Originally Posted by
Nevets
And that is exactly the point. Inequity by virtue that there are two separate lists. Both groups help make money for the same entity yet there will always be a disparity on who has it better just because management is afraid of unions.
I almost completely agree with what you just said. But it's not just management that's afraid of unions. So is the Skywest pilot group. You've got to give them some responsibility for that too.
Originally Posted by
winglets
You are missing the entire point I am trying to make.
I'm sorry if you don't see it, but pilots that fly Skywest paint and ASA paint work for the same company, Skywest. They are all Skywest pilots.
Maybe someday you'll recognize you're being whipsawed.
You know as much as I do that there shouldn't be any SKY poolies as long as their are furloughed Skywest pilots (ASA paint fliers
)
Skywest pilots that fly ASA paint around only have a lock on flying that is transferred over to Skywest paint. If the lease expires and they don't renew, they are screwed.
Do I want the two companies to merge their pilots? Yes I do. Would I prefer Skywest to transfer ASA furloughs into their seniority lists? Of course. But it's just not realistic. It's certainly a better scenario, just not one that can happen in the Skywest Inc. climate. Whether it's right or wrong, good or bad, the fact that one group is union and the other isn't PREVENTS Skywest Inc. from merging them. With regard to the poolies, word from ASA management to the ASA pilot group was that Skywest was offering a few positions to ASA furloughs before deciding to keep it in house (VLA's). They even fast tracked the resumes. It was also mentioned the remainder of the openings were slated for United furloughs per the United contract (if I remember correctly), but I can't confirm any of that. As for the whipsawing... Please give me one example of a work rule or quality of life issue that has gotten worse for either pilot group because of the acquisition. If you know one, I really am interested in hearing it. I think a lot of the perceptions of Skywest's evil intentions with ASA are baseless. It's just natural in this industry to accuse management of sinister intentions no matter what they do.
What about Berkshire Hathaway "paint"? Should the Netjets furloughed pilots be offered transitions to Geico or See's Candy or RC Willey Home Furnishings? I see your point that it's one ownership under one umbrella, but they are still separate companies. Granted the Berkshire companies are not even similar, but the point is same ownership doesn't imply equality among all. It could, if the company chooses for it to. But it doesn't in Skywest Inc's case. And as I've stated before, for union reasons, it can't. When Delta owned ASA, would they have been out of line hiring "poolies" instead of ASA furloughs? Of course not. I admit your views are based on fairness and equality and they're admirable, the logic just doesn't work in this particular case.