View Single Post
Old 06-01-2015 | 09:37 AM
  #639  
eaglefly
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Waitingformins
You really out to be smarter than applying a linier projection to the future. Your last contract hit the burn pile before it hit its half life. The one before that was terminated premature in BK. What was the last year Envoy worked all the way through a signed contract? Every mainline pilot has been through a seniority merger, and most lost their pensions, projecting a long play in this industry has proven to be disappointing. Seniority can be taken away ask AirTran and Continental and Pinnacle and TWA. Contracts can be taken away ask your company and reps.
The only thing that cannot be taken away is your log book. 1,000 to 1 pilots have been hired by what's in their log books as opposed to a contract flow.
I am not saying your assessment is incorrect, its just based on the rules today. That's like telling a 21 year old to calculate his Social Security income at 62 based on the rules today, when he knows darn well the rules wont be the same.
The gist of what I understand is that many at Envoy are angry with their union for taking the high road shall we say, and standing firm on concessions only to be sold out by others like PSA. Now, apparently, since there is obviously no honor among thieves in the regional pilot ranks, the gloves are off and the new approach at Envoy is to do and say whatever it takes to maximize Envoy's future.

This is what you are now seeing on this forum.

Cannot really blame them, but sadly, the ONLY entity that can START that process is AAG and so far, only Envoy management has made a peep and that peep has no legs because Envoy management doesn't call the shots. One "feel good" letter doesn't mean much, especially when that exact same approach has been made at least twice in the past, if not more. What's more, even if AAG STARTS that process, even they may not be able to pull 50 pilots out of a hat every month to make the magic show believable.
Reply