View Single Post
Old 04-27-2012 | 03:10 PM
  #97073  
NuGuy's Avatar
NuGuy
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,106
Likes: 102
Default

Originally Posted by gloopy
Not sure what to think about it. Maybe it's tin foil hat-ish of me but what I read between the lines could very easily be interpreted as more large RJ's as long as the total ratio swings more in our favor. But that's happening anyway with 50's being parked as well as Saabs, etc. we could allow 9 76 seaters for every 10 50 seaters parked and that would fulfill that "production balance" talking point 100%.

Then there was the veiled threat of you really need to vote for what we bring you cause if you don't it'll be many years before you get any raise. While that's probably true, it in no way justified a single additional large RJ unless we fly it but I worry we may be about to throw management into the briar patch with this production balance interpretation. Most if not all if what we gain would likely be gained anyway (50 seater block hours in perpetual decline with more 90's and maybe 71's coming regardless) while the losses of more long term large RJ DC -9-10 replacement jets will be disproportionately larger than any possible gain.

I really hope we aren't about to fall for that.
Heyas Gloopy,

You are spot on. With ANY union communication, it's what they don't say versus what they do.

What we should start doing is get the APC "Latest and Greatest" crowd divvied up into teams, so as to get ready to examine, pull apart and put back together any TA.

Consider it kind of a "Dissenting Opinion" that points out the bad, as well as the good.

There are eight ways to Sunday they can game a "balance of flying", and a merger is just one of them. Brocc laid out just one example.

If they want more 76 seaters, all they need to do is buy them.

Watch how any TA will be couched in a "take this or wait a long time aura". In other words, "hurry up and sign this, offer expires at midnight!!!"

Watch how any job gains (say from 717s) will be CAREFULLY offset by loss of jobs, replacement flying or other aircraft retirements. That part won't be mentioned.

If I see one more 76 seater in any TA, I will insta-click "NO" on my vote. It's a non starter.

Nu