What's the Latest at ASA/Expressjet?
11-24-2014 | 09:25 AM
#8161
Banned
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,934
Likes: 0
From: EMB 145 CPT
What's the Latest at ASA/Expressjet?
Well we all know there's no guarantee that there will be more or less flying with or with out a TA, obviously. You can't deny that a whipsaw could be occurring on some level. But what I pointed out was that (as my union reps told me) was that your MEC went behind our backs and negotiated with the company. Specifically to cut us out. I take offense to that. Agreed though our previous management sucked and almost sunk the company. Whatever happens as the process unfolds, we'll just have to live with it.
Did your source have an alternative agenda or is he biased? No one is negotiating anything behind anyone's back. ASA guys have been in all smartpref negotiations.
And I'd like to add that we all would love to have all of the good things in your contract, but that isn't going to happen. I am also not willing to give up my QOL so we can have them as well. The notion that you guys can have some things better then us and us you, defeats the purpose of a combined contract in the first place.
I would love for all of us to have them. But if you are right that it's not possible, then why should we take concessions when you just stated on this post that you are unwilling (rightfully so) to concede as well?! Dual tracks takes care of that issue. You have your system and we try out ours. If it sucks as bad as you say it does, we will be on your system.
Nope, still scheduled to shut down 12/31/17.
11-24-2014 | 04:59 PM
#8162
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
From: CRJ
So then Nevets, explain to me why we should even combine if we are going to have basically two contracts on the same piece of paper ? Why not stay separate forever then? Most of the guys here voted no because of the two separate rules; among lots of other things. If it failed before, why try the same thing again? It doesn't make sense.
Last edited by PeezDog; 11-24-2014 at 05:02 PM. Reason: spelling
11-24-2014 | 05:26 PM
#8163
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
From: CRJ
For you Nevets,
The ASA MEC (Master Executive Council) and the XJT MEC convened a joint meeting this week to discuss open issues with the JCBA (Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement), as well as how to move forward in a manner that represents the best interests of both groups. On Wednesday, the Company presented the joint MECs a financial briefing and reiterated their desire to move negotiations as quickly as possible. During this presentation, the financial situation of the Company was described by the Company as being a direct result of many factors, such as not achieving many of the combined efficiencies within labor groups, the extreme weather impact in comparison to previous years, missed completion and on-time performance incentives, and challenges with various reimbursement rates from major partners to cover rising costs associated with network and regulatory change requirements. It was candidly observed by the ASA MEC that the majority of the factors listed by the Company as contributing to the poor financial and operational performance were directly attributable to the decision to acquire XJT Airlines. At the conclusion of the briefing, the meeting was adjourned to allow both groups to separate and discuss amongst themselves the information that was presented.
On Thursday morning, the joint meeting resumed with the voting members discussing numerous ideas, viewpoints and concerns important to both groups. At times the meeting contained very candid discussions with spirited interaction.
A majority of the conversation centered on PBS (Preferential Bidding Systems) and the discrepancies between the two vendors being discussed for the combined pilot group to use in the JCBA. The ASA representatives made every attempt to educate and inform the XJT representatives of the known pitfalls associated with the globalized PBS system known as SmartPref currently being advocated for by some members of the XJT MEC. Furthermore, the ASA representatives strived to show the XJT representatives the whipsaw that is being created by actively negotiating an unproven system and the attendant waste of negotiating capital and efforts.
During these discussions, the XJT representatives were queried as to why neither the ASA CNC (Contract Negotiating Committee) nor the ASA PWG (PBS Working Group) were consulted before XJT committee members approached the Company to negotiate for SmartPref outside of the JCBA, an action specifically prohibited by the TPA (Transition and Process Agreement). It became clear that it was an incorrect understanding of their representatives that the ASA CNC was made aware of this meeting. No explanation was provided to the ASA MEC as to why some XJT MEC and committee members engaged in a course of action that was clearly detrimental to the ASA pilot group as well as to the overall goal of negotiating a JCBA.
At one point, the officers of both groups met in caucus with the JNC (Joint Negotiating Committee) and ALPA National staff members. Unfortunately, this meeting started with a disappointing tone, as the XJT Officers expressed disbelief in the financial briefing and communicated a refusal to even partially acknowledge the Company’s current financial condition. Equally disturbing in the context of a JCBA, the XJT MEC appears to still operate under the impression that having two separate pilot labor agreements is acceptable to the pilots and the company. This behavior threatens the livelihood and wellbeing of every pilot at XJT, whether they fly a CRJ or an ERJ.
The next joint meeting of the ASA and XJT MECs has been tentatively scheduled for August 11th, to be held in Atlanta. The ASA representatives were very appreciative of the XJT representatives’ candor but still remain cautious moving forward.
The ASA MEC (Master Executive Council) and the XJT MEC convened a joint meeting this week to discuss open issues with the JCBA (Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement), as well as how to move forward in a manner that represents the best interests of both groups. On Wednesday, the Company presented the joint MECs a financial briefing and reiterated their desire to move negotiations as quickly as possible. During this presentation, the financial situation of the Company was described by the Company as being a direct result of many factors, such as not achieving many of the combined efficiencies within labor groups, the extreme weather impact in comparison to previous years, missed completion and on-time performance incentives, and challenges with various reimbursement rates from major partners to cover rising costs associated with network and regulatory change requirements. It was candidly observed by the ASA MEC that the majority of the factors listed by the Company as contributing to the poor financial and operational performance were directly attributable to the decision to acquire XJT Airlines. At the conclusion of the briefing, the meeting was adjourned to allow both groups to separate and discuss amongst themselves the information that was presented.
On Thursday morning, the joint meeting resumed with the voting members discussing numerous ideas, viewpoints and concerns important to both groups. At times the meeting contained very candid discussions with spirited interaction.
A majority of the conversation centered on PBS (Preferential Bidding Systems) and the discrepancies between the two vendors being discussed for the combined pilot group to use in the JCBA. The ASA representatives made every attempt to educate and inform the XJT representatives of the known pitfalls associated with the globalized PBS system known as SmartPref currently being advocated for by some members of the XJT MEC. Furthermore, the ASA representatives strived to show the XJT representatives the whipsaw that is being created by actively negotiating an unproven system and the attendant waste of negotiating capital and efforts.
During these discussions, the XJT representatives were queried as to why neither the ASA CNC (Contract Negotiating Committee) nor the ASA PWG (PBS Working Group) were consulted before XJT committee members approached the Company to negotiate for SmartPref outside of the JCBA, an action specifically prohibited by the TPA (Transition and Process Agreement). It became clear that it was an incorrect understanding of their representatives that the ASA CNC was made aware of this meeting. No explanation was provided to the ASA MEC as to why some XJT MEC and committee members engaged in a course of action that was clearly detrimental to the ASA pilot group as well as to the overall goal of negotiating a JCBA.
At one point, the officers of both groups met in caucus with the JNC (Joint Negotiating Committee) and ALPA National staff members. Unfortunately, this meeting started with a disappointing tone, as the XJT Officers expressed disbelief in the financial briefing and communicated a refusal to even partially acknowledge the Company’s current financial condition. Equally disturbing in the context of a JCBA, the XJT MEC appears to still operate under the impression that having two separate pilot labor agreements is acceptable to the pilots and the company. This behavior threatens the livelihood and wellbeing of every pilot at XJT, whether they fly a CRJ or an ERJ.
The next joint meeting of the ASA and XJT MECs has been tentatively scheduled for August 11th, to be held in Atlanta. The ASA representatives were very appreciative of the XJT representatives’ candor but still remain cautious moving forward.
11-24-2014 | 06:19 PM
#8164
Banned
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,934
Likes: 0
From: EMB 145 CPT
What's the Latest at ASA/Expressjet?
So then Nevets, explain to me why we should even combine if we are going to have basically two contracts on the same piece of paper ? Why not stay separate forever then? Most of the guys here voted no because of the two separate rules; among lots of other things. If it failed before, why try the same thing again? It doesn't make sense.
I must not be making myself clear. I want you guys to have our better contract as I want to have what's better in your contract. If we can have that and dual tracks in order to have a JCBA, I think that would be good for us and the company as far as being able to finally complete the merger. Otherwise we will continue to be separate. I'm ok with that of its the only way from staging away from concessions. But if we can have a complete merger despite the PBS process agreement being part of the JCBA, than that's a good thing. If you rather stay separate just because you don't want the PBS process agreement, then I guess that's what we will do.
So what's the problem?
For you Nevets,
The ASA MEC (Master Executive Council) and the XJT MEC convened a joint meeting this week to discuss open issues with the JCBA (Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement), as well as how to move forward in a manner that represents the best interests of both groups. On Wednesday, the Company presented the joint MECs a financial briefing and reiterated their desire to move negotiations as quickly as possible. During this presentation, the financial situation of the Company was described by the Company as being a direct result of many factors, such as not achieving many of the combined efficiencies within labor groups, the extreme weather impact in comparison to previous years, missed completion and on-time performance incentives, and challenges with various reimbursement rates from major partners to cover rising costs associated with network and regulatory change requirements. It was candidly observed by the ASA MEC that the majority of the factors listed by the Company as contributing to the poor financial and operational performance were directly attributable to the decision to acquire XJT Airlines. At the conclusion of the briefing, the meeting was adjourned to allow both groups to separate and discuss amongst themselves the information that was presented.
On Thursday morning, the joint meeting resumed with the voting members discussing numerous ideas, viewpoints and concerns important to both groups. At times the meeting contained very candid discussions with spirited interaction.
A majority of the conversation centered on PBS (Preferential Bidding Systems) and the discrepancies between the two vendors being discussed for the combined pilot group to use in the JCBA. The ASA representatives made every attempt to educate and inform the XJT representatives of the known pitfalls associated with the globalized PBS system known as SmartPref currently being advocated for by some members of the XJT MEC. Furthermore, the ASA representatives strived to show the XJT representatives the whipsaw that is being created by actively negotiating an unproven system and the attendant waste of negotiating capital and efforts.
During these discussions, the XJT representatives were queried as to why neither the ASA CNC (Contract Negotiating Committee) nor the ASA PWG (PBS Working Group) were consulted before XJT committee members approached the Company to negotiate for SmartPref outside of the JCBA, an action specifically prohibited by the TPA (Transition and Process Agreement). It became clear that it was an incorrect understanding of their representatives that the ASA CNC was made aware of this meeting. No explanation was provided to the ASA MEC as to why some XJT MEC and committee members engaged in a course of action that was clearly detrimental to the ASA pilot group as well as to the overall goal of negotiating a JCBA.
At one point, the officers of both groups met in caucus with the JNC (Joint Negotiating Committee) and ALPA National staff members. Unfortunately, this meeting started with a disappointing tone, as the XJT Officers expressed disbelief in the financial briefing and communicated a refusal to even partially acknowledge the Company’s current financial condition. Equally disturbing in the context of a JCBA, the XJT MEC appears to still operate under the impression that having two separate pilot labor agreements is acceptable to the pilots and the company. This behavior threatens the livelihood and wellbeing of every pilot at XJT, whether they fly a CRJ or an ERJ.
The next joint meeting of the ASA and XJT MECs has been tentatively scheduled for August 11th, to be held in Atlanta. The ASA representatives were very appreciative of the XJT representatives’ candor but still remain cautious moving forward.
The ASA MEC (Master Executive Council) and the XJT MEC convened a joint meeting this week to discuss open issues with the JCBA (Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement), as well as how to move forward in a manner that represents the best interests of both groups. On Wednesday, the Company presented the joint MECs a financial briefing and reiterated their desire to move negotiations as quickly as possible. During this presentation, the financial situation of the Company was described by the Company as being a direct result of many factors, such as not achieving many of the combined efficiencies within labor groups, the extreme weather impact in comparison to previous years, missed completion and on-time performance incentives, and challenges with various reimbursement rates from major partners to cover rising costs associated with network and regulatory change requirements. It was candidly observed by the ASA MEC that the majority of the factors listed by the Company as contributing to the poor financial and operational performance were directly attributable to the decision to acquire XJT Airlines. At the conclusion of the briefing, the meeting was adjourned to allow both groups to separate and discuss amongst themselves the information that was presented.
On Thursday morning, the joint meeting resumed with the voting members discussing numerous ideas, viewpoints and concerns important to both groups. At times the meeting contained very candid discussions with spirited interaction.
A majority of the conversation centered on PBS (Preferential Bidding Systems) and the discrepancies between the two vendors being discussed for the combined pilot group to use in the JCBA. The ASA representatives made every attempt to educate and inform the XJT representatives of the known pitfalls associated with the globalized PBS system known as SmartPref currently being advocated for by some members of the XJT MEC. Furthermore, the ASA representatives strived to show the XJT representatives the whipsaw that is being created by actively negotiating an unproven system and the attendant waste of negotiating capital and efforts.
During these discussions, the XJT representatives were queried as to why neither the ASA CNC (Contract Negotiating Committee) nor the ASA PWG (PBS Working Group) were consulted before XJT committee members approached the Company to negotiate for SmartPref outside of the JCBA, an action specifically prohibited by the TPA (Transition and Process Agreement). It became clear that it was an incorrect understanding of their representatives that the ASA CNC was made aware of this meeting. No explanation was provided to the ASA MEC as to why some XJT MEC and committee members engaged in a course of action that was clearly detrimental to the ASA pilot group as well as to the overall goal of negotiating a JCBA.
At one point, the officers of both groups met in caucus with the JNC (Joint Negotiating Committee) and ALPA National staff members. Unfortunately, this meeting started with a disappointing tone, as the XJT Officers expressed disbelief in the financial briefing and communicated a refusal to even partially acknowledge the Company’s current financial condition. Equally disturbing in the context of a JCBA, the XJT MEC appears to still operate under the impression that having two separate pilot labor agreements is acceptable to the pilots and the company. This behavior threatens the livelihood and wellbeing of every pilot at XJT, whether they fly a CRJ or an ERJ.
The next joint meeting of the ASA and XJT MECs has been tentatively scheduled for August 11th, to be held in Atlanta. The ASA representatives were very appreciative of the XJT representatives’ candor but still remain cautious moving forward.
Isn't this an old email?
Anyway, this is making my point. Other than the cost of running two separate airlines and thus not being able to attain those synergy savings, none of the other factors have anything to do with LXJT, despite how candidly the perceived observations the CRJ MEC concluded. You are making my point. Do you want to hold up the synergy savings of a completely merger on the PBS process agreement or do we want to get all of us the best of both contracts while he erj side tries smartpref out? After all, if it's as bad as you guys say it is, then that issue will solve itself.
Keep doing what you guys think it's best. I'm ok with it. In then end, the process will works its way through one way or the other. So why keep beating this dead horse?
11-24-2014 | 07:22 PM
#8165
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
From: CRJ
Wow Nevets, I'm am speechless and out of patience trying to explain this to you. Now I know how our union guys feel working with you guys. I keep telling you what my objections are to your idea, then you repeat yourself and ask me what's the problem. You're nuts man
11-25-2014 | 05:50 AM
#8166
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,044
Likes: 2
Yeah, 100% integration would be great, but if that is not feasible, is 80% better than 0%?
11-25-2014 | 05:51 AM
#8167
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 5
From: 737 Left
Nevets,
I believe the reason most of us keep "beating this dead horse" is because we want to pas a reasonable contract that is better for us now, as well as those coming after us. Anything that supports a continued lack of unity, such as separate PBS, is not better for us. Also, we don't want Management to agree to an unrealistic contract now as the beginning point for a bankruptcy filing, which will end up worse for everybody. Also, eliminating certain things in the current contracts and gaining other things in a unified contract is not concession, it is compromise through negotiation. Regardless of the changes if the vast majority of pilots are better compensated and have a better quality of life after the signing of any new contract it isn't concession; it's compromise. Most people here, according to my interpretation of their responses, don't believe you are open to compromise, which is why your argument breaks down. We are not going to get everything good in both existing contracts, so let's figure out the most important things and stand firm there, then make everything else as good as we can get it for now.
I believe the reason most of us keep "beating this dead horse" is because we want to pas a reasonable contract that is better for us now, as well as those coming after us. Anything that supports a continued lack of unity, such as separate PBS, is not better for us. Also, we don't want Management to agree to an unrealistic contract now as the beginning point for a bankruptcy filing, which will end up worse for everybody. Also, eliminating certain things in the current contracts and gaining other things in a unified contract is not concession, it is compromise through negotiation. Regardless of the changes if the vast majority of pilots are better compensated and have a better quality of life after the signing of any new contract it isn't concession; it's compromise. Most people here, according to my interpretation of their responses, don't believe you are open to compromise, which is why your argument breaks down. We are not going to get everything good in both existing contracts, so let's figure out the most important things and stand firm there, then make everything else as good as we can get it for now.
11-25-2014 | 06:30 AM
#8168
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
From: CRJ
Thank you ATL. That is exactly the issue. You have done a much better job of articulating what I've been trying to say
11-25-2014 | 06:40 AM
#8169
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: Left Seat
Nevets,
I believe the reason most of us keep "beating this dead horse" is because we want to pas a reasonable contract that is better for us now, as well as those coming after us. Anything that supports a continued lack of unity, such as separate PBS, is not better for us. Also, we don't want Management to agree to an unrealistic contract now as the beginning point for a bankruptcy filing, which will end up worse for everybody. Also, eliminating certain things in the current contracts and gaining other things in a unified contract is not concession, it is compromise through negotiation. Regardless of the changes if the vast majority of pilots are better compensated and have a better quality of life after the signing of any new contract it isn't concession; it's compromise. Most people here, according to my interpretation of their responses, don't believe you are open to compromise, which is why your argument breaks down. We are not going to get everything good in both existing contracts, so let's figure out the most important things and stand firm there, then make everything else as good as we can get it for now.
I believe the reason most of us keep "beating this dead horse" is because we want to pas a reasonable contract that is better for us now, as well as those coming after us. Anything that supports a continued lack of unity, such as separate PBS, is not better for us. Also, we don't want Management to agree to an unrealistic contract now as the beginning point for a bankruptcy filing, which will end up worse for everybody. Also, eliminating certain things in the current contracts and gaining other things in a unified contract is not concession, it is compromise through negotiation. Regardless of the changes if the vast majority of pilots are better compensated and have a better quality of life after the signing of any new contract it isn't concession; it's compromise. Most people here, according to my interpretation of their responses, don't believe you are open to compromise, which is why your argument breaks down. We are not going to get everything good in both existing contracts, so let's figure out the most important things and stand firm there, then make everything else as good as we can get it for now.
AnchorDown
11-25-2014 | 09:38 AM
#8170
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
From: Back in right seat
So then Nevets, explain to me why we should even combine if we are going to have basically two contracts on the same piece of paper ? Why not stay separate forever then? Most of the guys here voted no because of the two separate rules; among lots of other things. If it failed before, why try the same thing again? It doesn't make sense.
The well has been so poisoned by now that the ERJ side will never accept any loss of retirement, LTD coverage etc to "help out" the ASA side to improve the overall contract like the TA proposed.
Attrition is so high that hiring and upgrades are starting up again. It's time to agree to disagree and move on, otherwise we stay as we are, I think most ERJ guys are comfortable with that.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
