SKW is starting flying tomorrow out of IAH. Some flights are being "rebranded" at the last second in order to comply with the arbitrators ruling in favor of Continental scope. We are being told that CALPA is fine with this and that we can fly with no fear of career repercussions. Some here and elsewhere say this is not true. With CALPA making no official statement on the matter I feel they are leaving us in professional limbo. No one knows what the real story is. REP pilots are in the same boat. Don't they owe us the courtesy of officially weighing in one way or the other.

 

NO. So what if they did make a statement, what would you do about it. You will have to fly or skywest will get rid of you.

 

You don't really have much choice.

 

I don't know if owe is the right word mate. CALPA doesn't owe SKW pilots anything, but that being said, I hope they wouldn't expect you to put your 5+ years of seniority on the line for an action that certainly isn't scabbing. This latest tactic certainly doesn't comply with the spirit of the contract, but with the merger going through there are a lot of issues that need to be sorted out. Unless "United" starts actively acquiring new 70 seat airplanes and retiring 50 seaters in their favor I don't think this poses a real threat to the scope that will be negotiated.

There is no doubt that this tactic by the new United management is underhanded, but luckily CALPA has bottle-necked further 70 seat flying in their hubs. Furthermore, even though some 70 seat flying exists now, this is much better than a free-for-all expansion that couldn't happened which would've been harder to reverse.

Bottomline, you're not scabbing. At this point, the predatory regional managements out there are constantly ****ing off mainline pilots, but most understand that we're pawns in this game and until somebody strikes or officially denounces certain actions, you keep putting food on your family's table. I mean, most regional pilots didn't loose much sleep when the expansion of 70 seaters came at the cost of the United 737 fleet, et al, so why make a show of getting worried now?

 

Hmm... A respected organization is telling you there is NOTHING wrong with doing this flying, meanwhile a few renegade pilots on the internet tell you it is wrong. Who do you think you should trust.

 

deleted......

 

Because UAL pilots gave up that 70 seat scope. They made a bad decision but no one went around their scope to fly those jets.

 

If the respected organization is CALPA my whole point is they are not telling me that. Our mgmt is saying that CALPA is saying that.

 

RJBoy, there is often a major discrepancy between the views of people who post on their board and the majority of pilots flying the line. In the real world, most people don't hold these radical views.

Go to work and do your job. There is nothing wrong with flying these routes. We gave this flying away. Until we get it back, it is your's to have.

 

A respected organization that accepted SCABS back into their ranks and forgave them and their back dues. Not exactly a "respectable organization" in my book!

The flying we now speak of is nothing new. It's outsourcing of mainline jobs to contract carriers for less money. A decade ago it was 50 seat jets, now its 70 seat jets. You have two choices: fly or quit. No one expects anyone to quit. Even regional pay is better than no pay.

To be a SCAB, you have to cross a legal stike.