you think xjt is going to be the only one signing agreements at a loss in this market? it is a sign of things to come. SKW was willing to do it at a loss because it got their foot in the door with another major. The regional industry is getting uglier and profitable contracts are going to be few and far between. It is all positioning for an "eventual" turn for the better in the industry.

 

I haven't referenced anything that "they" (management) has said, I've gotten everything off of SEC filings and made my own conclusions... The funny thing is my vote is going to contradict my knowledge. I think they may file bankruptcy weather we pass this thing or not.

 

3.75 min pay per day is only for PICKUPS on scheduled days off, our min pay per day is 2 hours except for the 4 day minimum that you mentioned.

The 401K match is 100% up to 4% for your first 5 years, 100% up to 5% for years 5-10, and 100% up to 6% for everything after 5 years... So if you put in 4% your first year they gave you 4%. In fact never in your career at ExpressJet under our current contract will the company ever match you more than 6%.

 

Everyone to the lifeboats!

 

This is my take as well - this company is in horrible shape financially, so much so that concessions will not let it avoid BK. They still won't be making money. The economy is only going to get worse. The industry overall will continue to contract in response. Additionally, we didn't furlough enough people. I hate to say it, but it's true. How can they seriously ask for concessions, when I don't see them doing whatever it takes elsewhere to save $? These concessions will not save us, and in fact will lower the benchmark for the BK judge to start with. So go ahead and vote yes, you won't save the company, but you will make less money in the interim.

Folks, it's the same tactic used by airlines throughout their history. Give in or else. Fear. It's the single best weapon management uses against pilots, and it's apparently working. What's ironic is that I think they are right in this case, we will go BK without concessions. But - I think they aren't telling us the whole story. Personally, I think the company knows and even expects we will be bankrupt despite the concession results.

 

AGAIN, what "contract" are you talking about that SkyWest has?

I'll rephrase, what legally binding document does SkyWest have?

 

Generally bad deals? Are you joking? Where on earth did you hear that? Generally speaking stock purchase plans are fantastic ideas for the the employees.

Says who? Are you speaking from what XJT does? My sister and borther-in-law are both white collar at IBM and they purchase at a percentage below the lowest price over that time period. Unless things have changed, or I was told incorrectly, at SKYW I was told just like I stated above. Able to purchase at 15% below the lowest price for that 6months with up to 15% of your paycheck.

1. Because it's an instant 15% you can sell off once the time has expired or hold if the value has increased. 2. Not all airlines are doomed. No company goes belly up overnight. Not LEH, WM, and not XJT. Each company is different and in XJTs case I would not have exercised the option. Take a look at a graph to figure out why. If I worked at SKYW I would. If I worked at Wal-Mart, Bank of America, Apple, IBM, RAH, etc. I would. When times are tight that's the best time to enter the game. As Buffett said, "Go where the agony is".

 

SKYW wasn't going to do it at a loss. They have a lower operating cost.

 

That's your argument? Ok I'll rephrase. I like the SkyWest agreement more. The one that isn't asking for paycuts, has good work rules, and gives the employees great benefits. I wish they were union but regardless they're a machine that works well and efficient and I like what the company has to offer it's emp.

 

Yeah that's my argument. You do know what an actual contract is, don't you?

So I guess you would also like where they flew 70/90 seat equipment for 50 seat rates because management needed it, right? Sounds like a paycut.

Actually, never mind that one. You do know they agreed to an 18 month pay freeze a while back because management needed it, right? Again, sounds like a paycut.

How long did that 18 month pay freeze last by the way? What legal recourse did they have to lift that 18 (36) month pay freeze?

Don't get pi$$y just because you don't know the difference between an actual contract and a "handbook".