OP
U 737 PILOT
Member
- Feb 5, 2003
- 69
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #16
ALPA has never met a concession they did not like........ and this one is no exception !!!
Should US Allow Affiliates To Fly The E170 Family?
- Thread starter U 737 PILOT
- Start date
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #17
700UW,
It wasn't the bylaws. The membership passed a resolution but the wording was courtesy of the old MEC. Can't quote it off the top of my head, but something like "any change that significantly affects pay or working conditions" requires a membership vote.
Since any change in scope for the RJ's/170's won't immediately affect the working mainline pilots (for lack of better terminology), it's open to interpretation.
Jim
It wasn't the bylaws. The membership passed a resolution but the wording was courtesy of the old MEC. Can't quote it off the top of my head, but something like "any change that significantly affects pay or working conditions" requires a membership vote.
Since any change in scope for the RJ's/170's won't immediately affect the working mainline pilots (for lack of better terminology), it's open to interpretation.
Jim
I think everyone knows that these Barbie Jets must not fall into the hands of all the regional and low paying jobs. It must not be allowed to continue. I'd rather go down with the ship than outsource my work to regionals for half the pay. Screw it, there has to be some integrity at U MEC but I'm so far seeing they are selling out the farm to save their own hides regardless of the future major damage they are doing to the rest of the pilots. Guys over at the regionals would love to get their hands on these little do they realize they are slitting their own throats since they will never see the majors because there won't be any. U MEC YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!!!!! U HAVE NO HONOR.
Furloughedagain
Senior
Delldude said, "based on past performance i expect a recall vote to be coming?"
Honestly, I doubt it.
Even if this goes to the pilot group for ratification why would they care enough to vote "no"?
It has absolutely no impact on a single pilot currently working at the airline.
They would basically be making a decision to GET enhanced jumpseat and commuter benefits and pay NOTHING for it.
The only folks who would feel the pain would be those furloughed pilots who are still waiting for their "soft landing".
I doubt that the average line-pilot currently flying at US Airways has any idea of the impact that the transfer of those airplanes to Mesa and Chautauqua will have on furloughed pilots.
But just in case one is reading this the math is simple
80 airplanes = 800 pilots.
at MDA that means putting 800 furloughees back to work.
at Mesatauqua that means putting 400 furloughees back to work.
Net loss of 400 jobs for furloughees.
But hey! You guys get a commuter clause in your contract. That is CERTAINLY an equitable trade for gainful employment for 400 pilots AND giving away an airplane that is equal in size and task to the DC9 or F100!
Sorry if I sound a little bitter, but come on guys. Doesn't anyone else remember the old mantra:
Scope is the Guardian. Jobs are the Key.
Sincerely,
Former DC9-30 RJ First Officer
Honestly, I doubt it.
Even if this goes to the pilot group for ratification why would they care enough to vote "no"?
It has absolutely no impact on a single pilot currently working at the airline.
They would basically be making a decision to GET enhanced jumpseat and commuter benefits and pay NOTHING for it.
The only folks who would feel the pain would be those furloughed pilots who are still waiting for their "soft landing".
I doubt that the average line-pilot currently flying at US Airways has any idea of the impact that the transfer of those airplanes to Mesa and Chautauqua will have on furloughed pilots.
But just in case one is reading this the math is simple
80 airplanes = 800 pilots.
at MDA that means putting 800 furloughees back to work.
at Mesatauqua that means putting 400 furloughees back to work.
Net loss of 400 jobs for furloughees.
But hey! You guys get a commuter clause in your contract. That is CERTAINLY an equitable trade for gainful employment for 400 pilots AND giving away an airplane that is equal in size and task to the DC9 or F100!
Sorry if I sound a little bitter, but come on guys. Doesn't anyone else remember the old mantra:
Scope is the Guardian. Jobs are the Key.
Sincerely,
Former DC9-30 RJ First Officer
mwereplanes
Senior
- Jan 21, 2004
- 302
- 0
Furloughed Again:
If there is anyone "waiting for their soft landing" they are fools. If there are any furloughed U pilots who think there is a future here for them, they are fools. It is disgraceful what this MEC has done and continues to do. Truly disgraceful.
The attempt to pull the entire pilot career into the sewer of Mesa-like working conditions and pay is aided and abetted by the total fear and panic of the guys still working at U. They will stop at nothing to save their jobs. Fear is rampant. That fear allows an incompetent management to continue unfettered.
We are being played for fools. And eventually we will all be furloughed again. Because we are not demanding competent management. We are settling for enhanced jumpseat privileges. Can you believe it?!
mr
If there is anyone "waiting for their soft landing" they are fools. If there are any furloughed U pilots who think there is a future here for them, they are fools. It is disgraceful what this MEC has done and continues to do. Truly disgraceful.
The attempt to pull the entire pilot career into the sewer of Mesa-like working conditions and pay is aided and abetted by the total fear and panic of the guys still working at U. They will stop at nothing to save their jobs. Fear is rampant. That fear allows an incompetent management to continue unfettered.
We are being played for fools. And eventually we will all be furloughed again. Because we are not demanding competent management. We are settling for enhanced jumpseat privileges. Can you believe it?!
mr
airlineorphan
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 380
- 0
Furloughedagain wrote:
You got it! And another mantra to remember is:
"An injury to one is an injury to all."
Selling out one's coworkers (furloughed or active) eventually will come around bite you in the ###.
In solidarity,
Airlineorphan
You got it! And another mantra to remember is:
"An injury to one is an injury to all."
Selling out one's coworkers (furloughed or active) eventually will come around bite you in the ###.
In solidarity,
Airlineorphan
Dilligas
Veteran
Dead on correct.mwereplanes said:
ALPA never ceases to amaze. Put a fork in this one. Time to move on.
OP
U 737 PILOT
Member
- Feb 5, 2003
- 69
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #26
ALPA...... Time to do the right thing and put a stop to this downward spiral of our careers !!! If not, lets just go ahead and turn over the keys to the rest of the fleet to MESA !
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
GECAS...not US Airways and not ALPA is driving this decision.
The move will reduce US Airways debt, will reduce the company's chance of having its credit rating dropped, and permit the company to pay off the federal loan guarantee sooner.
GECAS wants to diversify their risk, improve their chance of obtaining a capital gain on their 5% ownership of the company, ensure their power-by-hour CFM engine overhaul contract remains in place, and protect their $4 billion in investment (about $2 billion in mainline aircraft and $2 billion in RJ financing).
The move strengthens US Airways balance sheet, reduce its forward debt obligations, and keeps the RJ revenue within US Airways Group, which will help the airline meet its loan guarantee EBITDAR requirements this summer.
In my opinion, there will be a new LOA next week, the new "hardline" MEC will endorse the proposal and then the LOA will receive membership ratification by a 4 to 1 margin.
Moreover, there are reports United Airlines is trying to obtain US Airways' RJ delivery positions as a means to fix Dulles and unless ALPA gives in to GECAS' demands, the financier could strip US Airways of RJ delivery positions and move them to United Express.
Speaking of United Express, part of the Dulles situation could be solved with AirTran's decision to end its pact with Air Wisconsin.
See Story
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
The move will reduce US Airways debt, will reduce the company's chance of having its credit rating dropped, and permit the company to pay off the federal loan guarantee sooner.
GECAS wants to diversify their risk, improve their chance of obtaining a capital gain on their 5% ownership of the company, ensure their power-by-hour CFM engine overhaul contract remains in place, and protect their $4 billion in investment (about $2 billion in mainline aircraft and $2 billion in RJ financing).
The move strengthens US Airways balance sheet, reduce its forward debt obligations, and keeps the RJ revenue within US Airways Group, which will help the airline meet its loan guarantee EBITDAR requirements this summer.
In my opinion, there will be a new LOA next week, the new "hardline" MEC will endorse the proposal and then the LOA will receive membership ratification by a 4 to 1 margin.
Moreover, there are reports United Airlines is trying to obtain US Airways' RJ delivery positions as a means to fix Dulles and unless ALPA gives in to GECAS' demands, the financier could strip US Airways of RJ delivery positions and move them to United Express.
Speaking of United Express, part of the Dulles situation could be solved with AirTran's decision to end its pact with Air Wisconsin.
See Story
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
mwereplanes
Senior
- Jan 21, 2004
- 302
- 0
I fully agree with your assesment of a membership ratification of any and everything that the NC brings out of their meetings. Any and everything. That is the absolute mindset of the vast majority of the pilots. You actually may be low in your 4 to 1 estimate.
As far as GECAS driving this, you are only partially correct. I do not doubt you have read the AW&ST article and the associated numbers regarding costs of all the so called "legacy" carriers. Interesting you haven't brought out the fact that all of their OPERATING costs are going down while U's are going up. Hard numbers showing that personel costs at U are down but we are dead last as our operating costs rise while the others drop. Why is that? Is that GECAS's doing? Or is it our managements doing? Of course GECAS is driving it. Why would they loan money to an incompetently mangaged airline?
You know my point. These guys cannot operate this airline. And we will again, because of the fear of losing our jobs, attempt to subsidize their ineptness. Without doing a thing about bringing in qualified, intelligent, and capable management.
What we are about to give is akin to giving an alcoholic another bottle hoping it will be his last and he will find the cure. All we do is prolong the incessant march to the end. Like putting a bucket under a roof leak instead of getting on the roof and replacing the shingles. If we had some balls we would demand new mangagement for our concessions. But alas, we have bb's where our balls belong. Sad to think that some arrogant ivy types will ruin a solid franchise with solid people. I do not understand how you can carry their water. It truly amazes me.
mr
As far as GECAS driving this, you are only partially correct. I do not doubt you have read the AW&ST article and the associated numbers regarding costs of all the so called "legacy" carriers. Interesting you haven't brought out the fact that all of their OPERATING costs are going down while U's are going up. Hard numbers showing that personel costs at U are down but we are dead last as our operating costs rise while the others drop. Why is that? Is that GECAS's doing? Or is it our managements doing? Of course GECAS is driving it. Why would they loan money to an incompetently mangaged airline?
You know my point. These guys cannot operate this airline. And we will again, because of the fear of losing our jobs, attempt to subsidize their ineptness. Without doing a thing about bringing in qualified, intelligent, and capable management.
What we are about to give is akin to giving an alcoholic another bottle hoping it will be his last and he will find the cure. All we do is prolong the incessant march to the end. Like putting a bucket under a roof leak instead of getting on the roof and replacing the shingles. If we had some balls we would demand new mangagement for our concessions. But alas, we have bb's where our balls belong. Sad to think that some arrogant ivy types will ruin a solid franchise with solid people. I do not understand how you can carry their water. It truly amazes me.
mr
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
GECAS is driving this.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Similar threads
