![]() |
Originally Posted by Hou757
(Post 1784917)
Well... If people would look at and compare contracts they would see the difference. Not going to sit here and post all the reasons. It's been covered pretty well... Besides PSA has done nothing but bring this industry down by voting in the contract they did.
Could you post a side by side comparison of each contract? Do you have any idea what is actually in PSA's, or TSA's contract and what makes them so "bad" or are you just following the internet herd in chastising us? PSA pilots have industry leading QoL due to schedule flexibility, as well as comparable pay to the "good" regionals. I fail to see how that "brings the industry down." |
Originally Posted by Hou757
(Post 1784917)
Well... If people would look at and compare contracts they would see the difference. Not going to sit here and post all the reasons. It's been covered pretty well... Besides PSA has done nothing but bring this industry down by voting in the contract they did.
Covered pretty well? I've read a lot of PSA bashing on here for the last year or so, but I have not once seen someone actually post ONE fact that shows PSA's contract below industry average. Even if the upgrades stop and I top out at 4 year FO pay, it will still be above average for a regional. I think it's easy to pick on PSA but I doubt you know the specifics of the contract. I may be new to the 121 world but I've been reading these boards pretty religiously for the last 3 years and that's why I chose to come to PSA regardless of "how bad" others think the contract is. The growth at PSA played a role in my decision to come here also, but the fact is that even if the music stops and upgrade goes to 5 years there is really only 2 other regionals I would give the time of day. Any airline you go to is a gamble, but it's wise to take the facts given and give yourself the best chance of moving up. Maybe PSA doesn't work out the way everybody thinks, but right now the facts are in my favor. |
It's not that your contract is below average, but maybe below what the Envoy guys would like their to be.. so they voted no twice and now they have an even lesser last deal on the table. The 12 year rates proposed for PDT, compress into less years the same max rates that existed for 18 years on the older contract. Better pay sooner, if actually stop to look at it.
Then there's the resentment that some may have accepted airplanes stolen from them.. somebody's gotta do it. They are having challenges staffing up, other aren't. |
Originally Posted by Frick
(Post 1784951)
I have not once seen someone actually post ONE fact that shows PSA's contract below industry average.
|
Originally Posted by Maingear
(Post 1784962)
That's not the issue. The issue is that PSA took concessions on an already good contract in order to secure new flying. It sets a new standard that in order to get more flying, pilots should be willing to take concessions. Where does it end? At what point has it gone too far? The reason why Eagle is in their corner is directly because of PSA. If PSA didn't set the precedence, then Eagle would not be having to take concessions to stay alive. You are directly responsible for Eagle, PDT, and who knows who else in the future having a diminished QoL and smaller paychecks.
|
If PSA would have voted no Envoy's situation would be the same. AMR now AAG was trying to sell or spinoff American Eagle 3 years ago. They've been trying to get rid of Eagle and this is their way of doing it. If PSA would have voted no Envoy's CRJs would STILL be leaving. Maybe not to PSA, but they would be going to someone else none the less. And the ERJs would still be going to trans states and express jet. PSA's vote did not change the future of Envoy. It might have changed where Envoy's planes are going, but it did not change the fate of Envoy.
|
Originally Posted by Frick
(Post 1784973)
If PSA would have voted no Envoy's situation would be the same. AMR now AAG was trying to sell or spinoff American Eagle 3 years ago. They've been trying to get rid of Eagle and this is their way of doing it. If PSA would have voted no Envoy's CRJs would STILL be leaving. Maybe not to PSA, but they would be going to someone else none the less. And the ERJs would still be going to trans states and express jet. PSA's vote did not change the future of Envoy. It might have changed where Envoy's planes are going, but it did not change the fate of Envoy.
|
Go to TSA. The PSA ladies voted in a contract that stabbed the regional industry in the back and are the main reason that guys at Envoy are losing their jobs, families, livelihoods and leaving the industry for good. They're spineless. Go to an airline that doesn't have a pilot group that is shameful. Consider Compass, Skywest or TSA.
|
Originally Posted by CBreezy
(Post 1784429)
I'd go a company that's getting mainline Ejet aircraft. That under the wing jet time is pretty much worth twice E-145/CRJ200 time.
Most mainline airlines want 80k+ lbs MTOW jet experience and the Ejets qualify. Don't waste you time with those little 145/CRJ corporate looking jets unless that's all you can handle. |
Urban legend..
Majors like to see some TPIC, but some are hiring straight F/Os. How's the experience flying a F-16 or A-10 any less valuable than CRJ/ERJ time in a structured CRM environment? It's not, both are getting hired. The bar is going to continue to slide anyway. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:39 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands