|
All of your arguments above are excellent. I see everyone’s side but Bla Bla Bla has it right. We need representation now before we have a complete Mgmnt overhaul and they do a complete overhaul on our pay and QOL to impress the share holders and gain themselves huge bonuses (at our expense). Will things get better, I'm not expecting them to, but I do want legal representation to stop Mgmnt from changing both pay and QOL policies when flying is lost.
It will be a sad day when the hesitation of others catches up with us. |
Originally Posted by stickwiggler
(Post 180431)
I can't believe that not one of you guys (who all seem to be Skywest pilots) have not even mention, dare I say thought of the moral implication. Some Skywest pilots have said "the threat of a union is better than a union", now I realize that is not the feelings of everyone of you guys/gals, but it would appear to be in this string.
THE THREAT OF A UNION IS NOT FREE!!!!! Someone is paying for that threat. Someone is paying dues to form negotiating committees that push for years for a better contract. When the Comair guys went on strike, they made it better for all of us. When JA came to ASA and said we had to take a 13% pay cut, we held our ground and now Skywest gets an over ride for 70 seat flying. Every time JA has thrown you guys a bone, it is not out of the kindness of his heart, but rather keeping up with what other pilot groups have fought for. The Unions bring up the bar for all airlines. I wish I worked in an industry that unions were not necessary, but I don't. Look at the ridiculous pay outs the exec's are taking at United and Northwest. I hope if you get the chance you will read "Flying the Line" and at least when you vote, you can do so from a position of knowledge. I'm not looking to debate you guys, but rather hope that this thought of who is paying for your threat will at least be considered as you turn in your cards. Stick CR7 Cap, ASA |
Originally Posted by rjboy
(Post 180509)
With all the posts about union carriers bringing up wages at Skywest I think it is noteworthy that over the past 5 or so years it has been Skywest pilots (among others) that have held the line. While some ALPA pilot groups have taken pay cuts to obtain additional flying Skywest pilots voted down a pay package and held out for a split of 200/700 rates. I am not knocking any other pilot group. My point is simply that Skywest does not simply follow along and match the pay scales of other carriers. We have been the best or among the best compensated regional pilots for a long time and I am certain that ALPA has used the Skywest pay scales as a part of negotiations at other carriers.
You also must have forgotten about your Brasilla coworkers, who didn't get a penny raise in your latest, greatest, 1% raise for RJ pilots only pay package. Did you ever stop to think that might be a reason some ALPA groups have had to take concessions - to remain cost competitive with Skywest whose pilots were willing to fly larger aircraft for the same pay? |
You're right. I was hired shortly after the original 50/70 deal, but I don't think that deal happened because SKW didn't have a union. If the guys there at the time didn't take that pay some other ALPA carrier would have. Those rates were a fact of life in the short term, post 9/11. And again to be clear. I am not defending mgmt. I just feel that with a union it is like having two mgmt groups. Both are being funded by our (all employees, not just pilots) work. I don't think ALPA can get us 2% better than what we have right now. Look at ASA. I made friends with some of their guys when they still had SLC. Their MEC was promising them that they wouldn't let the base close. Then they were promising that they would get a new contract and retro pay. One of them finally gave up and is a recent hire of SKW after 5 years at ASA. It is disgusting the way ASA pilot have been treated and who knows they may get some great contract. If they do I will admit that I was wrong. What I see happening right now is them losing flying and losing good pilots because most who I have talked to hate being there. I come to work at SKW and most people are happy here. How can ALPA promise that we will be better off with them when we see our peers at ASA being treated worse than we are treated?
|
......................................?
|
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
(Post 180929)
You must not have been around for that whole "70 seats for 50 seat pay" ordeal.
You also must have forgotten about your Brasilla coworkers, who didn't get a penny raise in your latest, greatest, 1% raise for RJ pilots only pay package. Did you ever stop to think that might be a reason some ALPA groups have had to take concessions - to remain cost competitive with Skywest whose pilots were willing to fly larger aircraft for the same pay? You said “Skywest pilots were willing to fly larger aircraft for the same pay.” No! We didn’t/don't have representation so we we’re “FORCED!" BTW, I was a Bro pilot when we voted on our BS pay proposal and I voted NO! I wanted more. Our total pay/QOL package (even before the BS new pay policy) was & still is well above 90+% of the industry. You can argue a $1 here or there on our hourly rates but at the end of the year our W2's place us right up there with the #1. So, it's not our pay that caused some ALPA groups to take concessions, it was $hity Mgmnt and bankruptcies on their (not meaning pilots) part. Don't put this on us, ignorance like that really Pi$$ me off! :confused: |
Originally Posted by JetJock16
(Post 180940)
Easy Boiler! Our total pay/QOL package (even before the BS new pay policy) was & still is well above 90+% of the industry. You can argue a $1 here or there on our hourly rates but at the end of the year our W2's place us right up there with the #1. So, it's not our pay that caused some ALPA groups to take concessions, it was $hity Mgmnt and bankruptcies on their (not meaning pilots) part. Don't put this on us, ignorance like that really Pi$$ me off!
While there might be parity in the payrates and/or W2s *now*, Comair and ASA's crew costs simply were not competitive for the 700 when Skywest was flying them for 200 payrates. Nor was AWAC competitive for UAX flying when Skywest pilots were flying 700s for less than AWAC pilots were flying 200s for. You are right, those common payrates were dictated to Skywest pilots due by management...but there seemingly was no massive outcry from Skywest pilots counter to it, and you cannot deny the effect it had on other airlines' bargaining power. Please don't mistake what I'm saying....I am not blaming the ills of the regional industry on Skywest or Skywest pilots, nor am I blaming concessions at ALPA carriers on them/ I am not so ignorant as to believe that a buck on an hourly rate would be the only reason a carrier might gain or lose flying. I also know full well that Skywest pilots beyond their first year make equal or possibly even more than what I do, given slightly better workrules and profit sharing. That said, it would be highly naive for one to think that flying 70 seats for 50 seat wages did not put major crew cost pressures on the competition, and that those crew cost pressures (along with others) did not contribute to concessionary bargaining at other regional carriers to remain financially competitive. |
Jetjok I think you and I are much closer to being in complete agreement about the 50/70 situation than you and your coworker rjboy are.
|
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
(Post 180952)
Nor was AWAC competitive for UAX flying when Skywest pilots were flying 700s for less than AWAC pilots were flying 200s for.
Don't forget that we were "FORCED to fly 70 at 50 rates!" Things change, although I'm not satisfied with it, we're no longer doing that. |
ok relax everyone. the new sapa president was elected by the pilots who voted for him. What a lot of people didnt know at the time was he is a strong alpa supporter, which was great news for the alpa organizing committee. the previous sapa president from what i understand was a total company man. so this was a welcome change. If anyone feels cheated by this, YOU voted for him. and I think this will bring good results.
Does anyone else see something wrong with SAPA members being paid by SKW... talk about conflict of interest! A union is only as strong as the pilots who support it and are actively participating. If you have a bunch of jerkoffs serving as reps, of course youll get nothing out of it, but Skywests OC is a group of extremely level headed pilots. They want to start off with taking POLICY, and turning it into a CONTRACT. Is that too much to ask? The pro-sapa or anti union guys at skywest need to understand what the organizing committee wants. Theyre not going in guns blazing trying to flip everything upside down. This wont creat hostility with management. If you can firm up a contract in good graces this will actually be a great move for SKW's future. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:05 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands