your current job to work at ANY non-union job. Your rose-colored, "they shouldn't do that to me" attitude while noble, is pretty pathetic...

If the pilot group/MEC at TSA signed on to a weak scope clause who else are you supposed to blame ??? Since when did TS management ever have basic ethical practices ??? Gee whiz man, get real. It's never been that great which is all the more reason they should've paid more attention to their scope clause language. If you put your faith in to management to "do the right thing" you're asking for trouble and if that were the case there'd be no reason to have a union in the first place... For crying loud junior, what are you paying union dues for then ???

 

[BoilerUP]

I appreciate your concerns about and for me...but don't talk down to me with your terms like "junior". There are no rose colored glasses here. I've seen first hand how brutal this industry is and can be, but as I've said before, that doesn't make it right...and I don't expect the company to 'give' me anything. I would expect them to honor the intent of a "good-faith negotiated" CBA, but when they don't even honor the letter of said CBA, I admit such is wishful thinking.

You talk about escaping Chautauqua and the regional airline world in the late 90s to get into corporate then ask where your seniority would place you if you had stayed, which would be within top 100 with 17-18 days off a month as an E170 check airman. I'm sure you have no regrets about your current position and the career progression that got you there, especially in light of current events.

What I fail to understand, however, is how you can sit back and justify what TSA management is doing to Trans States pilots via Go Jet. When the contract was originally signed in 2000, nobody had ever heard of Freedom or Republic. During the extension scope may have been overlooked. I don't have the dates in front of me, but when did TSA sign their extension compared to the MAG and CHQ contracts being ratified? Even then it may not have been a factor, because Trans States Holdings did not exist at that time! How can a union scope something that doesn't exist?

Time will tell what will happen with Trans States Airlines and Go Jet. If Go Jet succeeds, it will cause even more trouble in this already turbulent industry. I think TSA pilots are taking a stand to protect their jobs, and they aren't willing to sell themselves or their value short. This board is full of corporate pilots who loudly proclaim their distain for people who "lower the bar" in their sandbox, so why are you defending those who do it somewhere else?

and BTW....I don't work for TSA.

 

[h25b]

What I fail to understand, however, is how you can sit back and justify what TSA management is doing to Trans States pilots via GJ. When the contract was originally signed in 2000, nobody had ever heard of Freedom or Republic. During the extension scope may have been overlooked. I don't have the dates in front of me, but when did TSA sign their extension compared to the MAG and CHQ contracts being ratified? Even then it may not have been a factor, because Trans States Holdings did not exist at that time! How can a union scope something that doesn't exist?

I think, if my memory serves, this guy had the sequence of events about right...

The TSA MEC, not the pilots through a vote, ratified the contract in 2000 with the weak scope in it.

The real crime was when the MEC extended the contract for 2 years around 2003, again with no pilot vote, understanding full well what happened with Mesa/Freedom and Chautauqua/Republic. They are fighting a losing battle and have convinced the TSA pilots that they will win.

 

[SkyBoy1981]

I guess we can only go with what someone on the inside says. If you haven't already come to the conclusion that ALPA hasn't a clue, then you're too far gone for my to save you now.. They're just following the standard ALPA playbook. Draw everyone out until the last possible moment, throw the regional pilots to the wolves, and collect as much revenue in dues as possible.

Here's another person that sees clearly... Read below....

I am not completely blinded by everything ALPA says, but at the same time I'm not going to be quick to believe the words of a few on this site either. If the scope is there, then this alter-ego is in violation of it. If it isn't there, well....its still ethically wrong, but the TSA MEC may have quite a bit of blame in this whole thing. FuelFlow flies for G0Jets himself, so he is no more reputable than ALPA or anyone else in my book. I don't think many of us on this site have the hard evidence to draw so much speculation one way or the other, we're all just going on biased information.

 

[BoilerUP]

I think, if my memory serves, this guy had the sequence of events about right...

Nice dodge, but you did not answer my question.

How can a union scope something that doesn't exist?

In 2000, there was no Trans States Holdings. In 2000, there was no such thing as Freedom or Republic. In 2003, there was no Trans States Holdings. In 2003, depending on the time frame of the TSA contract extension (which I am not aware of), there may or may not have been the precedent of Mesa/Freedom and CHQ/Republic to contend with. If TSH did not exist in 2003, and was therefore not a threat to TSA ALPA, how honest is it to fault the union leadership and pilot group for failing to protect themselves against an unknown entity?

If I am wrong and TSH *did* in fact exist in 2000 (or 2003) and the MEC failed to secure Holding Company flying, then yes there is some blame for them to bear. If TSH didn't exist then, one can't reasonably fault the union for failing to protect against a threat (holding company) that didn't exist.

 

[elcapitan]

In the early 90's through 2000 Transstates did in fact own another airline. It was United Feeder Service. It was formed to fly the BAEATP's that (United) owned after they purchased Air Wisconsin in the early 90's. So there must be a holding company that handled both airlines (TSA and UFS) at that time.

adios...

Nice dodge, but you did not answer my question.



In 2000, there was no Trans States Holdings. In 2000, there was no such thing as Freedom or Republic. In 2003, there was no Trans States Holdings. In 2003, depending on the time frame of the TSA contract extension (which I am not aware of), there may or may not have been the precedent of Mesa/Freedom and CHQ/Republic to contend with. If TSH did not exist in 2003, and was therefore not a threat to TSA ALPA, how honest is it to fault the union leadership and pilot group for failing to protect themselves against an unknown entity?

If I am wrong and TSH *did* in fact exist in 2000 (or 2003) and the MEC failed to secure Holding Company flying, then yes there is some blame for them to bear. If TSH didn't exist then, one can't reasonably fault the union for failing to protect against a threat (holding company) that didn't exist.

 

[Terry Hunter]

... If TSH did not exist in 2003, and was therefore not a threat to TSA ALPA, how honest is it to fault the union leadership and pilot group for failing to protect themselves against an unknown entity?

If I am wrong and TSH *did* in fact exist in 2000 (or 2003) and the MEC failed to secure Holding Company flying, then yes there is some blame for them to bear. If TSH didn't exist then, one can't reasonably fault the union for failing to protect against a threat (holding company) that didn't exist.

I see what your saying, but a rock-solid scope is protected by buy-outs, mergers or acquistions for the future after a contract is signed. I am not exactly sure, but I believe "successorship" is the section that comes into play for preserving the scope for the chance that your company is bought by another.

 

[fuelflow]

TSAH was created in 1998. Their annual filings can be found at MO's Dept of Commerce website. I'll link it for anyone who needs it.The contract extension was ratified in the Spring of 2003, AFTER the Mesa/Freedom debacle and their winter 2002/03 (I believe) contract. Most of the TSA guys who came to GJ, did so due to a loss of confidence with their union leadership (and continue to do so).Hulas did indeed own United Feeder Service, which flew BAE ATP's for United, as a separate entity from Trans States Airlines, Inc. They were represented by the Teamsters as well. Several of their pilots are back at GJ.This problem was created by the TSA MEC, and now they want to wage a war to cover their own mistakes. Even if they win the Single Carrier petition with the NMB (though unlikely), GJ pilots will still be on a separate seniority list with a separate CBA.These are just the facts. I know several of you disagree for one reason or another, but you should know the facts surrounding this case.

 

[waterski]

KEEP DRINKING KOOL-AID

 

[purduedchi]

Fuel Flow,
You seem to show the most arrogance out of anyone on this board, or any other for that matter. In all honesty, if the pilots at TSA had not signed that contract extension, then there would have been no, I repeat NO, United Express flying. United did not even want to talk to us knowing that we would begin labor negotiations in a year or two. They wanted a company that was more stable from a labor perspective, and we were able to do that in order help this company grow. Now that is a fact. It is because of our sacrifice that GJ had the opportunity to get off the ground. You talk of our MEC as the only cause for the TSA pilots problems. I'll admit, I do not agree with them 100% of the time. I do know however that are working to come up with a viable solution to help both sides out. Nothing that we have asked for has been too much. It's more that TSA Management hates our union leadership with a passion and would do anything and everything to make them look bad. The reason that they hate them, because they stand up for us and win. I honestly can not remember the last time we lost an arbitration. Now I know you think GJ will be different; it will be one of the best company's to work for in the industry right? Well do me a favor...post your payscales...from year one on up, FO's and CA's. Then do me another favor and post all of your work rules...all the stuff about 5 day trips and so on. You want to talk about the facts, kind of hard to do when you don't lay everything aout about your company(I mean, what should be our - TSA's - company). People have repeatedly asked you for this info, and you keep beating around the bush. So let's have it for once. Furthermore, is the rumor true that your negotiating chairperson, DT, has stepped aside. I wonder why if it is indeed true. Maybe the management isn't so different after all.

 

[TSA145]

TSAH was created in 1998. Their annual filings can be found at MO's Dept of Commerce website. I'll link it for anyone who needs it.The contract extension was ratified in the Spring of 2003, AFTER the Mesa/Freedom debacle and their winter 2002/03 (I believe) contract. Most of the TSA guys who came to GJ, did so due to a loss of confidence with their union leadership (and continue to do so).Hulas did indeed own United Feeder Service, which flew BAE ATP's for United, as a separate entity from Trans States Airlines, Inc. They were represented by the Teamsters as well. Several of their pilots are back at GJ.This problem was created by the TSA MEC, and now they want to wage a war to cover their own mistakes. Even if they win the Single Carrier petition with the NMB (though unlikely), GJ pilots will still be on a separate seniority list with a separate CBA.These are just the facts. I know several of you disagree for one reason or another, but you should know the facts surrounding this case.

So Hulas is the solution for not a trusting a union official who gets elected by the majority of the pilot group?????? Holy crap Fat Bastard, HK must pay you really a lot of cash....