Ok, a bit different than my read of the comments. I don't see a "risk" in fighting to enforce the XJT, if done by legitimate, legal means. I don't see a possible outcome of that killing any deal, or even having much affect at all. Therefore, I don't see job loss / BK / etc.

XJT will win, or lose, their claims, and SkW, Inc, will still own, and have control of, XJT.

The only thing that will pertain to job loss will be those who might quit. I suspect that they will be a staggeringly teeny, tiny number.

 

From what i am hearing now is that Skywest wants to give us the "protections we want" if we are willing to not be merged with Skywest. I am not trying to stir the pot but it sounds like the Skywest pilots MIGHT be on the losing end of this deal. Without a contract there is nothing stopping Skywest management from signing over portions of Skywest flying or growth that would have gone to Skywest over to ASA just to placate our pilot group.

Our union isnt sure what it wants to do right now. Skywest management doesnt want to merge all three, our union is torn between fighting for all three merged into one and the possible Skywest deal falling through or negotiating protections and guarantees into a new contract. What does Skywest management have to offer besides giving us all three lists merged into one... If i was a pilot at skywest i might be a little PO'ed at my management if they are going to negotiate away future growth and or current flying. Where did they get the money to do this buying? OFF the backs of their work groups.

I think if they **** off their work groups then there is very little stopping a union in the next vote.

 

That's a heck of a stretch to think that "protections" could only mean SkW pilots lose. Yes, I'm sure that was always possible, either direction.

 

If the ASA/ExpressJet pilots gain "protections" in exchange for ExpressJet pilots dropping their claim to a single list, I don't really see what there is worth getting.

Let's say the EV/XE group gets protection against SkyWest, Inc. buying or starting a third wholly-owned subsidiary. This has some value, but ASA already has protection from SkyWest, Inc. transferring aircraft out of our system. So we would gain a little, but not a lot.

Also, let's say we get a no-furlough clause covering the entire pilot group, even the furloughed guys (say they're recalled as part of the deal). That's great, but it only covers those that work here now, not those in the future.

Maybe we could get protections against the "retire and replace" where SkyWest, Inc. could retire a 145 or CRJ at EV/XE, and replace it with a CR7/9 at SkyWest Airlines. Again, it gives us some benefit, but not as much as one list. This would also be hard to put in writing to be able to enforce in a grievance. We all know what would constitute "retire and replace" but all it would take is a little maneuvering by SkyWest to render this clause useless.

Finally, what if we got a right to a percentage of future growth airplanes delivered to the SkyWest, Inc. umbrella. Say, XE+EV is 60% of SkyWest, Inc., so they get 60% of all growth aircraft. Never mind the fact that this would never be agreed to, just bear with me. This would by far be the best protection that we would get, but guess what, with one list 100% of growth airplanes would go to this pilot group.

So really, as far as I can see, one pilot group is by far the best. The latter two items would give us the most benefit, and would be worth pursuing if it goes that route, but they're all just band-aids on the real problem.

 

Agree with all of the above. Both sides are positioning for negotiations. If our scope holds water, JA was just posturing to get some concessions...if our scope is truly poorly written, ALPA is posturing for mgmt concessions. We won't know which is true until the lawyers are done lawyering. The playing field is level at this point.

 

Skywest WANTS ASA/XJT to merge ... theres two players here ASA and SKW. One gains and the other loses when management is trying to make this deal happen. XJT has leverage in forcing protections, future flying, and current SKW flying. Our contract is clear and our pilot group has just been witness to a complete decade of other airlines illustrating what happens when you let management have ANY leeway in a contract.

One list or SKW pilots are the ones going to be "giving" to make this deal happen. SKW could walk away but when they are planning on 50 million a year in savings ...

 

That was the case 2 years ago, why would it change?

 

I feel entitled to the terms of the contract I entered into for my services! My frustration comes from a management team who is intent on trampling my contract twice now. And my much bigger frustration is hearing those who's contract is not being violated telling us we shouldn't try to uphold our scope clause while at the same time hearing those same people vilify mainline pilots for not falling on their sword to uphold their scope.

 

Your last sentence pretty much kills the rest of your argument. You think skywest management would be stupid enough to give growth to the union side? That would 100% make skywest go union and pretty much make the whole point moot. Best you can hope for is to keep your current flying and hope if they replace the obsolete erj with bigger planes they go to you.

 

Two years ago we had this same sentiment. The direction our company has taken recently is appalling, as I am sure you have heard.

We used to be a very prideful group, and that was because we had a good relationship with management and a good contract.

Now we have a CEO whose only concern was to clean us up, sell us, and make bank. From our perspective he had no intention of trying to make us profitable and secure new flying... there are just a lot of frustrated XJTers out there right now.