JetBlue Selects Airbus A220-300
08-06-2018, 12:24 PM
#231
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
Originally Posted by aldonite7667
26% voted FOR the DR for another year or so. BTW, you voted no, knowing it would pass. Not much nuts needed there, just ego.... all due respect.
08-06-2018, 12:27 PM
#232
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: fifi whisperer
Posts: 1,255
Originally Posted by aldonite7667
26% voted FOR the DR for another year or so. BTW, you voted no, knowing it would pass. Not much nuts needed there, just ego.... all due respect.
Happy we got the language down.
As an aside, I hope we can stop being "yes" and "no" voters and become pro ALPA pilots again. Doesn't matter which way you voted: the CBA is in place. Let's work together to move forward.
08-06-2018, 12:27 PM
#233
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,122
Originally Posted by BeatNavy
Even with no CBA, ALPA protections still would have existed, ALPA merger policy would have been observed in the event of a merger with another ALPA carrier, and no changes to status quo. It wasn’t all doom and gloom if the CBA were voted down, nor was it the DR in most aspects. So your statement is patently false.
08-06-2018, 01:02 PM
#234
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
Originally Posted by aldonite7667
No changes to the status quo? How about the dependability policy? Or profit sharing? Or positive check in? Code shares? What about scope? Your statement is patently incorrect.
PS: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
PCI: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
CS: Codified. Unlimited unless we don’t grow by a block hour or add one pilot. This doesn’t really make anything we are doing any different, nor would it be different if we didn’t vote this in.
Scope: Ok sure it was great to codify...but if it was viable to outsource and downgauge flying they would have done it. But our slot and gate space restrictions, as well as our economic situation, wouldn’t have made it worth it to have a regional fly for us. Hence why we never did. And it want going to happen in the next 6-12 months had this been voted down.
Next?
08-06-2018, 01:33 PM
#236
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Left,Right, Left, Right,Right,Left, Right, Left
Posts: 3,150
Originally Posted by BeatNavy
Even with no CBA, ALPA protections still would have existed, ALPA merger policy would have been observed in the event of a merger with another ALPA carrier, and no changes to status quo. It wasn’t all doom and gloom if the CBA were voted down, nor was it the DR in most aspects. So your statement is patently false.
Alpa merger policy only applies to alpa mergers.
08-06-2018, 01:37 PM
#237
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,122
Originally Posted by BeatNavy
DP: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
PS: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
PCI: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
CS: Codified. Unlimited unless we don’t grow by a block hour or add one pilot. This doesn’t really make anything we are doing any different, nor would it be different if we didn’t vote this in.
Scope: Ok sure it was great to codify...but if it was viable to outsource and downgauge flying they would have done it. But our slot and gate space restrictions, as well as our economic situation, wouldn’t have made it worth it to have a regional fly for us. Hence why we never did. And it want going to happen in the next 6-12 months had this been voted down.
Next?
PS: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
PCI: Codified. Couldn’t get much worse. CBA didn’t help.
CS: Codified. Unlimited unless we don’t grow by a block hour or add one pilot. This doesn’t really make anything we are doing any different, nor would it be different if we didn’t vote this in.
Scope: Ok sure it was great to codify...but if it was viable to outsource and downgauge flying they would have done it. But our slot and gate space restrictions, as well as our economic situation, wouldn’t have made it worth it to have a regional fly for us. Hence why we never did. And it want going to happen in the next 6-12 months had this been voted down.
Next?
08-06-2018, 02:08 PM
#238
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,887
Originally Posted by aldonite7667
Your statement was about changes to the status quo before a CBA. I gave you changes.
And the RJs we're almost painted blue! Just a few more weeks and we would have all been replaced by Skywest and Mesa.
08-06-2018, 05:34 PM
#239
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: CA
Posts: 1,212
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
And the RJs we're almost painted blue! Just a few more weeks and we would have all been replaced by Skywest and Mesa.
"JetBlue and Skywest to join in a partnership. JetBlue and Skywest have entered into an agreement for Skywest to fly up to 20 JetBlue E190 aircraft as JetBlue transitions to an A220 fleet. JB President states that this will allow JB to properly transition to an all Airbus fleet yadda yadda...."
Keep telling us all how it couldn't have happened...
Last edited by Softpayman; 08-06-2018 at 05:54 PM.
08-06-2018, 05:51 PM
#240
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,122
Originally Posted by Softpayman
Announcement
"JetBlue and Skywest to join in a partnership. JetBlue and Skywest have entered into an agreement for Skywest to fly up to 20 JetBlue E190 aircraft as JetBlue transitions to an A220 fleet. JB President states that this will allow JB to properly transition to an all Airbus fleet yadda yadda...."
Keep telling us all how it could't have happened...
"JetBlue and Skywest to join in a partnership. JetBlue and Skywest have entered into an agreement for Skywest to fly up to 20 JetBlue E190 aircraft as JetBlue transitions to an A220 fleet. JB President states that this will allow JB to properly transition to an all Airbus fleet yadda yadda...."
Keep telling us all how it could't have happened...
Again, they had the luxury of voting no, knowing it was going to pass. Not a very bold move.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
