US Pilots Labor Discussion

[No Land Green]

Aviator/Thespian what a combo! How can you expect to get the truth from the drama queens always on the stage with their tales of intrigue and whodunnits? I'll bet these old easties will be great storytellers when they retire, holding court in the McDonalds breakroom.

I can imagine the 19 year-old night manager saying, "Hey Captain, I don't know who this Alphonse guy is you keep ranting about, but get a mop in the drive-through. Are you ON BOARD with that? And take off that stupid lanyard!"

Debt free, have been since 1997. I certainly hope that you don't find yourself in the above "Aviator/Thespian" fast food world.

I will still continue to take "safety" seriously. That's one of the things I'm paid to do.

 

[CactusPilot1]

That's funny, it's your Management that is part of the problem here. At the end of the day, we have safety issues at this airline, to think otherwise is your choice. Like I stated earlier, this is not the place to air out the Company's dirty laundry.

Is KFYI in Phoenix the proper forum to air dirty laundry? I understand James Ray aired some "safety" concerns this morning that may concern passengers buying tickets in the "leasure market" listening audience. <_<

 

[Freebird]

Why I answer your questions, just to have you call the answers "smartass" because you don't like them is beyond me, but here goes.

Jim

It's because he cannot handle the truth of the matter and is desperately trying to justify USAPA's failed attempt at dumping the NIC.

They all support the Mutiny on the S.S. USAPA, the derelict, rudderless, downtrodden vessel that's supposed to be thier savior. The "union" who admits in their Safety Hotline that even the company ignores them (because they have no Unity).

USAPA = Keep rowing in circles. Forever adrift and further from the dock than ever.

 

[Pi brat]

It's because he cannot handle the truth of the matter and is desperately trying to justify USAPA's failed attempt at dumping the NIC.

They all support the Mutiny on the S.S. USAPA, the derelict, rudderless, downtrodden vessel that's supposed to be thier savior. The "union" who admits in their Safety Hotline that even the company ignores them (because they have no Unity).

USAPA = Keep rowing in circles. Forever adrift and further from the dock than ever.

You wouldn't know the truth if it hit you between the eyes.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

I will still continue to take "safety" seriously. That's one of the things I'm paid to do.

I take safety very seriously as well, as every pilot we have no doubt does. Usapa, not so much though. Everything they spout has an agenda and ulterior motive.

 

[Pi brat]

But every person that is not effected by the Nicolau list has agreed that it is fair and the only people that disagree are east pilots.

Wrong again, but what's new. I know quite a few people that are unaffected by the Nic that think he got it wrong. I've talked to several west pilots that think Nic made big mistakes. Even Brucia shared my concern about the placement of furloughed pilots, but what does he know?

Do you never tire of being schooled?

 

[CactusPilot1]

This article appeared in
June 2011 Consumer Reports Magazine.

During the first successful airplane flight in 1903, Orville Wright had to lie on top of a wing, next to the motor, in the open air. He might feel right at home on many of today's airliners. Though pilots and passengers now get to ride inside the plane, comfort remains a sore point, according to a new survey by the Consumer Reports National Research Center.
Almost 15,000 readers told us about their experiences on 29,720 domestic round-trip flights in the previous 12 months. Eight of the 10 airlines they rated (available to subscribers) received low scores for seating comfort. Only JetBlue Airways and Southwest Airlines did better. They also topped our list overall. (In late April, consumers received some good news—the U.S. Department of Transportation announced a set of sweeping protections for airline passengers.)
Other quality-of-flight measures also got low marks from our readers, including cabin-crew service, cleanliness, and in-flight entertainment. The proliferation of added fees further contributes to passengers' low opinion of today's flying experience, and even to their decision of whether to fly at all, as we explain in Carriers continue to squeeze with fees.
But some carriers have done a better job than others, as evidenced by a wide difference in overall satisfaction scores, from Southwest's lofty 87 to US Airways' lowly 61. Southwest was the only airline to receive top marks for check-in ease and the service provided by its cabin crews. Passengers also gave the airline high grades for cabin cleanliness and baggage handling. The latter might reflect the fact that Southwest is the only airline we rated that lets you check two bags free of charge. But bags three, four, and beyond will cost you $50 each. And like most other carriers, Southwest charges extra for items over its size and weight limits. (Our survey was conducted before Southwest's well-publicized problems this past April with cracks in several of its planes.)
JetBlue, which ranked second in overall satisfaction, was the only airline to outscore Southwest for seating comfort, possibly because it gives passengers more room than they're accustomed to in this era of tightly packed planes. JetBlue's coach seats are 32 to 38 inches from the seat directly ahead, while coach seats on most other carriers are just 31 inches apart. JetBlue was also the lone carrier on our list to earn top scores for in-flight entertainment; its seatback TV screens offer passengers 36 channels.



Bottom-ranked US Airways occupies the same unenviable spot on our list as it did in 2007, when we last assessed airlines. In addition to its low overall score, survey respondents gave it the worst marks of any airline for cabin-crew service.

Makes me proud to be a US Airways pilot. The "safety" concerns aired this morning on KFYI are icing on the cake. <_<

 

[Pi brat]

I take safety very seriously as well, as every pilot we have no doubt does. Usapa, not so much though. Everything they spout has an agenda and ulterior motive.

LS, I have a lot of respect for you and agree with most of what you say, but not this. USAPA is not a person. It is an entity, made up of a lot of different people. I know there are some within the group that want to use safety as a negotiating tool, and there are those like me that strongly disagree with that route. The problem is that you can't always tell a person's motive. I have always put safety first and tend to make a lot of logbook write ups. In the last year I have refused to accept two airplanes. If I do the same now, am I participating in a "job action"?

I agree with no land green that this is not the place to air our dirty safety laundry, but this airline does have some safety issues. I imagine all airlines do, and for the company to just disregard our concerns is a mistake, IMHO. That flies in the face of good CRM. I believe it is also all of our duty to not cry wolf.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

LS, I have a lot of respect for you and agree with most of what you say, but no this. USAPA is not a person. It is an entity, made up of a lot of different people. I know there are some within the group that want to use safety as a negotiating tool, and there are those like me that strongly disagree with that route. The problem is that you can't always tell a person's motive. I have always put safety first and tend to make a lot of logbook write ups. In the last year I have refused to accept two airplanes. If I do the same now, am I participating in a "job action"?

I agree with no land green that this is not the place to air our dirty safety laundry, but this airline does have some safety issues. I imagine all airlines do, and for the company to just disregard our concerns is a mistake, IMHO. That flies in the face of good CRM. I believe it is also all of our duty to no cry wolf.

Fair enough, I did paint with a broad brush there, in a shot from the hip. I believe usapa as is, is reflecting poorly on all of us, and until we get a handle on it, the good guys and their motivations get buried. Same with any real issues. How can we tell who is who, and which is which? It's sad.

My broad brush in that post was meant to refer to the worst of usapa, my apologies to the decent folks out there, which of course includes you.

 

[No Land Green]

LS, I have a lot of respect for you and agree with most of what you say, but not this. USAPA is not a person. It is an entity, made up of a lot of different people. I know there are some within the group that want to use safety as a negotiating tool, and there are those like me that strongly disagree with that route. The problem is that you can't always tell a person's motive. I have always put safety first and tend to make a lot of logbook write ups. In the last year I have refused to accept two airplanes. If I do the same now, am I participating in a "job action"?

I agree with no land green that this is not the place to air our dirty safety laundry, but this airline does have some safety issues. I imagine all airlines do, and for the company to just disregard our concerns is a mistake, IMHO. That flies in the face of good CRM. I believe it is also all of our duty to not cry wolf.

Good Post Brat, you nailed it home!!!!!!!! You get it.

 

[N924PS]

tt

LS, I have a lot of respect for you and agree with most of what you say, but not this. USAPA is not a person. It is an entity, made up of a lot of different people. I know there are some within the group that want to use safety as a negotiating tool, and there are those like me that strongly disagree with that route. The problem is that you can't always tell a person's motive. I have always put safety first and tend to make a lot of logbook write ups. In the last year I have refused to accept two airplanesafetys. If I do the same now, am I participating in a "job action"?

I agree with no land green that this is not the place to air our dirty safety laundry, but this airline does have some safety issues. I imagine all airlines do, and for the company to just disregard our concerns is a mistake, IMHO. That flies in the face of good CRM. I believe it is also all of our duty to not cry wolf.

PI,
In the instances of refusing those two aircraft, did the company pressure you to accept them? Did you have dialogue with the Chief Pilot's that questioned your Captain's authority as the final decision maker?

I'm "on board" with you. USAPA's attempt to use safety as a bargaining chip is ill conceived and will ultimately fail.

 

[No Land Green]

Fair enough, I did paint with a broad brush there, in a shot from the hip. I believe usapa as is, is reflecting poorly on all of us, and until we get a handle on it, the good guys and their motivations get buried. Same with any real issues. How can we tell who is who, and which is which? It's sad.

My broad brush in that post was meant to refer to the worst of usapa, my apologies to the decent folks out there.

Same for you LS, Good Post and you also nailed it home!!!!! You get it too.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Hmmm... not too shabby for an outfit that NIC said had no future. The planes go where there is money to be made.

Now pay attention NLG...

Yeah, A320 - all it took was a merger and a big infusion of cash to make it happen. Now tell us all where that big cash infusion was coming from prior to the merger announcement. Even Lakefield said there was no option other than the merger - I'll take his word over yours. After all, the "money maching" you easties love to talk about was in it's 2nd bankruptcy within 3 years. Maybe that "money machine" of the east was devouring money instead of producing it...

Like I said earlier, it just proves that Nic was right - the east did a lot better after the merger than before, just like he said.

Jim

 

[Pi brat]

Fair enough, I did paint with a broad brush there, in a shot from the hip. I believe usapa as is, is reflecting poorly on all of us, and until we get a handle on it, the good guys and their motivations get buried. Same with any real issues. How can we tell who is who, and which is which? It's sad.

My broad brush in that post was meant to refer to the worst of usapa, my apologies to the decent folks out there, which of course includes you.

Thanks LS. The situation here really is sad and when I filled out the safety survey that is what I tried to show. We don't live in a vacuum, so there is no way what is happening at this company can't leave any of us untouched.

I don't think our management manages people, they play them. It's all a big game.

 

[Pi brat]

tt


PI,
In the instances of refusing those two aircraft, did the company pressure you to accept them? Did you have dialogue with the Chief Pilot's that questioned your Captain's authority as the final decision maker?

I'm "on board" with you. USAPA's attempt to use safety as a bargaining chip is ill conceived and will ultimately fail.

Nope PS, I can't remember the last time I was called into the CP's office. The first one I refused I thought I might hear about it because it had flown around for 2 days that way and I had a somewhat heated conversation with the guy in the CLT tower about it, but nothing.