Yes it is a whipsaw. The RAH pilot group was used as a pawn to force Midwest pilots to fly for the lowest cost, knowing if they dont, mighty RAH and the E170 will come in and gobble up all of the rest of the flying. It's a whipsaw, black and white. Also, do you think good ol' bryan bedford could get concessions from people flying a "70 seat" for "50 seat" rates. I think not. Happy Flying.

 

Yes it appears to be a whipsaw and the folks at RAH aren't happy about it in the least. I'm not the spokeman for the pilot group but if any RAH pilots out there feel good about this deal speak up. Personally it made me throw up in my mouth a little.

 

MCI is the new base but we still fly there for Continental. Maybe it has to do with routes, not sure.

 

I didn't say it wasn't a whipsaw. I said it's not a whipsaw on us. Midwest wasn't the direct object of the post since it was written as a response to someone else. No I don't think BBB could get concessions because RAH is making money hand over fist and there's no way it would be considered.

 

Honestly how could the RAH pilots not feel used? They have been. This is a great example of why pilots dont give up scope, in its various forms. T.he test for you guys is going to be what you do about this. Everybody on here from the RAH pilot group says " oh its bad, we wont do it, its not fair etc..." Lets see if its talk not walk.

 

Your right, lets wait and see. In the mean time why don't you crack a beer and relax a bit and stop being a typical pilot pushing his holier than thou finger in our chest.

 

This whole fiasco is just leaving a bad taste in everyone's mouths, both sides. It is the nature of the beast, this industry, I feel. What if the shoe was on the other foot, would the comments be the same about "unity" between 2 totally different pilot groups?

With that being said what if, "I do STAND up and do something by refusing to go to work." Will the Midwest Pilot group pay my mortgage, feed my kids, pay the health insurance premium for my family, pay the special needs care one of my kids needs, pay my auto payment?? Will they support me then? Everyone talks about "supporting the other group" "refusing this flying", etc, etc, etc. Will you support me when I don't have a job? Hell no....and I wouldn't EXPECT you to, either. We can feel for you, understand your anger without being slandered because of what the CEO of our company (and your CEO) has done.

This is just plain bad. By us going to work and flying what our CEO has acquired does NOT mean we don't feel for the Midwest crews, at all. It means we are in an industry where we DON'T make the policy, we're in an industry where WE ARE ALL whipsaws, to some extent, we are ALL pawns, we're all just an employee number, with MANY MANY more in the wings waiting for the chance to have an employee number.

This just SUCKS, bottom line. I feel for the Midwest group, it makes me incredibly sick to my stomach. But I will NOT trade the backs of my familiy and their well-being, the shoe could be on the other foot. Sorry if you hate seeing me type that, but it doesn't make me unsympathetic at all.

 

And you leave almost all the history out.

This is the deal that CAL wanted before the release of the 69 aircraft. The XJT BOD couldn't agree to a non-profit deal so XJT called CAL on their bluff. CAL released the 69 aircraft and gave some of that flying to RAH. Eventually CAL told XJT to make a deal or lose ALL of the CAL flying. In the meantime XJT BOD did with the 69 aircraft what they thought was best for the shareholders. Obviously XJT wasn't going to park those aircraft while paying the leases if they had opportunities for those aircraft. Frankly, XJT may have been in a different situation now and probably laughing at the naysayers if oil would have remained at the $60-70 a barrel it was when Branded was announced.

By the way, it wasn't a miserable failure as you stated. XJT met and exceeded many performance matrx including revenue and customer satisfaction. It was a great product and everyone was proud of it. The miserable failure was in not being able to charge enough to cover the cost of the increased fuel prices despite the hedges.

The whipsaw by CAL/SKW was possible because CAL made good on their first bluff of releasing the 69 aircraft, finding replacement flying (RAH), and further telling XJT if they didn't make a deal they would release ALL of the aircraft. This would have happened regardless of the balance sheet. They would have done it even if Branded was successful because the CAL flying was still 75% of XJT's flying and XJT couldn't afford to take any further risk.

My whole point of my reply to you other than setting the history straight is to point out that the similarity I'm talking about is one pilot group being used to whipsaw a different one. In XJT's case it was SKW being used to whipsaw XJT and in your case its RAH being used to whipsaw Midwest.

Let me spell it out for you since you either are ignoring it or don't understand. The similarity is that one pilot group, RAH and SKW, is being used to whipsaw another pilot group, Midwest and XJT.

That's the whole POINT!!! Its a whipsaw regardless. Its just that your pilot group seems to be the beneficiary of it at the peril of the other. Is that why you want to deny the similarities? Keep in mind, I'm not blaming the RAH pilot group. It just is what it is.

 

I am absolutely amazed that XJT is the first company to criticize RAH for doing something that would benefit the shareholders.

XJT - you did the exact same thing. You had to do something with the 69 aircraft that were sitting. You started branded. It would have worked if fuel prices would have stayed in a reasonable range. It was even stated above that this was done for the shareholders.

Whether we like it or not, management doesn't work for us. They work for the shareholders. That is it - end of story. The only weapon that we have to battle this is the union contracts that we have in place. This idiotic name-calling between ALPA, Teamsters, etc does nothing.

Did the Midwest Pilots get a bad deal with this? Yes. Are the pilots at Midwest to blame? No. Are the pilots at RAH to blame? No. If the RAH pilots don't fly the routes (depending on what transpires in the near future), then they will get fired. Not furloughed - fired. More people will get recall notices and either they will fly the routes or be fired. It will continue until enough pilots are on staff to fly the routes. There are a lot of pilots out of work right now that will do just about anything for a job as compared to letting their families starve.

If the RAH pilots stand firm and don't take the flying, Midwest will find someone else who will. I could envision a Midwest alter-ego starting for the exact same reason. Rather than saying that Midwest should be taking pay cuts to a "regional" level, why aren't we saying that RAH should push the bar higher to get "mainline" wages. I haven't looked at the balance sheets for Midwest, but I would be willing to bet that RAH is more financially stable right now and has a better argument for higher wages. Push the wages higher which would ultimately help out the Midwest pilots and possibly keep their company alive (along with helping RAH from the bleeding of 12 out-of-work 170's).

 

This is the the most ridiculous comment I have ever read on APC, Congratulations, that is not easy to do