Real Skywest Questions (Quit the complaining)
01-17-2008, 09:35 AM
#41
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by rickair7777
That stuff is an issue. Vacation accrual is based on credit, not block, so I'm 99% sure that the BHO (which is credit time) triggers vacation accrual.
As for the other stuff which pay at 200 rates, it would tough to implement a fair formula to calculate an appropriate rate...
You could calculate every single pilot's 200 vs 700/900 ratio, and apply that to non-flight duty. But how far back do you go? One month? One Year?
And good luck verifying that...I learned a lesson at mesa. The company managed to make the pay system so complicated that it was virtually impossible to calculate what you SHOULD be getting paid...that made it easier for the company to rip you off. So far the SKW system is pretty simple and I'd like to keep it that way.
I can think of two fair ways to do it...
1) Pay all non-flying duty at the 700/900 rate...of course the company might not consider this fair to them.
2) Develop a blended ratio for non-flight duty that is customized for each domicile, based on the ratio of 200 vs. 700/900 flying at that domicile. The senior guys (who fly more 700/900) would probably not like the idea of junior pilots getting a very tiny advantage here.
As for the other stuff which pay at 200 rates, it would tough to implement a fair formula to calculate an appropriate rate...
You could calculate every single pilot's 200 vs 700/900 ratio, and apply that to non-flight duty. But how far back do you go? One month? One Year?
And good luck verifying that...I learned a lesson at mesa. The company managed to make the pay system so complicated that it was virtually impossible to calculate what you SHOULD be getting paid...that made it easier for the company to rip you off. So far the SKW system is pretty simple and I'd like to keep it that way.
I can think of two fair ways to do it...
1) Pay all non-flying duty at the 700/900 rate...of course the company might not consider this fair to them.
2) Develop a blended ratio for non-flight duty that is customized for each domicile, based on the ratio of 200 vs. 700/900 flying at that domicile. The senior guys (who fly more 700/900) would probably not like the idea of junior pilots getting a very tiny advantage here.
01-17-2008, 10:00 AM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: SkyWest Capt.
Posts: 2,963
Originally Posted by rjboy
I know it is different depending on where you bid and what you bid but holding 2 day back to backs in SLC on the 700/900 the BHO covered an average of 85-90% of my total credit for the month. For someone who holds stand-ups it would be more like 50%. I would bet an average is around 80% coverage. So in essence our 5% BHO is really about a 4% real credit override. Pretty weak when the 900 holds over 50% more people.
I do not agree with the BHO and I was hoping for a change although we got what I expected and the BHO makes for simple calculations.
01-17-2008, 10:58 AM
#45
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by SharkAir
#1. I don't know of anyone who is happy with it. There may still be some yes votes, based on the argument that it's better than nothing, but mine won't be one of them.
#2. I don't know when ALPA can try again. To be honest, sooner rather than later would be fine with me. While I don't know that ALPA's motives are really all that pure, I think it is clear that some sort of collective organization with some legal teeth would be helpful around here. If not ALPA, maybe an in house union, or teamsters, or something would be ok.
#2. I don't know when ALPA can try again. To be honest, sooner rather than later would be fine with me. While I don't know that ALPA's motives are really all that pure, I think it is clear that some sort of collective organization with some legal teeth would be helpful around here. If not ALPA, maybe an in house union, or teamsters, or something would be ok.
Originally Posted by iahflyr
Here is my opinion.
If I were at Skywest for the ALPA vote, I would have voted yes. However, I am not angry that they voted it down. If Skywest turned into a Mesa, Skybus, Jetblue, or other bottom feeder, then I would insist that they have a union. However they are currently one of the top 5 regionals out there. I am more concerned about the attitudes of some of the Skywest pilots. I am not concerned when they talk about how good Skywest is (because it is a quality operation). I am mostly concerned about the people who look at ALPA and say, "oh ya, well look at Mesa." That is total crap. Mesa was in a tough situation with its last contract, and honestly it turned out much better BECAUSE they had ALPA. If they were non-union, JO would have eaten them alive. Don't bash Skywest pilots because they are non-union, just be sure to educate them that a union has many advantages.
Another thing I am concerned about with Skywest is their lack of bargaining power (ie, ability to say no to a pay proposal). I think this pay proposal is fairly bad. To be fair, Skywest was kind of doomed when ASA pilots voted their marginal contract in with a 84% yes vote. If you look at the Skywest pay proposal versus the current ASA rates, they are almost identical.
Exceptions are $22 first year versus $23 at ASA. Otherwise Skywest got the exact same 50 seat rates as ASA (captain and FO) up through year 18. Then Skywest has a few extra dollars for max captain. Skywest also got nearly identical rates for the CRJ-700/900. The exceptions are 2nd year FO is $1 higher at ASA, and years 10-18 captain is $1 higher at ASA. These are ASA rates for the CRJ-700 while these cover the CRJ-700/900 for Skywest. I don't know what ASA's COLA is, but Skywest got a terrible 1% COLA.
Here is my opinion. Send it back for management.
Ask for the same rates as ASA. That means $23 (or more) first year. Also about $1 an hour raise for years 10-18 CRJ-700/900 captains. And $1 for year 2 CRJ-700/900 FO's.
Then ask for a COLA to match inflation of 3%.
To bargain with them, tell them you will give back the pay raises for the 19 and 20 year max captains. Remember, EVERYONE goes through years 1-5 pay, but almost no one goes through years 19 and 20.
Your rates will be the same as ASA. I would call that a marginal contract. See what management says. If they negotiate with you and accept your offer, that is good news. Maybe you don't need ALPA (for now). If they decline your offer, it shows a HUGE reason to vote in ALPA at the next possible instant.
Skywest just aquired all the Skyway flying. That is probably another 10 CRJ's. They need to hire pilots, and this may be a good motivation to raise first year pay. Skywest management does not want to deal with ALPA. I think you have more bargaining power than you guys realize (the threat of ALPA).
Vote NO. See what management says. If they listen to you, that is good. If they don't, then vote in ALPA. It sounds really simple.
Good luck. Now what does everyone else think??
If I were at Skywest for the ALPA vote, I would have voted yes. However, I am not angry that they voted it down. If Skywest turned into a Mesa, Skybus, Jetblue, or other bottom feeder, then I would insist that they have a union. However they are currently one of the top 5 regionals out there. I am more concerned about the attitudes of some of the Skywest pilots. I am not concerned when they talk about how good Skywest is (because it is a quality operation). I am mostly concerned about the people who look at ALPA and say, "oh ya, well look at Mesa." That is total crap. Mesa was in a tough situation with its last contract, and honestly it turned out much better BECAUSE they had ALPA. If they were non-union, JO would have eaten them alive. Don't bash Skywest pilots because they are non-union, just be sure to educate them that a union has many advantages.
Another thing I am concerned about with Skywest is their lack of bargaining power (ie, ability to say no to a pay proposal). I think this pay proposal is fairly bad. To be fair, Skywest was kind of doomed when ASA pilots voted their marginal contract in with a 84% yes vote. If you look at the Skywest pay proposal versus the current ASA rates, they are almost identical.
Exceptions are $22 first year versus $23 at ASA. Otherwise Skywest got the exact same 50 seat rates as ASA (captain and FO) up through year 18. Then Skywest has a few extra dollars for max captain. Skywest also got nearly identical rates for the CRJ-700/900. The exceptions are 2nd year FO is $1 higher at ASA, and years 10-18 captain is $1 higher at ASA. These are ASA rates for the CRJ-700 while these cover the CRJ-700/900 for Skywest. I don't know what ASA's COLA is, but Skywest got a terrible 1% COLA.
Here is my opinion. Send it back for management.
Ask for the same rates as ASA. That means $23 (or more) first year. Also about $1 an hour raise for years 10-18 CRJ-700/900 captains. And $1 for year 2 CRJ-700/900 FO's.
Then ask for a COLA to match inflation of 3%.
To bargain with them, tell them you will give back the pay raises for the 19 and 20 year max captains. Remember, EVERYONE goes through years 1-5 pay, but almost no one goes through years 19 and 20.
Your rates will be the same as ASA. I would call that a marginal contract. See what management says. If they negotiate with you and accept your offer, that is good news. Maybe you don't need ALPA (for now). If they decline your offer, it shows a HUGE reason to vote in ALPA at the next possible instant.
Skywest just aquired all the Skyway flying. That is probably another 10 CRJ's. They need to hire pilots, and this may be a good motivation to raise first year pay. Skywest management does not want to deal with ALPA. I think you have more bargaining power than you guys realize (the threat of ALPA).
Vote NO. See what management says. If they listen to you, that is good. If they don't, then vote in ALPA. It sounds really simple.
Good luck. Now what does everyone else think??
If Skywest had a union, they could ask for XJT +5% for example, and bargain from there instead of resigning to parity with ASA. But ALPA is so much more than just having bargaining power...
Voting down the last ALPA drive didn't seem to give Skywest pilots any "bargaining power" this time. I don't see the threat of it giving them any going forward.
Originally Posted by rickair7777
I don't think you're complying with the poster's original intent.
The union vote was a seperate issue...and it's over and done with, so there's no need to discuss it, at least for a few years.
The union issue has no relevance to the situation we are currently in.
The union vote was a seperate issue...and it's over and done with, so there's no need to discuss it, at least for a few years.
The union issue has no relevance to the situation we are currently in.
Originally Posted by SkyWestPilot1
I guess the reason I'm not upset is because the raise we were offered is almost exactly what I was expecting. I think alot of people got all excited when they heard we were talking about getting a raise and in the process started expecting somthing that was not realistic.
Flying is a second career for me, I've spent the better part of my adult life running my own business, that being said I'm going to say something that alot of you are not going to like. Here goes. Jerry and crew (who have a much more successful business than I) feel that the pay we were offered is all the market will support today AND for the foreseeable future. Now, we could have been offered and paid more, the problem then becomes that we become unattractive to future suitors, endangering the companies health. This is not rocket science. Everyone gets so emotional about what they think they're worth, the reality is if you want to get paid what your worth start your own business, geez, we only work half the month, I'd go crazy if I didn't have something constructive to do when I got home.
Now, as far as ASA getting 1% more, please read my post from a month ago, and earlier today.
I'll be bold and predict that in the next 5-8 years we're going to see more regional carriers closing their doors. The market will cull out the weak, this has happened since the beginning of time. Survival of the fittest.
Flying is a second career for me, I've spent the better part of my adult life running my own business, that being said I'm going to say something that alot of you are not going to like. Here goes. Jerry and crew (who have a much more successful business than I) feel that the pay we were offered is all the market will support today AND for the foreseeable future. Now, we could have been offered and paid more, the problem then becomes that we become unattractive to future suitors, endangering the companies health. This is not rocket science. Everyone gets so emotional about what they think they're worth, the reality is if you want to get paid what your worth start your own business, geez, we only work half the month, I'd go crazy if I didn't have something constructive to do when I got home.
Now, as far as ASA getting 1% more, please read my post from a month ago, and earlier today.
I'll be bold and predict that in the next 5-8 years we're going to see more regional carriers closing their doors. The market will cull out the weak, this has happened since the beginning of time. Survival of the fittest.
Originally Posted by iahflyr
Thanks for all the constructive posts so far. This is what I was hoping would come from this thread.
Does anyone have an answer to question number 3. How soon could there be a union drive (for ALPA or another union)?
I agree with boilerup. I think Skywest pilots have more leverage than they think. The threat of voting in ALPA is leverage.
65% of Skywest pilots voted against ALPA because they believed their management would take care of them. Fair enough. Now prove it to all of us. Silence people like meritflyer and other anti-Skywest people. Vote NO and ask management, "Please sir, I'd like some more." See what they say. If they negotiate and give a fair increase, then I will believe that your management truly takes care of you. If they say too bad, do away with the increases, and unilaterally raise first year pay, then vote in ALPA or another union.
If 35% of people were in favor of ALPA at the last vote, I would bet anything that GREATER THAN 35% of Skywest pilots are in favor of ALPA after seeing this pay proposal. Now imagine what happens if management refuses to negotiate. You would have 50% majority easily.
Please, whatever you do, DO NOT vote YES because you feel you have no leverage. Vote YES if you are truly satisfied with the pay package. If you want to see an improvement, vote NO, and see what happens. If it ends up causing management to not take care of you, vote in ALPA or another union if you need it. And then negotiate a real contract.
Seems simple. What do you Skywest guys considering voting YES think??
Does anyone have an answer to question number 3. How soon could there be a union drive (for ALPA or another union)?
I agree with boilerup. I think Skywest pilots have more leverage than they think. The threat of voting in ALPA is leverage.
65% of Skywest pilots voted against ALPA because they believed their management would take care of them. Fair enough. Now prove it to all of us. Silence people like meritflyer and other anti-Skywest people. Vote NO and ask management, "Please sir, I'd like some more." See what they say. If they negotiate and give a fair increase, then I will believe that your management truly takes care of you. If they say too bad, do away with the increases, and unilaterally raise first year pay, then vote in ALPA or another union.
If 35% of people were in favor of ALPA at the last vote, I would bet anything that GREATER THAN 35% of Skywest pilots are in favor of ALPA after seeing this pay proposal. Now imagine what happens if management refuses to negotiate. You would have 50% majority easily.
Please, whatever you do, DO NOT vote YES because you feel you have no leverage. Vote YES if you are truly satisfied with the pay package. If you want to see an improvement, vote NO, and see what happens. If it ends up causing management to not take care of you, vote in ALPA or another union if you need it. And then negotiate a real contract.
Seems simple. What do you Skywest guys considering voting YES think??
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
I believe I stated somewhere, either in this thread, or forum, that I did vote to send it to the pilots, as did the majority of SAPA reps. That's not a good thing, or a bad thing, in my mind... just a fact.
I'm not the person to decide (individually) whether this is adequate or not. That is the pilot's duty, and they will conclude that duty on Jan 30.
SAPA put together and negotiated the package. From my individual stand point, as a Rep, I felt a number of things:
1. My observation was that our negotiations had not only hit a standstill, but was regressing.
2. Negotiating for six more months would probably get higher rates, but my opinion is that the overall increase in pay over the term would be substantially the same.
3. However, we may actually never reach even the number 2 scenario, when ANYTHING can happen. Mergers, accidents, lawsuits, oil, economy, more muslim terror, whatever.
4. This is money that the pilot group said that they didn't want in Nov 2006, when they voted to lock us into a pay contract through 2010. "A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush" comes to mind.
5. There is no "home run" in this game. Steady, and take it step by step. This is a step, one that wouldn't be happening had ALPA been successful, but a step nonetheless.
6. I couldn't vote against giving the pilots their chance to actually decide. Nor could I vote no because, as a second year FO, I'm only getting 0000000000.32%. The numbers still support that the overwhelming majority of folks will get some raise, measured in thousands of dollars.
I don't know if it takes balls to have a union. And there isn't going to be a union at SkyWest any time soon. Had we gotten that union in Nov 2007, our pay would be frozen FOR YEARS while a contract was being negotiated. One that may not be better that what we got, and certainly one that may never make up for the lost income potential in that interim negotiating period.
The reality is that MOST carriers support a union. SkyWest has not, and we do that by our own free will. No one is locked into the cockpit... any, and all, are free to leave at any time. I noticed not too many of the ALPA Organizing Committee members have quit when the vote failed... we even have one on our SAPA board.
But, back to the subject at hand. I voted to send this to the pilots, and I will probably vote for the proposal.
I'm not the person to decide (individually) whether this is adequate or not. That is the pilot's duty, and they will conclude that duty on Jan 30.
SAPA put together and negotiated the package. From my individual stand point, as a Rep, I felt a number of things:
1. My observation was that our negotiations had not only hit a standstill, but was regressing.
2. Negotiating for six more months would probably get higher rates, but my opinion is that the overall increase in pay over the term would be substantially the same.
3. However, we may actually never reach even the number 2 scenario, when ANYTHING can happen. Mergers, accidents, lawsuits, oil, economy, more muslim terror, whatever.
4. This is money that the pilot group said that they didn't want in Nov 2006, when they voted to lock us into a pay contract through 2010. "A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush" comes to mind.
5. There is no "home run" in this game. Steady, and take it step by step. This is a step, one that wouldn't be happening had ALPA been successful, but a step nonetheless.
6. I couldn't vote against giving the pilots their chance to actually decide. Nor could I vote no because, as a second year FO, I'm only getting 0000000000.32%. The numbers still support that the overwhelming majority of folks will get some raise, measured in thousands of dollars.
I don't know if it takes balls to have a union. And there isn't going to be a union at SkyWest any time soon. Had we gotten that union in Nov 2007, our pay would be frozen FOR YEARS while a contract was being negotiated. One that may not be better that what we got, and certainly one that may never make up for the lost income potential in that interim negotiating period.
The reality is that MOST carriers support a union. SkyWest has not, and we do that by our own free will. No one is locked into the cockpit... any, and all, are free to leave at any time. I noticed not too many of the ALPA Organizing Committee members have quit when the vote failed... we even have one on our SAPA board.
But, back to the subject at hand. I voted to send this to the pilots, and I will probably vote for the proposal.
As for pay being frozen for years with a union negotiating, not necessarily. Nothing stops a union and management negotiating certain parts of a contract separately. Nothing stops a union and management to expedited negotiations on certain parts of the contract, like pay for example. But then again, nothing stops management from dragging its feet either. So you may speak some truth in that regard.
By the way, organizing is and endless requirement of unions. Even when you have unions on property, you still continue organizing. It isn't something that only happens once the NMB has set the voting time line. I'm happy to hear that OC members have not given up as many of us have not given up either.
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
the end of the contract
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
Too complicated. I like the BHO for its simple calculations, or I'd like a straight scale.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
