Notices
PSA Airlines Regional Airline

Could flow stop?

Old 07-28-2018, 01:04 PM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,109
Default

Originally Posted by irrelevant View Post
As frustrating as this is for those who are being displaced out of domicile into the left seat, I suspect most of those who are complaining were those who benefited from the $20k-$35k in combined bonuses and longevity step increases, while the top half of the seniority list was ignored.

Increased flow is something that helps everyone, though the more senior one is, the greater the short term impact. Junior manning or street Captain hiring was going to occur, and while I agree something of this nature should have been put forth for a vote by the pilot group, the angst directed towards the senior portion of the pilot group who gained a larger benefit than the junior portion is not warranted, given the huge financial gains only PSA First Officers have made over the last couple of years.

Year one FO was about $24k/year. Year two was about $32k. Now First Officers are earning $50k-$60k in their first year or two, while Captains are still earning sub-par wages.

You can argue that Captain pay and reserve rules would have improved without this agreement, but I don't believe that's a valid argument. The company simply would have began junior manning from the bottom of the list, and hiring street Captains as they have in the past.

Welcome to the airline industry. Welcome to the regionals.
I agree with most of this. It’s very frustrating that the company is senior manning but we had no leverage regardless. Being forced to upgrade was already in the contract that was voted on in 2013 and if I had to guess it was probably in the previous contract as well. I don’t think anybody ever thought it would be an issue (I know I sure I didn’t) so it was never negotiated out.

Being forced was already there. This current MEC had NOTHING to do with it. If they wouldn’t have agreed to senior man upgrades, everyone would still be forced to upgrade regardless. It would just happen 2-3 months later. Like I said, it is frustrating and I don’t agree with some of the things the Union is doing, but to say they gave up leverage is nonsense. We had ZERO leverage. If the contract allows the company to do something regardless if 100% of the pilot is against it....best believe the company is still going to do it anyway. Why pay us more when they don’t have to?
Thedude86 is offline  
Old 07-28-2018, 02:46 PM
  #32  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 287
Default

Originally Posted by Thedude86 View Post
Being forced was already there. This current MEC had NOTHING to do with it. If they wouldn’t have agreed to senior man upgrades, everyone would still be forced to upgrade regardless.
Watch that you don't confuse two different issues...

More than the forced upgrades, people are complaining about being forced out of base and having it considered "voluntary." A forced relocation out of base is an involuntary displacement, and should be compensated as such. That's the difference that hurts the most.

Yes, forced upgrades were in the contract, but the upgrade itself is not the source of most complaining. It's the involuntary displacements from a (hub) base to an outstation base which is considered "voluntary" due to an agreement signed by the MEC. In this, the affected pilots were not given a voice.
FlyingSlowly is offline  
Old 07-28-2018, 02:51 PM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 449
Default

Originally Posted by Thedude86 View Post
I agree with most of this. It’s very frustrating that the company is senior manning but we had no leverage regardless. Being forced to upgrade was already in the contract that was voted on in 2013 and if I had to guess it was probably in the previous contract as well. I don’t think anybody ever thought it would be an issue (I know I sure I didn’t) so it was never negotiated out.

Being forced was already there. This current MEC had NOTHING to do with it. If they wouldn’t have agreed to senior man upgrades, everyone would still be forced to upgrade regardless. It would just happen 2-3 months later. Like I said, it is frustrating and I don’t agree with some of the things the Union is doing, but to say they gave up leverage is nonsense. We had ZERO leverage. If the contract allows the company to do something regardless if 100% of the pilot is against it....best believe the company is still going to do it anyway. Why pay us more when they don’t have to?
The Union didn't agree to do it, Senior maning was their idea. It goes in the face of what the seniority system means. If someone's seniority earns them only 2-3 months before being forced then they've earned those 2-3 months. Also they slipped in the statement that displacements out of base would be voluntary....

So at this point every first officer at PSA would be better off if the Union had done absolutely nothing.

As for the flow increasing that had to increase it in order to account for the growth of the company.
Approach1260 is offline  
Old 07-28-2018, 07:31 PM
  #34  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,109
Default

Originally Posted by Approach1260 View Post
The Union didn't agree to do it, Senior maning was their idea. It goes in the face of what the seniority system means. If someone's seniority earns them only 2-3 months before being forced then they've earned those 2-3 months. Also they slipped in the statement that displacements out of base would be voluntary....

So at this point every first officer at PSA would be better off if the Union had done absolutely nothing.

As for the flow increasing that had to increase it in order to account for the growth of the company.
I totally get that, but my point is that people are claiming we had leverage when we did not. The voluntary displacements is definitely a valid argument, but to think the MEC screwed the pooch and gave away leverage for higher pay is nonsense.
Thedude86 is offline  
Old 07-29-2018, 10:31 AM
  #35  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 425
Default

The company did not have to increase the flow beyond the negotiated 8/month. Those who have been with PSA for more than a year have seen how difficult it is to get the company to use math that anyone else who has graduated first grade understands. They drug their feet with increasing from 4-5, then from 5-6. A nearly immediately effective “no more of your creative interpretations”, along with a 67% increase in flow within two months was a huge win for the pilot group.

I still think these things should be voted on, and I still think that if 1,800 of us have the opportunity to review proposed changes, rather than ten or so of us, there’s a lot better chance someone will be able to identify potential problems with a change. Senior manning “voluntarily” out of domicile is just wrong.

If I were in that position where I was forced “voluntarily” to commute, I’d look very hard at simply leaving and taking the $40k or so in bonuses as a street Captain at Envoy. Years on reserve is years on reserve, and if I had to commute, someone better be paying more than $65/block hour.
irrelevant is offline  
Old 07-29-2018, 04:51 PM
  #36  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 227
Default

Envoy won't let you collect the DEC bonus if you're coming from another WO. Per the recruiter I spoke with.
Jecain7 is offline  
Old 07-30-2018, 06:15 AM
  #37  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 287
Default

Originally Posted by irrelevant View Post
Senior manning “voluntarily” out of domicile is just wrong.
Especially for those that went through the pain of relocating to CLT and even buying a house there! I know someone in that situation. They have every right to be ****ed off.

Originally Posted by irrelevant View Post
Years on reserve is years on reserve, and if I had to commute, someone better be paying more than $65/block hour.
Here is the truth, straight off of Endeavor's website:

Endeavor offers the richest compensation package in the regional industry. From our industry-changing first-year rates, to rates that increase as you grow your career, Endeavor pilots will earn more money faster. No asterisks or fine print.

That last line made me laugh...everything seems to be asterisks and fine print at PSA.
FlyingSlowly is offline  
Old 07-30-2018, 07:10 AM
  #38  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 608
Default

Originally Posted by FlyingSlowly View Post
No asterisks or fine print. [/I]

That last line made me laugh...everything seems to be asterisks and fine print at PSA.
I'm only half joking and being generous when I say our contract is written on Swiss cheese !
JayBee is offline  
Old 07-30-2018, 04:37 PM
  #39  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Posts: 152
Default

Originally Posted by Approach1260 View Post
The Union didn't agree to do it, Senior maning was their idea. It goes in the face of what the seniority system means. If someone's seniority earns them only 2-3 months before being forced then they've earned those 2-3 months. Also they slipped in the statement that displacements out of base would be voluntary....

So at this point every first officer at PSA would be better off if the Union had done absolutely nothing.

As for the flow increasing that had to increase it in order to account for the growth of the company.
Seems like the reason given for senior manning vs junior manning was to avoid negative publicity about more inexperienced pilots becoming captains . . . which the union agreed with.
texinc is offline  
Old 07-30-2018, 05:45 PM
  #40  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 608
Default

Originally Posted by texinc View Post
Seems like the reason given for senior manning vs junior manning was to avoid negative publicity about more inexperienced pilots becoming captains . . . which the union agreed with.
Aaaaaaand they are forcing upgrades on people with 1000 hours and one year on property, that argument doesn't hold water
JayBee is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Skyvector
Envoy Airlines
6894
06-18-2022 11:07 AM
PurdueFlyer
PSA Airlines
173
09-08-2021 08:26 AM
KingAirpilot90
PSA Airlines
1925
06-20-2018 12:38 PM
Skyler02
Regional
9
12-29-2014 02:00 PM
N927EV
Regional
245
03-28-2014 06:29 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices