Search

Notices
Air Wisconsin Regional Airline

THE Air Wisconsin thread...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:02 AM
  #171  
billyho's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,450
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by 50SeatsofGrey
They didn't seem to think that would matter when they voted in concessions.

The reason AA is keeping most of the flying at the WOs has to be either because:
1. They are cheaper
2. They want to keep the profits, even if the WOs are more expensive.

If it's 1, then all three are on track to become more expensive, and at this rate it will be cheaper to give us more flying, as much as saying that makes me want to vomit.
If it's 2, then you/they voted in concessions for no reason, because according to that AA would have expanded the WOs just to keep the profits, even if they were the more expensive option.
First off they can't give you more flying if you can't hire more people right? Pretty much nobody really wants to go there with all the other opportunities available to them. So I don't think you'll have to worry about vomiting at all due to added flying.
Second, I am puzzled also in the fact that American needs the lift and I'm sure they need the pilots. Maybe they are beating down AWAC Pilots to rid it from the senior pilots (and to force a take it or leave it offer) and then in a swift move Parker comes in and allows PSA/PDT to acquire all the remaining AWAC assets that are left. (Basically the Pilots (PSA) & ground equipment and personal (PDT).

I think something needs to be done soon because AWAC can't keep losing pilots and American can't afford to start seeing flights cancelled by them for crews. Gonna get very interesting really soon.
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:18 AM
  #172  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by prex8390
Didnt Awac vote in concessions at one point? Like when Pinnacle did.
Completely different time. That was in 2003. Right after 2001.. But I guess you forgot what was going on back then..
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:22 AM
  #173  
billyho's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,450
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by sweetholyjesus
Completely different time. That was in 2003. Right after 2001.. But I guess you forgot what was going on back then..
Actually they voting in Concession before that to keep flying for United. It was before my time but I've heard the stories. AWAC was lucky to have survived the grips of United back then. I think United actually bought them then and tore them down badly.
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:34 AM
  #174  
prex8390's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,191
Likes: 7
Default

Originally Posted by sweetholyjesus
Completely different time. That was in 2003. Right after 2001.. But I guess you forgot what was going on back then..
Yeah and pinnacle signed it during a economic downturn what's your point
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:36 AM
  #175  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by billyho
Actually they voting in Concession before that to keep flying for United. It was before my time but I've heard the stories. AWAC was lucky to have survived the grips of United back then. I think United actually bought them then and tore them down badly.
Which was in 2003....What year are you talking about then, that AWAC voted in concessions before 2003 to keep the United flying? From what I understand, AWAC actually negotiated significant gains in 2001 right before 9/11.
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:44 AM
  #176  
billyho's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,450
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by sweetholyjesus
Which was in 2003....What year are you talking about then, that AWAC voted in concessions before 2003 to keep the United flying? From what I understand, AWAC actually negotiated significant gains in 2001 right before 9/11.
Like I said it was before our time. I'm thinking it was the early 90's. Ask some of your senior Captains. I think United basically bought them for the routes and then almost squeezed them out of existence. It's pretty interesting learning the history of many of our regional carriers.
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:45 AM
  #177  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by prex8390
Yeah and pinnacle signed it during a economic downturn what's your point
My point is you made a poor comparison.
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:50 AM
  #178  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by billyho
First off they can't give you more flying if you can't hire more people right? Pretty much nobody really wants to go there with all the other opportunities available to them. So I don't think you'll have to worry about vomiting at all due to added flying.
First of all this is a rediculous statement. The flying has never gone to whoever has the most pilots, or even whoever has the best chance at staffing it. History has proven that growth precipitates recruitment. There was a point not long ago that AWAC had more than enough pilots to take on any added flying that could be thrown its way, especially when republic was hurting badly. Further, before Piedmont voted in concessionary jet rates, they were in the exact same situation as AWAC; couldn't recruit because of an uncertain future and aging fleet, and had nowhere near the amount of pilots they needed for all the (potential) added flying. By your own logic, the flying would have gone to AWAC at this point and not Piedmont because they could staff it. But that's not what happened. Singing that new deal with Parker changed Piedmonts outlook and made it an attractive place to be, and people started to apply. You don't need the full amount of pilots that added flying would require as a prerequisite to get it. So when we are whipsawed against Piedmont and PSA again, and do take more of their flying because we now make less, I will vomit.
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:54 AM
  #179  
prex8390's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,191
Likes: 7
Default

Originally Posted by sweetholyjesus
My point is you made a poor comparison.
They were both signed in times of economic hardship. At this point we are just bragging who has a smellier turd
Reply
Old 12-23-2016 | 07:56 AM
  #180  
doin time
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
From: RJ Left
Default

Originally Posted by prex8390
Didnt Awac vote in concessions at one point? Like when Pinnacle did.
You're now deflecting. It's ok little fella.
You enjoyed the industry leading contact. You gave that up. Move on with your career.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Freightbird
FedEx
22
08-12-2016 11:12 PM
Duksrule
Hangar Talk
4
11-09-2011 06:56 AM
Jurassic Jet
Cargo
26
11-15-2007 07:16 AM
flystraightin
Major
4
05-31-2006 06:31 AM
Sir James
Hangar Talk
0
08-04-2005 04:31 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices