Should US Allow Affiliates To Fly The E170 Family?

[U 737 PILOT]

... " Allow EMB170-175 to be flown by a Participating Affiliate at 50% Jets for Jobs " WAKE up guys ! When are you going to put a stop to this ? What's next ? How long before 100 seaters ? 120 seaters ? and on and on. KISS your careers goodbye !!!

 

[Light Years]

Can I get a witness! Thats what I'm saying!

You are correct 737... they are kissing thier's and everyone else's career goodbye!

 

[Light Years]

What do you think?

 

[700UW]

Why doesn't the MEC just hand over all mainline flying to Mesa to prevent going back in again and again and again for concessions.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Maybe IF it goes to a membership vote and IF enough of us pilots vote against it, we can stop this in it's tracks.

Hopefully,

Jim

 

[700UW]

Jim,

After the pension fiasco, did ALPA not change their bylaws that you had to vote on any contract changes?

 

[U 737 PILOT]

I doubt it will go to a membership vote ......... no time ya know !

 

[Furloughedagain]

If you give away the 70 - 100 seat market (i/e former F28, F100, DC9, 737-200) flying, then where does it stop?

There is a reason why scope language exists -- not just in airline contracts -- but in ANY contract.


Scope identifies the specific work that must be performed by the contracted party, in this case the US Airways pilots.

If scope is a moving target then EVERYONE'S job is at risk from the most junior furloughee through the most senior A330 Captain.

ALPA's Job #1 is JOBS. Period.

 

[Light Years]

This is particularly important for US Airways, where most of the flying is short haul 100 or so seat flying. What are they thinking? We've always got the Carribbean?

Theres no stopping the 190 and 195 (and a further strech if that happens) once this is out of the bag.

Its too bad there can't just be one airline with pay rates for everything from regional jets to widebodies. The teamwork, operational flexibilty, and morale alone would outweigh any cost savings from the tangled mess of carriers they have now.

How close are we to the end?

 

[Furloughedagain]

I just read the update from the special MEC meeting.

Apparently I was mistaken.

ALPA's job #1 is NOT jobs after all.

ALPA's job #1 is TRADING furloughee jobs for a commuter clause and offline jumpseat.

It makes perfect sense.

I am absolutely amazed that these guys can sleep at night. :angry:

 

[PITbull]

If you give away the 70 - 100 seat market (i/e former F28, F100, DC9, 737-200) flying, then where does it stop?

There is a reason why scope language exists -- not just in airline contracts -- but in ANY contract.


Scope identifies the specific work that must be performed by the contracted party, in this case the US Airways pilots.

If scope is a moving target then EVERYONE'S job is at risk from the most junior furloughee through the most senior A330 Captain.

ALPA's Job #1 is JOBS. Period.

Furloughedagain,

Any union starts giving away scope language...IS DOOMED.

Shame on ALPA as they go down this road.

 

[Light Years]

PITbull-

Do US F/As have thier own scope language or does it just go with the pilots?

For example UAL AFA has thier scope clause prohibiting wholly-owneds, USA obviously does not. But is there some sort of scope saying what has to be staffed by US F/As? There must be something that stops them from putting non-AFA F/As on US aircraft, I'm just wondering what the exact language is?

 

[sentrido]

If the planes go, the jobs will follow. The thing is, when I was at Allegheny, All of our C checks were farmed out.They wont have to fight the IAM over outsourcing. They will just give all the airplanes to all of the regionals.Then thats it, game over. The union will lose a lot of pull.Do you think they will really care if a union at one of five or six regionals strikes?

 

[PITbull]

PITbull-

Do US F/As have thier own scope language or does it just go with the pilots?

For example UAL AFA has thier scope clause prohibiting wholly-owneds, USA obviously does not. But is there some sort of scope saying what has to be staffed by US F/As? There must be something that stops them from putting non-AFA F/As on US aircraft, I'm just wondering what the exact language is?

Yes we have that language. No f/a who is not on our seniority list can fly our planes. MAA will be on our seniority list. U and MAA are a single seniority list.

 

[U 737 PILOT]

Hey ALPA..... Why don't we just turn it all over to mesa now and end this agonizing desent into the oblivion of our careers !!!