...........................................

 

Please don't bump threads. It messes with the natural progression of the discussion. I've seen it twice here. If you have something useful to say, please contribute. If people are bumping a thread that would otherwise just die out, then it leaves me thinking maybe it should just be locked as no one has anything worthy to contribute. A bunch of dots is not a worthy post.

 

I dont think our management does want you that bad, the pilots of XJT have the power to reject this offer. By all means please do. We can do without the headaches. And the fact that we aren't union, gives you the power to turn down this offer, because skywest management wouldn't care about it if we were union.





I take no joy in taking someone else's flying, however I am afraid that that is exactly what will happen. I'm just being realistic here. I believe CAL sent XJT a letter stating exactly that.





The person I quoted mentioned only ASA, they have one base, ATL, and we have that base already. So we would gain no bases, as I stated

 

I'm confused, you want me to tell you how NOT to merge?? it's easy, reject the offer, and don't merge. Problem solved as far as XJT is conerned.

 

Here is what you said:

You specifically said, "SkyWest pilots stand to lose more than they gain from a merger with either ASA or XJT."

Skywest may already have an LAX base and ONT/SAT would be closed if the purchase is completed. So it would only be three bases.

 

I responded to the idea of us merging with ASA...
I also responded to the idea of us merging with either...
sorry if it was confusing, but my point remains the same, skywest pilots don't want to merge with ASA especially since it means no new bases for us, and a decrease in QOL given the likely DOH integration which would be terrible for us vs ASA....
And we don't want XJT because nothing positive for almost anyone at skywest will come from it....
either A: we furlough our own for problems we had nothing to do with
or B: we furlough XJT pilots and are hated by the industry

skywest pilots don't want anything to do with either

 

I also disagree with the assumption more bases = better QOL

for many of us an intergration would only mean us getting bumped down in the base we currently fly out of....

there are those at SkyWest that would want IAH, and certainly many that would like a large LAX... but I doubt highly more than 10 of our pilots would want anything to do with CLE/EWR

 

Yeah, I was referring to the part about your reference to merging with XJT. That is why I added emphasis to that specific part our your quote. Wasn't confusing to me at all.

Curious if you have looked at an excel file with a DOH integration? I think many people would be surprised. But DOH is not automatically the way to integrate. You could use relative seniority or a hybrid. There are many possibilities.

As for option A, I think a solution could be found so that SKW pilots that had nothing to do with other's problems wouldn't suffer for them. I don't see option B if the deal is fair to everyone. Fair doesn't necessarily mean that no one gets furloughed.

There would most definitely be fences up for a period of time to mitigate costs. But over time, more bases means better QOL. Many pilots would move anywhere for a quick upgrade - new bases usually decrease upgrade time. Of course if you don't want to go anywhere, you wouldn't necessarily bet bumped down. You may get bumped up also. But the fact remains that the more bases, the more choices and that always equates to QOL

 

One thing I think a lot of people are missing, is I personally think CAL wants to reduce their RJ flying by a lot in the next few years, doesn't matter if it SkyWest or XJT, I think in time CAL will pull down their regional feed, them using the "threat" of taking it away if we don't go through with the buyout is their way of scaring, or forcing us into this.......They may keep more around initially if this deal goes through, to prove a point but in time they will pull it down further citing some lame excuse like "cost competitiveness"

again just my opinion

 

I think Saab is right... to an extent.

Here is my thought on how things MIGHT evolve industry wide:

* Its no secret that most of the BIG legacy type carriers are planning on focusing on international business and VERY long haul domestic, there will be exceptions where they feel they can turn a profit at that level but much reduced from today
* Where as 20-25 years ago you had 10-12 major carriers and just a few "commuter" lines..... I think we are headed for a THREE tiered system as the industry moves forward.
-- the Big legacy and there long haul routes
-- large national/regional Jet carriers who ( whether we like it or not ) are going to fill the domestic void in the 70-100 seat market ( most still contracting i think (
-- and smaller Tprop and 50 seat jet carriers that can operate to markets were those size aircraft make sense.

NOW... before you go screaming about scope.... I understand... For the above to happen scope has to change ( i dont like it... but I still think it has a good chance of happening ).

All that international lift is useless if they cant feed it domestically. And the flying public nearly as much as low prices demand frequency which can be achieved with smaller aircraft... no its probably NOT cheaper to fly say 4 E170 's where 2 737's could do, but you give the public MORE choice thus a better chance and garnering that business. Aircraft at this level of the business AND the mainline end of things have been increasing in size FOREVER.

This business is changing ( not all for the better mind you ) and the companies at all levels that will survive are the ones that will adapt to the change and embrace it rather than fighting it at every turn.

Nobody has all the answers or knows how this will play out. But those companies and employee groups who fail to adapt or change will be gone.