ClearLeft
I agree that 20 days in a row is a bit much, but it has been a precondition of understanding that was well stated when we interviewed for the job. If we weren't willing to accept it at the time of interview we were free to not accept the job. Everyone working at SA accepted the 20 day rule by accepting the job. Not saying we don't want to change it though. My understanding of the SACG Contract is, that it is renegotiable after five years and that would be the time to introduce the changes. I'll admit I haven't read it close enough to know all the provisions for making amendments prior to the five year point, but I would guess with the merger there might be a window of opportunity for amending. Your right about your last statement referring to pressure and a "reasonable management team." Wish we had one of those here at SAI. Sadly that part of the equation is missing. Of course the term 'reasonable' is a very subjective one, but I know what you mean.

 

I hope you are correct on the "window" and I am afraid you are correct on the "reasonable" part, only time will tell.

 

As someone earlier stated, slinging mud on this forum will do nothing but create animosity. It is agreed the there are problems at SAH. The initial agreement is weak at best. It has to be understood that there really was no SACG when it was negotiated. It was still a very small airline. The Neffs' were in a position to say if you don't like it there is the door. I think things are a bit different now. Nobody gets a top notch contract the first time around. Lets hope there is a window of opportunity. If so then we need to strike while the iron is hot. The SACG combined with C360 have a great opportunity to make this a great place to be. We just have to be realistic about it. It won't happen over night.
Cheers

 

Wonder what the Neffs are thinking about 10 no shows in the last class? Wonder if they even care?

 

When I was at SAH, I had no problem being gone 20 days. The problem was I WAS NEVER GONE JUST 20 DAYS. The always took at least 3-4 of my days off away. I couldnt get off of Transition Lines, so very often the 20 from this month worked right in to the 20 for next month. Then on top of that they would take some of your days off away at the end... I NEVER NEVER, NEVER signed on for 45 days in a row. Dont even get me started on the fact they dont have duty limits. I dont even bring it up because no one believes me that they dont have them.

The guys that work in the SACG work very, very hard. I flew with several of them and they spent almost all of there free time answering emails and calls while on the road. They have done alot in a little time and I have alot of respect for them. They will eventualy have a good life there but it will take years.

 

I don't think they care about the 10 no shows. As long as all the flights are being covered it is of no concern. The 10 that didn't show this time will be replaced next time. As far as being gone 40 days, I have been here a year and it has never happened. The most is 23 days for OE. They have delt with the carry over lines in the last few months. Now, depending on your bid you can choose to drop a trip on the end or begining of a trip. It is not perfect but it is a start.

 

According to Tom Gilles, the employment offers for the Cargo 360 guys is being held up by the lawyers until issues with the SACG get worked out.

Can anyone in the SACG shed some light on this?

 

I am part of the SACG but I guess I am not on the cool kids list. I have no idea what the hold up is unless what the C360 guys are asking for is not acceptable to the SACG. This is not a shot because I have no idea what C360 wants in the merger. I have not seen anything put up for vote or been shown any info regarding the integration. It very well could be management playing a game. Who knows.

 

The letter has nothing to do with the "merger" because it is not a "merger". The letter is spelling out what C360 pilots and F/E's will receive if they accept a conditional offer of employment with SA. This is not nor has it ever been a merger. Conditional offers of employment typically come from the acquiring company not from the acquired company. The offer does not mean you have the job, it is conditional and the conditions of the offer have to be complied with.

 

They way I understood this deal was that Oak Hill acquired the majority share of SAI, not C360. Now we are owned by Oak Hill and partially the Neffs just like C360 under the banner of Southern Air Holdings. Is that not the case? Is that what you are waiting for, the offer of employment from SAH? No need to get heated man, I am not your enemy. I am mearly a working smuck.