SKW people sure do think highly of themselves! I agree, neither is a great place to go, by any means. But how is going to TSA a HUGE risk? I understand Mesa, b/c they could be gone anyday, but I don't get TSA. I'm really getting tired of the holier than thou SKW people on these boards.

How does working for these companies damage your profession? They aren't GoJets. Dont listen to this moron!

 

Let's just say by some twist of fate that I'm the guy interviewing you for your job at your carrier of choice. If I know that you willingly went to Mesa, in 2008, knowing what you know, you'd be in hot water with me.

Of course you'd sue me for discrimination, but that's beside the point.

 

Well ok...I can see your point of view with that. But how does TSA get included in that?

 

I'm sure some current or former TSA guys would be happy to chime in regarding that. But my understanding is that TSA isn't too far behind.

 

Well as a current TSA guy, and as someone who has worked under management and pilot interviewers at a major airline, I can assure you that it is absurd to include TSA and even Mesa pilots in a blanket statement such as "damaging to you profession." as if they were Go Jets. Thats ridiculous and offensive!

 

I didn't necessarily include TSA. I mean no offense. Particularly if you were around prior to the GoJet fiasco. In fact, I kind of feel for those guys.

 

Mesa:
ICAO requirements

1200 PIC
-all PIC in your log book is counted 1 for 1
-all jet SIC from the company in your logbook is counted 2 for 1

So… If hired with 1200 PIC, then you would qualify to at least attain your captain recommendations and fill out the captain qualification sheet. Then when your seniority could hold captain, you would be awarded captain.

To answer everyone’s questions, guys hired with low time (MAPD and what not) would generally only have maybe at most 200 total PIC. So they would have to fly right seat for 2000 hrs of SIC in order to qualify for ICAO…

(2.5 yrs here and having a blast!!)









…not

 

Here I'll double post just as you did. BTW, you could have just used the edit function!

Easy there Pedro. No "holier than thou" attitude here but answer these questions, if the industry takes a turn for the south is TSA an airline you would like spending the next 10 years of your life with? And would you HIGHLY recommend them as a place of employment to your brother, sister or best friend? I didn't think so.

I do respect for TSA pilots where as I don’t respect GoJet pilots, but if someone wants advice on where to go then TSA will NEVER come up on my list. If you don’t know why then enjoy your SJS and I hope you wake up soon.

 

Well I'm gonna go ahead and chime in here flyinaway, because your ignorance is showing and everyone else is being too polite to call you on it. Yes, I said you are IGNORANT. Six months as an intern and a new hire 121 FO does NOT make you a repository for information about how this industry works. Let me lay a couple of terms on you:
Pattern bargaining: a collective bargaining technique in which contract terms in one settlement are used as models to be imposed on other negotiating parties within an industry.

Undercutting: to offer goods or services at a lower price or rate than (a competing price or rate) or than that of (a competitor).

So lets expand on these concepts and apply them to places like TSA, Mesa, Colgan, etc. First of all, when contracts at other carriers (usually the better carriers) are negotiated based on "industry average" you, as someone working for a lower tier company, bring that average DOWN. So that hurts the pattern bargaining that is part of the industry. Company A will look at your company and say "TSA will do it for this much, why won't you?". Of course, I'm oversimplifying but the concept is the same.

Second, undercutting...pretty self explanatory and closely related to the first point. You say your company (and companies like it) don't hurt the industry because you just get paid a few dollars per hour less and have much worse work rules. Fine. What if your lovely CEO Hulas Kulas decides to replace you with a bunch of Oompa Loompas pilots who work for half what you make and accept worse working conditions just for the promise of a work visa and a chance to move to the US? Thats under cutting. Think that would be bad for you or the industry? Thats how some of us at the "better" regionals feel about bottom feeders like Mesa and Colgan. It's no different than you accepting crummy pay and work rules for the promise of quick PIC and a chance to move on 6 months sooner (or in your case, I feel like you took the first thing that came along...always a quality decision).

Now don't get me wrong. I have no disrespect for my fellow pilots. Except the ones who complacently accept the reaming they receive from management out of ignorance or because they don't mind stepping on the back others to "get theirs". We're all in this together and the actions of one group affect the actions and opportunities of the others. You know who I have the utmost respect for and who will ALWAYS have my support? Guys and gals at places like Mesa and Pinnacle who would rather burn the place to the ground than accept a sub-standard contract.

 

I'd be willing to bet that TSA isn't the cheapest out there, which is why there is no growth. I wonder if you put all of the numbers together if republic, skywest, expressjet and others would actually be cheaper in a lot of situations. Yeah, service and competence is better at these airlines, but how much do the majors care about it. There is always someone saying, "my experience with continental sucked, so from now on I'm flying delta." But at the same time there is someone saying "my experience at delta sucked, from on I'm flying continental". So service is important, but I bet the majors are more concerned about price. If we went back to summer 06 where TSA was trying to get the Continental contract, I'm sure CAL did think CHQ would offer a better product, but I bet the deciding factor was price. Just goes to show what TSA is. Bad quality, and I bet they can't even do bad quality cheaper then someone else can do better quality.