ENVOY presented with details on new contract
12-09-2014 | 08:33 AM
#421
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 771
Likes: 0
From: Qualified to carry liquids through security.
If we turn it down, they will send the rest of the -175s out ASAP. Talk to your union reps. Yes, the deal is garbage at best, but we're backed into a corner. It'd be different if other airlines held the line and refused to fly the -175s and our -145s, but what's the likelihood of that happening? Nil. We'd be down to a fleet of 68 E-145s. What was comair at when they were shut down? Around 70 airframes.
What happened last time we turned the TA down? They outsourced the first batch of 175s and even outsourced some of our 145s. And on top of that they've made this a miserable place to work. Not saying the vote will magically change all of this, but it's better than the alternative. Most people I talk to are yes voters. Even some of the vocal no voters from last time.
Now, flame away!
What happened last time we turned the TA down? They outsourced the first batch of 175s and even outsourced some of our 145s. And on top of that they've made this a miserable place to work. Not saying the vote will magically change all of this, but it's better than the alternative. Most people I talk to are yes voters. Even some of the vocal no voters from last time.
Now, flame away!
12-09-2014 | 08:35 AM
#422
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 21
From: Sleeping
I'm sorry but I fail to see how "burning it down" and indirectly sending 40 planes to another carrier, dropping upgrade times, enticing fos to make MORE lateral moves to chase an upgrade, increasing the whipsaw, eliminating a relatively well paid regional and leaving more lower paid ones to flight for the scraps, and giving up a guaranteed job at a legacy is preserving the industry and your future careers. In my eyes this would have the opposite effect.
If Eagle votes yes, they are only guaranteed 40 airplanes correct?? So what is the incentive to vote yes? you already have 220some airplanes.
That would already put a large majority of pilots on the street.
12-09-2014 | 08:38 AM
#424
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,041
Likes: 0
From: GV Captain
I think it very well may fail. A lot of captains would rather they keep the 12k and preserve the industry and their mainline careers. Tons of fos are really ****ed that yet again we got less than captains. Everyone feels it's an over reach with not one single fleet guarantee. 40 planes is ripe foor shutdown. Only yes votes are guys who feel they will eject soon because they are getting calls from majors or LLC and want 7500 out the door.
Why should FOs get the same as captains?
Good Luck.
12-09-2014 | 08:40 AM
#425
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
If we turn it down, they will send the rest of the -175s out ASAP. Talk to your union reps. Yes, the deal is garbage at best, but we're backed into a corner. It'd be different if other airlines held the line and refused to fly the -175s and our -145s, but what's the likelihood of that happening? Nil. We'd be down to a fleet of 68 E-145s. What was comair at when they were shut down? Around 70 airframes.
What happened last time we turned the TA down? They outsourced the first batch of 175s and even outsourced some of our 145s. And on top of that they've made this a miserable place to work. Not saying the vote will magically change all of this, but it's better than the alternative. Most people I talk to are yes voters. Even some of the vocal no voters from last time.
Now, flame away!
What happened last time we turned the TA down? They outsourced the first batch of 175s and even outsourced some of our 145s. And on top of that they've made this a miserable place to work. Not saying the vote will magically change all of this, but it's better than the alternative. Most people I talk to are yes voters. Even some of the vocal no voters from last time.
Now, flame away!
12-09-2014 | 08:46 AM
#426
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
12-09-2014 | 08:47 AM
#427
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,041
Likes: 0
From: GV Captain
I think envoy pilots got tired of voting NO while their planes and Future deliveries are being flown by the PSA's and PDT, and TSAs out there.
Good Luck.
12-09-2014 | 08:49 AM
#428
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 21
From: Sleeping
Ejets? options?, by the time those things get on property there won't be any people left to fly them
12-09-2014 | 08:56 AM
#429
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 771
Likes: 0
From: Qualified to carry liquids through security.
If we vote no, they give the 40 E-Jets to some other carrier and eventually wind us down. As it stands now, eaglevoy is slated to go down to 68 ERJ-145s. All CR7s are going to psa and 50 ERJ-145s are going to TSA, expressjet, and piedmont.
12-09-2014 | 08:56 AM
#430
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
I am a senior pilot and my vote is NO. The flow is smoke and mirrors after the 824 are gone. The fleet commitment only applies if they can staff the airline if they cannot as we see currently they can't the planes don't come here. F/o get shafted only 7500 before taxes leaves them with 4000.
Anyone who votes yes is someone who is always afraid or has no idea what is playing out.
Vote yes and that mainline job won't be there even with retirements. You will be stuck here doing the job for less.
Anyone who votes yes is someone who is always afraid or has no idea what is playing out.
Vote yes and that mainline job won't be there even with retirements. You will be stuck here doing the job for less.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
