Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




Pages : [1] 2

View Full Version : JetBlue Selects Airbus A220-300


jetliner1526
07-10-2018, 12:25 PM
JetBlue Selects Airbus A220-300 as Key Component of Its Next Generation Fleet

A220-300, formerly the Bombardier CS300, provides superior value and a powerful combination of aircraft economics, range capabilities and customer experience

Airline to retire Embraer 190 fleet beginning in 2020

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- JetBlue (NASDAQ:JBLU) today announced it has ordered 60 Airbus A220-300 aircraft – previously called the Bombardier CS300 – for delivery beginning in 2020, with the option for 60 additional aircraft beginning in 2025. The aircraft will be powered by Pratt & Whitney Geared Turbofan (GTF) PW1500G engines. The order follows JetBlue’s intensive review aimed at ensuring the best financial performance of the airline’s fleet while providing maximum flexibility to execute its network strategy and enhancing its industry-leading customer experience.

This press release features multimedia. View the full release here: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180710006015/en/

As part of the agreement, JetBlue has also reshaped its Airbus orderbook, including converting its order for 25 A320neos to the A321neo and adjusting the delivery schedule.

“We are evolving our fleet for the future of JetBlue, and the A220-300’s impressive range and economics offer us flexibility and support our key financial and operating priorities,” said Robin Hayes, chief executive officer, JetBlue. “As we approach our 20th anniversary, the A220, combined with our A321 and restyled A320 fleet, will help ensure we deliver the best onboard experience to customers and meet our long-term financial targets as we continue disciplined growth into the future.”

“JetBlue’s selection of the A220 aircraft as a complement to its growing A320 Family fleet is a tremendous endorsement – both of the A220 itself and of the way these two aircraft can work together to provide airline network flexibility and a great customer experience,” said Eric Schulz, chief commercial officer for Airbus. “JetBlue will be able to leverage the unbeatable efficiency of both the A321neo and the A220-300, as well as taking advantage of the roomiest and most customer-pleasing cabins of any aircraft in their size categories.”

“We’re honored by JetBlue’s confidence in selecting the A220-300 aircraft which adds to their existing order of the A320neo family of aircraft both powered by the Pratt & Whitney GTF engine,” said Chris Calio, president of commercial engines at Pratt & Whitney. “We’ve been powering JetBlue with our V2500® engines since they started operations in 2000. We now look forward to also supporting JetBlue across their two new fuel-efficient, next-generation aircraft platforms.”

State-of-the-Art Technology & Enhanced Customer Experience

The A220-300’s spacious and comfortable cabin makes it the perfect fit for JetBlue, which has consistently led U.S. airlines in the onboard experience. The A220’s cabin design offers customers the best inflight experience with wider seats, spacious overhead bins and extra-large windows that offer a great view from the sky and on the ground.

The aircraft’s advanced aerodynamics combined with a specially designed Pratt & Whitney engine help the aircraft deliver approximately 40 percent lower fuel burn per seat than JetBlue’s current E190 fleet, a reduced noise footprint and decreased emissions.

Thorough Analysis Determined Path to Greatest Value

JetBlue conducted a comprehensive review of multiple options for its 100-seat aircraft. In addition to its financial analysis, JetBlue invited frontline leaders and crewmembers, including technical operations, to evaluate the aircraft in person at JetBlue’s JFK hangar.

JetBlue plans to phase in the A220-300 as a replacement for JetBlue’s existing fleet of 60 Embraer E190 aircraft. The aircraft’s range and seating capacity will add flexibility to JetBlue’s network strategy as it targets growth in its focus cities, including options to schedule it for transcontinental flying. The aircraft also opens the door to new markets and routes that would have been unprofitable with JetBlue’s existing fleet.

“We expect the A220 to be an important long-term building block in our goal to deliver superior margins and create long-term shareholder value,” said Steve Priest, executive vice president and chief financial officer, JetBlue. “We are confident the A220 will perform well in every aspect, including network, cost, maintenance, or customer experience. Simply put – our crewmembers, customers and owners are going to love this aircraft.”

While the E190 has played an important role in JetBlue’s network since 2005, the airline’s fleet review determined that the A220’s economics would allow the airline to lower costs in the coming years. The A220 was designed by previous manufacturer Bombardier to seat between 130 and 160 customers, enabling financial and network advantages over the current 100-seat Embraer configuration.

Seamless Transition With Built-In Flexibility

“The diligence that went into this analysis from teams across JetBlue speaks to the aircraft’s importance for the next generation of our airline,” Priest said. “We expect a seamless transition, and we’ve worked with Airbus and Bombardier to build in maximum flexibility to the order book as market conditions shift over time.”

JetBlue plans to take delivery of the first five aircraft in 2020, the airline’s 20th year of service. Deliveries will continue through 2025. JetBlue expects it will begin to reduce flying with its existing fleet of E190 aircraft beginning in 2020. The phase out will continue gradually through approximately 2025.

Options for 60 additional aircraft begin in 2025, and JetBlue retains flexibility to convert certain aircraft to the smaller A220-100 if it chooses. Both members of the A220 Family share commonality in more than 99 percent of their replaceable parts as well as the same family of engines.

JetBlue’s A220 aircraft will be assembled in Mobile, Ala.

Conference Call

JetBlue will conduct an analyst and media conference call to discuss the aircraft purchase agreement on Wednesday, July 11, at 10 a.m. Eastern Time. A live broadcast of the conference call will also be available via the internet at JetBlue | Investor Relations (http://investor.jetblue.com). An analyst Q&A, followed by a media Q&A, will be held at the end of the call. Credentialed reporters can request access from JetBlue Corporate Communications, [email protected]

About JetBlue Airways

JetBlue is New York's Hometown Airline®, and a leading carrier in Boston, Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood, Los Angeles (Long Beach), Orlando, and San Juan. JetBlue carries more than 40 million customers a year to 102 cities in the U.S., Caribbean, and Latin America with an average of 1,000 daily flights. For more information please visit jetblue.com.



View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180710006015/en/


Bozo the pilot
07-10-2018, 12:26 PM
Wheres David Puddy?
I gotta hear your reaction Dave. :D

CaptCoolHand
07-10-2018, 12:34 PM
Vote no its a turd


Speedbird2263
07-10-2018, 12:38 PM
Wheres David Puddy?
I gotta hear your reaction Dave. :D

I second that :D

Bluedriver
07-10-2018, 12:42 PM
Vote no its a turd

I for one am really impressed that JB for ONCE didn't choose the cheapest option. Finally some investment in the actual airline (Airways).

CaptCoolHand
07-10-2018, 12:43 PM
I for one am really impressed that JB for ONCE didn't choose the cheapest option. Finally some investment in the actual airline (Airways).

first words from my mouth... Ohmygod, we made a good decision!

Mattio
07-10-2018, 12:44 PM
"including converting its order for 25 A320neos to the A321neo and adjusting the delivery schedule"

CaptCoolHand
07-10-2018, 12:44 PM
goodbye mco... it was fun while it lasted.

Acehole
07-10-2018, 12:47 PM
goodbye mco... it was fun while it lasted.
Explain your thought.

RiddleEagle18
07-10-2018, 12:49 PM
goodbye mco... it was fun while it lasted.



Nah. We are actually expanding mco departures by 20% in the next 2 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Softpayman
07-10-2018, 12:51 PM
Wait I thought this was all a contract ploy, that we’d get the 195 all along. Guess you guys don’t know what you’re talking about.

Flyby1206
07-10-2018, 12:53 PM
Wheres David Puddy?
I gotta hear your reaction Dave. :D

Lol I came here for the same thing.

Mattio
07-10-2018, 12:54 PM
I'm happy that the company made a good decision on aircraft choice. I'm unhappy that the TA would make us the lowest paid CS 300 pilots among our peers... I wonder what kind of effect this is going to have on how people vote... Not to make everything about the TA... I'm ready to say goodbye to the god-awful 190 seat!

Edit: That's assuming the rates would be applicable to A220. Does the name change negate the rates?

capn a220
07-10-2018, 12:55 PM
Q: If JetBlue purchases the C-series jets, especially the 300 series, what's to prevent the company from subsidizing the majority of the A320 flying with the 300 C-series aircraft to get away with paying the lower pay rate?
A: The CS-300 pay rate in the TA is approximately 4% lower than the A320, however the configuration of the CS300 has 17% fewer seats (135 vs.162 with comparable seat pitch). With pilot costs amounting to only about 10% of operating costs and most—if not all—airlines only increasing seats, it wouldn't make sense to reduce seats in today's environment for only a 4% pilot-cost savings. The subsequent reduction in RASM by reducing the number of seats reduces the profitability of the fleet (overhead and maintenance related expenses become even more costly). Additionally, immediate fleet replacement would not occur by virtue of airplane delivery practices and availability. Because of these problems, it is highly unlikely this scenario would occur, or that it could occur before the amendable date of this agreement.

Vote this TA down and require the A220 pay to match industry standard. Add verbiage stating that if the A220 is configured to seat 150 pax, then the A220 will pay equal to the A320.

Does anyone actually trust the company to only park the E190s?

FLY100
07-10-2018, 12:58 PM
Does this announcement (A220) change anyone's vote?
Just curious.

Softpayman
07-10-2018, 01:05 PM
Does this announcement (A220) change anyone's vote?
Just curious.

It doesn't change my vote.

YES.

Mattio
07-10-2018, 01:10 PM
Does this announcement (A220) change anyone's vote?
Just curious.

I was already a firm No, and this is just another reason in the "Cons" category. Signing a TA to be the lowest paid pilots on type among our peers is the definition of dragging down the industry.

CaptCoolHand
07-10-2018, 01:15 PM
Does this announcement (A220) change anyone's vote?
Just curious.

Well I'm voting No now.

I will not go from the worlds highest paid 190 driver to the worlds lowest paid A220-300 driver.

NOPE.

Vote NO.
even if it's within 2% of Delta.

seekingblue
07-10-2018, 01:17 PM
Does this announcement (A220) change anyone's vote?
Just curious.

Nope.


Still voting yes on the contract

Mattio
07-10-2018, 01:19 PM
Check my math but the 12-year FO rates are 10% lower than AMR and CA is 9% lower. That's assuming CS 300 rates apply to A220...

CaptCoolHand
07-10-2018, 01:27 PM
Check my math but the 12-year FO rates are 10% lower than Delta and CA is 9% lower. That's assuming CS 300 rates apply to A220...
Your math is wrong.

CA 12yr
JB248.42/DAL253=.981
2%

FO 12yr
JB166.64/DAL176= .963
3.7%

don't get emotionally strung to highest or lowest.
This doesn't bring down the industry... Not even close.

We got within 2% of the top tier pay rates on our first contract? my god we must suck.

good riddance 190.

Xtreme87
07-10-2018, 01:29 PM
Q: If JetBlue purchases the C-series jets, especially the 300 series, what's to prevent the company from subsidizing the majority of the A320 flying with the 300 C-series aircraft to get away with paying the lower pay rate?
A: The CS-300 pay rate in the TA is approximately 4% lower than the A320, however the configuration of the CS300 has 17% fewer seats (135 vs.162 with comparable seat pitch). With pilot costs amounting to only about 10% of operating costs and most—if not all—airlines only increasing seats, it wouldn't make sense to reduce seats in today's environment for only a 4% pilot-cost savings. The subsequent reduction in RASM by reducing the number of seats reduces the profitability of the fleet (overhead and maintenance related expenses become even more costly). Additionally, immediate fleet replacement would not occur by virtue of airplane delivery practices and availability. Because of these problems, it is highly unlikely this scenario would occur, or that it could occur before the amendable date of this agreement.

Vote this TA down and require the A220 pay to match industry standard. Add verbiage stating that if the A220 is configured to seat 150 pax, then the A220 will pay equal to the A320.

Does anyone actually trust the company to only park the E190s?

Well considering they have to disclose to shareholders what they are going to do with the E190, and they did just that...yes. They will park them. Why the hell would they run 3 fleet types of similar seating capacity?

capt707
07-10-2018, 01:30 PM
"including converting its order for 25 A320neos to the A321neo and adjusting the delivery schedule"

@320 payrates! :rolleyes:

David Puddy
07-10-2018, 01:34 PM
Wheres David Puddy?
I gotta hear your reaction Dave. :D

Great news! Not too surprising. If you have to spend time in a flightdeck, it might as well be ergonomic and high tech - right? The E190 ain’t bad, but the CS300/A220-300 will be a lot nicer for us up front and it will be interesting to see how it is used beyond the typical regional routes flown by the E190. How about BOS-PSP or MCO-BOI?

For those people still unfamiliar with the airplane:

http://www.worldairroutes.com/airbalticcs300.html

And

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ldQt2pXbjAE&feature=youtu.be

The timing of the decision surprised me - I thought we would hear it at Farnborough. Perhaps Robin wanted to secure his delivery slots before a big order rush... Great news! :)

Bozo the pilot
07-10-2018, 01:36 PM
Great news! Not too surprising. If you have to spend time in a flightdeck, it might as well be ergonomic and high tech - right? The E190 ain’t bad, but the CS300/A220-300 will be a lot nicer for us up front and it will be interesting to see how it is used beyond the typical regional routes flown by the E190. How about BOS-PSP or MCO-BOI?

For those people still unfamiliar with the airplane:

airbalticcs300 (http://www.worldairroutes.com/airbalticcs300.html)

And

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ldQt2pXbjAE&feature=youtu.be

The timing of the decision surprised me - I thought we would hear it at Farnborough. Perhaps Robin wanted to secure his delivery slots before a big order rush... Great news! :)
Thanks Dave. Maybe he's waiting for the airshow to have a separate LR announcement. We'll see.

Mattio
07-10-2018, 01:36 PM
Your math is wrong.

CA 12yr
JB248.42/DAL253=.981
2%

FO 12yr
JB166.64/DAL176= .963
3.7%

don't get emotionally strung to highest or lowest.
This doesn't bring down the industry... Not even close.

We got within 2% of the top tier pay rates on our first contract? my god we must suck.

good riddance 190.

Sorry! I meant in comparison to AMR (the top dawgs in CS300 pay), not Delta! But I'm not emotionally stung by being the lowest. This isn't based on emotions. Dragging down the industry and being the lowest paid with a brand new contract is bad for others now and for us in the long run.

nuball5
07-10-2018, 01:39 PM
Thanks Dave. Maybe he's waiting for the airshow to have a separate LR announcement. We'll see.

Announcement said to expect something on the LR in a few months

Bozo the pilot
07-10-2018, 01:41 PM
Well I'm voting No now.

I will not go from the worlds highest paid 190 driver to the worlds lowest paid A220-300 driver.

NOPE.

Vote NO.
even if it's within 2% of Delta.
Im still laughing a bit at this post CCH- Thanks :D

Bozo the pilot
07-10-2018, 01:42 PM
Announcement said to expect something on the LR in a few months

You think I read past "we're getting A220s"? ;)

CaptCoolHand
07-10-2018, 01:43 PM
Sorry! I meant in comparison to AMR (the top dawgs in CS300 pay), not Delta! But I'm not emotionally stung by being the lowest. This isn't based on emotions. Dragging down the industry and being the lowest paid with a brand new contract is bad for others now and for us in the long run.

AA has an order for them?

we all have to vote for our own best interest.

seekingblue
07-10-2018, 01:45 PM
Your math is wrong.

CA 12yr
JB248.42/DAL253=.981
2%

FO 12yr
JB166.64/DAL176= .963
3.7%

don't get emotionally strung to highest or lowest.
This doesn't bring down the industry... Not even close.

We got within 2% of the top tier pay rates on our first contract? my god we must suck.

good riddance 190.

Yes. Good riddance for sure.

captsurf
07-10-2018, 01:57 PM
1-for-1 replacement with the Boeing-190.

A220-300 has a 160 seat capacity. Figure 140 with our seat pitch. So we just grew our airline by 2400 seats without bringing a single additional pilot to the seniority list.

*slow clap*

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mattio
07-10-2018, 01:59 PM
Q: If JetBlue purchases the C-series jets, especially the 300 series, what's to prevent the company from subsidizing the majority of the A320 flying with the 300 C-series aircraft to get away with paying the lower pay rate?
A: The CS-300 pay rate in the TA is approximately 4% lower than the A320, however the configuration of the CS300 has 17% fewer seats (135 vs.162 with comparable seat pitch). With pilot costs amounting to only about 10% of operating costs and most—if not all—airlines only increasing seats, it wouldn't make sense to reduce seats in today's environment for only a 4% pilot-cost savings. The subsequent reduction in RASM by reducing the number of seats reduces the profitability of the fleet (overhead and maintenance related expenses become even more costly). Additionally, immediate fleet replacement would not occur by virtue of airplane delivery practices and availability. Because of these problems, it is highly unlikely this scenario would occur, or that it could occur before the amendable date of this agreement.

Vote this TA down and require the A220 pay to match industry standard. Add verbiage stating that if the A220 is configured to seat 150 pax, then the A220 will pay equal to the A320.

Does anyone actually trust the company to only park the E190s?

Well considering they have to disclose to shareholders what they are going to do with the E190, and they did just that...yes. They will park them. Why the hell would they run 3 fleet types of similar seating capacity?

Xtreme, he asked if anyone trusts the company to ONLY park the 190's, instead of also eventually parking some A320's and sending some flying to the lower paid A220.

capn a220
07-10-2018, 02:04 PM
Thanks Mattio. How is demanding industry average pay demanding too much? If we have the lowest pay by 2% or 20% - we will be front runners in the race to the bottom. The percentage simply indicates how commanding a lead we will have. To those who are ok with this, have you no shame?

Bozo the pilot
07-10-2018, 02:11 PM
Please reread "Does anyone actually trust the company to only park the E190s?" Sure, they'll start with parking the E190s. Does anyone actually trust that they will stop with the E190s?

So what year are we talking about?
Welcome aboard capn. :D

antbar01
07-10-2018, 02:14 PM
1-for-1 replacement with the Boeing-190.

A220-300 has a 160 seat capacity. Figure 140 with our seat pitch. So we just grew our airline by 2400 seats without bringing a single additional pilot to the seniority list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is true, but if they had announced a complete fleet replacement with 777s nobody would sweat the seat increase if the money was right. It's just smart business.

Whether or not you like the CS rate is another question.

Mattio
07-10-2018, 02:18 PM
Thanks Mattio. How is demanding industry average pay demanding too much? If we have the lowest pay by 2% or 20% - we will be front runners in the race to the bottom. The percentage simply indicates how commanding a lead we will have. To those who are ok with this, have you no shame?

Nice 2nd post. Strong start. :D

Bozo the pilot
07-10-2018, 02:21 PM
Nice 2nd post. Strong start. :D

Nice alter ego ya mean. ;)

captsurf
07-10-2018, 02:21 PM
This is true, but if they had announced a complete fleet replacement with 777s nobody would sweat the seat increase if the money was right. It's just smart business.



Whether or not you like the CS rate is another question.



Key word, “IF” the money was right. In this case, it isn’t. Especially when there’s no A321 override


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Softpayman
07-10-2018, 02:27 PM
1-for-1 replacement with the Boeing-190.

A220-300 has a 160 seat capacity. Figure 140 with our seat pitch. So we just grew our airline by 2400 seats without bringing a single additional pilot to the seniority list.

*slow clap*

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And if had been the E2 195 you’d be complaining about something else. Either way complainers are gonna complain.

seekingblue
07-10-2018, 02:32 PM
And if had been the E2 195 you’d be complaining about something else. Either way complainers are gonna complain.

This. 1000%

Everyone was on here complaining that “jetcheap” was going to get the E190 E2, that it’s a stupid choice etc etc.

Now that the company did exactly what we all wanted them to do, we complain.

I swear there are some of us who would complain about having a free dinner.

da42pilot
07-10-2018, 02:35 PM
Yeah this looks like abandoning the lower end of the market (100 seaters) and replacing A320s with lower paying 220s.

This ain’t a E190 replacement, folks.

nuball5
07-10-2018, 02:37 PM
This. 1000%

Everyone was on here complaining that “jetcheap” was going to get the E190 E2, that it’s a stupid choice etc etc.

Now that the company did exactly what we all wanted them to do, we complain.

I swear there are some of us who would complain about having a free dinner.

If you consider those snack boxes dinner, then sure. 😉

captsurf
07-10-2018, 02:39 PM
And if had been the E2 195 you’d be complaining about something else. Either way complainers are gonna complain.



Sorry for wanting to see this airline actually GROW. Saying 5-7% growth year-over-year is BS when it’s only because the ASM is increasing, and nothing else...

Everyone else is ADDING hulls. We are just replacing ours with bigger ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

seekingblue
07-10-2018, 02:42 PM
Sorry for wanting to see this airline actually GROW. Saying 5-7% growth year-over-year is BS when it’s only because the ASM is increasing, and nothing else...

Everyone else is ADDING hulls. We are just replacing ours with bigger ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sort of confused by your statement.

We are replacing the 190’s for sure. But also adding hulls.

So we are replacing the 190’s and growing (both in ASM and fleet count)

capn a220
07-10-2018, 02:46 PM
I agree, this is the right aircraft for Jetblue. Not that anyone asked me to vote for/against. The pay for this aircraft and fleet protection language in our TA, however, is all kinds of wrong. And I am being asked to vote for/against that.

They just announced the order. The company will cave quickly if we vote no and insist on fixing this now. Industry average pay. A320 pay for any A220 configured with greater than 135 seats. A320/321 block hour/fleet number protection - if either decreases from DOS - A220 pay increases to A320.

This can be fixed over lunch. But if the TA passes, we'll regret it for the next 5-7 years.

seekingblue
07-10-2018, 02:47 PM
Question for the 190 guys in the group:

Does this fundamentally change how you will vote?

captsurf
07-10-2018, 02:47 PM
Sort of confused by your statement.



We are replacing the 190’s for sure. But also adding hulls.



So we are replacing the 190’s and growing (both in ASM and fleet count)



And adding seats to our A320s..... and replacing A320s with A321s. And replacing A320neo orders with A321neo orders. So, yea we are growing. But a lot of it is fake growth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

da42pilot
07-10-2018, 02:53 PM
And adding seats to our A320s..... and replacing A320s with A321s. And replacing A320neo orders with A321neo orders. So, yea we are growing. But a lot of it is fake growth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A fake Airbus replacing a real Airbus :D

hyperboy
07-10-2018, 03:00 PM
Nice 2nd post. Strong start. :D

The love affair begins.....:D

hyperboy
07-10-2018, 03:03 PM
Question for the 190 guys in the group:

Does this fundamentally change how you will vote?

Believe it or not we are all on the same seniority list so we can go where ever we want to if we can hold it? Even the 320.

hyperboy
07-10-2018, 03:06 PM
Sorry for wanting to see this airline actually GROW. Saying 5-7% growth year-over-year is BS when it’s only because the ASM is increasing, and nothing else...

Everyone else is ADDING hulls. We are just replacing ours with bigger ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The growth and aircraft order will come via Frontier.

Softpayman
07-10-2018, 03:12 PM
Sorry for wanting to see this airline actually GROW. Saying 5-7% growth year-over-year is BS when it’s only because the ASM is increasing, and nothing else...

Everyone else is ADDING hulls. We are just replacing ours with bigger ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are we adding any A321NEOs in 2019 & 2020? If so do they constitute growth?

David Puddy
07-10-2018, 03:18 PM
Yeah this looks like abandoning the lower end of the market (100 seaters) and replacing A320s with lower paying 220s.

This ain’t a E190 replacement, folks.

Agreed about it not being an E190 replacement. The CS100 possibly. The CS300 is a biggish airplane - although it seats less than an A320 (partly due to the 2X3 searing), it is actually longer than a regular A320 - this is not an extended regional jet like the E190. Here’s a good look at the CS300 next to an A321:

https://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/1069711/hb-iod-swiss-airbus-a321/

The CS300/A220-300 ain’t a small airplane. From an efficiency standpoint, a non-NEO A320 can’t compare to the low CASM on the CS300/A220-300. It will be a very profitable platform for JB.

Bozo the pilot
07-10-2018, 03:21 PM
I agree, this is the right aircraft for Jetblue. Not that anyone asked me to vote for/against. The pay for this aircraft and fleet protection language in our TA, however, is all kinds of wrong. And I am being asked to vote for/against that.

They just announced the order. The company will cave quickly if we vote no and insist on fixing this now. Industry average pay. A320 pay for any A220 configured with greater than 135 seats. A320/321 block hour/fleet number protection - if either decreases from DOS - A220 pay increases to A320.

This can be fixed over lunch. But if the TA passes, we'll regret it for the next 5-7 years.
Do you need to list a different email for an alternate account here?
Good to see you with your new name capn.

captsurf
07-10-2018, 03:45 PM
Are we adding any A321NEOs in 2019 & 2020? If so do they constitute growth?



Don’t disagree with you at all. I just know there’s a lot of cities between NY and LAX that we do not current serve that hopefully the A220/CS300 will allow us to serve in the future. The 190 “replacements” will be the test. Hopefully we exercise our 60 additional options and actually go to some new cities


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

200Driver
07-10-2018, 03:47 PM
I agree, this is the right aircraft for Jetblue. Not that anyone asked me to vote for/against. The pay for this aircraft and fleet protection language in our TA, however, is all kinds of wrong. And I am being asked to vote for/against that.

They just announced the order. The company will cave quickly if we vote no and insist on fixing this now. Industry average pay. A320 pay for any A220 configured with greater than 135 seats. A320/321 block hour/fleet number protection - if either decreases from DOS - A220 pay increases to A320.

This can be fixed over lunch. But if the TA passes, we'll regret it for the next 5-7 years.

Here’s the problem with that logic...unlike SWA with the Max we have NO agreement to go back to. We vote down, company says no problemo here’s your C-Series rates (copy paste current 190 rates) and we will meet once a quarter with the mediator to address the concerns of the pilot group. We can’t meet anymore now that our plate is full with getting ready for the new aircraft.

We vote this down we go back to crap...when DAL and SWA voted theirs down they went back to top of the industry CBA’s....

expectholding
07-10-2018, 03:48 PM
I agree, this is the right aircraft for Jetblue. Not that anyone asked me to vote for/against. The pay for this aircraft and fleet protection language in our TA, however, is all kinds of wrong. And I am being asked to vote for/against that.

They just announced the order. The company will cave quickly if we vote no and insist on fixing this now. Industry average pay. A320 pay for any A220 configured with greater than 135 seats. A320/321 block hour/fleet number protection - if either decreases from DOS - A220 pay increases to A320.

This can be fixed over lunch. But if the TA passes, we'll regret it for the next 5-7 years.

The fallacy that they'll be crawling to us and fixing this over lunch is unfounded, and I would challenge you to reference an instance where this has ever happened.

Look at the big picture here. SWA doesn't override the 737-800, 900. United is flying the 321, the 737-700, -800, and -900, and the 757-200 all at the same rate as the 320. American flies the 737-800 and 321 at the same rate as the 320, and American has 200+ 321s (almost a 5:1 ratio 321:320 ref. APC). Alaska flies all versions of the 737 and the 321 at the same rate as the 320. Spirit has a blended rate which is near bottom of the industry.

Do I want more. He!! yes! But I'm sorry, your claim is not supported by the market, so fixing it over lunch doesn't happen. If you want to vote no because you dont like it, then ok. But don't live in fantasy land and understand what is realistically achievable, and that opening up bargaining over issues that are likely unachievable allows the company to attack us on scope, rigs, retirement, etc., all while not having a CBA and living under the Direct Relationship for an indeterminable amount of time.

Bozo the pilot
07-10-2018, 03:55 PM
Here’s the problem with that logic...unlike SWA with the Max we have NO agreement to go back to. We vote down, company says no problemo here’s your C-Series rates (copy paste current 190 rates) and we will meet once a quarter with the mediator to address the concerns of the pilot group. We can’t meet anymore now that our plate is full with getting ready for the new aircraft.

We vote this down we go back to crap...when DAL and SWA voted theirs down they went back to top of the industry CBA’s....

This fact is not registering with the T/A haters.
Most know that this TA could be better, but comparing it to DAL and SWA is naive at best.

PasserOGas
07-10-2018, 04:28 PM
Here’s the problem with that logic...unlike SWA with the Max we have NO agreement to go back to. We vote down, company says no problemo here’s your C-Series rates (copy paste current 190 rates) and we will meet once a quarter with the mediator to address the concerns of the pilot group. We can’t meet anymore now that our plate is full with getting ready for the new aircraft.

We vote this down we go back to crap...when DAL and SWA voted theirs down they went back to top of the industry CBA’s....

We don't have language for these payscales now. Where in the PEA are they allowed to impose new payates while in negotiations? Honest question.

antbar01
07-10-2018, 04:37 PM
The fallacy that they'll be crawling to us and fixing this over lunch is unfounded, and I would challenge you to reference an instance where this has ever happened.

Look at the big picture here. SWA doesn't override the 737-800, 900. United is flying the 321, the 737-700, -800, and -900, and the 757-200 all at the same rate as the 320. American flies the 737-800 and 321 at the same rate as the 320, and American has 200+ 321s (almost a 5:1 ratio 321:320 ref. APC). Alaska flies all versions of the 737 and the 321 at the same rate as the 320. Spirit has a blended rate which is near bottom of the industry.

Do I want more. He!! yes! But I'm sorry, your claim is not supported by the market, so fixing it over lunch doesn't happen. If you want to vote no because you dont like it, then ok. But don't live in fantasy land and understand what is realistically achievable, and that opening up bargaining over issues that are likely unachievable allows the company to attack us on scope, rigs, retirement, etc., all while not having a CBA and living under the Direct Relationship for an indeterminable amount of time.

This resonates.

Bluedriver
07-10-2018, 04:38 PM
Wait I thought this was all a contract ploy, that we’d get the 195 all along. Guess you guys don’t know what you’re talking about.

Most of us said that IF fleet review wasn't announced before vote close, that it would mean the C rates were a ruse.

Well, they announced it before vote close, so...

200Driver
07-10-2018, 04:38 PM
We don't have language for these payscales now. Where in the PEA are they allowed to impose new payates while in negotiations? Honest question.

As far as I know it doesn’t say they can nor does it say they can’t ... which equals ... they can (i.e. 1st and 2nd implementation of the original 190 rates).

I’ll take a look though to try and verify the exact language.

Bluedriver
07-10-2018, 04:53 PM
The Airline is in an upgauging trend. The A220-300 will not replace any A320 airframes.

Now, in 2025 when it's time to potentially exercise the A220 options and our oldest A320s reach age 65? EXPECT us to exercise those A220-*500* or -*700* options to replace our oldest A320s.

And that aircraft should have a new pay rate to match or exceed the A320 rate.

antbar01
07-10-2018, 04:59 PM
The Airline is in an upgauging trend. The A220-300 will not replace any A320 airframes.

Now, in 2025 when it's time to potentially exercise the A220 options and our oldest A320s reach age 65? EXPECT us to exercise those A220-*500* or -*700* options to replace our oldest A320s.

And that aircraft should have a new pay rate to match or exceed the A320 rate.

Exactly. Set ourselves up to fight that fight when it comes.

hyperboy
07-10-2018, 05:06 PM
We don't have language for these payscales now. Where in the PEA are they allowed to impose new payates while in negotiations? Honest question.


Where in the PEA does it say anything about negotiations?

symbian simian
07-10-2018, 05:07 PM
I am guessing that there are 900 or so E190 pilots now, if this gets voted in, they will get a $20 raise on average. Total cost to the company around $20million per year extra for the pilots. Does that make up for all the other deficiencies in the TA? Just curious no one has mentioned it.

nuball5
07-10-2018, 05:17 PM
I am guessing that there are 900 or so E190 pilots now, if this gets voted in, they will get a $20 raise on average. Total cost to the company around $20million per year extra for the pilots. Does that make up for all the other deficiencies in the TA? Just curious no one has mentioned it.

As a 190 pilot, these new airplanes and their rates are hard to imagine for myself cause it's still so far down the road. I think we have only 9 on property until 2022 comes around.

symbian simian
07-10-2018, 05:18 PM
As a 190 pilot, these new airplanes and their rates are hard to imagine for myself cause it's still so far down the road. I think we have only 9 on property until 2022 comes around.

true..................................

hyperboy
07-10-2018, 05:24 PM
As a 190 pilot, these new airplanes and their rates are hard to imagine for myself cause it's still so far down the road. I think we have only 9 on property until 2022 comes around.

Put me in coach!

Bluedriver
07-10-2018, 05:24 PM
I was told by a JB exec today that the company was in final negotiations with Skywest to replace our E190 100 seaters with Skywest CRJ200 50 seaters. He said it was happening industry wide, and called it "small-gauging". But just before the deal was closed, ALPA came in and forced them into our TA scope.

So they instead decided to replace our 100 seaters with 130-140 seaters.

#wediditguys!

Softpayman
07-10-2018, 05:31 PM
As a 190 pilot, these new airplanes and their rates are hard to imagine for myself cause it's still so far down the road. I think we have only 9 on property until 2022 comes around.

Call me crazy but maybe by then you could bid to the 320 if it was such a problem. I mean, if you’re up for the training cycle. The TA does address training pay.

200Driver
07-10-2018, 05:35 PM
I was told by a JB exec today that the company was in final negotiations with Skywest to replace our E190 100 seaters with Skywest CRJ200 50 seaters. He said it was happening industry wide, and called it "small-gauging". But just before the deal was closed, ALPA came in and forced them into our TA scope.

So they instead decided to replace our 100 seaters with 130-140 seaters.

#wediditguys!

🤪🤪 if you would have said E170/175’s or even the MRJ maybe, but antiquated CRJ200’s, I think not....lol

flapshalfspeed
07-10-2018, 05:39 PM
I agree, this is the right aircraft for Jetblue. Not that anyone asked me to vote for/against. The pay for this aircraft and fleet protection language in our TA, however, is all kinds of wrong. And I am being asked to vote for/against that.

They just announced the order. The company will cave quickly if we vote no and insist on fixing this now. Industry average pay. A320 pay for any A220 configured with greater than 135 seats. A320/321 block hour/fleet number protection - if either decreases from DOS - A220 pay increases to A320.

This can be fixed over lunch. But if the TA passes, we'll regret it for the next 5-7 years.

Or, if we vote down the TA, they could simply execute a pre-canned Plan B to create a subsidiary/alter ego to operate the 60 A-220s they just ordered..."fix it over lunch" as you say.

I'm certain the NMB would be receptive to a "business necessity" argument from the company (for farming out the A-220s), if the agreement is voted down and our ask goes up. They'd have 2 years to scale up a paper subsidiary and get a hiring pipeline of street upgrades/initial cadre going.

Show me something in the PEA that proves me wrong, and I will gladly admit that I am wrong.

Unlike current contracts at other carriers, we have very little protection against such scenarios under our current framework. Channel the anger and unity of a mighty legacy ALPA group all you want, but at least beware of the fact that we don't have the big gorilla of an established, solid CBA full of scope restrictions standing behind us like they do now.

seekingblue
07-10-2018, 05:41 PM
Or, if we vote down the TA, they could simply execute a pre-canned Plan B to create a subsidiary/alter ego to operate the 60 A-220s they just ordered.

Am I wrong?

This is what keeps me up at night....

If we vote this contract down, we have ZERO scope protections. Skywest could very easily fly these or fly their E175’s to replace our flying....

nuball5
07-10-2018, 05:54 PM
Call me crazy but maybe by then you could bid to the 320 if it was such a problem. I mean, if you’re up for the training cycle. The TA does address training pay.


Yes, that's my plan. I just was responding to the someone that said those on the 190 are going to see a large raise with the A220 and how it's still about 5 years away.

flapshalfspeed
07-10-2018, 06:36 PM
This is what keeps me up at night....

If we vote this contract down, we have ZERO scope protections. Skywest could very easily fly these or fly their E175’s to replace our flying....

Yep--just because JetBlue the company is buying A-220s, we cannot--and should not--categorically presume that JetBlue pilots have to be the people who fly them.

Many people on here seem to be basing their entire decision on this TA on the above presumption, using shreds of hypothetical "evidence" of the company's intentions re: regionals/contractors/alter egos. And it's a false presumption until there is a legally-binding document signed and in effect making it so.

That legally-binding document is on the table in front of us. But it's not signed yet.

BunkerF16
07-10-2018, 06:54 PM
JB must have been scared the vote was going to be a little closer than they wanted.......all the fearmongering going on now with the announcement of the 220 is classic.


SCOPE and recession! Holy crap! We need to just close out the vote right now before the sky falls in!


This pilot group, man. Ahhhh to be about 10 years younger.......

PasserOGas
07-10-2018, 07:19 PM
This is what keeps me up at night....

If we vote this contract down, we have ZERO scope protections. Skywest could very easily fly these or fly their E175’s to replace our flying....

So when the big 4 are hiring 1,000 pilots a year each who will they get to do this outsourced flying?

BeatNavy
07-10-2018, 07:23 PM
This is what keeps me up at night....

If we vote this contract down, we have ZERO scope protections. Skywest could very easily fly these or fly their E175’s to replace our flying....

SkyWest can’t fly anything that doesn’t fit in deltas scope. If SkyWest flies anything bigger than an E175 for anyone, delta cancels SkyWest flying. That’s why their 100 175 E2s won’t ever be delivered. 175s...yes. C series or E2s...no.

Xtreme87
07-10-2018, 07:47 PM
SkyWest can’t fly anything that doesn’t fit in deltas scope. If SkyWest flies anything bigger than an E175 for anyone, delta cancels SkyWest flying. That’s why their 100 175 E2s won’t ever be delivered. 175s...yes. C series or E2s...no.

Ok. Gojet. Mesa. Republic. Compass. Anyone else?

RiddleEagle18
07-10-2018, 07:50 PM
We will be deep into negotiations on our second contract before we even have 20 of these planes.

This order really has no bearing on this contract cycle....


However we are still the highest paid 190 pilots in the world and don’t have to worry about flying the 195 at highly reduced rates.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

GuppyPuppy
07-10-2018, 08:17 PM
Yeah this looks like abandoning the lower end of the market (100 seaters) and replacing A320s with lower paying 220s.

This ain’t a E190 replacement, folks.

If they were just planning on having the replacement aircraft do exactly what the 190 was doing, they would have gone with the E195 E2. Less acquisition cost. Pilots, flight attendants, ramp, and maintenance would have required little training.

Getting these planes is a much more expensive endeavor than getting E2s.

This plane will be replacing some A320s for sure.

Yay🙄

BeatNavy
07-10-2018, 08:34 PM
Ok. Gojet. Mesa. Republic. Compass. Anyone else?

Any regional that flies for delta can’t operate a plane bigger than DALs scope allows, even for another carrier. So for example SkyWest can’t fly their 100 E175-E2s they have on order for Alaska (no scope) or us, because of DLs scope. No idea about UA/AA’s scope allowing it, so non DCI carriers may be able to. Not sure. But for the sake of this argument it doesn’t really matter, as current gen e175s could be flown by a regional for us. On the other hand, regionals are getting more expensive as pilot costs climb, the shortage will get worse before it gets better, and most of our focus cities are slot or gate restricted, so downgaging doesn’t really make sense in this environment. I like scope. And I like the -300 with jetblue colors. But I’m not that fearful of SkyWest taking our flying if this TA is voted down. Fear not though...it’ll pass by a pretty big margin imo.

PilotJ3
07-10-2018, 08:49 PM
Your math is wrong.

CA 12yr
JB248.42/DAL253=.981
2%

FO 12yr
JB166.64/DAL176= .963
3.7%

don't get emotionally strung to highest or lowest.
This doesn't bring down the industry... Not even close.

We got within 2% of the top tier pay rates on our first contract? my god we must suck.

good riddance 190.

Problem is that if the B6 contract passes in 2019

JB CA$253.38/DAL$269.15=.941
5.9%

JB FO$169.98/DAL$183.84=.925
7.5%

These are 2019 rates. Also take in consideration that DAL goes into contract negotiations next year.

To me it seems that B6 management is using the lower payscale of the A220 to save money.

flyboygt
07-10-2018, 10:36 PM
Any regional that flies for delta can’t operate a plane bigger than DALs scope allows, even for another carrier. So for example SkyWest can’t fly their 100 E175-E2s they have on order for Alaska (no scope) or us, because of DLs scope. No idea about UA/AA’s scope allowing it, so non DCI carriers may be able to. Not sure. But for the sake of this argument it doesn’t really matter, as current gen e175s could be flown by a regional for us. On the other hand, regionals are getting more expensive as pilot costs climb, the shortage will get worse before it gets better, and most of our focus cities are slot or gate restricted, so downgaging doesn’t really make sense in this environment. I like scope. And I like the -300 with jetblue colors. But I’m not that fearful of SkyWest taking our flying if this TA is voted down. Fear not though...it’ll pass by a pretty big margin imo.

Silver airways? Cape air? Not associated with Delta. They are already our "business partners" what's to stop BJ from contacting them to fly the 220?

Example: Current day Envoy Air. Wholly owned subsidiary of American Airlines. It used to be American Eagle which used to be Simmons, Executive, BizEx, Wings West, Metro, and Flagship. All individual contractors (BJ calls then business partners)for AMR. One day AMR decided to buy them all up and call it American Eagle Airlines (1998) Then AMR bought Embraer 145 series jets, and offered them to AA pilots because those pesky Eagle guys only knew how to fly props. The AA pilots said, and I'm paraphrasing, "we are too good to fly that 50 seat RJ".
What was AMR to do? They have all these planes ordered and no one to fly them... Oh wait they did. It's called American Eagle/Envoy. Thus they now operate the E175, CRJ700 and EMB145 for American. At one point when I worked At Eagle we had 3700 pilots (yup the size of present day BJ) flying American Airlines routes at a massive discount because AA pilots did not want to fly an RJ.

SCOPE is not limited to present day regional operators. Under our stellar PEA, BJ CAN do whatever they want to make THEIR money. Point being is that the order is in and they WILL find someone to fly those airplanes.

Don't make the mistake AA did.
Scope is worth more than your precious pay rates compared to Delta, United and AA who don't have a single *******ing ORDER in for the A220.

Keep all flying in house.

sailingfun
07-11-2018, 02:12 AM
Sorry for wanting to see this airline actually GROW. Saying 5-7% growth year-over-year is BS when it’s only because the ASM is increasing, and nothing else...

Everyone else is ADDING hulls. We are just replacing ours with bigger ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Doesn’t your fleet plan have more growth than any of the majors?

sailingfun
07-11-2018, 02:16 AM
Silver airways? Cape air? Not associated with Delta. They are already our "business partners" what's to stop BJ from contacting them to fly the 220?

Example: Current day Envoy Air. Wholly owned subsidiary of American Airlines. It used to be American Eagle which used to be Simmons, Executive, BizEx, Wings West, Metro, and Flagship. All individual contractors (BJ calls then business partners)for AMR. One day AMR decided to buy them all up and call it American Eagle Airlines (1998) Then AMR bought Embraer 145 series jets, and offered them to AA pilots because those pesky Eagle guys only knew how to fly props. The AA pilots said, and I'm paraphrasing, "we are too good to fly that 50 seat RJ".
What was AMR to do? They have all these planes ordered and no one to fly them... Oh wait they did. It's called American Eagle/Envoy. Thus they now operate the E175, CRJ700 and EMB145 for American. At one point when I worked At Eagle we had 3700 pilots (yup the size of present day BJ) flying American Airlines routes at a massive discount because AA pilots did not want to fly an RJ.

SCOPE is not limited to present day regional operators. Under our stellar PEA, BJ CAN do whatever they want to make THEIR money. Point being is that the order is in and they WILL find someone to fly those airplanes.

Don't make the mistake AA did.
Scope is worth more than your precious pay rates compared to Delta, United and AA who don't have a single *******ing ORDER in for the A220.

Keep all flying in house.

American never offered the 145 to the AA pilots. Pure fiction.

Bluedriver
07-11-2018, 02:43 AM
Silver airways? Cape air? Not associated with Delta. They are already our "business partners" what's to stop BJ from contacting them to fly the 220?

Example: Current day Envoy Air. Wholly owned subsidiary of American Airlines. It used to be American Eagle which used to be Simmons, Executive, BizEx, Wings West, Metro, and Flagship. All individual contractors (BJ calls then business partners)for AMR. One day AMR decided to buy them all up and call it American Eagle Airlines (1998) Then AMR bought Embraer 145 series jets, and offered them to AA pilots because those pesky Eagle guys only knew how to fly props. The AA pilots said, and I'm paraphrasing, "we are too good to fly that 50 seat RJ".
What was AMR to do? They have all these planes ordered and no one to fly them... Oh wait they did. It's called American Eagle/Envoy. Thus they now operate the E175, CRJ700 and EMB145 for American. At one point when I worked At Eagle we had 3700 pilots (yup the size of present day BJ) flying American Airlines routes at a massive discount because AA pilots did not want to fly an RJ.

SCOPE is not limited to present day regional operators. Under our stellar PEA, BJ CAN do whatever they want to make THEIR money. Point being is that the order is in and they WILL find someone to fly those airplanes.

Don't make the mistake AA did.
Scope is worth more than your precious pay rates compared to Delta, United and AA who don't have a single *******ing ORDER in for the A220.

Keep all flying in house.

Seems that you skipped over a lot of good points that Navy made...

1. Regional airlines are becoming much more expensive to operate because of much higher pilot salaries due to shortage of pilots, which will only get worse. It's a stretch to even suggest they can staff all the RJs currently under contract.

2. Our slots are maxed out.

3. Our other hubs are heavily gate restricted, and getting worse.

4. If you thought JB was having operational problems before this TA, there would be a literal nuclear detonation if JB tried to outsource the A220 to a regional during negotiations for TA2. Even our management wouldn't be that stupid.

5. Delta has 75 A220s and 50 options on order, so your last statement is incorrect.

6. This scope doesn't keep all flying in-house either. It has virtually unlimited domestic and international codesharing. You have us confused with Southwest.

hyperboy
07-11-2018, 03:11 AM
JB must have been scared the vote was going to be a little closer than they wanted.......all the fearmongering going on now with the announcement of the 220 is classic.


SCOPE and recession! Holy crap! We need to just close out the vote right now before the sky falls in!


This pilot group, man. Ahhhh to be about 10 years younger.......

Yes you are so much better and smarter than us....the pilot group. Forget about the surveys and what you pilots want as a majority. It's your call. You also have a crystal ball?... because you know everything.

We got real lucky when you got hired here, huh?!. To think you could have went anywhere and you came here?......our fault too?

sailingfun
07-11-2018, 03:29 AM
Seems that you skipped over a lot of good points that Navy made...

1. Regional airlines are becoming much more expensive to operate because of much higher pilot salaries due to shortage of pilots, which will only get worse. It's a stretch to even suggest they can staff all the RJs currently under contract.

2. Our slots are maxed out.

3. Our other hubs are heavily gate restricted, and getting worse.

4. If you thought JB was having operational problems before this TA, there would be a literal nuclear detonation if JB tried to outsource the A220 to a regional during negotiations for TA2. Even our management wouldn't be that stupid.

5. Delta has 75 A220s and 50 options on order, so your last statement is incorrect.

6. This scope doesn't keep all flying in-house either. It has virtually unlimited domestic and international codesharing. You have us confused with Southwest.

Delta A220’s are in production as we speak and the bid closes on 13 July for pilots. Training starts in the fall. First revenue flight will be 31 Jan.

CaptCoolHand
07-11-2018, 05:27 AM
Doesn’t your fleet plan have more growth than any of the majors?

Not sure about more than everyone. But yes. We are adding hulls. 85 more 321s by 2024 or 2025... I don’t remember.

And if we exercise the 60 options in a few years on the 220 that’s 60 more. Subtract a few old busses, it’s still growth. We’ve been growing slowly but surely for about 7years.

benzoate
07-11-2018, 05:40 AM
Not sure about more than everyone. But yes. We are adding hulls. 85 more 321s by 2024 or 2025... I don’t remember.

And if we exercise the 60 options in a few years on the 220 that’s 60 more. Subtract a few old busses, it’s still growth. We’ve been growing slowly but surely for about 7years.

Growth is the only mechanism for seniority improvement at jetblue so any growth is good.

todd1200
07-11-2018, 06:00 AM
It’s comical how people were certain JB would never order these planes, how we’re guaranteed to get E2s because they pay less, cost less, etc. And after this announcement, how many people say “Oops, guess I was wrong about that one” and how many just double-down on the self-pity? I’m sure if they ordered the 100s we’d be complaining about how they pay less than 300s and how the cool airlines were ordering 300s. Now that they ordered 300s, of course, they’re going to replace 320s, more stagnation, etc. It’s like an unfortunate majority of people actually derive pleasure from being miserable.

A while ago on an overnight we got in around midnight and one of the crew was complaining about how the hotel restaurant was closed, we never get food, etc. The front desk overheard and said, “Actually, the restaurant’s open for another hour.” So the guy responds, “Well it’s overpriced and it’s too late to eat anyway.” Complaining just to complain—have fun with that!

PasserOGas
07-11-2018, 06:16 AM
It’s comical how people were certain JB would never order these planes, how we’re guaranteed to get E2s because they pay less, cost less, etc. And after this announcement, how many people say “Oops, guess I was wrong about that one” and how many just double-down on the self-pity? I’m sure if they ordered the 100s we’d be complaining about how they pay less than 300s and how the cool airlines were ordering 300s. Now that they ordered 300s, of course, they’re going to replace 320s, more stagnation, etc. It’s like an unfortunate majority of people actually derive pleasure from being miserable.

A while ago on an overnight we got in around midnight and one of the crew was complaining about how the hotel restaurant was closed, we never get food, etc. The front desk overheard and said, “Actually, the restaurant’s open for another hour.” So the guy responds, “Well it’s overpriced and it’s too late to eat anyway.” Complaining just to complain—have fun with that!

Or it could be that Jetblue has worse work rules and pay than our peers. You act like they bought wide bodies or something. It's a narrow body. A smaller narrow body that we have bargain basement rates on. I don't understand why anyone would be excited about this.

AYLflyer
07-11-2018, 06:21 AM
It’s comical how people were certain JB would never order these planes, how we’re guaranteed to get E2s because they pay less, cost less, etc. And after this announcement, how many people say “Oops, guess I was wrong about that one” and how many just double-down on the self-pity? I’m sure if they ordered the 100s we’d be complaining about how they pay less than 300s and how the cool airlines were ordering 300s. Now that they ordered 300s, of course, they’re going to replace 320s, more stagnation, etc. It’s like an unfortunate majority of people actually derive pleasure from being miserable.

A while ago on an overnight we got in around midnight and one of the crew was complaining about how the hotel restaurant was closed, we never get food, etc. The front desk overheard and said, “Actually, the restaurant’s open for another hour.” So the guy responds, “Well it’s overpriced and it’s too late to eat anyway.” Complaining just to complain—have fun with that!


Many people like to complain about anything and everything. Someone earlier in this thread said it best. The normal posters here promised everyone that JB would get the E2 because it was cheapest option, and now that the company actually did exactly what so many here wanted, they're complaining about something else.


I'm actually very excited about this announcement and hope it helps the growth of our company.

Also, we'll be into negotiating our 2nd contract by the time enough of these things hit property.

hilltopflyer
07-11-2018, 06:29 AM
I’m very happy with this order. Hopefully it shows me the ELT isn’t as short sighted as they seemed. This order shouldn’t make anyone change their mind on the ta since by the time this contract is done we will have 9 planes on property.

PasserOGas
07-11-2018, 06:31 AM
I’m very happy with this order. Hopefully it shows me the ELT isn’t as short sighted as they seemed. This order shouldn’t make anyone change their mind on the ta since by the time this contract is done we will have 9 planes on property.

This is a 6-8 year contract. Watch.

Bozo the pilot
07-11-2018, 06:33 AM
Or it could be that Jetblue has worse work rules and pay than our peers. You act like they bought wide bodies or something. It's a narrow body. A smaller narrow body that we have bargain basement rates on. I don't understand why anyone would be excited about this.

You didnt bother to comprehend Todd's example did you?
Its not about anyone getting excited, its the pivot from the angry NO voter to yet another theory of how we're getting screwed.

So I guess the 320s are being replaced by the 220s now.
Whats next when after theory doesnt pan out?
Lets hear all the doomsday scenarios.

cf105
07-11-2018, 06:37 AM
so, taking into account monthly min guarantee, JetBlue's CS drivers are going to make more than NK's 320 drivers... with real training pay... If this new contract passes, the number of job applications at B6 are only going to get much bigger, many 'regional' captains will go for it now.

hilltopflyer
07-11-2018, 06:39 AM
This is a 6-8 year contract. Watch.

It can be that is why the cola being done at contract expiration date is bs

pilotpayne
07-11-2018, 06:58 AM
Not sure about more than everyone. But yes. We are adding hulls. 85 more 321s by 2024 or 2025... I don’t remember.

And if we exercise the 60 options in a few years on the 220 that’s 60 more. Subtract a few old busses, it’s still growth. We’ve been growing slowly but surely for about 7years.


Like slowly as in stagnation type?
:)

pilotpayne
07-11-2018, 07:03 AM
Or it could be that Jetblue has worse work rules and pay than our peers. You act like they bought wide bodies or something. It's a narrow body. A smaller narrow body that we have bargain basement rates on. I don't understand why anyone would be excited about this.

Dude respectfully if you can’t be happy about us getting a much better airplane vs going cheap with the E2. I don’t even know. For once the company seems to be thinking long term and that’s good for us. After reading all of your posts I don’t think you are going to be happy here long term. That’s not if you don’t like it leave but if you can’t even think this decision is good well it’s going to be a rough career sorry job here.

PasserOGas
07-11-2018, 07:05 AM
You didnt bother to comprehend Todd's example did you?
Its not about anyone getting excited, its the pivot from the angry NO voter to yet another theory of how we're getting screwed.

So I guess the 320s are being replaced by the 220s now.
Whats next when after theory doesnt pan out?
Lets hear all the doomsday scenarios.

We get paid less than our peers with worse work rules on every plane we purchase. That's pretty much it.

PasserOGas
07-11-2018, 07:06 AM
Dude respectfully if you can’t be happy about us getting a much better airplane vs going cheap with the E2. I don’t even know. For once the company seems to be thinking long term and that’s good for us. After reading all of your posts I don’t think you are going to be happy here long term. That’s not if you don’t like it leave but if you can’t even think this decision is good well it’s going to be a rough career sorry job here.

I am way over "shiny jet syndrome". Sorry to see that you aren't.

pilotpayne
07-11-2018, 07:07 AM
Many people like to complain about anything and everything. Someone earlier in this thread said it best. The normal posters here promised everyone that JB would get the E2 because it was cheapest option, and now that the company actually did exactly what so many here wanted, they're complaining about something else.


I'm actually very excited about this announcement and hope it helps the growth of our company.

Also, we'll be into negotiating our 2nd contract by the time enough of these things hit property.


Not everyone thought it would be the E2.

Look I’m just happy that I will be able to walk into the flight deck not fold myself into the seat like the 190.

It does seem to be the perfect plane for us.

Bluedriver
07-11-2018, 07:35 AM
Yes you are so much better and smarter than us....the pilot group. Forget about the surveys and what you pilots want as a majority. It's your call. You also have a crystal ball?... because you know everything.

We got real lucky when you got hired here, huh?!. To think you could have went anywhere and you came here?......our fault too?

I don't remember a single survey asking how I (we) felt about taking OE pairings out of the bid package? I don't remember a survey asking if 2% COLA was acceptable? I don't remember a survey asking if Gate Agent Profit Sharing was acceptable? I don't remember a survey asking if Gate Agent Healthcare was acceptable?

Not saying vote NO, but there was a lot of crud-sandwich that wasn't exactly "cleared" with the pilot group via polling.

Bluedriver
07-11-2018, 07:43 AM
Not everyone thought it would be the E2.

Look I’m just happy that I will be able to walk into the flight deck not fold myself into the seat like the 190.

It does seem to be the perfect plane for us.

No doubt. I hope to NEVER EVER be subjected to an E190 torcher device (seat) again!

Do people in Brazil not have backs? Or butts?

Bluedriver
07-11-2018, 07:52 AM
Lots of accusations flying, my position has always been, if JB doesn't announce fleet review *before* vote closes it's E2 and the C rates were a ruse. Said it, about a billion times. Well, they announced fleet review before vote closes, so it's option B, as allowed for in my prediction.

Choosing the A220-300 to replace the E180 was literally the best possible decision JB could make and is the first great decision with long term vision I have seen here in a long time. And this requires significant investment from the company and will, eventually, put 25% of our pilot group into much better paying positions and give our pilots more "good" seats to bid into.

I am giving credit where credit is due on this one, as I did on page one of this thread.

It doesn't fix a multitude of other issues here and it doesn't fix most of the deficiencies of the TA, and no the -300 rates aren't exactly industry leading for the type, but the career of many of our JB seniority list just got much better or less bleak, depending on how you view this place.

BD

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 07:57 AM
American never offered the 145 to the AA pilots. Pure fiction.

Did you work there when it happend in the late 90's... ?

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 08:00 AM
Seems that you skipped over a lot of good points that Navy made...

1. Regional airlines are becoming much more expensive to operate because of much higher pilot salaries due to shortage of pilots, which will only get worse. It's a stretch to even suggest they can staff all the RJs currently under contract.

2. Our slots are maxed out.

3. Our other hubs are heavily gate restricted, and getting worse.

4. If you thought JB was having operational problems before this TA, there would be a literal nuclear detonation if JB tried to outsource the A220 to a regional during negotiations for TA2. Even our management wouldn't be that stupid.

5. Delta has 75 A220s and 50 options on order, so your last statement is incorrect.

6. This scope doesn't keep all flying in-house either. It has virtually unlimited domestic and international codesharing. You have us confused with Southwest.

I'm not doing over anything,, sorry I'm misinformed about Delta's orders.
My point was completely the fact that a parent company WILL absolutely find someone to find the airplanes.

Bluedriver
07-11-2018, 08:03 AM
Did you work there when it happend in a little late 90's... ?

He just told you, it didn't happen. I've been reading Sailing's posts for years, I trust him a lot more than you.

The701Express
07-11-2018, 08:03 AM
Do people in Brazil not have backs? Or butts?

Are you trying to conjure thewang? Because I'm pretty sure this is how you conjure thewang.

Bluedriver
07-11-2018, 08:08 AM
I'm not doing over anything,, sorry I'm misinformed about Delta's orders.
My point was completely the fact that a parent company WILL absolutely find someone to find the airplanes.

In this case, specifically, they will negotiate and come to agreeable terms with JB pilots flying the A220. Any other suggestion is really fear mongering.

This place would DETONATE if they tried to outsource the A220 during TA2 negotiations. And management knows it. Our group was finally getting fed up leading up to the May negotiations and summer, and is the primary reason for the TA timing. It would be 10 times worse for the company if they tried to outsource the A220.

With that said, my current prediction is A321LR announcement on or around the Farnborough air show and the TA passing, so this discussion is mostly just pilots talking on a message board at this point.

Bluedriver
07-11-2018, 08:09 AM
Are you trying to conjure thewang? Because I'm pretty sure this is how you conjure thewang.

As long as it's not pilots butts! Thewang impresses me greatly, serious skills...

sailingfun
07-11-2018, 08:35 AM
Did you work there when it happend in the late 90's... ?
It did not happen. In fact have you ever heard of a airline management offering aircraft to a union? They purchase what they want. They could never have operated the aircraft at the mainline and competed with the regionals at that point. Cost per seat mile would have been off the chart.

The701Express
07-11-2018, 08:37 AM
As long as it's not pilots butts! Thewang impresses me greatly, serious skills...

Haha, Thewang would never do that.

AYLflyer
07-11-2018, 08:39 AM
Do people in Brazil not have backs? Or butts?

The women do! :D

capn a220
07-11-2018, 08:46 AM
I’m very happy with this order. Hopefully it shows me the ELT isn’t as short sighted as they seemed. This order shouldn’t make anyone change their mind on the ta since by the time this contract is done we will have 9 planes on property.

A CBA never expires. It just becomes amendable. If we have a new contract and there are only 9 planes on property, 51 on order and none configured for more than 135 seats, I’ll buy you a 🍺. If we don’t fix this now, we’ll regret it later. It’s as simple as that.

hilltopflyer
07-11-2018, 08:56 AM
A CBA never expires. It just becomes amendable. If we have a new contract and there are only 9 planes on property, 51 on order and none configured for more than 135 seats, I’ll buy you a 🍺. If we don’t fix this now, we’ll regret it later. It’s as simple as that.

Ok but my preface of the cola stopping in four years is still accurate (as I read it). I hope we have a new contract with only 9 a220s on property. Means that the next contract wouldn’t get extended out forever with out a raise.

hilltopflyer
07-11-2018, 08:57 AM
Are the 190 guys going to be able to write praise the sun on every A220 anymore? Won’t be able to escape the red eyes anymore :(

nuball5
07-11-2018, 09:23 AM
Are the 190 guys going to be able to write praise the sun on every A220 anymore? Won’t be able to escape the red eyes anymore :(

I wonder how junior the 190 will go in the next couple years. A shrinking fleet cannot be good for QOL, which is the only reason besides the lack of red-eyes, that people stay on the 190. Plus that APU or Autopilot MEL that maintenance would defer for maybe a day, I bet will be extended as long as possible to save money.

CaptCoolHand
07-11-2018, 03:48 PM
Are you trying to conjure thewang? Because I'm pretty sure this is how you conjure thewang.

I think you have to say his name three times

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 04:43 PM
He just told you, it didn't happen. I've been reading Sailing's posts for years, I trust him a lot more than you.

Wow such credibility he has generated. Posting for years on a public forum makes him an expert. Brilliant.
No faith in the guy that worked there or anything and watched it go on.
Wait wait. Nope never happened either.

queue
07-11-2018, 06:49 PM
Check my math but the 12-year FO rates are 10% lower than AMR and CA is 9% lower. That's assuming CS 300 rates apply to A220...

Don't forget to subtract approximately 2.1%... you can't tax deduct ALPA dues.

This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

queue
07-11-2018, 06:58 PM
You didnt bother to comprehend Todd's example did you?
Its not about anyone getting excited, its the pivot from the angry NO voter to yet another theory of how we're getting screwed.

So I guess the 320s are being replaced by the 220s now.
Whats next when after theory doesnt pan out?
Lets hear all the doomsday scenarios.

Aren't you the angry Yes defeatist/apologist that has to block people who you can't control with your lack of understanding of the TA, your willful ignorance of the process, and your overall lack of research on contracts?

Last time I checked, all the doomsday scenarious are floated by you if you don't accept this horrible TA.

We need to start winning. You constantly advocate losing. We can get a much better TA with minimal effort.

This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 08:50 PM
Don't forget to subtract approximately 2.1%... you can't tax deduct ALPA dues.

This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

How much are our ALPA dues?

svergin
07-11-2018, 08:58 PM
And adding seats to our A320s..... and replacing A320s with A321s. And replacing A320neo orders with A321neo orders. So, yea we are growing. But a lot of it is fake growth.

Its growth of seat miles, but not additional pilot jobs. Just upgauging of planes. Interesting that JB 321 rates are less than 320 rates at most majors. Now we know why they wanted to make a deal so quickly. If they news came out before the AIP it might not have passed the MEC.

In any case good luck.

queue
07-11-2018, 09:02 PM
How much are our ALPA dues?


1.9% base PLUS


Ground Holding Time
Premium Pay
Junior Assignment Pay
Electronic Learning pay
Night override pay
Profit sharing pay
Holiday Pay
PTO pay
AND NOW... probably the "signing bonus"



This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 09:16 PM
1.9% base PLUS


Ground Holding Time
Premium Pay
Junior Assignment Pay
Electronic Learning pay
Night override pay
Profit sharing pay
Holiday Pay
PTO pay
AND NOW... probably the "signing bonus"



This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.


Probably the signing bonus?
Absolutely the signing bonus, it's compensation read your contact. ALPA takes their cut out of EVERY penny you earn.. welcome to ALPA, time to get over it.

queue
07-11-2018, 09:24 PM
Probably the signing bonus?
Absolutely the signing bonus, it's compensation read your contact. ALPA takes their cut out of EVERY penny you earn.. welcome to ALPA, time to get over it.

We are ALPA. If we want to change things we can. These aren't the laws of physics we're changing, it's merely bylaws and policy.

In any case, the Total Cost of Ownership must include all factors. So our substandard TA pay rates don't adequately cover ALPA costs.


This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 09:43 PM
We are ALPA. If we want to change things we can. These aren't the laws of physics we're changing, it's merely bylaws and policy.

In any case, the Total Cost of Ownership must include all factors. So our substandard TA pay rates don't adequately cover ALPA costs.


This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

Not trying to bust your bubble, ALPA Will NEVER CHANGE. THEY WILL ALWAYS GET THEIRS. Your bylaws are set.

queue
07-11-2018, 09:56 PM
Not trying to bust your bubble, ALPA Will NEVER CHANGE. THEY WILL ALWAYS GET THEIRS. Your bylaws are set.


And Trump will never get elected, says all the establishment and leftist media. The sound barrier will never be broken either.


ALPA should only get the money it needs to operate, provided they give more than barely incremental results. Remember, ALPA is only ONE court case away from losing their forced payer membership model. Wouldn't you want a higher performing organization that sells itself?







This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 10:00 PM
It did not happen. In fact have you ever heard of a airline management offering aircraft to a union? They purchase what they want. They could never have operated the aircraft at the mainline and competed with the regionals at that point. Cost per seat mile would have been off the chart.

Where is your proof that it didn't happen? Because you say it didn't! Ha I laugh
The planes weren't offered to a union they were purchased by AMR, first rights were to AA for bad pay, AA said nope we are better than that. AMR said well it sucks that you don't have scope we will have American Eagle do it.
I was gracefully informed by many AA pilots during my tenure that if Eagle didn't exist that all of their furloughed pilot buddies would still have jobs.
Yes it happened. Quit lying to yourself that this management wouldn't do the same to you.

BeatNavy
07-11-2018, 10:03 PM
Where is your proof that it didn't happen? Because you say it didn't! Ha I laugh
The planes weren't offered to a union they were purchased by AMR, first rights were to AA for bad pay, AA said nope we are better than that. AMR said well it sucks that you don't have scope we will have American Eagle do it.
I was gracefully informed by many AA pilots during my tenure that if Eagle didn't exist that all of their furloughed pilot buddies would still have jobs.
Yes it happened. Quit lying to yourself that this management wouldn't do the same to you.

He’s a delta guy. I doubt he gives a sht what JB mgmt does to us.

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 10:03 PM
And Trump will never get elected, says all the establishment and leftist media. The sound barrier will never be broken either.


ALPA should only get the money it needs to operate, provided they give more than barely incremental results. Remember, ALPA is only ONE court case away from losing their forced payer membership model. Wouldn't you want a higher performing organization that sells itself?







This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

I will happily stand side by side with you to dismantle ALPA's model of forced pay to play. Let me know when it goes down. Till then we are stuck in the current establishment and it keeps getting bigger. Every carrier that brings them on means we are farther from stopping their model.

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 10:04 PM
He’s a delta guy. I doubt he gives a sht what JB mgmt does to us.

I'm a Delta guy?
I wish! I wouldn't be having this argument, would have a much better commute, a better QOL. And career advancement.
That's a standard comment from someone who has nothing to say.

BeatNavy
07-11-2018, 10:19 PM
I'm a Delta guy?
I wish! I wouldn't be having this argument, would have a much better commute, a better QOL. And career advancement.
That's a standard comment from someone who has nothing to say.

You quoted sailingfun and said “Quit lying to yourself that this management wouldn't do the same to you.”

Sailingfun is a delta guy and doesn’t care what JB mgmt does to JB pilots.

flyboygt
07-11-2018, 10:36 PM
You quoted sailingfun and said “Quit lying to yourself that this management wouldn't do the same to you.”

Sailingfun is a delta guy and doesn’t care what JB mgmt does to JB pilots.

Prior to this post how would I know he is a Delta guy?

queue
07-11-2018, 11:38 PM
I will happily stand side by side with you to dismantle ALPA's model of forced pay to play. Let me know when it goes down. Till then we are stuck in the current establishment and it keeps getting bigger. Every carrier that brings them on means we are farther from stopping their model.

I don't have a problem with ALPA winning over more airlines, provided they offer revolutionary improvements (not barely incremental, cost neutral progress like this TA). Also, we would have to have complete power to defund them if they fail to do our bidding. Right now they do things by a so called democratic process, but that isn't the best system. Pure democracies are merely mob rule, not intelligent design. I would rather vote with my funding. If they do a good job, they get my funding. We'll see how this TA goes before options for or against ALPA are explored. They are overdue for a house cleaning.


This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

sailingfun
07-12-2018, 04:31 AM
Where is your proof that it didn't happen? Because you say it didn't! Ha I laugh
The planes weren't offered to a union they were purchased by AMR, first rights were to AA for bad pay, AA said nope we are better than that. AMR said well it sucks that you don't have scope we will have American Eagle do it.
I was gracefully informed by many AA pilots during my tenure that if Eagle didn't exist that all of their furloughed pilot buddies would still have jobs.
Yes it happened. Quit lying to yourself that this management wouldn't do the same to you.

I lived that time period with many friends at AMR. You posted it so show your proof. You have already changed your story from the AMR pilots refused to fly them to the AMR pilots would not fly them cheaply enough so management took them away. That is a MAJOR change in what you said.
The same exact rumor has been said about Delta and UAL. The Delta MEC in-fact commissioned a financial study to show the CRJ50 could be flown at the mainline. Sadly they could not make the numbers work or convince management.

Bluedriver
07-12-2018, 05:50 AM
I lived that time period with many friends at AMR. You posted it so show your proof. You have already changed your story from the AMR pilots refused to fly them to the AMR pilots would not fly them cheaply enough so management took them away. That is a MAJOR change in what you said.
The same exact rumor has been said about Delta and UAL. The Delta MEC in-fact commissioned a financial study to show the CRJ50 could be flown at the mainline. Sadly they could not make the numbers work or convince management.

This "flyboygt" seems quite "special".

flyboygt
07-12-2018, 05:55 AM
This "flyboygt" seems quite "special".

I am thanks for noticing.

When you have something worthwhile to contribute let me know, till then go back to trusting your internet buddy from Delta.

I don't need to prove anything. I lived it as well as many of my friends. Because some Delta guy with friends at AA says it's not true I'm the one that's wrong. Ok. I'm out...
Since this has become a ****ing war I will try yet again to let you know that under the PEA there are ZERO protections from management to give BJ pilots these airplanes.
You obviously have been at BJ for too long and have the belief that you are owed something. You are not owed anything. You accepted the job at substandard rates and loved them for years because BJ was hiring and expanding while there was an economic recession and everyone else furloughing.

Bluedriver
07-12-2018, 06:11 AM
I am thanks for noticing.

When you have something worthwhile to contribute let me know, till then go back to trusting your internet buddy from Delta.

I don't need to prove anything. I lived it as well as many of my friends. Because some Delta guy with friends at AA says it's not true I'm the one that's wrong. Ok. I'm out...
Since this has become a ****ing war I will try yet again to let you know that under the PEA there are ZERO protections from management to give BJ pilots these airplanes.

Ha, ok. I've been contributing substance to this forum for years. You're pretty new to the JB forum but seem to suddenly have a lot to say with you're vast JB experience.

I'll say it again, this airline would DETONATE if management tried to outsource the A220, and they know it.

So far you sound like a scared JB newb who wants his big 1st year pay raise. There are reasons to vote YES and reasons to vote NO. Management outsourcing our A220s or being just about ready to sign up Skywest to fly RJs for us are not one of them. Wrong time, wrong business model, wrong strategy.

flyboygt
07-12-2018, 06:25 AM
Ha, ok. I've been contributing substance to this forum for years. You're pretty new to the JB forum but seem to suddenly have a lot to say with you're vast JB experience.

I'll say it again, this airline would DETONATE if management tried to outsource the A220, and they know it.

So far you sound like a scared JB newb who wants his big 1st year pay raise. There are reasons to vote YES and reasons to vote NO. Management outsourcing our A220s or being just about ready to sign up Skywest to fly RJs for us are not one of them. Wrong time, wrong business model, wrong strategy.

Substance? That's debatable.

You contribute opinion.

Detonate... HA I laugh. stuck in your old ways. I bet you think Neeleman is still CEO and culture still exists.
Damn noob!

I can tell you from experience while on furlough that guys were picking up OT. If you think that wouldn't happen here while someone else does our new shiny A220 you are delusional.

BTW I've been on APC for a long time also. I never had much to say in BJ forum especially when I worked at a different company.

Bluedriver
07-12-2018, 06:33 AM
Substance? That's debatable.

You contribute opinion.

Detonate... HA I laugh. stuck in your old ways. I bet you think Neeleman is still CEO and culture still exists.
Damn noob!

I can tell you from experience while on furlough that guys were picking up OT. If you think that wouldn't happen here while someone else does our new shiny A220 you are delusional.

BTW I've been on APC for a long time also. I never had much to say in BJ forum especially when I worked at a different company.

More gibberish and opinion from someone I don't find credible or reasonable. Thanks for your newly shared opinions and hope you get your big 1st year pay raise you so desperately want.

flyboygt
07-12-2018, 06:48 AM
More gibberish and opinion from someone I don't find credible or reasonable. Thanks for your newly shared opinions and hope you get your big 1st year pay raise you so desperately want.

So quick to talk yet doesn't listen. Typical. I don't care how credible you find my statements. You back someone's opinion that doesn't even work here.

I've never once said I'm in this for the "big" pay raise. I'm arguing scope and the importance of it.

Bluedriver
07-12-2018, 06:58 AM
So quick to talk yet doesn't listen. Typical. I don't care how credible you find my statements. You back someone's opinion that doesn't even work here.

I've never once said I'm in this for the "big" pay raise. I'm arguing scope and the importance of it.

You're arguing gravity, and the importance of it. Everyone knows how important scope is.

flyboygt
07-12-2018, 07:24 AM
You're arguing gravity, and the importance of it. Everyone knows how important scope is.

The whole reason for my argument is because there are too many that don't believe it. It has already been stated that "BJ would detonate" if there flying gets farmed out. That says to me that you believe their business model would fail if they brought in a regional. How many times has BJ changed their business model? I thought that we would "Never" have first class? Cape Air and Silver already partner with us. What's to stop them from doing more?

I don't think that some understand the gravity of scope and brush it off like "eh the company won't survive with someone else doing the flying"

Very few people in the flying public know who is flying the airplanes. All they see is what name is painted on the side. There company will survive. Their model will change.
Back to my original argument of AA. They contracted 5 independent companies to do their regional flying then bought them all called them American Eagle thus changing their business model.
We currently contact 2, what's to stop BJ mgmt from doing the same?

Bluedriver
07-12-2018, 08:03 AM
The whole reason for my argument is because there are too many that don't believe it. It has already been stated that "BJ would detonate" if there flying gets farmed out. That says to me that you believe their business model would fail if they brought in a regional. How many times has BJ changed their business model? I thought that we would "Never" have first class? Cape Air and Silver already partner with us. What's to stop them from doing more?

I don't think that some understand the gravity of scope and brush it off like "eh the company won't survive with someone else doing the flying"

Very few people in the flying public know who is flying the airplanes. All they see is what name is painted on the side. There company will survive. Their model will change.
Back to my original argument of AA. They contracted 5 independent companies to do their regional flying then bought them all called them American Eagle thus changing their business model.
We currently contact 2, what's to stop BJ mgmt from doing the same?

Before the A220-300 fleet review announcement many here were saying we have to take THIS TA and we have to take it NOW! Skywest was just about to be contracted to fly RJs as we parked our E190 fleet, if you listened to some on this site.

I said, that's ridiculous. I said we don't have the slots or gates to add RJs, and if those slots and gates were to come from our parked E190s it would be a significant down-gauging of our route network, which is 200% counter to all industry trends. I sarcastically called it "small-gauging". In our highly congested, gate and slot restricted premium geography it made/makes absolutely NO business sense, "none-what-so-ever". You haven't been here long enough to understand that reference.

So what happened just days later? An announcement from JB 100% validating everything I have been saying. The airline wants BADLY (If you don't believe me, listen to the fleet review conference call from yesterday) to *UP*-gauge our E190 fleet to this "game-changing" new aircraft. And they didn't order the -100, they ordered the -300.... They have shown their hand and their business plan. The reason they gave us RJ scope in the TA (which I would NEVER give up) is because they have absolutely ZERO intention of using RJs. ZERO. If they did they wouldn't have agreed to it, and because it makes ZERO business sense for OUR geography and model. No pilots, no gates, no slots, high CASM, counter to recent JB and industry trends. ONE. HUNDRED. PERCENT. VALIDATED.

With that said, I would NEVER give up RJ scope because we don't know what the business case is for RJs 10 years from now.

So now that that talking point was proven to be moronic, now it's "if we don't vote THIS TA NOW, JB is going to farm out the A220-300 to a regional".

Ok, let's have this discussion. *I* am the one who said JB would DETONATE if they farmed out the A220-300 to a subcontractor. I didn't say, as you suggested above, that JB would DETONATE if JB subcontracted our flying to an RJ, although I don't think it would go well for the company. I said the airline would detonate if they subcontracted the A220.

The ONE intelligent thing you've said was that JB agreed to this TA just before summer because they were concerned about the integrity of the airline going into the summer, I presume because of the labor dispute and the affect it was having on the operation. Very wise of you. It took years, but the pilots en-mase were fed up with the delayed contract and the group was absolutely withdrawing their good-will.

It shouldn't have taken so long to get to that point, but we had a union that called "labor dispute" too late in the game because they were trying to give the company a "chance" to do something they were NEVER going to do, take the "high road". The other problem was we had WAY to many Southerner (the APC handle, not the region) types who thought that if they were just quiet and patient, and promoted enough docility in the pilot group, management would just give us a great contract at some pre-determined time in the future. That is some stupidity on a galactic scale.

When the union finally called "labor dispute" and the group finally realized how gullible it had been and began to withdraw it's good-will, hello TA.

Well, if we vote this TA down (I highly doubt it at this point), we are back in a labor dispute. Yes, summer is almost over by that point, but then there's Thanksgiving, then holiday season, then spring break, then summer 2019.....

If we vote this down collectively as a group, and if during TA2 negotiations they announce an outsource of the A220-300, the resulting "labor dispute" would be tectonic. This operation is already holding on by a thread, and if the company announced that 25% of our existing pilot group was going to be outsourced? BJ DETONATION.

Take that to the bank dude. And management knows it.

Southerner
07-12-2018, 08:47 AM
Substance...hahaha. Fecal matter is definitely a substance, so I guess he is correct on that.

pilotpayne
07-12-2018, 09:10 AM
Before the A220-300 fleet review announcement many here were saying we have to take THIS TA and we have to take it NOW! Skywest was just about to be contracted to fly RJs as we parked our E190 fleet, if you listened to some on this site.

I said, that's ridiculous. I said we don't have the slots or gates to add RJs, and if those slots and gates were to come from our parked E190s it would be a significant down-gauging of our route network, which is 200% counter to all industry trends. I sarcastically called it "small-gauging". In our highly congested, gate and slot restricted premium geography it made/makes absolutely NO business sense, "none-what-so-ever". You haven't been here long enough to understand that reference.

So what happened just days later? An announcement from JB 100% validating everything I have been saying. The airline wants BADLY (If you don't believe me, listen to the fleet review conference call from yesterday) to *UP*-gauge our E190 fleet to this "game-changing" new aircraft. And they didn't order the -100, they ordered the -300.... They have shown their hand and their business plan. The reason they gave us RJ scope in the TA (which I would NEVER give up) is because they have absolutely ZERO intention of using RJs. ZERO. If they did they wouldn't have agreed to it, and because it makes ZERO business sense for OUR geography and model. No pilots, no gates, no slots, high CASM, counter to recent JB and industry trends. ONE. HUNDRED. PERCENT. VALIDATED.

With that said, I would NEVER give up RJ scope because we don't know what the business case is for RJs 10 years from now.

So now that that talking point was proven to be moronic, now it's "if we don't vote THIS TA NOW, JB is going to farm out the A220-300 to a regional".

Ok, let's have this discussion. *I* am the one who said JB would DETONATE if they farmed out the A220-300 to a subcontractor. I didn't say, as you suggested above, that JB would DETONATE if JB subcontracted our flying to an RJ, although I don't think it would go well for the company. I said the airline would detonate if they subcontracted the A220.

The ONE intelligent thing you've said was that JB agreed to this TA just before summer because they were concerned about the integrity of the airline going into the summer, I presume because of the labor dispute and the affect it was having on the operation. Very wise of you. It took years, but the pilots en-mase were fed up with the delayed contract and the group was absolutely withdrawing their good-will.

It shouldn't have taken so long to get to that point, but we had a union that called "labor dispute" too late in the game because they were trying to give the company a "chance" to do something they were NEVER going to do, take the "high road". The other problem was we had WAY to many Southerner (the APC handle, not the region) types who thought that if they were just quiet and patient, and promoted enough docility in the pilot group, management would just give us a great contract at some pre-determined time in the future. That is some stupidity on a galactic scale.

When the union finally called "labor dispute" and the group finally realized how gullible it had been and began to withdraw it's good-will, hello TA.

Well, if we vote this TA down (I highly doubt it at this point), we are back in a labor dispute. Yes, summer is almost over by that point, but then there's Thanksgiving, then holiday season, then spring break, then summer 2019.....

If we vote this down collectively as a group, and if during TA2 negotiations they announce an outsource of the A220-300, the resulting "labor dispute" would be tectonic. This operation is already holding on by a thread, and if the company announced that 25% of our existing pilot group was going to be outsourced? BJ DETONATION.

Take that to the bank dude. And management knows it.


Roughly translated bluedriver was right all along, but we all knew that.

:)-

Bluedriver
07-12-2018, 09:26 AM
Roughly translated bluedriver was right all along, but we all knew that.

:)-

It's like we've done this before!

😀

Bluedriver
07-12-2018, 09:27 AM
Substance...hahaha. Fecal matter is definitely a substance, so I guess he is correct on that.

See my long post, your dumb-rump is is correctly used as prime example.

embraerjetpilot
07-12-2018, 05:24 PM
ALPA should only get the money it needs to operate, provided they give more than barely incremental results. Remember, ALPA is only ONE court case away from losing their forced payer membership model. Wouldn't you want a higher performing organization that sells itself?







This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.[/QUOTE]

PasserOGas
07-12-2018, 07:53 PM
ALPA should only get the money it needs to operate, provided they give more than barely incremental results. Remember, ALPA is only ONE court case away from losing their forced payer membership model. Wouldn't you want a higher performing organization that sells itself?







This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.[/QUOTE]

Bwah hah hah! And just like that Q is back in your feed. Lol.

hockeypilot44
07-13-2018, 10:27 AM
Your math is wrong.

CA 12yr
JB248.42/DAL253=.981
2%

FO 12yr
JB166.64/DAL176= .963
3.7%

don't get emotionally strung to highest or lowest.
This doesn't bring down the industry... Not even close.

We got within 2% of the top tier pay rates on our first contract? my god we must suck.

good riddance 190.

12 year Delta C-series 300 captain in $269.15 per hour
FO is $184 in 2019 (6 months from now)

You’re comparing 2018 C series 100 rates.

In 2019, you’re about 6 percent below Delta rates.

expectholding
07-13-2018, 10:59 AM
12 year Delta C-series 300 captain in $269.15 per hour
FO is $184 in 2019 (6 months from now)

You’re comparing 2018 C series 100 rates.

In 2019, you’re about 6 percent below Delta rates.

There will not be any A220s on our property in 2019. When the first group are delivered in 2020 we will be 4% behind Delta at the 12 year Capt. rate.

BeatNavy
07-13-2018, 11:14 AM
There will not be any A220s on our property in 2019. When the first group are delivered in 2020 we will be 4% behind Delta at the 12 year Capt. rate.

When the first group are delivered in 2020, DAL will have a new contract, which will likely keep the 3-4% a year cola trend they have had over this contract. Comparing our April 2020 rates with DALs Jan 2019 rates and assuming DAL will get zero raise to their rates in their new contract is a bit disingenuous at best. Assuming they get 3%, we will be 7% behind, significantly more so when you consider PS.

CaptCoolHand
07-13-2018, 11:47 AM
12 year Delta C-series 300 captain in $269.15 per hour
FO is $184 in 2019 (6 months from now)

You’re comparing 2018 C series 100 rates.

In 2019, you’re about 6 percent below Delta rates.
I stand corrected. APC should update their numbers then! LoL

expectholding
07-13-2018, 12:03 PM
When the first group are delivered in 2020, DAL will have a new contract, which will likely keep the 3-4% a year cola trend they have had over this contract. Comparing our April 2020 rates with DALs Jan 2019 rates and assuming DAL will get zero raise to their rates in their new contract is a bit disingenuous at best. Assuming they get 3%, we will be 7% behind, significantly more so when you consider PS.

The Delta contract is amendable on December 31, 2019. I have no idea when they will get an new contract, and neither do you, although I very much doubt that it will be by the amendable date, and likely not by May of 2020. Just like you or I cannot predict when they'll get a new contract, you and I can't predict what will be in the new contract (neither of us can possibly know where the economy will be then, or what events will happen between now and then...but CASM is rising, fuel is rising...I'm not saying those trends will continue or will impact negotiations, but...facts to consider).

They also have many non-pay issues (including scope) and few DAL pilots I talk to think bargaining will be a short term process.

I hope they do get the increase, so we can bargain off of it when we go back to the table 6 months before our amendable date.

BeatNavy
07-13-2018, 12:25 PM
The Delta contract is amendable on December 31, 2019. I have no idea when they will get an new contract, and neither do you, although I very much doubt that it will be by the amendable date, and likely not by May of 2020. Just like you or I cannot predict when they'll get a new contract, you and I can't predict what will be in the new contract (neither of us can possibly know where the economy will be then, or what events will happen between now and then...but CASM is rising, fuel is rising...I'm not saying those trends will continue or will impact negotiations, but...facts to consider).

They also have many non-pay issues (including scope) and few DAL pilots I talk to think bargaining will be a short term process.

I hope they do get the increase, so we can bargain off of it when we go back to the table 6 months before our amendable date.

They open 6 months prior to their amendable date. Regardless, whether it takes until 2020/21 or later, they’ll most likely get retro covering the lack of a raise from the amendable date to the new DOS. So your argument is mostly invalid, unless the following 3 things happen: they don’t get a raise (not likely), they don’t get a contract at or near the amendable date, and they don’t get retro if they have a delay in ratification (not likely).

expectholding
07-13-2018, 12:43 PM
They open 6 months prior to their amendable date. Regardless, whether it takes until 2020/21 or later, they’ll most likely get retro covering the lack of a raise from the amendable date to the new DOS. So your argument is mostly invalid, unless the following 3 things happen: they don’t get a raise (not likely), they don’t get a contract at or near the amendable date, and they don’t get retro if they have a delay in ratification (not likely).

you said many words, yet it ends the same fact...you do not know what they will get or when they will get it.

to go turn this deal down and go back to the mediator and argue that we need a higher rate based on what delta may get in 2020 or 2021 is not going to be an effective strategy, in my estimation. sorry man.

hockeypilot44
07-13-2018, 12:45 PM
They open 6 months prior to their amendable date. Regardless, whether it takes until 2020/21 or later, they’ll most likely get retro covering the lack of a raise from the amendable date to the new DOS. So your argument is mostly invalid, unless the following 3 things happen: they don’t get a raise (not likely), they don’t get a contract at or near the amendable date, and they don’t get retro if they have a delay in ratification (not likely).

We open 9 months early. A year later we, go to mediation. The last two contracts, we’ve had a TA 6 months early. The second time we voted it down. That being said, our union is taking a hard line which means it probably will get dragged out.

CaptCoolHand
07-13-2018, 06:20 PM
We open 9 months early. A year later we, go to mediation. The last two contracts, we’ve had a TA 6 months early. The second time we voted it down. That being said, our union is taking a hard line which means it probably will get dragged out.

Wait. Your union? You mean your membership? You mean the guys in the union actually participate vs “just paying dues”? Is that how it works at “real” airlines.

Because here a lot of guys like to bbítch but severely lack in the participation catagory.

BeatNavy
07-13-2018, 06:26 PM
Wait. Your union? You mean your membership? You mean the guys in the union actually participate vs “just paying dues”? Is that how it works at “real” airlines.

Because here a lot of guys like to bbítch but severely lack in the participation catagory.

How bout the 700 at the picket in the cold. Wasn’t that some sort of record?

CaptCoolHand
07-13-2018, 06:41 PM
How bout the 700 at the picket in the cold. Wasn’t that some sort of record?

Yes it was i was there.

One show of force. A battle won. I refused for years that “this is the dumbest pilot group ever” or “biggest group of pùssies” or juicers or whatever.

But dude we lost the every day battle. We lost the RSA VDA no extensions just your job battle. The SOP safety first battle.

I’m sorry but I have a hard... hard time listening to some of these guys who bítch that this wasn’t good enough. Or their potentially taking a pay cut when I’ve been falling on my sword for years. Years. Honestly i don’t care about “your problems” we’ve all got problems. We ALL need the money. I’ve left tens of thousands on the table not picking up trips. Not answering the phone and doing the hard things like missing commutes ect....

We’re here with guys that will vote no. send this back and the next minute will pick up a trip from the first call from CS. God look at the JFK sec tres! He couldn’t even be bothered to go to the road show! BQN dh JFK turn in there. See ya gots to go!

NOPE. I’m personally done. I’m taking the QOL improvements. Voting yes.
Where I’m at now it’s cost neutral but huge QOL improvements. I’m gonna gonto the bus. Then it’ll be huge QOL and more money. My seniority affords me that.

After two organizing committees, and P2P over the last 3 years I’m done. I praise the guys who do more. I can’t. I’ll pick up the tab for the reps the NC the MEC any time.

Everyone has to vote. Yes or no do whatcha gotta do.

seekingblue
07-13-2018, 06:47 PM
Yes it was i was there.

One show of force. A battle won. I refused for years that “this is the dumbest pilot group ever” or “biggest group of pùssies” or juicers or whatever.

But dude we lost the every day battle. We lost the RSA VDA no extensions just your job battle. The SOP safety first battle.

I’m sorry but I have a hard... hard time listening to some of these guys who bítch that this wasn’t good enough. Or their potentially taking a pay cut when I’ve been falling on my sword for years. Years. Honestly i don’t care about “your problems” we’ve all got problems. We ALL need the money. I’ve left tens of thousands on the table not picking up trips. Not answering the phone and doing the hard things like missing commutes ect....

We’re here with guys that will vote no. send this back and the next minute will pick up a trip from the first call from CS.

NOPE. I’m personally done. I’m taking the QOL improvements. Voting yes.
Where I’m at now it’s cost neutral but huge QOL improvements. I’m gonna gonto the bus. Then it’ll be huge QOL and more money. My seniority affords me that.

After two organizing committees, and P2P over the last 3 years I’m done. I praise the guys who do more. I can’t. I’ll pick up the tab for the reps the NC the MEC any time.

Everyone has to vote. Yes or no do whatcha gotta do.

Vote yes. Take the improvement and codified work rules.

expectholding
07-13-2018, 06:54 PM
Yes it was i was there.

One show of force. A battle won. I refused for years that “this is the dumbest pilot group ever” or “biggest group of pùssies” or juicers or whatever.

But dude we lost the every day battle. We lost the RSA VDA no extensions just your job battle. The SOP safety first battle.

I’m sorry but I have a hard... hard time listening to some of these guys who bítch that this wasn’t good enough. Or their potentially taking a pay cut when I’ve been falling on my sword for years. Years. Honestly i don’t care about “your problems” we’ve all got problems. We ALL need the money. I’ve left tens of thousands on the table not picking up trips. Not answering the phone and doing the hard things like missing commutes ect....

We’re here with guys that will vote no. send this back and the next minute will pick up a trip from the first call from CS. God look at the JFK sec tres! He couldn’t even be bothered to go to the road show! BQN dh JFK turn in there. See ya gots to go!

NOPE. I’m personally done. I’m taking the QOL improvements. Voting yes.
Where I’m at now it’s cost neutral but huge QOL improvements. I’m gonna gonto the bus. Then it’ll be huge QOL and more money. My seniority affords me that.

After two organizing committees, and P2P over the last 3 years I’m done. I praise the guys who do more. I can’t. I’ll pick up the tab for the reps the NC the MEC any time.

Everyone has to vote. Yes or no do whatcha gotta do.

By cost neutral, I can only assume you’re a ptosb guy. I am too. I’m seeing way more money per day of work in this TA. Isn’t that what work is about?

Combatcraig
07-13-2018, 07:06 PM
Yes it was i was there.

One show of force. A battle won. I refused for years that “this is the dumbest pilot group ever” or “biggest group of pùssies” or juicers or whatever.

But dude we lost the every day battle. We lost the RSA VDA no extensions just your job battle. The SOP safety first battle.

I’m sorry but I have a hard... hard time listening to some of these guys who bítch that this wasn’t good enough. Or their potentially taking a pay cut when I’ve been falling on my sword for years. Years. Honestly i don’t care about “your problems” we’ve all got problems. We ALL need the money. I’ve left tens of thousands on the table not picking up trips. Not answering the phone and doing the hard things like missing commutes ect....

We’re here with guys that will vote no. send this back and the next minute will pick up a trip from the first call from CS. God look at the JFK sec tres! He couldn’t even be bothered to go to the road show! BQN dh JFK turn in there. See ya gots to go!

NOPE. I’m personally done. I’m taking the QOL improvements. Voting yes.
Where I’m at now it’s cost neutral but huge QOL improvements. I’m gonna gonto the bus. Then it’ll be huge QOL and more money. My seniority affords me that.

After two organizing committees, and P2P over the last 3 years I’m done. I praise the guys who do more. I can’t. I’ll pick up the tab for the reps the NC the MEC any time.

Everyone has to vote. Yes or no do whatcha gotta do.

Where is the doggon LIKE button?!
Agreed!

nuball5
07-14-2018, 02:59 AM
Yes it was i was there.

One show of force. A battle won. I refused for years that “this is the dumbest pilot group ever” or “biggest group of pùssies” or juicers or whatever.

But dude we lost the every day battle. We lost the RSA VDA no extensions just your job battle. The SOP safety first battle.

I’m sorry but I have a hard... hard time listening to some of these guys who bítch that this wasn’t good enough. Or their potentially taking a pay cut when I’ve been falling on my sword for years. Years. Honestly i don’t care about “your problems” we’ve all got problems. We ALL need the money. I’ve left tens of thousands on the table not picking up trips. Not answering the phone and doing the hard things like missing commutes ect....

We’re here with guys that will vote no. send this back and the next minute will pick up a trip from the first call from CS. God look at the JFK sec tres! He couldn’t even be bothered to go to the road show! BQN dh JFK turn in there. See ya gots to go!

NOPE. I’m personally done. I’m taking the QOL improvements. Voting yes.
Where I’m at now it’s cost neutral but huge QOL improvements. I’m gonna gonto the bus. Then it’ll be huge QOL and more money. My seniority affords me that.

After two organizing committees, and P2P over the last 3 years I’m done. I praise the guys who do more. I can’t. I’ll pick up the tab for the reps the NC the MEC any time.

Everyone has to vote. Yes or no do whatcha gotta do.


Good write up...and thank you for volunteering.

David Puddy
07-14-2018, 05:11 AM
Looks like Robin got a
GREAT deal on the A220s:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-13/jetblue-got-discount-of-up-to-72-on-airbus-a220s-moody-s-says

RiddleEagle18
07-14-2018, 05:24 AM
Looks like Robin got a

GREAT deal on the A220s:



https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-13/jetblue-got-discount-of-up-to-72-on-airbus-a220s-moody-s-says



That’s because it was part of a larger order is my guess... more to come at the air show.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BunkerF16
07-14-2018, 05:29 AM
That’s because it was part of a larger order is my guess... more to come at the air show.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Meaning?



.....

Bluedriver
07-14-2018, 05:36 AM
Meaning?



.....

A321LR at the airshow. That's my "guess" about what's about to happen.

hilltopflyer
07-14-2018, 05:45 AM
Meaning?



.....

A350 20 of them. Just what my source says....





Disclaimer: my source is no one. I agree with BD that an LR order will be announced. I think They just did the 220-300 (convertible to -100s) order for the vote

RiddleEagle18
07-14-2018, 07:12 AM
Yep 321LR’s is my guess.

350’s are the size of 777’s. We don’t need and probably can’t support that many seats in an already overcrowded market.

The 787 is hurting the 330NEO program though. Maybe a very long outside shot if that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Softpayman
07-14-2018, 11:15 AM
Yep 321LR’s is my guess.

350’s are the size of 777’s. We don’t need and probably can’t support that many seats in an already overcrowded market.

The 787 is hurting the 330NEO program though. Maybe a very long outside shot if that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The 330NEO program is on life support. Don't know if we'd go stick our necks out for it.

The 321LR makes too much sense....it's too easy not to try with it. The company will do great with it and you'll have 5 guys here saying it's an absolute failure because on a blizzard day the plane will divert to Portland ME or Halifax NS. See!!! It's a failure!! Told you guys!

pilotpayne
07-14-2018, 11:19 AM
The 330NEO program is on life support. Don't know if we'd go stick our necks out for it.

The 321LR makes too much sense....it's too easy not to try with it. The company will do great with it and you'll have 5 guys here saying it's an absolute failure because on a blizzard day the plane will divert to Portland ME or Halifax NS. See!!! It's a failure!! Told you guys!

Exactly right

Bluedriver
07-14-2018, 01:25 PM
A350 20 of them. Just what my source says....





Disclaimer: my source is no one. I agree with BD that an LR order will be announced. I think They just did the 220-300 (convertible to -100s) order for the vote

I believe they announced the A220-300 now because they want the spotlight on our Europe announcement during the show. They could have announced the A220 and the LR at the show, but I think they want to celebrate them separately.

You are correct that all 60 FIRM orders can be converted to the -100. I personally believe they won't do that. The entire industry is in an upgauging trend, and the company will want to move more passengers per pilot/gate/slot/landing fee/etc...

The cost to aquire and operate a -100 is only negligibly less than a -300, but the number of fewer seats you can sell during the high-travel months is considerable.

Also, I do not believe it is a coincidence that they will announce the A220 and the LR both during the vote....

And NO chance for twin isle aircraft. Too much risk for this management group. Plus the LR is a good aircraft for what we want to do initially.

Bluedriver
07-14-2018, 01:25 PM
Exactly right

Some will some won't.

dontsurf
07-14-2018, 02:17 PM
You are correct that all 60 FIRM orders can be converted to the -100.

not saying you're wrong, but where are you finding that information? everything from our company, from airbus, from the business and aviation media all say "some" or "certain" of the -300 orders can be switched to the -100. i suppose a linguist would say that "certain" could include "all", but that would be a misleading way of saying "all". why not just say "all" if that is really the case?

nuball5
07-14-2018, 02:46 PM
I believe they announced the A220-300 now because they want the spotlight on our Europe announcement during the show. They could have announced the A220 and the LR at the show, but I think they want to celebrate them separately.

You are correct that all 60 FIRM orders can be converted to the -100. I personally believe they won't do that. The entire industry is in an upgauging trend, and the company will want to move more passengers per pilot/gate/slot/landing fee/etc...

The cost to aquire and operate a -100 is only negligibly less than a -300, but the number of fewer seats you can sell during the high-travel months is considerable.

Also, I do not believe it is a coincidence that they will announce the A220 and the LR both during the vote....

And NO chance for twin isle aircraft. Too much risk for this management group. Plus the LR is a good aircraft for what we want to do initially.


They said in the A220 announcement to expect a decision on the A321LR in a few months....but anything is subject to change.

Bluedriver
07-14-2018, 05:18 PM
not saying you're wrong, but where are you finding that information? everything from our company, from airbus, from the business and aviation media all say "some" or "certain" of the -300 orders can be switched to the -100. i suppose a linguist would say that "certain" could include "all", but that would be a misleading way of saying "all". why not just say "all" if that is really the case?

If you listen to the A220 conference call with Wall Street the CFO makes it explicitly clear that they have the option on the FIRM orders as well as the options.

Bluedriver
07-14-2018, 05:19 PM
They said in the A220 announcement to expect a decision on the A321LR in a few months....but anything is subject to change.

I don't think that's correct. I think they said "within" a few months, but I'm not sure. But that was said to the employees, not to the investment community.

LR during Farnborough, that's my call.

RiddleEagle18
07-14-2018, 05:57 PM
“With this choice finalized, you may be wondering about our A321LR (long-range) review. We’re continuing to evaluate that aircraft and expect to make a final decision in the coming months.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BunkerF16
07-14-2018, 06:06 PM
Why does everyone think we're going to have an announcement at the airshow? It's possible Airbus has orders they reveal, but that they don't include JB, no?

RiddleEagle18
07-14-2018, 06:32 PM
Why does everyone think we're going to have an announcement at the airshow? It's possible Airbus has orders they reveal, but that they don't include JB, no?



Only because the A220 announcement was pre air show. Very odd timing on that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BeatNavy
07-14-2018, 06:45 PM
Only because the A220 announcement was pre air show. Very odd timing on that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Strategic move to give some pre-show momentum to sales for anyone contemplating a purchase. Hasn’t been a large sale other than Moxy lately, so this is a big backing for the rebranding, and a move from JB to break from EMB is a huge selling point for AB.

pilotpayne
07-14-2018, 07:04 PM
Only because the A220 announcement was pre air show. Very odd timing on that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I was surprised it was early as well. I think bluedriver might be right about the timing. There is no way they need more time. I know it’s jetblue and all but does anyone really think they are not sure about the 321lr? Like the 220 with our hubs it’s the perfect low risk plane.

nuball5
07-14-2018, 07:26 PM
Yeah I was surprised it was early as well. I think bluedriver might be right about the timing. There is no way they need more time. I know it’s jetblue and all but does anyone really think they are not sure about the 321lr? Like the 220 with our hubs it’s the perfect low risk plane.

The difference is the A220 is fully certified and flying pax around in Europe with rave reviews. The A321LR just completed it first test flight earlier this year. Knowing Jetblue, they might not feel comfortable pulling the trigger yet until they gather more data on the LR.....who knows.

RiddleEagle18
07-14-2018, 07:27 PM
Yeah I was surprised it was early as well. I think bluedriver might be right about the timing. There is no way they need more time. I know it’s jetblue and all but does anyone really think they are not sure about the 321lr? Like the 220 with our hubs it’s the perfect low risk plane.



Absolutely. Thats why I think another announcement next week. Why negotiate section 14 if they weren’t sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

pilotpayne
07-14-2018, 08:05 PM
The difference is the A220 is fully certified and flying pax around in Europe with rave reviews. The A321LR just completed it first test flight earlier this year. Knowing Jetblue, they might not feel comfortable pulling the trigger yet until they gather more data on the LR.....who knows.

Yeah I don’t know. I know back in December when I talked at length with one of our most senior “ELT” members(been here the longest)he told me about what was going to happen with LGB, which turned out to be almost exactly true with the new “strategy” out there. He also talked a lot about the LR and the cabin configuration and all the work that was already done. They have been hinting at Europe for so long I just can’t see them not going. I definitely think it’s possible they wanted a big Europe announcement and didn’t want the 220 announcement to take anything away from it. Remember we work for a PR company. There was also something in one of those ask giggity questions about them coming out with a new slogan/ catch phrase to use other than you above all. To me it just feels (and that’s all I got is a feeling) they are about to go with something. Like riddle said why put that stuff in the CBA just like they wanted 220 rates. Obviously they have some plan they just are so freaking secretive right now it’s not even funny.


Or they have no plane at all......also totally possible.


But this is where we get into the bipolar airline that is jetblue. In some areas they are smart and innovative, but they still can’t figure out OTP, well they can but it would cost more money.

Bluedriver
07-15-2018, 05:17 AM
Yeah I was surprised it was early as well. I think bluedriver might be right about the timing. There is no way they need more time. I know it’s jetblue and all but does anyone really think they are not sure about the 321lr? Like the 220 with our hubs it’s the perfect low risk plane.

I was initially surprised that they announced the A220 the week before the airshow. Then it occurred to me that they probably want to celebrate them separately. The A220 isn't really a step- change in our business model, it's simply a massive improvement in our business model.

The LR is big expansion of our business model and I think they want the full spotlight on that announcement.

Just my opinion.

ItnStln
07-15-2018, 06:02 AM
United is flying the 321, the 737-700, -800, and -900, and the 757-200 all at the same rate as the 320.



When did United get the A321?

SmitteyB
07-15-2018, 06:32 AM
When did United get the A321?

They don’t.

pilotpayne
07-15-2018, 06:37 AM
I was initially surprised that they announced the A220 the week before the airshow. Then it occurred to me that they probably want to celebrate them separately. The A220 isn't really a step- change in our business model, it's simply a massive improvement in our business model.

The LR is big expansion of our business model and I think they want the full spotlight on that announcement.

Just my opinion.


I think that’s about right. While the 220 is big for us it doesn’t really change the jetblue model....going to Europe would be a big change.

ItnStln
07-15-2018, 07:17 AM
They don’t.



That’s what I thought.

RiddleEagle18
07-15-2018, 07:44 AM
What I find really interesting is I think the company actually didn’t have a decision until after the TA.

If your the company and you know the 220 is coming then you don’t negotiate the rates at all. You leave in the “new equipment” clause, impose ****ty rates and then take your chances in arbitration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BunkerF16
07-15-2018, 07:50 AM
What I find really interesting is I think the company actually didn’t have a decision until after the TA.

If your the company and you know the 220 is coming then you don’t negotiate the rates at all. You leave in the “new equipment” clause, impose ****ty rates and then take your chances in arbitration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I have no doubt the decision was made before the TA was signed. It's about keeping the decision a secret as long as they possibly could.

BeatNavy
07-15-2018, 09:06 AM
What I find really interesting is I think the company actually didn’t have a decision until after the TA.

If your the company and you know the 220 is coming then you don’t negotiate the rates at all. You leave in the “new equipment” clause, impose ****ty rates and then take your chances in arbitration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The decision was made before the AIP/TA imo. This was a strategic and textbook negotiating move for this announcement’s timing. Take guys plssed off about the 190 rates, or otherwise on the fence, then woo them with much higher -300 rates. $207 (or even $227 for the -100) vs $248, $258 by the time it gets here. All of a sudden people get SJS (this time with higher pay, so SJS is kind of justified). If they announced this a month ago, or a month from now, it wouldn’t have the same effect. If there was no rate pre-negotiated for the plane, it would breed fear that book 190/195E2 rates (or rates near those) could be arbitrated under the new equipment clause, and that could get guys to vote no until/unless a new rate was negotiated. If no CSeries order was announced before or during the window, the assumption would be that 190/195E2s would be the fleet review answer, and the dismal rates would persist for the next couple decades. The timing of this announcement right in the middle of the voting window was intentional. It also helped strategically with airbus rebranding the aircraft and getting momentum leading into farnborough.

I predicted a C series order announcement during the voting window for this very reason (although I wrongly thought they would tie it to ratification...but now I see they dont have to, as it’ll pass anyway). They get free yes votes with this timing, and they get them despite paying $35/$20 per hour less than the only other non-ghost rate Cseries rates out there).

Notice they didn’t announce any -100 orders, but they can convert some of our firm -300 orders to -100s, as well as all of our options. If they announced a mix of 100s/300s, it wouldn’t have the same effect as all -300s ($227 sounds way worse than $248, especially when compared to DAL’s $263/$269). I think the all -300 announcement is part of their psychological strategery and we will take some -100s. I hope I’m wrong because our -100 rate is so far below what it should be, and the casm is so much better on the -300 anyway. Regardless, lots of strategic win here with the content/timing of the voting and the announcement for both JB/AB.

David Puddy
07-16-2018, 08:17 AM
The decision was made before the AIP/TA imo. This was a strategic and textbook negotiating move for this announcement’s timing. Take guys plssed off about the 190 rates, or otherwise on the fence, then woo them with much higher -300 rates. $207 (or even $227 for the -100) vs $248, $258 by the time it gets here. All of a sudden people get SJS (this time with higher pay, so SJS is kind of justified). If they announced this a month ago, or a month from now, it wouldn’t have the same effect. If there was no rate pre-negotiated for the plane, it would breed fear that book 190/195E2 rates (or rates near those) could be arbitrated under the new equipment clause, and that could get guys to vote no until/unless a new rate was negotiated. If no CSeries order was announced before or during the window, the assumption would be that 190/195E2s would be the fleet review answer, and the dismal rates would persist for the next couple decades. The timing of this announcement right in the middle of the voting window was intentional. It also helped strategically with airbus rebranding the aircraft and getting momentum leading into farnborough.

I predicted a C series order announcement during the voting window for this very reason (although I wrongly thought they would tie it to ratification...but now I see they dont have to, as it’ll pass anyway). They get free yes votes with this timing, and they get them despite paying $35/$20 per hour less than the only other non-ghost rate Cseries rates out there).

Notice they didn’t announce any -100 orders, but they can convert some of our firm -300 orders to -100s, as well as all of our options. If they announced a mix of 100s/300s, it wouldn’t have the same effect as all -300s ($227 sounds way worse than $248, especially when compared to DAL’s $263/$269). I think the all -300 announcement is part of their psychological strategery and we will take some -100s. I hope I’m wrong because our -100 rate is so far below what it should be, and the casm is so much better on the -300 anyway. Regardless, lots of strategic win here with the content/timing of the voting and the announcement for both JB/AB.

Agreed. CASM on the 300 is much better than the 100. I would be shocked to see any converted to 100s when you have the better CASM and revenue upside of more seats in the 300....

David Puddy
08-05-2018, 06:15 PM
Yes, the CS300/A220 cockpit is gonna be more comfortable than the E190 cockpit. Anyone know if JB will get the HUD option too? Some good pics:

https://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/1077451/hb-jce-swiss-bombardier-cs300/

and

https://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/1077452/hb-jcg-swiss-bombardier-cs300/

Tom a Hawk
08-05-2018, 06:31 PM
Yes, the CS300/A220 cockpit is gonna be more comfortable than the E190 cockpit. Anyone know if JB will get the HUD option too? Some good pics:

https://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/1077451/hb-jce-swiss-bombardier-cs300/

and

https://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/1077452/hb-jcg-swiss-bombardier-cs300/

I love flying with the hud, but man the ergo of it in the 190 is terrible. The projectors are huge, you have to sit way high and close to see everything on take off, and if you’re slightly too high your head blocks some of the data. The projectors are also huge so you can’t push your seat all the way up to help level your legs. You’ll smack your head into the projector. Hope the 220 is better, but I doubt it. The pictures I’ve seen have monstrous projectors too.

hilltopflyer
08-05-2018, 06:57 PM
I love flying with the hud, but man the ergo of it in the 190 is terrible. The projectors are huge, you have to sit way high and close to see everything on take off, and if you’re slightly too high your head blocks some of the data. The projectors are also huge so you can’t push your seat all the way up to help level your legs. You’ll smack your head into the projector. Hope the 220 is better, but I doubt it. The pictures I’ve seen have monstrous projectors too.

I hate the hud

CaptCoolHand
08-05-2018, 10:57 PM
I hate the hud

Poundmetoo

rvr1800
08-06-2018, 02:41 AM
I hate the hud

Yup


.......

jtrain609
08-06-2018, 03:50 AM
APC universally hates the HUD?

I'm voting yes for HUD's! HUD's in every aircraft! HUD's in cars! HUD's for dogs!!! Vote for our future, vote for HUD's!!!

PasserOGas
08-06-2018, 04:03 AM
APC universally hates the HUD?

I'm voting yes for HUD's! HUD's in every aircraft! HUD's in cars! HUD's for dogs!!! Vote for our future, vote for HUD's!!!

HUDs will pass by 75%.

aldonite7667
08-06-2018, 05:14 AM
HUDs will pass by 75%.

With out a HUD the rest is pointless.

aldonite7667
08-06-2018, 05:16 AM
I used a hud in my previous airplane and loved it. I don’t like it at Jetblue because of the way the SOP’s are written and that the que isn’t “fixed” like the PFD.

I’d rather have Autopilot Cat 3.

jtrain609
08-06-2018, 05:16 AM
I used a hud in my previous airplane and loved it. I don’t like it at Jetblue because of the way the SOP’s are written and that the que isn’t “fixed” like the PFD.

I’d rather have Autopilot Cat 3.

You mean you don't like the FPV?

aldonite7667
08-06-2018, 05:19 AM
You mean you don't like the FPV?

Yes, been so long I forgot the term.. lol

jtrain609
08-06-2018, 05:41 AM
Yes, been so long I forgot the term.. lol

I love the FPV, but I'm an Airbus hater, so pretty much ignore me.

PasserOGas
08-06-2018, 06:15 AM
With out a HUD the rest is pointless.

The HUD provision of the CBA is rock solid. Ignore the pay rates vote YES!

blueballs
08-06-2018, 06:22 AM
The HUD provision of the CBA is rock solid. Ignore the pay rates vote YES!
74% of us say it’s time to move on

Bluedriver
08-06-2018, 06:25 AM
I absolutely HATE the HUD. And yes, our SOP makes me hate it soooo much more.

hilltopflyer
08-06-2018, 06:29 AM
I used a hud in my previous airplane and loved it. I don’t like it at Jetblue because of the way the SOP’s are written and that the que isn’t “fixed” like the PFD.

I’d rather have Autopilot Cat 3.

The hud is nice for specific purposes. But mandatory use (sop) is just dumb.

PasserOGas
08-06-2018, 07:00 AM
74% of us say it’s time to move on

26% of us have a spine.

nuball5
08-06-2018, 07:05 AM
I asked in ground school just recently when the A220 was being discussed. Jetblue hasn't decided yet whether to go HUD or not....at least publicly to their chief pilots and others. I know Delta are going without the HUD with their A220's...hopefully we'll do the same. Or at least put it just on the Captain's side. There's zero use for it for FO's.

PasserOGas
08-06-2018, 07:18 AM
I asked in ground school just recently when the A220 was being discussed. Jetblue hasn't decided yet whether to go HUD or not....at least publicly to their chief pilots and others. I know Delta are going without the HUD with their A220's...hopefully we'll do the same. Or at least put it just on the Captain's side. There's zero use for it for FO's.

With auto land there is zero use for it period.

queue
08-06-2018, 07:31 AM
74% of us say it’s time to move on


74% of you are the reason it took 3 attempts to get ALPA on property.

74% of you are responsible for a substandard contract with tons of legal loopholes.

I'm moving on, but learning from the mistakes of the 74%. Remember that mob rule (majority vote) does not guarantee a superior outcome, which is why the USA is not a Democracy but rather a Constitutional Republic. The founding fathers recognized that a true democratic election process (e.g. union vote) is just mob rule and the worst way of doing things.

This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

queue
08-06-2018, 07:36 AM
I asked in ground school just recently when the A220 was being discussed. Jetblue hasn't decided yet whether to go HUD or not....at least publicly to their chief pilots and others. I know Delta are going without the HUD with their A220's...hopefully we'll do the same. Or at least put it just on the Captain's side. There's zero use for it for FO's.


I question the wisdom of having captain only capabilities. Both pilots should be equally qualified in the event of an abnormal or emergency scenario. I'm sure the FO and CA could swap seats in case the CA ate the fish and your only choice is to land < min fuel at an island below Cat I minimums, but if the FO never does CA stuff, he would become quite a liability. As we all know, those compound failures never happen. Even Fukashima couldn't be foreseen :-)

I'd be more in favor of ditching the traditional HUD that is merely a laser overlay. A good alternative would be a synthetic vision display that uses the IR spectrum and displayed on a high resolution LCD display that could be put in front of you. I've seen G5's and other corporate jets have a similar configuration and it's far better than a traditional HUD that only overlays a vector drawing on top of what you see outside. IR spectrum actually does let you see much much farther.

This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

GuppyPuppy
08-06-2018, 07:42 AM
74% of you are the reason it took 3 attempts to get ALPA on property.

.[/COLOR]

I couldn't disagree more.

I, and many whom I know, voted for representation 3 times. None of us are giddy about this contract, but decided to vote yes because we felt the risk of voting no, with no contract to fall back on, wasn't worth the unknown gains we might get in the ensuing months of negotiations.

This contract does nothing to fuel my GAS meter.

Gup

BeatNavy
08-06-2018, 08:05 AM
With auto land there is zero use for it period.

Using the FPV to see exactly how many degrees you need to deviate, and/or to see if you will clear a build up, was the most utility that thing had. The runway overlay in a CATIII was cool, but autoland is cooler, and I would choose the latter if it was a mutually exclusive capability. I believe you can have both on most planes, and it’s a redundancy item. If I had the option to have the hud up or down, I would have it up 99.99% of the time. Or more. And I hate the projector and the headroom it cuts out.

I don’t have a problem with HUDs in general. Used them in the military and one of my cars had it. But the projector, pink glass and green glare never bothered me in those. In the 190 it’s horrible. Not sure how the A220 HUD is, but I kind of hope we keep commonality with the rest of our bus fleet and put the HUDs to bed at JetBlue, unless it’s significantly better than the 190 HUD, and the projector box is smaller or otherwise less intrusive.

nuball5
08-06-2018, 08:11 AM
Using the FPV to see exactly how many degrees you need to deviate, and/or to see if you will clear a build up, was the most utility that thing had. The runway overlay in a CATIII was cool, but autoland is cooler, and I would choose the latter if it was a mutually exclusive capability. I believe you can have both on most planes, and it’s a redundancy item. If I had the option to have the hud up or down, I would have it up 99.99% of the time. Or more. And I hate the projector and the headroom it cuts out.

I don’t have a problem with HUDs in general. Used them in the military and one of my cars had it. But the projector, pink glass and green glare never bothered me in those. In the 190 it’s horrible. Not sure how the A220 HUD is, but I kind of hope we keep commonality with the rest of our bus fleet and put the HUDs to bed at JetBlue, unless it’s significantly better than the 190 HUD, and the projector box is smaller or otherwise less intrusive.

I find the 190 HUD distracting for all the above reasons you and others have stated. Distracting enough for me to consider it a "safety issue" and the need to stow it.

hilltopflyer
08-06-2018, 08:16 AM
I find the 190 HUD distracting for all the above reasons you and others have stated. Distracting enough for me to consider it a "safety issue" and the need to stow it.

I get sick using it so it’s a safety issue for me as well. The depth perception jacks with me. It’s way worse in the sim.

BunkerF16
08-06-2018, 08:21 AM
HUDs will pass by 75%.

It shows it 51-49% in Blue Pilots though....

aldonite7667
08-06-2018, 12:17 PM
26% of us have a spine.

26% voted FOR the DR for another year or so. BTW, you voted no, knowing it would pass. Not much nuts needed there, just ego.... all due respect.

seekingblue
08-06-2018, 12:20 PM
It shows it 51-49% in Blue Pilots though....

Hilarious.

Lots of internet tough guys over there

BeatNavy
08-06-2018, 12:24 PM
26% voted FOR the DR for another year or so. BTW, you voted no, knowing it would pass. Not much nuts needed there, just ego.... all due respect.

Even with no CBA, ALPA protections still would have existed, ALPA merger policy would have been observed in the event of a merger with another ALPA carrier, and no changes to status quo. It wasn’t all doom and gloom if the CBA were voted down, nor was it the DR in most aspects. So your statement is patently false.

seekingblue
08-06-2018, 12:27 PM
26% voted FOR the DR for another year or so. BTW, you voted no, knowing it would pass. Not much nuts needed there, just ego.... all due respect.

As I stated before, codifying language (scope, scheduling, retirement) was very important. The DR was a disaster. Having a significant change via email @ 1am was simply unacceptable.

Happy we got the language down.


As an aside, I hope we can stop being "yes" and "no" voters and become pro ALPA pilots again. Doesn't matter which way you voted: the CBA is in place. Let's work together to move forward.

aldonite7667
08-06-2018, 12:27 PM
Even with no CBA, ALPA protections still would have existed, ALPA merger policy would have been observed in the event of a merger with another ALPA carrier, and no changes to status quo. It wasn’t all doom and gloom if the CBA were voted down, nor was it the DR in most aspects. So your statement is patently false.

No changes to the status quo? How about the dependability policy? Or profit sharing? Or positive check in? Code shares? What about scope? Your statement is patently incorrect.

BeatNavy
08-06-2018, 01:02 PM
No changes to the status quo? How about the dependability policy? Or profit sharing? Or positive check in? Code shares? What about scope? Your statement is patently incorrect.

DP: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
PS: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
PCI: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
CS: Codified. Unlimited unless we don’t grow by a block hour or add one pilot. This doesn’t really make anything we are doing any different, nor would it be different if we didn’t vote this in.
Scope: Ok sure it was great to codify...but if it was viable to outsource and downgauge flying they would have done it. But our slot and gate space restrictions, as well as our economic situation, wouldn’t have made it worth it to have a regional fly for us. Hence why we never did. And it want going to happen in the next 6-12 months had this been voted down.


Next?

SmitteyB
08-06-2018, 01:05 PM
I was in schoolhouse a few weeks ago and we were given the impression that there is a 0% chance that they take the HUD option on the 220s.

CaptCoolHand
08-06-2018, 01:33 PM
Even with no CBA, ALPA protections still would have existed, ALPA merger policy would have been observed in the event of a merger with another ALPA carrier, and no changes to status quo. It wasn’t all doom and gloom if the CBA were voted down, nor was it the DR in most aspects. So your statement is patently false.

Until we’re bought by SWA or AA...

Alpa merger policy only applies to alpa mergers.

aldonite7667
08-06-2018, 01:37 PM
DP: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
PS: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
PCI: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
CS: Codified. Unlimited unless we don’t grow by a block hour or add one pilot. This doesn’t really make anything we are doing any different, nor would it be different if we didn’t vote this in.
Scope: Ok sure it was great to codify...but if it was viable to outsource and downgauge flying they would have done it. But our slot and gate space restrictions, as well as our economic situation, wouldn’t have made it worth it to have a regional fly for us. Hence why we never did. And it want going to happen in the next 6-12 months had this been voted down.


Next?

Your statement was about changes to the status quo before a CBA. I gave you changes.

Bluedriver
08-06-2018, 02:08 PM
Your statement was about changes to the status quo before a CBA. I gave you changes.

Yeah, but there couldn't have been any MORE changes. JB wouldn't do that.

And the RJs we're almost painted blue! Just a few more weeks and we would have all been replaced by Skywest and Mesa.

Softpayman
08-06-2018, 05:34 PM
And the RJs we're almost painted blue! Just a few more weeks and we would have all been replaced by Skywest and Mesa.

Announcement

"JetBlue and Skywest to join in a partnership. JetBlue and Skywest have entered into an agreement for Skywest to fly up to 20 JetBlue E190 aircraft as JetBlue transitions to an A220 fleet. JB President states that this will allow JB to properly transition to an all Airbus fleet yadda yadda...."

Keep telling us all how it couldn't have happened...

aldonite7667
08-06-2018, 05:51 PM
Announcement

"JetBlue and Skywest to join in a partnership. JetBlue and Skywest have entered into an agreement for Skywest to fly up to 20 JetBlue E190 aircraft as JetBlue transitions to an A220 fleet. JB President states that this will allow JB to properly transition to an all Airbus fleet yadda yadda...."

Keep telling us all how it could't have happened...


Again, they had the luxury of voting no, knowing it was going to pass. Not a very bold move.

PasserOGas
08-06-2018, 05:59 PM
Anywho.... How does it feel flying under our new CBA? Totally different right? Like a new company! How is that dropping down to ZERO working out? I have really been enjoying our in-flight meals. Looking forward to putting a very small dent in my past ALPA dues with my bonus check.

I feel like I work for a real airline now. Totally different from how it was a year ago. When I do my post flight walk around I do it on a full stomach of cheese and crackers. Way to go B6ALPA.

On a side note, can we please not have BOS 190 guys negotiate our next CBA? It turns out they have their sights set a little low. Must be the HUD radiation.

Gordie H
08-06-2018, 07:20 PM
Anybody got any thoughts on where the first 220's will go?

Maybe MCO?...currently the smallest 190 base so easiest to swap the planes out, the training center is right there, etc.

Last base to get them maybe Boston? The 190 does pretty well there (as I understand) with the NYC shuttles, other short routes, etc.

I really have no idea :)

NightOwl
08-06-2018, 07:52 PM
Anybody got any thoughts on where the first 220's will go?

Maybe MCO?...currently the smallest 190 base so easiest to swap the planes out, the training center is right there, etc.

Last base to get them maybe Boston? The 190 does pretty well there (as I understand) with the NYC shuttles, other short routes, etc.

I really have no idea :)

My guess :
MCO gets the first 5
BOS gets the next batch while they displace the 190 flying out of JFK to BOS and FLL
The rest of the deliveries get spread out between the 3 new A220 bases.

My guess for base size from largest to smallest

BOS
MCO
FLL

BeatNavy
08-06-2018, 07:58 PM
Announcement

"JetBlue and Skywest to join in a partnership. JetBlue and Skywest have entered into an agreement for Skywest to fly up to 20 JetBlue E190 aircraft as JetBlue transitions to an A220 fleet. JB President states that this will allow JB to properly transition to an all Airbus fleet yadda yadda...."

Keep telling us all how it couldn't have happened...

SkyWest couldn’t fly e190s for anyone under their Delta agreement. If JB had any inclination to use regionals to outsource they would have done it a year ago. Or two. Or three. Or four. Or 15.

jtrain609
08-07-2018, 01:36 AM
SkyWest couldn’t fly e190s for anyone under their Delta agreement. If JB had any inclination to use regionals to outsource they would have done it a year ago. Or two. Or three. Or four. Or 15.

Sure they could, just create a holding company with a different air carrier certificate and staff it from Skywest or XJT.

Hell use the XJT certificate and park the rest of XJT.

The possibilities are endless for a simple solution to that problem.

CaptCoolHand
08-07-2018, 02:51 AM
SkyWest couldn’t fly e190s for anyone under their Delta agreement. If JB had any inclination to use regionals to outsource they would have done it a year ago. Or two. Or three. Or four. Or 15.
Jet blue will never fly anything but 320
Will never code share
Will never have first class
Will Never go West
Will grow organically

If jb wanted to... they could have. Now they can’t. Because of us. So it won’t be an email stating that we now have jetsuite moxi surejet or any other ever unless we decide to give that up.

Softpayman
08-07-2018, 04:10 AM
SkyWest couldn’t fly e190s for anyone under their Delta agreement. If JB had any inclination to use regionals to outsource they would have done it a year ago. Or two. Or three. Or four. Or 15.

As stated above there are easy work arounds for that, already been done. Guess that sort of thing never caught your attention?

You’re right, if JB didn’t do it already, they probably would never do it!
Seriously?

Bluedriver
08-07-2018, 05:57 AM
Announcement

"JetBlue and Skywest to join in a partnership. JetBlue and Skywest have entered into an agreement for Skywest to fly up to 20 JetBlue E190 aircraft as JetBlue transitions to an A220 fleet. JB President states that this will allow JB to properly transition to an all Airbus fleet yadda yadda...."

Keep telling us all how it couldn't have happened...

The next announcement would be Skywest losing it's entire Delta contract for 20 RJs... Skywest CANNOT fly the E190, violates their contract with Delta. Same with any other Delta feeder. And can't be any other wholly owned company. And they would need an E170 on their certificate to make it even remotely cost effective. And JB would DETONATE.

And a temporary transition contract is the best you can do?

So yeah, no.

Bluedriver
08-07-2018, 06:01 AM
Jet blue will never fly anything but 320
Will never code share
Will never have first class
Will Never go West
Will grow organically

If jb wanted to... they could have. Now they can’t. Because of us. So it won’t be an email stating that we now have jetsuite moxi surejet or any other ever unless we decide to give that up.

That last part of your statement is REALLY wrong. Yeah, we definitely COULD get that email.

BeatNavy
08-07-2018, 06:11 AM
Jet blue will never fly anything but 320
Will never code share
Will never have first class
Will Never go West
Will grow organically

If jb wanted to... they could have. Now they can’t. Because of us. So it won’t be an email stating that we now have jetsuite moxi surejet or any other ever unless we decide to give that up.

Whatever helps you sleep better at night. We weren’t going to have a regional. Period dot.