Like I said, it's not over till it's over. I'm not singling out CAL, but many other legacies talked tough on scope and caved anyway. CAL can't play the same cards that most others played for scope relief. But more and more, the deck is stacked in CAL management's favor.

They (CAL pilots) conceded last time. And look how well CAL did on the backs of their employees. But how high can they keep the bar this time around? I hope they keep it, but god it's going to suck if they give. Even in the littlest bit.

Not really much to brag about, but how ironic would it be if the little ol' regional pilots at XJT stayed firm on scope to prevent a buyout by a non-union carrier, but the CAL guys decided to give it up?

 

Would be ironic, but the fact is that over one third of their current work force came from XJT, and over half from the regionals...all those guys have been able to witness the byproducts of scope relaxation. Although not impossible, improbable is a better word, heck, lately I've been jumpseating and even the old guys have truly surprised me. They're p!ssed enough as it is on account of the Q's, I guess we'll see, they start section 6 next month.

 

Just saw a person on the LAX FO list that has that last name. Thought your name was a nickname, but it seemed too coincidental

guess it was, good last name to have though.

edit: nevermind, your first name start with a F?

 

[quote=Bond;394480]There are no available aircraft in the market, and you're telling me that papa CAL will magically make them appear out of thin air? Whether or not CAL has interest in diversifying more feed is irrelevant, if the frames are not available, I suspect Colgan will be seeing more Q400 flying....welcome to reality my brother.[/quote

I never said that. I may not be right in what I am about to say but I think that if CAL do not renew a contract with any operator it would free aircraft that was flown under that contract.

Also, MESA is clearly using the last tube of oxy, now they may last a few months more but not years for sure. TSA is trying to sell some of their 145s, Embraer itself have 145s from other operators not only in the US but also around the world for sale so to say that there are no 145s on the market is strange. By 2009 there may be a lot of 145s for sale if SKYW would like to lease or own any and would not be provided the aircraft by CAL from whatever contract they did not renew (strange).

Do you say that XJTs contract (even if CAL does not renew the contract)prevents CAL from giving any airplanes to any other operator that they might sign a contract with?

So even if CAL does not renew a contract with XJT, XJT gets to keep the aircraft under that contract that was not renewed? aircraft that are owned by CAL?
That sounds a bit to strange to me.................

 

[quote=HermannGraf;394548]I'm not going to copy and paste our whole CPA, but here's how it works, under the provisions of the current contract, which is still in effect for a few more years; we have first rights to the aircraft that are released from the CPA. Two years ago we exercised such option, and that's how Branded, Charter, and Delta came into existence. Again, whether they renew the CPA or not, it is irrelevant as we will operate under such terms until the last aircraft is gone. So as you can see, it's a bit of a gamble...CHQ took it, and suddenly found themselves fishing out old CRJ's out of the junkyard. The question now becomes, does J.A. gamble that we will return the frames? If we find folks to fly them for, we will, and guess what? You better hope other carriers are selling them by the dozen.

As a I said earlier the CPA that was struck with skywest was contingent upon a purchase of XJT, rightfully allowing the holding company to shift assets. No purchase, no assets, and now you guys got to get creative! Furthermore, you're assuming that CAL is not going to renegotiate with us, and that the CPA with skywest is a done deal...it's not, if it is someone please post the release, this is all speculation guys, and we're not going to find out who will be flying for CAL, and with what aircraft for a while.

 

[quote=Bond;394557]Thanks for the answer, I understand your point.

 

The one you're thinking of is a good dude.

 

I KNOW dude, I was poking fun at the potential for some ironic humor.

But with all those guys at CAL you mentioned, there are ALSO guys that may not be to that way of thinking. The class of the mid 80's, corporate/135 dudes, mil guys, or the FO's from (insert regional airline here) that went over. They may have little, or NO experience with negotiations. IE, they haven't been through it before. Not picking on CAL pilot's specifically, or the guys I mentioned, just pointing it out. SOME just simply may not be armed with the experience this whole process.

And no, I haven't been in the front of a CAL plane lately. I spent plenty of in the front on DAL/UAL BOTH pre 9/11 and post 9/11. Pre 9/11, it was interesting to hear the conversations of what they wanted and what they wouldn't settle for. Although they got A LOT in those CBA's, some of the talk would make you laugh.

After 9/11, it was the same. Guys would talk about what they want and what they won't settle for. It doesn't matter sector of the airlines guys work, or what company they work for. We pilots are all human. We will talk a tough game, but when the info in presented, the vote is made, you'd be surprised with how the chips fall. At my previous employer we went through plenty of negotiations. Some good, some not. It was the same, all of us talking, at the end making the decision that may or may not have been what it was before we had the info/facts.

I remember at my company, and UAL, and CAL when they took concessions, hearing guys always say "I voted no". I always wondered, if EVERYBODY seemed to vote NO, how did ANYTHING get passed?

 

To the original question on this thread, I vote no.

 

thanks...at least i got 2 answers.