Originally Posted by buddies8 (Post 1732624)

You can have the E140's good luck with the E175's. Personally I don't see both together in PDT future. Also envoy contract does not expire it is up for renegotiations in 6 years, an amendment round in two years.

Originally Posted by billyho (Post 1732648)

Fellow Envoy Pilots:
Recently, ALPA pilots at Piedmont Airlines ratified a new agreement with 77 percent of the pilots voting in favor. Their new agreement is similar to the deal ratified by the PSA pilots last year and includes the cost structure the company demanded from us in return for aircraft and flow through to AA.
A video was released by ALPA National last week that drives home the message that the industry has a “pay shortage, not a pilot shortage”. You can view it here, and I encourage us all to watch it. The MEC believes it does not make sense to advocate and support an agreement that validates poor compensation by locking in an agreement for 10 years with no method of improving it.
What does this mean for us? AAG has indicated that PDT’s new agreement provides another avenue to operate the EMB 175s within the wholly owned family at a lower compensation model. We fully expect an announcement that AAG will commit those 175’s to Piedmont. Coupled with the announced movement of our CRJs to PSA, it’s easy to form a clear picture of AAG’s plans for our carrier. We haven’t been notified of displacements or downgrades as of yet, but we will advise you when we have.
This is a very stressful time for our group. Please maintain the level of professionalism we are known for as we transition to this new reality.
Fly Safe.
Bill Sprague
MEC Chairman

Originally Posted by Lvlng4Spd (Post 1732679)

The announcement is forthcoming...no one is throwing a party so relax. The jets arriving just mean the less attractive parts of our agreement will take effect. We would rather just flow, and you all can have a steel cage death match over the planes. This is business, however, and unfortunately we are just a more reasonable deal. We were able to compromise, Envoy was not. It is what it is...

Originally Posted by SenecaII (Post 1732688)

YYou bash RAH because our rates are the lowest right now, but they are 2007 50 seat rates, and we had a real chance to fix them till you came along and set the rate for everyone. YOU SOLD others out FOR YOUR FLOW AGREEMENT. That is why everyone is ticked off right know.
IT IS WHAT IT IS" as an excuse doesn't cut it.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by SenecaII (Post 1732688)

You guys just don't get it do you. You think the rest of us want to fight for the jets? WE ARE FIGHTING FOR FAIR WAGES TO FLY THOSE JETS......
You guys cut us off at the knees because the jet rates you set ( while an increase for you) are lower that what they should be, this was the only time in history we had a real chance of getting them back inline where they should be. YOU GUYS AGREED TO RATES FOR THE 175 that are less than what Envoy and Republic voted NO on. You bash RAH because our rates are the lowest right now, but they are 2007 50 seat rates, and we had a real chance to fix them till you came along and set the rate for everyone. YOU SOLD others out FOR YOUR FLOW AGREEMENT. That is why everyone is ticked off right know.
IT IS WHAT IT IS" as an excuse doesn't cut it.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by BSOuthisplace (Post 1732719)

We voted to keep our jobs. Simple as that. You might disagree. Honestly I don't really care what you think unless you are a fellow Piedmont pilot.

Originally Posted by Lvlng4Spd (Post 1732716)

Second, I don't care what your rates are, if I think tHe rates are fair,

then it's my right to agree and I do.

Originally Posted by SenecaII (Post 1732737)

So you believe the lowest rates offered for 175 flying are acceptable. Got it!



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk