New Envoy Information
04-11-2016, 01:38 PM
#2211
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Posts: 894
Originally Posted by Bassman1985
Interesting. Was just told on Friday that they are guaranteeing base and equipment choice to new hires. If you show up for class and don't get the 175 in DFW like you wanted, you do the week of indoc and then get time off with pay until a 175 spot is available. Nobody goes to ORD unless they want it. Maybe that is only from the April 25th class onwards?
04-11-2016, 01:55 PM
#2212
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2012
Position: E-175 CA
Posts: 339
Originally Posted by RyanP
You could be correct. I don't know what they are doing right now with new hires. That would be a recruiter question. What I said about age is what they have done in the past.
04-11-2016, 01:57 PM
#2213
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,208
Originally Posted by FirstClass
LOL who cares? AA is not exactly a dream job. So PSA can't hire them either then? Or can only hire with the understanding they can't flow? Seems like nonsense.
Your AA employee number follows you around like a your credit and SSN.
They can see everything you do in one company from the other one.
04-11-2016, 02:03 PM
#2214
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Qualified to carry liquids through security.
Posts: 771
Originally Posted by FirstClass
LOL who cares? AA is not exactly a dream job. So PSA can't hire them either then? Or can only hire with the understanding they can't flow? Seems like nonsense.
04-11-2016, 04:09 PM
#2216
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2011
Posts: 894
Originally Posted by Bassman1985
They told me the same regarding age determining seniority in class. Pretty standard, unlike some companies that go by SSN. They also told me about guaranteeing equipment, at least for my class on the 25th. Don't know if mine will be the first class with that perk.
04-11-2016, 04:14 PM
#2217
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Narrow/Left Wide/Right
Posts: 3,655
Originally Posted by eaglefly
No rumor. They could do that because unlike a merger, the TWA transaction was structured as an "asset acquisition with an offer of employment". Not everyone got "offers" and ALPA was more interested in courting the AA pilots and threw the TWA pilots under the bus in trying, supposedly from my understanding, this being one of those ways. Of course, they were sued and lost. 
There is a good lesson in that though and that is the consolidation of companies can be structured in ways that give leverage to certain parties and put other parties at a disadvantage. Depending on what happens with Envoy in the future, it may be Envoy ALPA that must make certain exceptions to contractual items which was a point in one of my previous posts, hence my skepticism of the PP being "bulletproof".
There is a good lesson in that though and that is the consolidation of companies can be structured in ways that give leverage to certain parties and put other parties at a disadvantage. Depending on what happens with Envoy in the future, it may be Envoy ALPA that must make certain exceptions to contractual items which was a point in one of my previous posts, hence my skepticism of the PP being "bulletproof".
Then you say ALPA (who exactly, ALPA national or the TWA MEC, that part I'm not clear) was the one who was helping AA mgmt rape TWA employees.
It seems history is revised against everyone except the vaunted, righteous APA.
04-11-2016, 04:30 PM
#2219
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by full of luv
So in one sentence you say that AA mgmt structured the deal in a way that would allow them to rape and pillage certain TWA employees without recourse.
Then you say ALPA (who exactly, ALPA national or the TWA MEC, that part I'm not clear) was the one who was helping AA mgmt rape TWA employees.
It seems history is revised against everyone except the vaunted, righteous APA.
Then you say ALPA (who exactly, ALPA national or the TWA MEC, that part I'm not clear) was the one who was helping AA mgmt rape TWA employees.
It seems history is revised against everyone except the vaunted, righteous APA.
04-11-2016, 04:40 PM
#2220
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by Meatball
29 fools. People are crazy to come to this airline.
Envoy needs to bring in and most importantly retain at least 35 new-hires a month every month, if they plan to flow the represented numbers to AA along with outside attrition from more tenured pilots. Absent that, each months deficit from that only ensures future contraction which jeopardizes present flying allocation from AAG. It's interesting that a union source said that MIA flying is projected in May to be equivalent to at least 40 hard lines of flying, yet AAG won't green light an Envoy domicile there (at least not yet). To me, that says AAG is keeping their options open for the future should that flying be reassigned elsewhere over time as the capabilities of various carriers ebb and flow with their pilot counts.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
