Psa And Piedmont Fa's Ready For War

PIT-

I was waiting for you to comment on this thread! I've said my bit about the fairness of seniority and benefits of solidarity, no more venting from me... :D


And airlineorphan, I agree with PIT... you are articulate and know what you're talking about... glad you are on our side!
 
I didn't realize that PSA was merging with anybody. Where is the source of this news? The AFA merger clause only works if there is a merger.
 
NCflyer said:
skyguy25,

By the way,

thanks for the compassion.



Maybe you would like all of the USAirways employees to be phased out. Just you and your own left. And of course MESA still around.


NCflyer,


You know, sometimes I wish some of these characters that come on here and speak out against a group, would be inflicted with NO seniority and then phased out so they could empathize with what that might feel like when they speak...... :angry:
 
PoorPropDriver said:
Group has never signed any orders/options for the EMB-145 only the 170/175.
This is not true. The actual order is for 85 firm deliveries of the EMB-170's which can be converted to 175's. Options include an additional 50 EMB-170's and 140 ERJ-145's.
So the options include 140 ERJ-145's.

Check out the official press release on the Embraer website. Release date May 12, 2003

Embraer.com
 
Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles could even see the writing on this wall...it's been there for 20 + months now. PDT is by all ( or most see it )... "screwed". It's more to life than waiting around for this BS to play out. Quit being pawns for these ***holes that are calling the shots. Green light on ! stand ! hook-up! and GO! GO! BAIL OUT!!! boys and girls... you'll sleep better and your blood psi is much lower, trust me I spent 17 years in this and the last 3 were "crap". Best luck to all. Happy Holidays to all, I'll spent it with my family for a change. YEE HA!!

Fail to plan.. Plan on failing.
N786P.
 
FWIW, does US really need three wholly owned commuter carriers? I'm still a big believer in just having one airline, from the 19 seat turboprop up to the 250+ seat A330. But, this would entail a total rework of the salary structures to make it palatable to everyone.
 
USFlyer said:
FWIW, does US really need three wholly owned commuter carriers? I'm still a big believer in just having one airline, from the 19 seat turboprop up to the 250+ seat A330. But, this would entail a total rework of the salary structures to make it palatable to everyone.
I dont think the 19 seaters to A330s as one would necessarily work, but we definitely dont need 3 (soon to be 4) Express carriers all within the 37-70 seat range. Just think of all the duplicate work being done, the expenses involved and the lack of coordination that has got to happen with 3 "companies" doing the same job. Not that I want to see any more jobs lost, but how much would that add to the bottom line if the duplicate management and services were cut and merged? Managers, training, ordering, actually being able to sub equipment instead of cancelling cause airline X doesnt run extra sections for airline Y? The list of savings goes on and on and since they're wholly owned, it would go right to the bottom line.
 
algflyr said:
This is not true. The actual order is for 85 firm deliveries of the EMB-170's which can be converted to 175's. Options include an additional 50 EMB-170's and 140 ERJ-145's.
So the options include 140 ERJ-145's.

Check out the official press release on the Embraer website. Release date May 12, 2003

Embraer.com
I stand corrected....
 
Bluestreak,

You asked earlier in this thread about PDT losing 30% of their pilots.

Our newest seniority list came out today:

Last month's list 388 pilots.
This month's list 370 pilots.

According to the most current list 18 pilots left in 1 month.

Just thought you might be interested.
 
USFlyer said:
I thought US already semi did this, centralizing everything in MDT?
They just recently centralized some things, but not even close to all they could. I think payroll and maybe one or two other departments, but thats it afaik.
 
:eek:

To all on this thread,

The person that started this thread has made some statements that, as a PSA pilot, I find absolutly disturbing. And I can assure my brothers and sisters at ALG and PDT that his/her comments do NOT reflect the attitudes of our pilot group.

In defense of our FA's though, their leadership is not "representing" them. And it would be HIGHLY unlikely that Mgt would even agree to this.
 
NCflyer and all other angry PDT and ALG people

I have a friend that quit PDT to go to air traffic control school. I hope you didn't get the wrong impression from my post. I have a bunch of friends at PDT and I feel bad about what's happening over there. Also, I voted no on everything that they let us PSA pilots vote on. It's a bad deal, but PSA got lucky only because our Pilot union had no leverage when all these concessions were going down. Insider sources (sorry if I sound like Chip) told me PSA was within days of being shut down several times during bankrupcy. I believe Siegel saw that our unions had the least leverage and our management was the strongest of the wholly owneds so he decided to put the jets here. That's nothing for the PSA pilots to be proud of. But on the other hand, do you think the PDT pilots would be in a rush to merge the seniority lists if they were the ones getting the jets? I don't think so. Pilots cut each others throats again and again. Throughout the 90s PSA was the forgotten wholly owned. We had the worst work rules and lowest wages. That doesn't say good things about our union strenght. However, your union leadship should have realized at that time that any one pilot group at U is only as strong as the weakest group U. Was any help offered by either of the other wholly owneds when our contract negotiations were stalled for two years? No.

Before the jet order was anounced why didn't the three wholly owneds come to an agreement to merge the seniority lists in the event only one carrier in the group survived? That would have been the only time to come to a fair decision about merging the lists. At that time, I think each side was gambling that they would be the big RJ winner and they didn't want to take the risk of splitting the spoils with their so called union brothers. Now after all the decisions have been made and political manuvering is done, PSA comes out as the carrier getting the RJs and ALG and PDT act as if we were all happy union brothers all along and somehow the pilots at PSA Pilots have turned greedy.

That's just my view of it all. I don't like what's going on. But what can I do? Should I give my job and seniority to some guy at PDT that I never met before? How much do I owe you? Should I give you my job because you work for PDT? That's what it comes down to. If we merge the lists, I am out of a job.
 
Bluestreak,

Don't misunderstand what most of us are saying.

Most of us here at PDT were glad to see at least 1 of the WO get RJs. We, like you and the pilots of ALG were sick each time we heard of another RJ going to some contract carrier. Would I like to see RJs scheduled for delivery at PDT and ALG? Absolutely. However I firmly believe that will never happen. What got me and some of the others upset is the quote that apparently came from 1 of your coworkers at PSA and their statements that PSA was some how better than PDT & ALG and therefore more deserving of an RJ. And then the best thing would be to just shut down PDT & ALG.

skyguy25 said:
The best thing that can happen to USAirways is the phasing out of PDT and Allegheny all together.


Of course it could just be the same idiot that I heard in the CLT crew room several months ago spouting off about how PSA pilots were better for any jet because of the "near jet speed" of the Dornier. I guess those of us with hundreds or thousands of jet time are some how not able to make the transition from the lowly dash to mighty RJ.

By the way, I don't want your job. I don't think it would be fair to now insist on merging the 3 WO just so I can keep my job by taking some one else’s.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top