Flows are more of a retention tool than a good hiring tool it would seem. At least that is what history tells us. Anyway, with PSA and now Envoy having a seemingly difficult time hiring... And other regionals offering far more enticing compensation and contracts, I would think that AAG has to do something if they want to keep their regionals afloat and competitive enough to attract new hires.

 

I think they know most present Envoy pilots won't leave any faster then they could anyway, regardless of how bad things get there. Everyone there who got an offer from a legacy would leave regardless of the situation at Envoy and they know that. Those who have apps in at LCC's and got offers, most would go and most have apps in at LCC's, expect those close to flowing in the 824 who are shooting craps on AA, so that component is a byproduct not of Envoy, but outside factors that Envoy can't control. The only "retention" wildcard I think they would target is consideration of lateral moves to other regionals and the only pilots likely to do that would be those with little or no investment in Envoy and with less then a year or two seniority. The past poll by Cujo proved most are committed to Envoy until someone calls with an offer they would go to anyway or...............well, they are committed after they crack-up (with some it sounds like, already well on the way).

 

But remember, they are not the same company - even you admitted that



AAG likes WO carriers for one simple fact: it allows them to keep the profits in house. All things equal, they would rather have the flying in house at a WO carrier. However, if a non-WO carriers has even the slightest competitive edge such that costContractCarrier < costWOCarrier without the slightest hesitation, the flying will go there. If it comes to the point where the flow does not recruit enough people (where we are now) and the alternative is farm the flying out to non-WO carriers or give increased pay to the WO carriers, the flying WILL go to someone else. They can staff it for cheaper.

 

I certainly did, but that doesn't mean they aren't using the same playbook and that's what matters. If the same playbook is used (which is obvious and undeniable), it matters little who the company has become. That's one of the fundamental errors many have made there now. They assumed there was no difference and thus couldn't differentiate that which really governs the game. Now, it's starting to sink in and thus the skyrocketing heartburn that's occurring. Nothing has really changed there except the name and faces.

 

Can any of the former Eagle guys tell me the name of the Chief Pilot (or even the Assistant Chief Pilot) at DFW back in 2004? Thanks in advance.

 

I think it was Scott Gies - not 100% sure.

 

Just checked some old docs; yes, it was Scott Gies.

And most of us are still "Eagle", despite what the company does to us, lol.

 

Better way to say it. "Don't p*** down my back and tell me it's raining."

 

Why, you need some lovin'? It was Scott, who also loves sack.

 

Nicest guy to work at Starbucks, ever.