Cujo665

speaking of thrustlever....

some the posts in the forums matched the copied posts on facebook until a guy called him on it, then he unfriended him and deleted all his facebook posts.

eaglefly

Well, let's see. I'm trying to get this all straight now, so bear with me.

Since according to RJ pilot (and perhaps a few others, but it was him that made the initial claim IIRC), my name is "Joey" AKA "JJ", AKA "frosty tips" and most recently "thrustlever", that must mean either I am the one you speak of on Facebook or somone was poaching posts from elsewhere and posting them there, which isn't hard to do. Since Facebook isn't anonymous as far as I'm aware of it would seem to be easy to confirm, yes ?

So, if you could prove that those names are all associated with the same person, that would go a long way to substantiating all these so far baseless claims repetedly made by an obvious liar. If not, it would seem to indicate that advocating the concept of poaching and believing baseless claims has become an epidemic among many at Envoy and if so, perhaps the problem isn't with me, but within many at Envoy ?

Just a few thoughts anyway.........

sublime259

I'm telling you, do what I did. Put him on ignore. It makes reading this thread much more enjoyable when all the crap he says just doesn't show up.

FirstClass

I like his posts, in my opinion very rational arguments.

Good Luck!

sublime259

Of course you would. I've never seen such biased posts that promote the downfall of another airline then when the two of you have something to say. Your posts are nothing more then outright lies with the intent of stirring the pot. You act like a know-it-all, but in reality have probably been in the industry for a very small amount of time with very little life experience to draw from.

Any argument that either of you ever makes ignore simple facts and numbers yet somehow that is "rational?" Please.

Unfortunately the mods refuse to do anything about the outright lies the two of you tell, which is really doing a disservice to the APC community. Go run back to your little circle jerk at PSA. Newsflash, nobody here likes you or anything you have to say. You're a troll and your personality is very indicative of the typical PSA pilot.

WakeWash

Part one true, part two not. When you begin basing an entire group off one person then you become no better than him. No pilot here I know of condones his comments.

eaglefly

It is THIS poster who not only promotes misinformation, but demands the mods act as his weapon to silence others opinions that he disagrees with and THAT is the real disservice to the members here. This forum is neither a dictatorship for any one member, nor are the mods a weapon in his arsenal to silence dissent.

What I've stated is that basically as it stands now, Envoy cannot support the projections of flow to AA (or the upgrade schedule) without an equal number of new-hires that as of now, have yet to materialize. Today the representatives of the DFW base held a teleconference and the info indicates they basically agree with me. Kudos to them, for at least SOMEONE at Envoy believes something factual should be represented about Envoy's present situation. The information I have essentially stated that;

- In order for the flow to work as projected by Wilson letter, 30-40 new-hires will be required every month, that so far has not happened and that the actual new-hire rate is 25% of that required.

- Of the number originally projected to flow this year, that number will now actually be about 75% of projected or roughly 175 pilots. Next years projection to flow will be about the same and that would equate to about 14.7 pilots/monthly average for the year. That number almost matches EXACTLY with the projection of 14.7 pilots/month Envoy plans to upgrade through the end of next year (18 months). Clearly, these numbers now have ALREADY been diluted from the projections of just weeks ago and this reduced number is STILL based on getting that minimum 30-40 pilots/month in the door as new-hires at Envoy.

This is what I've said all along would be likely to occur.

- Due to AA's deferral of Airbus aircraft, the Envoy option abilities have now fallen to anywhere from 6-20 aircraft depending on other RJ reconfigurations. As of now, AAG has made no announcement of additional E-175 options being converted to firm orders for Envoy.

- Potential good news for present 824 pilots is that they may have access soon to new-hire slots on the US Airways partition, however since no mention of that increasing the flow numbers which have actually now been ratcheted back from that Letter's projections, it is unclear if that means less or no flow to the AA partition. Supposedly there was mention made of possibly making either Envoy or more likely all the WO's as the only pathway to AA by none other than Jerry Glass, but that would require AA approval and that will neither be free to the company, nor cheap. I consider that a long shot unless AAG is willing to pony up and make AA pilots compensation more like that of DAL pilots. As it stands now, AA pilots are angry and frustrated AAG management is dragging their feet on implementing JCBA contractual provisions most beneficial to AA pilots.

So, in a nutshell, most of my assertions appear to have been validated by the DFW representatives and the fact remains that AAG has yet to make concrete, long-term commitments to Envoy pilots to ensure Wilson's projections materialize and Envoy management has yet to demonstrate either the willingness or ability to meet the hiring requirements to make it happen.

LeadFoot

Why would AAG not excercise their option for another 90 E175's though? I read about the Airbus order deferral by AAG but help me understand how that affects the additional 90 jets on option. Are you saying AAG cannot commit to those jets anymore?

air101

If AA needed them, they wouldn't be options, they would be orders. It was just a carrot dangled out there to get Envoy to vote yes. AAG is not committed to the options.

eaglefly

The RJ fleet count for AA is tied to the number of narrowbody aircraft at mainline. The retirement schedules and now delivery deferrals will limit the ability to add further large RJ's absent another change to the narrowbody retirement schedule.