|
|
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1196874)
No. They never agreed to stop flying them. They only agreed to not obtain more, and give us some improvements to our current contract.
|
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1196868)
Maybe you better check with your reps again...
As I said, you can't handle the Half-truth.:p Carl |
Originally Posted by Boomer
(Post 1196869)
Only if the regional pilots are represented by ALPA.
(Un)luckily, the growth may very well go to the non-ALPA regionals. Carl |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1196871)
Carl,
Your answer to just about everything is that the language is "legally unenforceable." It seems as if there isn't language that will ever satisfy you. Carl |
Originally Posted by Elvis90
(Post 1196879)
All this back & forth reminded me of a quote:
--------------- "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873) --------------- Air Force Academy guys had to memorize this as part of their freshman year. Carl |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1196880)
Two choices:
1. Yes to this TA and allow the company to have more airplanes that are better mainline replacement jets in exchange for being able to park the airplanes that are not better. 2. No to this TA and actually hold the line on scope. I strongly urge everyone to take the time required to understand what is being offered here. Our scope is currently very weak in many places. The TA strenghtens our scope. The TA holds the line on Scope (wrt to seat limits. AA will soon have 80+ seaters, and a whole lot of them) and tightens it in almost every section, from top to bottom. Allow yourself to think past the "not one more jet" slogan for a moment and consider what significant block hour shift to mainline will do for: 1. Hiring 2. Advancement 3. Job Security Please do not make up your minds yet. Take the time to read the TA fully, read/digest the Negotiator's Notepads that are coming out, attend a roadshow, call your reps, talk to fellow pilots, etc. After all that, make a decision, but let it be based on what is really being offered. We all owe that to ourselves and each other. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1196880)
Two choices:
1. Yes to this TA and allow the company to have more airplanes that are better mainline replacement jets in exchange for being able to park the airplanes that are not better. 2. No to this TA and actually hold the line on scope. |
Originally Posted by Elvis90
(Post 1196879)
All this back & forth reminded me of a quote:
--------------- "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stuart Mill English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873) --------------- Air Force Academy guys had to memorize this as part of their freshman year. |
Originally Posted by PropNWA
(Post 1196898)
Unfortunately, life and this TA aren't that black and white. Anyone who actually understands what's in section 1 of this TA would not say that. There is plenty not to like in this TA but section 1 is not one of them.
In essence, we're going to order 70 new jets that the company can use to replace us in exchange for parking 200+ jets the company won't replace us with. Another way to look at it, if the CRJ-200 killed the 100 seater, what can a CRJ-900 kill? Now you may say the CRJ-200 didn't kill the 100 seater, we are getting 717s. But only because SWA is dumping them, it's a unique situation and... what if the 717s are here to kill the 88? And there is no guarantee the parked CRJ-200 routes will be covered by the large RJs, they may not necessarily backfill their routes either if high frequency is no longer en vogue as it doesn't meet the capacity discipline maximize PRASM mantra. |
Okay, so we're ordering 100 739s and getting 88 717s.
If this TA passed, we could probably up that 739 order to 180 739s. Use them, the 90s and the 717s to replace all of the 319s, all of the 88s, half the 320s, 2 dozen 757s, all of the 763s. The end result would be a net increase of 9 mainline jets (that may not even require hiring given the reserve rule changes), a 2% increase in the number of mainline block hours, 1% decrease in ASMs and still meet the 1.56 ratio with DCI knocked down to 450 aircraft. Unless i'm missing something we could grow to shrink. To me there's a real possibility we're giving up scope for no real gain... at least for us. Ya'll have a good night, hopefully won't see you til Saturday night. Because it'll take all day saturday to catch up. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:50 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands