michael707767
Senior
- Aug 21, 2002
- 332
- 0
So if the people providing financing for the A-330s want us to outsource them you'd be ok with that too? You already gave them the pay rate they wanted, what more do they need?USA320Pilot said:
Should US Allow Affiliates To Fly The E170 Family?
- Thread starter U 737 PILOT
- Start date
Light Years
Veteran
- Aug 27, 2002
- 2,878
- 0
19 votes for outsourcing... 19 vice presidents?
Did this really surprise anyone? No.
Will it come to pass? Yes, with or without membership ratification (it will be without as it affects no U pilot negatively). Hopefully they will at least add language that guarantees 100% J4J if the airplanes still come to a U-owned "ED" or PSA.
The only hope and saving grace is that, even if the scope is relaxed, the airplanes will still come to ED and/or PSA. It would seem to be foolish of the company (not that that will stop them) to farm them out when they can have all the revenue at AE and PSA costs.
What do I think of it? I think somebody needs to grow a pair.
Will it come to pass? Yes, with or without membership ratification (it will be without as it affects no U pilot negatively). Hopefully they will at least add language that guarantees 100% J4J if the airplanes still come to a U-owned "ED" or PSA.
The only hope and saving grace is that, even if the scope is relaxed, the airplanes will still come to ED and/or PSA. It would seem to be foolish of the company (not that that will stop them) to farm them out when they can have all the revenue at AE and PSA costs.
What do I think of it? I think somebody needs to grow a pair.
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,566
- 37
No. I think he'll reach that conclusion when Mesa starts flying aircraft that used to be Group 2 at US, and the folks above him on the seniority list at ALPA feed him to the animals for their own survival.michael707767 said:
And, with ALPA's tendency to cave (at US), it's only a matter of time until this happens.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Today an ALPA MEC wrote the following information to his constituents:
Just to bring you up to date:
1. We have decided to not to get into the details of the Scope Relief proposals and counterproposals because negotiations are still in progress, and when a TA is reached between the company and the NC the final product will come back to the MEC for our review and, if accepted, will then go out to you for membership ratification.
As an overview, however, the company is basically asking for scope relief to allow GECAS to sell the CRJ's slated for PSA and the EMB's slated for MDA to an US Airways Express Participating Affiliate (Mesa, for example) if GECAS decides not to sell them to USAirways Inc.
We can't make GECAS lend us the money to buy these airplanes no matter what we do with scope, as their decision appears to be credit worthiness driven and that, at the moment, is not our strong suit. So if they decide not to lend us the money for some or all of these SJ deliveries, then the company wants to be able to capture the revenue stream by those SJ's being sold to our Affiliates. Why is that so important? Because that revenue stream makes up a significant portion of the revenue that we told the ATSB we would deliver under our Plan of Reorganization (POR), and if it goes away we are going to have even bigger problems meeting our ATSB loan covenants.
And if GECAS does pull some or all deliveries, and if the company is successful in persuading GECAS to sell these airplanes to our Affiliates, then we can put these airplanes under our existing J4J's program and get 50% of all these new jobs for our furloughed pilots. Yes, it's not as good as 100% that we now have at MDA if GECAS would continue to lend us money to put airplanes there, but it's a whole lot better than 0% jobs if GECAS sells these airplanes to a United Express carrier (and United wants these EMB 170's real bad for their Dulles feed).
So the real "quid," or return, to the pilot group may be what I described above, and, in my view, the company thus realizes that scope relief is in our own best interest as well. We did, however, appear to be able to secure some "quality of life" issues that we have been hammering away at the company about, and, again only as an overview, these include:
1. Negotiations on "Tag Along" rights to sell our stock at the same price that RSA sells theirs.
2. A Commuter Policy to allow using a back-up flight to commute (and thus if you miss on both your primary and back-up, you are not exposed to a punitive situation. MDA already has this in their Agreement).
3. Participation in an Interline Jump Seat program (that is currently in its trial stage).
4. Participation in a Trip Construction working group to improve the "quality and efficiency" of our trip pairings.
5. Company participation in and payment for Alternate Security Access for all pilots at their respective domiciles.
Regards,
USA320Pilot
Just to bring you up to date:
1. We have decided to not to get into the details of the Scope Relief proposals and counterproposals because negotiations are still in progress, and when a TA is reached between the company and the NC the final product will come back to the MEC for our review and, if accepted, will then go out to you for membership ratification.
As an overview, however, the company is basically asking for scope relief to allow GECAS to sell the CRJ's slated for PSA and the EMB's slated for MDA to an US Airways Express Participating Affiliate (Mesa, for example) if GECAS decides not to sell them to USAirways Inc.
We can't make GECAS lend us the money to buy these airplanes no matter what we do with scope, as their decision appears to be credit worthiness driven and that, at the moment, is not our strong suit. So if they decide not to lend us the money for some or all of these SJ deliveries, then the company wants to be able to capture the revenue stream by those SJ's being sold to our Affiliates. Why is that so important? Because that revenue stream makes up a significant portion of the revenue that we told the ATSB we would deliver under our Plan of Reorganization (POR), and if it goes away we are going to have even bigger problems meeting our ATSB loan covenants.
And if GECAS does pull some or all deliveries, and if the company is successful in persuading GECAS to sell these airplanes to our Affiliates, then we can put these airplanes under our existing J4J's program and get 50% of all these new jobs for our furloughed pilots. Yes, it's not as good as 100% that we now have at MDA if GECAS would continue to lend us money to put airplanes there, but it's a whole lot better than 0% jobs if GECAS sells these airplanes to a United Express carrier (and United wants these EMB 170's real bad for their Dulles feed).
So the real "quid," or return, to the pilot group may be what I described above, and, in my view, the company thus realizes that scope relief is in our own best interest as well. We did, however, appear to be able to secure some "quality of life" issues that we have been hammering away at the company about, and, again only as an overview, these include:
1. Negotiations on "Tag Along" rights to sell our stock at the same price that RSA sells theirs.
2. A Commuter Policy to allow using a back-up flight to commute (and thus if you miss on both your primary and back-up, you are not exposed to a punitive situation. MDA already has this in their Agreement).
3. Participation in an Interline Jump Seat program (that is currently in its trial stage).
4. Participation in a Trip Construction working group to improve the "quality and efficiency" of our trip pairings.
5. Company participation in and payment for Alternate Security Access for all pilots at their respective domiciles.
Regards,
USA320Pilot
Furloughedagain
Senior
No. I think he'll reach that conclusion when Mesa starts flying aircraft that used to be Group 2 at US, and the folks above him on the seniority list at ALPA feed him to the animals for their own survival.
For every pilot on the property there are roughly 8 employees.
When the MEC gives away jobs in exchange for a commuter clause it is a slap in the face those whose jobs are being outsourced. It is unconscionable for a UNION to give away scope at so low a price -- to give away jobs.
Only on the day that USA320Pilot walks into the chief pilots office and is told to surrender his manuals, his ID, his hat brass and wings and to go home and wait 2 years for a call from Mesa for his "soft landing" will he FINALLY understand what he's been "selling" on this website!
These aren't just jobs. These are people's lives. These are worth more than your ability to get from PIT to LGA without jeopardy.
So I have a question for you. I doubt, however, that you will answer.
If Bronner met with the MEC and told them that if they didn't outsource the Airbus narrowbodies the company would be shut-down ... what would the MEC's answer be?
Don't worry. 50% of those furloughed as a result of the decision will be offered jobs at Mesa. :down:
For every pilot on the property there are roughly 8 employees.
When the MEC gives away jobs in exchange for a commuter clause it is a slap in the face those whose jobs are being outsourced. It is unconscionable for a UNION to give away scope at so low a price -- to give away jobs.
Only on the day that USA320Pilot walks into the chief pilots office and is told to surrender his manuals, his ID, his hat brass and wings and to go home and wait 2 years for a call from Mesa for his "soft landing" will he FINALLY understand what he's been "selling" on this website!
These aren't just jobs. These are people's lives. These are worth more than your ability to get from PIT to LGA without jeopardy.
So I have a question for you. I doubt, however, that you will answer.
If Bronner met with the MEC and told them that if they didn't outsource the Airbus narrowbodies the company would be shut-down ... what would the MEC's answer be?
Don't worry. 50% of those furloughed as a result of the decision will be offered jobs at Mesa. :down:
Light Years
Veteran
- Aug 27, 2002
- 2,878
- 0
They are willing to sell out the entire industry for crap like a commuter policy and interline jumpseating?!?
OH
MY
GOD!
OH
MY
GOD!
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Just one more point:
In my opinion, the new SJ LOA will permit US Airways to sell PSA, Allegheny/Piedmont, and MDA, if desired, improve the company's credit rating, permit the guaranteed loans to be paid off early, and allow the company to lower its debt going forward.
Moreover, the LOA will prevent United from getting its hands on near-term CRJ and EMB RJ delivery positions, which will cut off a key avenue for the Chicago-based airline to fix its Dulles hub problem.
Expect a TA this week and membership ratification shortly thereafter.
Separately, US Airways also must take steps to avoid defaulting on $900 million in loans backed by the ATSB because the government expects US Airways to hit certain profit levels by the end of June.
US Airways continues to talk to the board, but they want to see things in black and white. Therefore, to obtain EBITDAR relief there needs to be ALPA scope relief, asset sales, increased liquidity, the loan guarantee paid down, and the ability to maintain POR/loan guarantee application revenue projections through affiliate carrier code sharing.
Once this occurs, it is expected the ATSB will give US Airways relief.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
In my opinion, the new SJ LOA will permit US Airways to sell PSA, Allegheny/Piedmont, and MDA, if desired, improve the company's credit rating, permit the guaranteed loans to be paid off early, and allow the company to lower its debt going forward.
Moreover, the LOA will prevent United from getting its hands on near-term CRJ and EMB RJ delivery positions, which will cut off a key avenue for the Chicago-based airline to fix its Dulles hub problem.
Expect a TA this week and membership ratification shortly thereafter.
Separately, US Airways also must take steps to avoid defaulting on $900 million in loans backed by the ATSB because the government expects US Airways to hit certain profit levels by the end of June.
US Airways continues to talk to the board, but they want to see things in black and white. Therefore, to obtain EBITDAR relief there needs to be ALPA scope relief, asset sales, increased liquidity, the loan guarantee paid down, and the ability to maintain POR/loan guarantee application revenue projections through affiliate carrier code sharing.
Once this occurs, it is expected the ATSB will give US Airways relief.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
mwereplanes
Senior
- Jan 21, 2004
- 302
- 0
"They are willing to sell out the entire industry for crap like a commuter policy and interline jumpseating?!?"
The answer to that question is yes.
This pilot group will go to any and all lengths to save (in their eyes) their jobs.
USA320pilot is not in the minority. He is in the majority. And he absolutely will vote yes on any TA that comes down the pike. We (the pilots) must save the company.
As if we had that ability.
mr
The answer to that question is yes.
This pilot group will go to any and all lengths to save (in their eyes) their jobs.
USA320pilot is not in the minority. He is in the majority. And he absolutely will vote yes on any TA that comes down the pike. We (the pilots) must save the company.
As if we had that ability.
mr
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Furloughedagain:
Furloughedagain asked: "What would ALPA's response be if the company told them that they had to outsource the Airbus narrowbodys to Mesa in order to survive BUT ... don't be concerned because 50% of the positions on those outsourced airplanes would be offered to furloughed pilots?"
USA320Pilot answers: I do not know, you would have to ask ALPA.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Furloughedagain asked: "What would ALPA's response be if the company told them that they had to outsource the Airbus narrowbodys to Mesa in order to survive BUT ... don't be concerned because 50% of the positions on those outsourced airplanes would be offered to furloughed pilots?"
USA320Pilot answers: I do not know, you would have to ask ALPA.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
mwereplanes
Senior
- Jan 21, 2004
- 302
- 0
"Separately, US Airways also must take steps to avoid defaulting on $900 million in loans backed by the ATSB because the government expects US Airways to hit certain profit levels by the end of June."
Wait a minute. We weren't supposed to be profitable until 2005. That was the original plan wasn't it 320? Are you backpeddling or just putting out erroneous information?
mr
Wait a minute. We weren't supposed to be profitable until 2005. That was the original plan wasn't it 320? Are you backpeddling or just putting out erroneous information?
mr
Furloughedagain
Senior
And what would YOUR response be Captain? (assuming such a request would be subject to membership ratification)
I can only imagine the firestorm of messages on "Pilotaction". :huh:
I can only imagine the firestorm of messages on "Pilotaction". :huh:
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
I forgot another point, it appears that the only assets that may be sold are PSA and Allegheny/Piedmont, then if necessary MDA.
I understand at this point the Shuttle, the New York LaGuardia terminal, and other assets will not need to be sold, provided the company and the unions agree on "Going Forward Plan" contract changes. In addition, Business Week is reporting talks have broken down between USA Virgin and US Airways and Richard Banson's proposed start up will not be obtaining any US Airways assets.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
I understand at this point the Shuttle, the New York LaGuardia terminal, and other assets will not need to be sold, provided the company and the unions agree on "Going Forward Plan" contract changes. In addition, Business Week is reporting talks have broken down between USA Virgin and US Airways and Richard Banson's proposed start up will not be obtaining any US Airways assets.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Mwereplanes:
USA320Pilot said: "Separately, US Airways also must take steps to avoid defaulting on $900 million in loans backed by the ATSB because the government expects US Airways to hit certain profit levels by the end of June."
Mwereplanes asked: "Wait a minute. We weren't supposed to be profitable until 2005. That was the original plan wasn't it 320? Are you backpeddling or just putting out erroneous information?"
USA320Pilot answers: The ATSB loan guarantee covenants require US Airways must maintain an unrestricted cash balance of $1.0 billion through June 30, then in Q3 and beyond the company must meet certain EBITDAR requirements. For more information on these covenants (click here).
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
USA320Pilot said: "Separately, US Airways also must take steps to avoid defaulting on $900 million in loans backed by the ATSB because the government expects US Airways to hit certain profit levels by the end of June."
Mwereplanes asked: "Wait a minute. We weren't supposed to be profitable until 2005. That was the original plan wasn't it 320? Are you backpeddling or just putting out erroneous information?"
USA320Pilot answers: The ATSB loan guarantee covenants require US Airways must maintain an unrestricted cash balance of $1.0 billion through June 30, then in Q3 and beyond the company must meet certain EBITDAR requirements. For more information on these covenants (click here).
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Light Years
Veteran
- Aug 27, 2002
- 2,878
- 0
If they were going to sell Mid off, why would they want E-Jets at other carriers? Why not just spin it off like CoEx, let someone else with money build a huge fleet of them to operate exclusively for US?
Why give the orders to Mesa, CHQ and friends only to see them pop up in America West, United, Delta, and American colours?
Why give the orders to Mesa, CHQ and friends only to see them pop up in America West, United, Delta, and American colours?
Similar threads
