I guess my question would be this:

Could Eagle fly an ATR72 or E145 specifically on routes intended to feed AA, but then fly a E170/E190 on something like DFW to NAS?

No, they couldn't.

As was stated, under the CURRENT arrangement, no.

IMO, either one of two things will happen. Either the APA will come to terms with the fact that AA needs a healthy and cost competitive feed system whcih will require a reasonable number of aircraft of the type which can be both competitive and profitable (76-seat mixed-class) which they now do not have and accept and negotiate scope to allow that -or- they will not, leaving AMR no alternative but to have to use the BK method to achieve a profitable and competitive model for both AA and regionals (that inlcudes AT LEAST one other regional besides Eagle).

Even in the unlikely event the current APA stand of either strangling Eagle out of existance or taking over the flying succeeds (I'm sure none of their pilots is THAT interested in flying RJ's to CMI, ICT or GRR), it would only lead to the same place due to AA unviability from an economic standpoint. That's liable to cost MORE AA jobs and result in virtually eliminated scope as opposed to rational negotiation leading to relaxed scope to allow larger aircraft that can compete and not lose money due to economic inefficiency.

It appears AMR is stalling for THEIR benefit to insure the competitive landscape is known and to insure all their ducks are lined up for quick and tidy trip in and out of BK. There IS one wild card that would change the dynamics of this conundrum and that is also another reason (I believe) AMR is stalling. It appears UAL could be in serious trouble by next summer cash wise as they've burned thru 1/3 of their pervious 3.8 billion in 7 months. It's going to be a long, cold and hard fall and winter revenue wise and UAL is running out of things to finance and credit to find. It may be a strategy of WHO is the first to liqiuidate.

I'll tell you this as harsh as it is, should ONE major liquidate (even if it survived to come out 1/4th of itself), it would blow the relief valve of excess capacity off the industry and allow the survivors to finally bring ticket prices in line with expenses, thus likely insuring survival and higher degree of prosperity for those that remain. Kinda like 5 people in a boat and one becomes sick and diseased. The others are starting to show the first symptoms and to save the group, the really sick one is tossed out of the boat for the benefit of the others.......not pretty. Many are convinced it wont happen, but if you'd described 9/11 on 9/10/01, it would have been preposterous to 99.99% of everyone you asked.

The question is who will it be ?

The clear front runner (now) for collapse is UAL followed by AA and U. So what we have with AMR might be a waiting game. Hypothetically, if say UAL were liquidated and say 75% of its operation and assets were auctioned off, AA would need to recall and hire to cover their chunk of the pie. UAL could remain strictly an International carrier with that segment sold off to a new buyer and UAL would still survive in name and legacy, but a lot of the domestic scraps would be picked apart by others whom appear ready to circle the wreckage at a moments notice.

At any rate, AA needs feed (and Eagle) as much as Eagle needs AA (and someone to feed), at least under the CURRENT arrangement. The current APA philosophy I'll call, "The Cyanide Diary" will only doom AA pilots to a worse scenario. Even now, many AA pilots are asking the APA what it means when they say, "ALL flying to be done by AA pilots" and the APA so far hasn't come up with a coherent answer other then falling in love with the idea, so their current scope "plan" is fairly rudderless.

In the meantime, AMR is using its friend and ally TIME to their advantage. When the time is right either by choice or the neccesity of outside forces they'll act.

Agreed under the same certificate. Could they do it if both Eagles are divested with one owning the other and the owned airline feeding AA while the owning airline contracted with other airlines ala' RAH/CHQ?

Thank you, Eaglefly. This is good information to know. I've seen oppressive environments before, but will give this one the benefit of the doubt until your words are proved or disproved.

My comments on scope are not intended to be flamebait nor are meant to irritate anyone. If that happens, then it's their problem. I'm simply stating market realities. Our industry has been evolving ever since the Deregulation Act of 1978 and being in denial about it isn't going to change anything.

My experience has taught me that the best way to handle a problem is to face it and learn as much about it as possible before deciding upon a plan to deal with it. The same goes for deregulation, scope, cabotage and all the other problems facing our profession.

Wishing a problem would go away doesn't work. Let's hope the moderators of this forum also realize this truism.

Still no. However, with the history of the recent arbitrators opening siding with the company, I suppose the company could grieve it and win. After all, the APA just lost a grievance concerning the minimum pilot floor where the arbitrator ruled that every single pilot at AA could be furloughed, yet the APA pilot floor concerning commuter exception to scope would NOT be triggered.

Another possibility could be that the APA grants exception for a certain number of 76 seat aircraft with the proviso that furloughed AA pilots fly the captain's seat at AE pay rates.

I think Arpey is loath to take the company to bankruptcy. He just renegotiated debt due at the end of the year. Despite some commuter pilots' dream for once again dumbing down the industry, Bk is not what is used to be and AA can't just come in and dictate the terms of a change to the employee contracts, so the outcome is not certain. Keep in mind also that a change in scope would also, almost certainly, mean that AE would NOT be the only small jet supplier. However, eaglefly's right in that AE future is uncertain without viable jets, vice the 37-50 seat money pits they have now.

There's a lot of angles to all this and it's not anywhere close the the slam dunk fait accompli that eaglefly would lead you to believe.

"Let's hope the moderators of this forum also realize this truism."

Mod note:

The moderators at APC simply enforce a set of rules outlined in the TOS. You can find those rules at the top of each forum page. Those who post within those rules will never have a problem with the moderation here. Questions about moderation should be via PM's and are off topic and inappropriate for the forums. Thanks.

The APA already tried this move years ago and it failed miserably. To be done at Eagle, it would require the agreement of Eagle ALPA (good luck) or another flowthrough type agreement that AMR wont want any part of considering the last nightmare.

At first glance, it would seem more likely at the other carrier they're sure to bring in, but two things ruffle that plans feathers (and ruin its economics), 1. It would be too unpredictable and expensive planning that carriers captain staffing (which affect ALL it's staffing) if sudden furloughs or shortages occur at AA. It would be very undesirable in planning and predictability and will rise any costs at this carrier (not to mention the anymosity of that carriers F/O's). Since AMR would have to relinquish a segment of that carriers profit TO that carrier, instead of all to AMR (like Eagle), it would further erode profitability. 2. That scenario would place at least SOME control of that carriers operation within the APA and that is a sure fire way to increase costs over the long-term by once again granting leverage to mainline labor to use at a later time.

I think I can safely assert this idea is a non-starter at worst or a non-finisher at best.
Yes, BK is the LAST option, but backdropped against hopeless unprofitability, it may be the ONLY option. The industry is already "dumbed" down and I'm just highlighting the obvious. It is WELL known that Eagle will not be the sole feed provider for AA in the future, so again nothing new there.

Gee, we used to be a "regional pilots", but now we're just "commuter pilots"..........I guess that's a step up from "losers" or "lifers" as seems to be the rage here on Mainline Pilot Forums, but I will (and did) take that as a condescending insult as it was obviously meant to be. It reminds me when the APA referred to us as AA's "propeller division" when that label suited them.

Ahh, what can you do...........some things never change.

Starting to taste it a little bit now, Phrog ?

Well, scope is costing AMR a lot of money. My question is what is the price tag?

Would it be cheaper to do a flow up to AA? One list with AE stabled below AA? Or for APA to hold the line on scope?

The only thing I have learned about the airline industry is that I know nothing. As a AE pilot I would like to see APA hold the line on scope.

Your 3 options ;

1. New flowthru - AMR found the old one way too much of a headache and actually expensive with all the legal fees for the various arbitrations. They sighed relief when it died........their interest in a new one is about nil. If interest was there, they would have brought that up for discussion with the APA as a method of dealing with scope.

2. Any merging of the lists becomes unpredictable and sticky considering the new developments as a result of the U-AWA debacle. Additonally, Eagle's contract has provisions for use of the "Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions" in the even of no agreements with a non-ALPA carrier. DOH for Eagle pilots wouldn'y fly with AA pilots or the APA and a straight staple to the bottom wouldn't fly with Eagle ALPA or Eagle pilots, but the above is all moot. AMR cannot afford to have mainline labor control any aspect of regional labor costs unless they were competing against similar cost structures with the competition. The large RJ ops are done almost exclusively by regionals and it is they who will set the labor cost structure. Forget about any merger of AA and Eagle (or their seniority lists)......it's even LESS likely then #1..

3. If APA holds the line on current scope, AA's feed system will slowly wither and die as the smaller RJ's become either mechanically unviable or economically unviable (they're pretty much there now, economically). This will only weigh AA down with more debt as their revenue shrinks as a result of their feed shrinking. Competitors will convert former AA customers who can no longer get flexibility form AA with a weak (and getting weaker) feed system and that further weakens AA (and will cost AA jobs, especially pilots). Eventually, either AA will have to reinvent itself into a carrier that doesn't need feed (I can't see how) or its parent (AMR) will have to acquire the necessary scope changes it needs to maintain revenue with a healthy and competitive feed system. Of course some believe that thru whatever way (even magic), AMR can pull a rabbit out of a hat and thrive AND GROW without feed or with it all being done at the mainline level by all mainline employees with mainline costs against other regionals as they have the money to maintain an executive bonus plan.

It seems all 3 aren't realistic or likely options.

Option 4. is the reality IMO and that involves AMR gaining the necessary scope changes it needs for AA to thrive and compete by whatever means necessary. There are several options, the best being rational negotiation with both sides realistic about the situation. This would probably involve the allowance of mixed-class 76-seaters, but limits on size and mission based on current AA feeder size and competitive feeder sizes. Barring that, AMR would have little choice but to achieve that by another far less pleasant method, which it really doesn't want to do. My guess, is that should they have to do the unpleasant, AMR would make it worth their while by eliminating more scope provisions then likely would have been realized through negotiation rationalizing that decision to offset the cost and hassle of BK. If AMR HAS to go to BK, I think they're going to maximize the outcome of that for their best interest regardless of the criticism and that would likely mean larger aircraft and virtually no operational restrictions for feeders. This would anger many AA pilots and a bunch would proabably quit, but under this scenario, AA would likely shrink more in BK then out of it and I'm sure AMR would include PBS in AA's new post BK structure which would mean substantially less pilots needed, so they would probably need to trim a couple of thousand currently active pilots anyway, maybe more.

If you want to see the APA hold the line on scope, that's fine, but have you thought about your next employment move ?

It would mean that your tenure here would be as a career F/O until either Eagle shrunk enough that you'd be furloughed (having never made captain) or you quit for something better before that happens. You may in fact want to consider resignation sooner rather then later and get some PIC time somewhere in anything as 10,000 hours SIC time in an RJ won't get you anywhere and wont be doing your bank account much good either. At least if you really hope and expect the APA to maintain current AA scope.

If you understand the ramifications of your wishes, you can plan for your future better.

I keep hearing Eagle is going to order new ATRs.

There have been rumblings of that from management. They're getting old and tired from too much time down in the salty Carribean air. The ones transferred to DFW have been a nightmare to maintain, due in part to the lack of experience the current MTX cadre has with them and cancellations have been high, especially due to air conditioning issues.

Just as is the 22 CRJ orders that they could make if they want, it's come down to financing and for most anyone to do that now is tough. I've heard that Bombardier is willing to do a deal requiring 15% down, but finding the financing is the effort. AMR has upcoming debt problems and lenders are justifiably nervous about lending money to airlines right now......even more so than home buyers !

Most analysts consider AA a close #3 in the race to liquidation just behind U with UAL clearly the lead horse. If UAL flops by next summer or fall. it would probably not only insure both U and AA's survival but it would insure the industry would likely regain its health with appropriate ticket prices as a result of right-sized capacity.

Since it would be identical to the solution CHQ came up with when they encountered the same problem several years ago, I fail to see why you "just say no". Will you explain why this could not happen?

/fume

***!! How is SJU STILL way under staffed!? We got furloughs and reserves are still getting shipped all over to cover flying.

Sometimes I think I might develop an aneurysm sorting out this companies logic.

/fume thanks for listening.

I think I misunderstood. I suppose they could if they set up a legalistic shell game like RAH. However, I think the market value of AE is poor given its antiquated fleet and overcapacity in the commuter market now.

I don't think AMR is going to make any significant moves until it's labor contracts with the pilots, FAs, and mechanics are settled and that could be a couple years off.

From its attempt to sell AE last year, it would seem that AMR would rather contract out it's small jets and be rid of AE. How scope shakes out in the next contract will be pivotal. I see rigid opposition to any give on 76-seat narrow bodies even among the few most fervent company-concessionistas AA pilots.

Technically speaking... if Eagle was spun off, and all aircraft that were doing AA feed got moved onto the Eagle certificate (ATRs from Executive to Eagle). Then the Executive certificate would be open to expansion for any/all aircraft. This is how RAH set up CHQ and has it separate from the other certificates. Also interesting to note, I believe Executive already has operating certificate privileges for an amazing amount of area through the caribbean, mexico, central and south america. Most areas current unused.


I disagree that AMR would rather contract out all feed flying. I believe the announcement to sell previously was due to the massive growth regional carriers were seeing, and they were in high demand. If AMR could have sold Eagle at a large profit they would have. There were several interested carriers (Skywest, RAH) but when AMR told them the strings attatched they declined to buy.

If AMR owns their feed flying they are basically paying themselves to do work. Taking money from one pocket and moving it to another. If they contract out flying, they are paying money to a 3rd party and will never see that money again. Even if Eagle lost money I bet it would still be more profitable than paying someone else to do it.

Im sure AMR will contract some other carriers to do a small portion of feed flying, strictly for whipsaw purposes when 2012 comes around and the Eagle contract is up.

I understand not wanting to give concessions, but if APA refuses and AMR goes into BK will the ultimate outcome be the same regarding scope? Wouldn't it be preferable to negotiate something (pay raises/QOL/benefits) in exchange for something that the company will get one way or another?

In a perfect world I would wish APA could hold the line, create more mainline jobs, higher pay, etc. In the real world, I want AMR to be able to compete and remain in business as a competitive carrier.

I jumpseated on one when visiting in Florida. Their airplanes are very tired but I was grateful for the ride.

I've been saying this exact same thing. This is not a popular philosophy among many, for there is a lot of emotion overriding practical reality. When that happens, the chances of big mistakes increases.

For everyones sake, lets hope practical reality overrides raw emotion for the betterment of all.

Among my fellow AA pilots have have not talked to a single one EVER that would vote for a contract that has concessions on scope.

Which is exactly why it is my contention that AMR will likely have to get it another (more painful) way and if they do, they'll want (and get) greater relief from current limits. AA cannot survive without feed and that is immutable fact. AMR cannot continue with the current feed system indefinately, at least not profitably or competitively and that is also immutable fact.

The APA has yet to present any viable options to overcome the above, except a blanket statement that, "all flying is ours", which they cannot even dissect the meaning of for their own membership. A large portion of that flying, is flying their membership had no interest (which is why we do it in the first place) in and I think still doesn't unless maybe they get AA pay/schedules/pension which will not happen.

Emotion it may be then and that's unfortunate.

I respect every AA pilot wanting to keep the line where it is, and I understand the desire to keep jobs at mainline. The sad truth is that APA cannot reverse the direction of the entire airline industry. Every legacy carrier competitor has outsourced E170 flying to a regional carrier that has 1/4 the operating expense of a mainline carrier. These E170s are flying mainline routes competing head-to-head against AA MD80s. If you have not jumpseated on a E170/E190 I would recommend it and compare it to an AA MD80.

If APA doesn't want to change scope then I really truly hope they find a way to operate E170s for the same operating cost of competitors who have already outsourced this flying. Even if APA agreed to Republic payscales the legacy costs of benefits, FAs, MTX, etc would drive the total operating cost through the roof. I would estimate APA would have to go at least 15-20% below Republic payrates to be equally competitive. Thats not going to happen, and I don't expect APA to agree to something ridiculous like that.

The other option is outsourcing the flying to another carrier. You can give it away to Republic, who is a 3rd party company, or make a scope exception for Eagle to be the sole provider of regional flying and at least keep the flying within the AMR umbrella.

I personally would rather fly a E170 at a mainline carrier than at Eagle. I have 37 more years until retirement. It wasn't my ultimate goal to be an Eagle pilot for life, but the industry has changed a lot in the past 5 years since I got hired. If Eagle got E170s I would be nowhere close to being able to hold a CA position on it, or any other Eagle plane for that matter. My main concern is for APA and AMR as a whole to remain competitive and avoid making irrational and emotional decisions like Eastern, Pan-Am, TWA, and the list goes on...

AMRs scope opener specifically allows ANY commuter operator and purposely does not make distinction between Eagle, Mesa, GoJet, or any other outsourcer. As far as the AA pilots go, it wouldn't make any difference whether their jobs were outsourced to GoJet or Eagle, so if AMR was to somehow extract 76 seat aircraft from AA, AA pilots might as well allow them to go to the cheapest bidder "to remain competitive." And Eagle is not "competitive" which I'm sure AMR will explain to you in a couple years.

And to "keep the outsourced flying under the AMR umbrella" how much more of MY paycheck are YOU willing to give Arpey to subsidize the non-competitiveness of Eagle? Sorry, no sale.

If it comes to that, a chapter 7 is ok too. There's way to much capacity in the system now and that might allow UAL's "competitive contract" to survive, while those nasty AA pilots hit the unemployment line.

It would seem somehow iconic that "American" Airlines go belly-up . . . . just like the present government of this republic is herding the nation to.

Probably should change your avatar to "Live on your knees and take what they give you"

You might want to research why the companies you cite went out of business. It was largely management incompetence, not scope.

It is well known AMR intends to bring in another feeder for whipsaw purposes against Eagle in the future, so nothing new there. Most everyone here is certainly well aware of that. However when (not, if) they contract out to another feeder, they'll have to set aside some of the money they have kept for themselves with Eagle for the outside carrier to be profitable in and of itself, which is money they normally would have kept. They also wont be able to get a way with charging staggering fees for equipment and services as the other carrier couldn't afford that and would have it's own, so more money lost there. On the labor front, it's getting to the point, most of Eagle's pilots are topping out at their scales and will not be making much income progress over the next few years, wheras many of the other formerly junior pilots at other regionals will continue to see their compensation get close to Eagle due to increasing longevity. Add it all up in 3-5 years and another carrier is likely to cost AMR MORE than Eagle.

The idea that it will be AA PILOTS that "allow" (read decide) what regionals acquire whatever percentage of new 76-seaters is more then unlikely. It will be hard enough for the APA to get what language they can out of scope and AMR granting the APA language that gives the APA approval of any pirticular regional carrier is laughable, especially if it is aimed against Eagle purely out of spiteful anger. Good luck with that, but I see no hope of it.


I don't think you have to worry about AA going Chapter 7 as AMR wont let that happen. Again, should emotion overtake the situation at AA, AMR will make successful and appropriate use of the reorganizational abilities of Chapter 11 to do just that.............RE-organize. They've seen others do it and have the luxury of seeing their mistakes and avoiding them . Analysts uniformly agree, one of UAL's principle mistakes was not going deep enough on cuts and AMR will definately go deeper than they would have had practicality won over emotion and the issues were negotiated instead of implimented.

Both Eagle and AA will be here 10 years from now, but different from where each is now. One question will be who the "new kid on the block" will be regional wise..................time will tell, but not much time.

Since Eagle is wholly owned by AMR I find it hard to believe that it would be cheaper to pay an outside company to do the same flying we do. AMR wins by having its cheap(er) labor in-house. AMR wants other regionals to do feeder flying strictly for whipsaw purposes(especially when 2012 comes around). I am sure at least 1 other carrier will wind up doing feeder flying, but Eagle will do the majority share because that is the most profitable situation.

If AA contracts some outside company to do feed flying those routes are gone from AA for the duration of the contract. If a route is given to Eagle to fly it can switch back and forth between AA/Eagle seasonally, and to maximize profit by right-sizing the aircraft with the route. Give away a route to Republic and you wont see it again. Ever.


Ok, how about a different angle. Are you willing to give up your pension and take a 15% paycut in order to keep the flying on the APA side? Those will be the two options. Give on scope and get a payraise, or keep the flying for a reduction in your pay/benefits.



AA isnt going anywhere. Eagle isnt going anywhere. Its just a matter of how much smaller they both will be in the future.


I never said they went out of business because of scope. I stated irrational and emotional decisions were the downfall. All I ask is that everyone takes a real hard look at what is going on at other airlines we are competing against. I'm on your side, I want AA to be successful and profitable. Without AA we at Eagle wouldnt have jobs. And it goes the other way as well.

They just announced more displacements.

Yep, it looks like a shuffle from the DFW ATR to the EMB for the most part. totaling perhaps 15 positions, but a loss of a half dozen EMB captains in LAX will hurt there. Most there are from the area.

The pain continues

BS. They want complete flexibility to contract out with the commuter clause and I believe they want to get rid of Eagle rather than sink a lot of money into acquiring new airplanes and dealing with the upcoming labor issues. Just like they want to revenue share with offshore airlines. They want to run a "virtual" airline, not a real one. They also want unlimited 76 seat aircraft which even Delta ALPA with their limp scope doesn't allow.

BS. How do you know? You don't. You need to put in an expense report to AMR for throwing dud fear grenades for them.

I hope you're not negotiating for ALPA in 2012. You'd be whipped before you started.

That said, I think the final outcome (maybe as much as 2 years from now) will be that scope stays pretty much where it is, there's a moderate payraise and an incremental increase in productivity, but certainly not PBS since that involves a small degree of trust. I think Eagle will be divested and the sub-76 seat flying farmed out, and 76 seaters flown by AA albeit probably at a lower than F100 rate. I also don't think there will be a BK nor a strike. I have also lost faith that the Obama administration will do anything but their typical empty PR pap for labor. So, the RLA will remain the same. It's not going to be full 1992 restoration, nor is it going to be a BK contract without the BK. My 2 cents. Some AE guys are saying Bk by Christmas regardless. Either way, that's ok.

BS. They want complete flexibility to contract out with the commuter clause and I believe they want to get rid of Eagle rather than sink a lot of money into acquiring new airplanes for AE and dealing with the upcoming labor issues. Just like they want to revenue share with offshore airlines. They want to run a "virtual" airline, not a real one. They also want unlimited 76 seat aircraft which even Delta ALPA with their limp scope doesn't allow. And maybe it's not really the 76 seaters they want but something a little larger that they have more flexibility with.

Besides Eagle service is atrocious. I fly on other regionals and deadhead on Eagle and from my personal experience AE is by far the worst . . . and I'm not saying AA is any shining star with that regard either. And it's got nothing to do with the pilots at either AA or AE, but is a serious management failure, especially at Eagle.

BS. How do you know? You don't. You need to put in an expense report to AMR for throwing dud fear grenades for them.

I hope you're not negotiating for ALPA in 2012. You'd be whipped before you started.

Acrimony aside, I think the final outcome (maybe as much as 2 years from now) will be that scope stays pretty much where it is, there's a moderate pay restoration and an incremental increase in productivity, but certainly not PBS since that involves a small degree of trust. I think Eagle will be divested and the sub-76 seat flying farmed out, and 76 seaters flown by AA albeit probably at a lower than F100 rate. I also don't think there will be a BK nor a strike. I have also lost faith that the Obama administration will do anything but their typical empty PR pap for labor. So, the RLA will remain the same. It's not going to be full 1992 restoration, nor is it going to be a BK contract without the BK. My 2 cents. Some AE guys are saying Bk by Christmas regardless. Either way, that's ok.

Where did that note come from? Its not in my HI6. All i got was a reassignment notification.

Keep thinking that, Wheels. I'll bet it helps you sleep better. Nice of you to admit what it was. As for scope, good luck, but you are going against the grain of the global economy. Tie up your airline with an industry-leading scope clause and see what happens in less than 10 years. I hope you are near retirement because starting over at a regional when you are in your forties is tough. I know since I started over in my late 30's. Not an easy road.

Well we do have a difference of opinion, but I respect your thoughts and appreciate the debate. If APA flies 76 seaters(without some sort of co-op with Eagle) I will be thoroughly shocked. It will be an interesting next few years, I hope for the best for all.

Yes.........I certainly admit here's one guy who cannot be faulted for aiming high.

Their new contract will apparently include :

- Modest pay raises.

- No PBS.

- Pension obviously unaffected.

- Mainline 76-seaters flown at slightly lower rates then old F-100's,
but still with AA schedules and pensions.

- The ability of AMR to pay all other labor groups mainline costs,
especially after THEIR "me too" contracts kick in.

- The ability of AMR to do this competitively against other regionals who
could undercut them easily.

- The disappearance of American Eagle like a fart in the wind.

Nothing wrong with high expectations, except the fact that if they don't materialize, the devestatingly bitter disappointment that follows.

BTW, if AMR was stupid enough to agree to all this, it would only last about 6 months, then.........well, AMR ends up where they would have had the APA threatened to strike.

It's a slightly longer road, but it still leads to the same destination.

BS on the FRB. I had an FT in April and haven't heard jack about it. Thanks EGL ALPA for continuing to be worthless to the Executive pilots.

Hey;easy there pal,they are helping the DFW ATR ops with the heat issue.OTOH, they complained so much,that basically you can thank them for creating such issue to the point of less flying for them creating displacements from DFW. Sad.:rolleyes:

Are you a LGA based CA that commutes from Albany?

No..........what gives you that idea ?

142K!!! use the contract, take advantage, OT grabber with furloughs on the fence, I am sure is justifiable.:cool:

It's interesting that apparently some pilots are angry with others for maximizing their income by taking advantage of the benefits in a contract (one they waited decades for), then frequently turn around and blame them or others for not getting enough benefits in that contract for them. Our union (ALPA) negotiated this provision in our contract and we had to give something else up in order to get this. It's there, many take advantage of it and that's reality. Expecting a pilot with 25 years senioirty to consider the interests of a pilot perhaps not even born when he began here is not realistic. I'm sure not one of those single furloughees would repay him back for giving up tens of thousands of dollars, so THEY can do their time at Eagle as quickly as possible and get to a major sooner. Instead, the consideration is "what will you do for ME".

As a general statement, I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but this is the airline industry. As I said before, the common denominator among airline pilots is, "every pilot group for themselves" and within each pilot group, it's "every pilot for themself".............sad, but true.

But since you're feeling altruistic, perhaps you can email your MEC offering the following in the interest of future junior new-hires;

Dear sir,

In the interest of unity and maximizing the pleasant career experiences of pilots not yet hired here or very recently hired and to avoid furlough, I am willing to either pass on my upgrade entirely so those junior to me can advance to their liking or take a 50% pay cut NOW in the hope it will provide employment to more pilots. Please insure my wishes are communicated and implimented as soon as possible and please ensure everyone else be required to do the same.

Signed,

F/O Andy Hosemyself


-or-


Here is an alterante email I like better (only applicable if they were to heed your expectations);

Dear Sir,

In response to the sacrifices made by senior pilots here who have waited decades to make decent money and have elected to give most of that up at my demand to insure I can avoid furlough, I'd be willing to sign an agreement either repaying those pilots at a later date in full (with interest) when I get to a major carrier -or- agreeing to stay at XXX Airlines to make my career here and abandon my plan of coming here, sucking whatever sap I can get out of this tree and flying off to a prettier tree at the first opportunity in the hope that I too can sacrifice in 20 years for a future pilot currently in kindergarten.

Signed,

F/O Gary Getouttathisplace



My guess, is you bid the best line you can, will upgrade as soon as you can and have (and will) made your career choices in YOUR best interest instead of those junior to you. If you say you haven't or won't, you're not being honest. My guess is that you're also angry that YOUR beliefs are not followed by most others to insure your career goes as fast and smooth as possible and your tenure at your regional is as short as possible. With that attitude, it wouldn't surprise me that once you got to a major, you'd not only not repay these senior pilots for sacrificing for YOU, but would probably belittle them as "lifers" and/or "losers". Congrats.......I can DEFINATELY tell you, YOU are airline pilot material.

If only life molded itself to the way we each think it should be and others acted how we think they should act, would it be heaven. This world is not and so back to reality it is.

Love it. LOL.

I worked with a ca sometime ago and all he did was talk about how he made over $120k last year by bidding day trips, flying under and picking up ot... blah blah blah.....