is this for a JCBA?

there is no chance in h*ll we are getting those rates before this deal closes. Sorry SY folks but I’m skeptical management will offer anything more than what you’re current rates are…

we have zero leverage. IBT has royally screwed us for years. I think most G4 pilots will look back on this merger as a gift to us because it will finally end the teamsters reign over us.

The proposed rates seem to be from a contract comparison pdf. I don't have a date so idk when it's from. As far as the screenshot of the SY rates, those are the current correct rates.

One leverage of a joint contract is the company does not get the efficiencies and savings of a joint company tell its all together. The longer they 2 are left apart the more and more it cost and less savings they will see. So to an extend the merger puts some time constant on the company. That that it will make us a windfall but in 3 years there will be multi new contracts done at the other carries again.

This was a company proposal at G4. Maybe not the one the mailed to our wives, but it’s a bit old I think their latest offer was $380ish top out for captains. But keep in mind you’re looking at a corvette with a civic motor…decent hourly rate but crap work rules. SY’s work rules are head and shoulders above us. We’re squabbling over them paying us a min day pay over here and leg/trip rigs.

are you talking about just the pilots are separate or the entire operation? Management told Wall Street that they will see 100m in “synergies” once they have a single operating certificate. Maybe others can help but i am pretty certain you can have a single certificate before a JCBA and SLI?

I think getting a 50% savings on 2/3 of your pilots is gonna outweigh whatever “synergies” management misses out on by having separate operations. Company is telling Wall Street there are synergies just on the revenue management and loyalty side.

Again, I’m not saying management wouldn’t like to get the JCBA done for all the unions, but we have a whole lot more to lose if we don’t get a deal until JCBA in 2030 than management does. Thats why I’m skeptical management will give us something that could get ratified.

my prediction: management gives us something they know won’t get ratified (think NK retirement, slight improvement to LTD and then SY rates with no work rule improvements). It goes for vote. Gets voted down. Management washes their hands, say they did their best, and drag us out for years in JCBA.

I hope I am wrong, but I remain skeptical.

Basically I was trying to say for the joint contract they will be more motivated because to capture all the joint savings we have to be working all as one. That does not help our cause now. It could however cause them issues on the retaining and if need recruiting side if they give us nothing now tell then. In the past even spirit gave the pilots something to be onboard to wait out the merger process. We shall see if G4 will follow.

in that sense then yes I agree, there will be opportunity for way more leverage during the JCBA no doubt. Totally agree.

right now, I think the leverage pie chart is a tiny slice for the union. That’s it. We can all thank JR, Robles, Josh, and all the IBT leadership etc when we see them for losing us all several hundreds of thousands. It’s infuriating how much they have screwed us.

<THIS>

But I encourage all, to not pull the "trigger" preemptively. As I said, we're all fatigued, exhausted of having weak, reckless and selfish leadership (choose to blame who you want). As well as having a pilot group that's been too apathetic, and some almost being complicit to support the bad leadership. I don't expect perfection, never have, from either company or union. I want progress, and finally some form of results. For too long union leadership put their thumb on the scale and refused to let the pilots decide "what is good enough" for them. Refusing to be realistic of the cards they held, or accept the little to no leverage they had. Before the merger announcement, the IBT had NO IDEA or believed there was a possibility of the merger. As I've said, we've been lead by people that refused to see past their noses; myopic.

I believe this has changed with the election, and can ONLY HOPE the company still "remains committed to delivering a contract we can be proud of". From what I've heard, the mediator will not entertain ANYMORE nonsense. Fingers crossed for these two days.

Yes you can have SOC first, we've had it for months, still working on JCBA. Unless a current CBA specifies otherwise. AS is enjoying most but not all of the synergies, while enjoying the lower rates on the HA side, plus any scheduling/soft time benefit they have with the AS CBA.

I'd tend to agree, especially if it looks like big raises are inevitable.

Regarding this issue, clarifying. I would assume that a single certificate with common opspecs would be required before the SOC element could be common to both operators?

Dispatch is obviously regulated where crew scheduling and other support would be more gray area.

Anyone have any experience here?

Also, does the Hawaiian cargo operate under part 117?

[QUOTE=rickair7777;3992318]Yes you can have SOC first, we've had it for months, still working on JCBA. Unless a current CBA specifies otherwise. AS is enjoying most but not all of the synergies, while enjoying the lower rates on the HA side, plus any scheduling/soft time benefit they have with the AS CBA.

I think one of the issues with SY and G4 will be managements greed. Even though we have little overlap now what we’re doing is so similar any changes post SOC could be seen and contested as disparate growth or alter ego flying. Just a myriad of scope, RLA, and MB issues. They are gonna want to announce new routes quickly after the SOC that’ll be challenging, and if any of that goes to the cheaper labor group I think management is going to run into a lot of issues. That’s also why we need ALPA here, the Toonster truck driver lawyers are completely incompetent when it comes to the RLA, MB, or pretty much any other sort of legal expertise pertaining to the airline world.

with AS and HA at least there is more distinction in the flying with the exception of the Hawaii routes but changes in that would be pretty visible.

I think getting a 50% savings on 2/3 of your pilots is gonna outweigh whatever “synergies” management misses out on by having separate operations. Company is telling Wall Street there are synergies just on the revenue management and loyalty side.

Doesn’t your retention bonus mou extend until another agreement is reached? With that are you still 50% lower costs? I got a brief look at that on a commute and was thinking that was a decent bit of leverage. Also there was a sentence that led me to believe you don’t necessarily have to be teamsters to receive that $. The intent was pretty clear. Shouldn’t really matter who bargained it.

Yes SOC means single certificate, which normally means bringing the acquired operation under the acquiring carrier's certificate.

Yes that would also need a single OPSPEC but an OPSPEC can and will have differences across fleets. Although in this case it would likely mostly consist of just bringing the SY 737's under the G4 737 rules, except any operationally unique stuff might need to be carved out (and example might be if one carrier had HUDs and the other didn't.)

The acquired carrier's SOP/FOM would be adjusted, typically in several phases. Training would likely be via CBT or maybe just during recurrent. In some cases, such as for flows/checklists, you'll just get a memo to learn/practice a new way of doing things, which will be effective on a certain date... that would be a good week to take vacation, while people unfluck themselves :rolleyes:

At or prior to SOC the acquired carrier's flight ops will be on the common OPSPEC, FOM, SOP, etc. The company can operate out of a single HQ and control center at that point, and I would expect that with just 737's to integrate.

At that point the company has achieved a lot of synergies, but crew admin, pay, contract admin etc would still need to be handled separately until JCBA. They would likely keep the 737's segregated, because the CBA workrules and scheduling would be different... they wouldn't want an entire G4 crew to time out because, if for example, the SY FO has better workrules in his CBA.

All of that can and likely will happen before JCBA and SLI. Not sure where the union merger fits into that but it would not be a holdup for SOC.

Everybody is locked into their original fleet(s) until SLI. There is the potential for painful pre-SLI adjustments to flying and domiciles as the company sets the table for SLI. They might also take advantage of a lower-cost pilot group by shifting flying from the higher-cost group. There's nothing to prevent say G4 planes from getting flowed through MSP, and also nothing to prevent them from opening a G4 737 crew base in MSP. Not saying they will, just something to be aware of.

We actually got the company to agree to some limits on block hour changes in the TPA, but some AS pilots were sure surprised when the company opened a 787 base in SEA, crewed by HA pilots.

I don't know.

I can’t speak for HA cargo ops,but if it is like SY cargo ops where crews intermingle between cargo, charter and pax ops they almost definitely operate under 117. Everything at SY is 117.

It's possible.

AS definitely shuffled some mainland-HI flying around, and some AS pilots were really unhappy when their long OGG layovers turned into short GEG layovers.

Long-term, all the HI flying will be on HA branded airplanes, but for now they don't really care about the paint job. The company can do anything they want with paint and branding... some HA aircraft now have an AS paint job.

The TPA protections we got were on total block hours IIRC... the company can and did shuffle block hours amongst the bases, as long as it stayed with the original pilot group. They're also opening and shrinking bases pre-JCBA/SLI.

HA cargo ops is a separate category and only does freight flying. There is no inter-mingling of pax and freight flying. That said, the cargo op is done under 117 and contractually required to be that way.

Well you bring up a good point about TPA and that will be another battleground for us. I spoke to one of our Eboard members and they were clueless that you actually negotiate these provisions and they are still operating on the idea that IBT will just be the de facto representation since G4 is larger. I haven’t had any experience with TPA negotiations under separate representational groups but both unions will have to sit down and figure this out prior to the SOC or I doubt it’ll happen (the TPA).

Well at least it sounds like our new Eboard is on-top of things.:eek:

You may have your expectations misaligned considering your newly elected union president was previously a trustee and secretary treasurer for over 2 years leading up to the emergency trusteeship.

Yeah and he was trash in those roles too lol 🤣

My expectations are very very low at this point. Almost anything will exceed them, because I expect nothing to happen and we are stuck tell after everything is done.

:eek:

This is rather alarming. That your union guys have less SA than me (anonymous line swine on the internet). But I have lived it twice in less than a decade.

You MEC should 1,000% be engaging vigorously and proactively with SY MEC and vice versa. Like yesterday. They should all be best buddies for the next three years. Fringe benefit: SY can leverage ALPA resources.

That's what I assumed, just didn't want to speak out of turn.

In this era it seems that anytime pax airlines do anything that's not strictly pax 121 they stick with 117.

this is huge. The DL NWA merger lost a lot due to the NWA MEC doing dumb egotistical stuff and not taking advantage of the full contract that the dominant DL MEC negotiated. Anderson ended up voiding it, and the MECs ended up having to give up scope to make it work. (Apologies to comair folks)

In the deal Anderson and the DL MEC negotiated there were a lot of concessions from the company and a big stock deal to all pilots in order to make the merger seamless. The nwa mec played dirty to the dl mec, arguing they should have violated their confidentiality agreement, all were replaced but one eventually.

Thanks, that context helps.

I 100% agree about the pay and work rules. At some point, we need to get some of that information out there for those who aren't too familiar with the SY contract and operation. I certainly don't spend my free time reading contracts from other airlines. Maybe I can throw a little something together later on.

I'm guessing that you're not a part of either airline in question and are here in part bc your the head honcho here on the forum. So far you have contributed a lot of insight which is very cool for both pilot groups who are facing a steep learning curve. Thank you for that.

I disagree with this being "likely." The general pilot community probably doesn't see how much of an odd duck SY is. I'd venture to bet even G4 management doesn't really know what they are buying. On the one hand, AS/HA is pretty darn complex in terms of international, ETOPS, multiple types, Amazon, etc, and they are navigating this process, so it must not be too hard, right? On the other hand, G4 is something of a limited operation buying a very nuanced operation.

If a legacy flight diverts into Laughlin it makes national news. SY has low time captains flying in an out in the dark on a daily basis, no news made. ETOPS, international, Caribbean, Amazon, charters. When it comes to charters, with unreliable information operating in and out of airports that hardly ever see narrowbodies, I'll give you that one, since G4 is king of operating at small airports. AQP vs non-AQP. etc.

Why do I think it's hard for these to companies to pull off what others have in the past? SY has spent 4 decades building a nuanced operation, it changes all the time, and we still have a lot of difficulty, even having done NAT flying in the past, it's taking a long time to spin that up again, e.g. Now, try to take 40 years of evolution of FOM and CBA details and shove them under an operation that doesn't include those details, and get the FAA to sign off on it. It's possible that G4 management is staffed entirely by people who are secretly black-belts in all these areas and they will handle all this deftly. In reality, SY is not an interchangeable p/n, and there could be many bumps on the road to single certificate, especially so unless G4 wholesale adopts the SY way of operation, which seems unlikely, but this also depends on G4 management's experience and mindsets.

And the most recent SY CBA has been designed around a lot of our unique features, so that's likely to come into play. AQP is one example that alone could be a show stopper. SY CBA requires AQP, G4 doesn't. How then do you get the certificate without either first getting a JCBA, or maybe bringing G4 onto an AQP? Things with the FAA seem to go pretty slow.

Hopefully these ramblings make sense. Over time it will come to light that in spite of the small size, there is a lot going on under the hood at SY. While OPSPECS are more "plug and play" type of interchangeable parts, the rest of our manuals and procedures are not.

If somehow it were successful, imagine the nightmare of trying to running dual CBAs with all that is entailed there. Anyway, there is a lot to unpack, but feel free to bookmark this and see how I did regarding certificate integration 3 to 5 years from now. I'm learning a lot from the information you all are posting here and will try to contribute a bit more as well.

If the entire decision-making managerial power is 100% Allegiant management, a lot will depend on whether they are willing to pay what it costs to succeed with respect to moving to a single cert and opspecs. It will probably cost more than expected, and present a lot of challenges that are not visible yet (as alluded to by Nibake).

I know nothing about the acquiring airline's management, but knowing about how things go in this industry it is often really hard to get the money guys to put out the needed cash for a durable, quality solution. Adding to that, any unrealistic deadlines from top management can cause long-term consequences. You'll have a fleet manager or chief pilot saying "we really need solution XYZ", and the word from on high is "make do with the cheaper faster solution".

Another question is the FSDO / CMO that will have jurisdiction, which I assume will be Vegas. Does MSP have to agree with any short-term solutions during the shift to single-carrier? What roadblocks await?

Given that this move is toward growing into a much larger airline, hopefully there is some willingness on your management's part to invest where needed to ensure long-term operational success.

This is the benefit of a fully unified group of 2000+ pilots - we can speak with one voice for those issues, especially where it takes a line pilot's perspective to overcome/influence management's cost-saving impulses and exuberance. Ask me how I know...

Everybody should go back and re-read this with the understanding that >50% of our Building C staff will be gone within 6 months. This is going to break us before G4 ever gets a chance to close on the deal anyway. Between staff and pilots attrition in going to hollow this company out.

I don’t know a single person that hasn’t put in their apps. Working for G4 is three steps back in every single one of our careers.

I've lived through one merger and am living the second in less than a decade. You learn a few things, whether you want to or not. Hopefully sharing is useful.

That would complicate SOC, although the work around is simply keep two 737 fleet operations, along with two pilot groups, in the interim. FAA won't care for that, and won't let it be a permanent thing.


JCBA would have to reconcile that, I can pretty much tell you that it's going to AQP for everyone, especially 737's. While the company might want to just remove SY from AQP the FAA will not like that, they want *everyone* on AQP and are unlikely to want to allow the SY operation to revert to the old system.


Dual CBA's will not happen long-term, unions can simply petition for single-carrier status. Unless the company just wants to own and operate SY as a *completely* separate airline AND *both* CBA''s have no scope.


It would behoove everyone to get as smart as possible on this stuff. Especially if the MEC and IBT aren't very experienced with airline mergers.

Great post. You effectively communicated the things rattling around in my brain. Feel the same way.
Moderator Rick, your insight is valued. Thank you.

Jude is correct, we are weird. Domestic and international PAX. ACMI cargo, major league team charters, charters of all types- casino to mil, VIPs to Kona. Supposedly a return to the North Atlantic.

SY pilots feel like they should be the highest paid in the entire industry and there’s an argument for that (what’s behind the cockpit door possibly changes not by trip, or day, but rather by leg)- unfortunately our profit margins were tied to surviving, not thriving.

And maybe that’s it. The entire thing will be blown to shreds with the just the most profitable pieces exploited. Nothing convoluted forward. But the contract to fit such an op will remain for years. Good luck. Will be fun to watch.

Comments like this create division. Perhaps you feel this way. What is the need to make this kind of comment publicly?

I've seen nothing like this from the Allegiant group, but yours is the second from ours that certainly takes a superior tone. If you feel that way, then you are better off leaving.

Do you have some unique attribute that makes you superior to the rest of us?

We had something like this with the VX group. It mostly had to do with the fact that they really liked their niche culture and schedules.

Also you have to recognize that there are many good reasons to leave SY or G4 for a legacy, and for some people a few good reasons to stay. M&A obviously brings all of those staying reasons into question, especially if you're on the receiving end.

AS attrition of junior pilots was heavier on the VX side for many years, as the airbus operation declined.

Maybe so.

For those who don't think that this merged entity is right for them, they should move on. There are absolutely many uncertainties to the whole situation, and the uncertainties are reason enough for some to leave, especially if they have many years left.

His first reason, the rumored draw down in the HQ and assumed pilot attrition are possibilities, and also a reason for some to leave. No argument there.

Valid thoughts. It’s not like that though. We’re just losing our identity. In truth many feel like we can be value add to the whole. Be it AQP, better PBS. International. Even cargo. And there’s the things G4 guys are better at. We’re in this together. And we’ll all come out better on the other end. Five stages of grief for our brand.

My comment and feelings about this are towards G4 management and not the pilot group. Specifically towards managements unwillingness to negotiate a fair competitive contract. Based on comments on the combined FB group many G4 pilots believe they are worse off than regionals. And that’s not because of their pilots. It’s because of the way their management treats them. And soon to be the way they treat us.

I’m not trying to be divisive, or to insult anyone. But we were hopeful for a new and improved contract sometime in the next three years. Now the feeling is we’ll be lucky to have an equitable contract sometime in the next 5.

And of course G4 pilots aren’t talking about filling out their apps and leaving. It’s not their business model that’s being threatened. It’s not their domicile that’s likely going to shrink. Their way of life isn’t likely to change. We’re not now trying to leave because being a G4 pilot is somehow beneath us. Our entire culture and work life is going to shift to something that we either don’t understand yet or don’t want.

2/3rds of SY’s flying happens outside of MSP. Anybody that thinks this domicile isn’t going to shrink is lying to themselves. We could have 120 pilots in each seat and we’d still be G4s largest domicile. (As JB has told us several times) That’s the top 1/3 of our captains that get to keep their base. And 20% of them still will be reserve pilots. Thats 10years to hold the domicile and 13 years to hold a line. By the time all is said and done (in four years) those numbers will be 14 years and 17 years respectively.

This just isn't what anybody who works here signed up for. It’s often said that SY pilots have a gamblers heart. The gamble hasn’t been paying off. Those of us at the bottom of the list have lost some hands recently. PBS didn't do us any favors by eliminating relief lines, CVG didn’t do us any favors, and now this. This was a big hand to lose. I can’t keep throwing my chips at the table.

Dude is 100% correct, working for G4 is a backwards step to anyone's career. Wouldn't be surprised if SY routes and flights aren't given to G4 to save even more money since G4 will never be allowed a contract. That's tons of savings right there. And yes that means those pilots would lose out on their bases and flying. Basically a whipsaw, and the since they are ALPA the Toonsters wont lift a finger to help, in fact they will probably help G4 screw the SY pilots for their own benefit. So stop pretending this guy said something wrong and attacking him for stating facts. SY pilots are in for a world of hurt. I wish that wasn't true but it is. They have NO idea how much Maury HATES pilots. Almost as much as the Toonsters do.

I can tell you that the G4 pilots are looking very much forward to those things that SY will bring. I also can tell you that there are a ton of us that are ready to shed the IBT shadow that’s been looming over this place for so long and we also know how much better this place will become with ALPA on property.

I have a couple of questions for the G4 guys -

1) There is talk of sending the maxes to MSP after the purchase is finalized but before the SOC because MSP is such a hot opportunity. (Set aside the fact that for years we've been hearing that it's not worth it bc the maxes are too expensive, somehow it's suddenly a good deal.) Before this was announced, what was the game plan for the max? I have zero context on the strategy behind those orders.

2) With the ongoing struggle for a modern CBA, are you guys not having bad attrition? How are you making it with so little hiring?

3) Is there limited leverage for negotiations? Our leverage has been largely in CA upgrades. The mix of flying, especially cargo redeyes, has made for some horrendous quality pairings, and our reserve is spectacularly bad, especially when understaffed, so most FOs are just not willing to become a jr captain. The more senior FOs get accustomed to a very cush QOL and are also slow to upgrade. We don't have a serious problem with attrition, just yet. We also have plenty of new hire classes lined up.

Ironically, this announcement has led to a massive influx in panic upgrades which kneecaps some of that leverage. However, we have a few more airplanes coming soon and we are still considerably behind the power curve. Also, as others have hinted at, there are many FOs and jr CAs who have decided to try to leave as soon as they can on account of the acquisition. Whether the Bldg C ppl will leave before the jobs are eliminated, idk.

Piggybacking on other's comments about our unique brand, it's pretty cool what we can do and how profitable we can be while doing it. However, if you start tinkering with what makes it work, you could easily make it a big, unprofitable mess. It's hard to overstate how much of a niche deal we are.

Some of our calls gave me the impression that this purchase is more of a desperation move "we have to do this." SY and G4 have struggling stock prices and somehow this is going to send us to the moon? I think the profitability of the venture is very suspect, but that's another subject.

Sorry about the randomness. As Roger Ball said, there are so many things bouncing around in our minds right now.

it’s the fact that MSP as a pilot base will shrink. That’s why half the SY group is at SY!

yes on the call he said it will grow. But NOT as a pilot base.

Apparently we got the MAX as a two for one special. Exact $ not known but it was a great deal and we couldn't wait for NEOs. Fuel savings is big. 10 more PAX. If Boeing would have delivered in time it would have helped with leverage. But the slow down at Boeing only created an over supply of pilots.

I could envision more 3 or 4 leg days for G4 pilots through MSP via our bases. I dont think the intent is to gut MSP.

Leverage? Yes. They did this to grow and make money. Hard to do that with 2000 ****ed off pilots. Personally I think they will get something done sooner than later. Especially with the right union reps in the room.