I just spit out my coffee reading this.....

well done.

Wait, It's not a joke?

Sadly is it not a joke.
Cheers T5

To the other posters, my screen name is to keep continuity with that "other board"; I joined there in either '99 or '00. Never worked at Eagle, but I had an interview scheduled there for 9/13/2001.

To F9; CFI 1999-2001, freight dog (single-pilot piston checks) 2001-2003, CHQ 145 driver 2003-2007, and then B6 2007-present. Previous airline experience in non-pilot positions working for the AArogant empire. 190 FO 2007 to January 2011, then 320 January 2011 to present. I was present for the signing of the current RAH CBA as a fairly new FO, and can speak to why we signed it, the intent behind the short duration, the FO payscales, etc.

Some examples of the typical relationship between native RAH pilots and different levels of management that I experienced: calls from CP interns to explain 2-minute delays coded to crew, hotels not booked for reserve rotations (or better yet booked at substantially worse locations than the normal crew hotel), crew rooms in domicile being literal closets with a chair shoe-horned in, crew scheduling continually assigning illegal reserve pairings or line-holder reroutes, under the "fly it or grieve it" premise, multiple calls on the day before a reserve rotation threatening disciplinary action for failure to contact (although we were not required to be available on off-days); this was done in an attempt to circumvent Whitlow restrictions on the first day of reserve. This list is by no means comprehensive; the behavior became especially consistent in the 2005-2007 timeframe where growth of the 170 operation far outstripped the company's ability to support the crews. Any place in the CBA with the wording "the company shall, to the best of it's ability, provide/comply/etc" quickly became evident that the company would NEVER have the ability. Prior to approximately late 2004 those wordings had not been used against the pilot group.

As I said previously, I can sympathize with your frustrations regarding the SLI, especially if you've encountered some entitlement mentality amongst native RAH pilots. Regardless of your feelings regarding the IBT, the 190 greivance and arbitration should be a clear warning to your group about the amount of integrity Bedford and Heller truly have. I'd also think that any action to compensate native RAH pilots better (getting 190 pilots on the correct payscale) would reduce future whipsaw threats to the pre-merger F9 pilots. Just my .02

I'm sorry that any of my posts could be construed as arrogant, that is a trait I try most to avoid.

I don't know that I said the Negotiators have soured the relationship, I think that IBT National and the Trustee they assigned to 357 while in trusteeship, HAVE further damaged the relationship with RAH Management. IBT National and the Trustee certainly had an extremely negative affect on the FAPA/F9 pilot/IBT 357/RAH pilot relationship.

I also recognize that things could not be this bad without both sides contributing to the poor relationship. I don't know the history of the IBT's and Management's relationship prior to becoming involved through the SLI process. I base much of my perception of the relationship on the behavior of the 747 ExCo reps present at the table through the negotiation, mediation and arbitration process and on IBT National's unwillingness to work with the Frontier pilots and our leadership at any level.

If someone could give an unbiased history of the IBT/RAH relationship, it could be extremely useful. Someone said, "We didn't always have this type of relationship with Management." I'd love to hear how it got from there to where it is today.

Our first contract was also written based partially on good faith, the worst phrase we had in contract 1 was, "Whenever possible." We were lucky, soon after we got of first contract, we got a VP of Flt Ops that showed us how horribly "Whenever possible" could be exploited. Contract 2007 does not contain that phrase - ANYWHERE. Live and learn.

We have had crappy crew schedulers, CP's and VP's. We were fortunate that we could appeal directly to the CEO on the more onerous issues and if we had a good case, he became involved and the issue was generally resolved quickly. We too were "a sleepy, pleasant to work for" airline. I think much of that exists today.

The primary reason we disagree with the IBT's approach is that they seem driven to create conflict or at least exacerbate or elevate every issue into an all out war. IMO, employees of - sleepy, pleasant to work for - airlines would prefer to resolve issues at the lowest level, with the least conflict possible.

Don't get me wrong, we have (especially when we had crap managers) declared war on managers and issues, but only when there was no possibility of resolving it through reason. I believe our restraint in taking only the issues that threatened our membership and our QOL is the reason we have an exceptional record of winning arbitrations. If we have a record of working in a reasonable manner with Management, when we freak out it really gets people's attention.

If, as I perceive the IBT to be, a Union freaks out over everything, it loses its impact as Management can't differentiate between issues that the Union is willing to throw itself on their sword over and issues that the Union may be escalating for political or personal reasons or just because they're dying for a fight over anything.

Thank you, really.

I've always struggled with events, arbitrations, a company's or a union's actions and the effect on the industry as a whole. It seems to me everyone in the industry is concerned about what a singular pilot group does in lowering the bar, until it comes to their own pilot group.

I agree the 190 is a 100 seat aircraft, I agree that the First Officer's pay at RAH is despicable. I hope they are able to fix the way RAH ignores seniority, the way RAH schedules their pilots (although to a certain degree they're at the mercy of the carrier with which they have a CPA) and scheduling seems the most obvious section that could be modified to benefit both the pilot group and the company as far as efficiency and productivity.

I'm sorry if it seems as though I'm celebrating any of these issues because the pilots are "merely" RJ drivers, that is not how I feel. I have good friends that are RAH 170 & 190 pilots, I think no less of their skills and the aircraft they fly are every bit as advanced as any aircraft operated by Frontier or other carriers.

I also realize that as long as Bryan and company are hoping to achieve the same thing as the Frontier pilots our interests are aligned, the day we are no longer hoping to achieve the same thing is the day we have to start being very careful with Bryan. But, for the Frontier pilots to enter into a relationship with RAH Management assuming the worst, when we have yet to have a reason to not trust them is counterproductive.

So, I don't think less of the RAH pilots because of their contract or the airplanes they fly, I still have an issue with the IBT's strategy of assuming the worst in every situation and entering a "battle to the death" on every conflict they face.

Pat was able to work with the Company on the line hour reduction LOA, I know that's not turning out exactly as it was envisioned, but, IMO, that type of negotiation is a step in the right direction.

And, I again apologize if my comments or posts come across as arrogant, that is not my intention.

My personal view on the we bought you issue is this:

1.) Our scope mandates the lists must be merged. There's no way around this which is why you guys are fighting so hard to find a way around it. Pilots actively helping to break scope, sounds just wrong to me.

2.) Federal law does not allow for a staple. (Had the F9 SLI team gone in with a different approach it might have gone much differently. Alas they did not so more than likely their proposal was tossed out the window shortly after reading page 1)

3.) My upgrade time has now increased because at the very least my management team, instead of pursuing CPA contracts is busy trying to learn it's @$$ from a hole in the ground dealing with running an airline that flies for itself. Skywest got a deal with Airways, we've missed out on a few others as well.

4.) My feeling is that I don't deserve your chair, and you don't deserve my chair. But if their is growth on the Airbus side of the yard, should my awarded number come up, I'd like to hve the option to bid over there. I know you all say we should go straight to the bottom. If I went I'd have only the 20 defectees or how ever many went below me that gave up there spot early. (Tier III) Basically I'd be at the bottom. At the same time you guys should have some sort of protection that if F9 goes tits up and we secure a large CPA or have a ton of attrition you can fly here and stay current with a decent QOL until you find a better place to be.

5.) I understand the argument that you guys did your time in the regionals already. What about all the UAL furloughs and AA furloughs we have working here? They all came back when times were tough and haven't demanded to go to the top. Rather than get ****ed at the RAH natives, get ****ed that BB and Co have stalled us out of a contract for almost 5 years now. The price goes up every year. The animosity in this relationship did not start with local 357/1224/747. It came from FAPA. Had you guys come out with the RPC idea right away and meant it, before we were able to get our ducks in a row in 2010, it would have won easily. Most people here were fed up with IBT, myself included. There has been a dramatic shift in the way things work around here. If you guys took the time to get involved with your new union you would see that. There's plenty of room under 1 roof here.


If BB is able to completely wash his hand of everything F9, and you guys so longer see 1 cent of RAH money and are completely with someone else, I longer have any sort of flow through. i'm more than fine with that. But as long as it's one company, or there's some sort of financial relationship, we need to be 1 team. End of story.

You can't really pick Frontier and accuse them of being the only ones that tried a "staple." First, it wasn't a staple and second, the IBT's first proposal put 1,300 of their pilots at the top of the list. The number gradually decreased with each proposal but the last one I remember still had something like 350+ RAH pilots at the top of the list.

The argument (which I never fully understood) was that even if RAH lost every CPA, those 350+ would still have a job and should therefore be at the top of the list.

RAH hasn't even bid on a CPA since they bought F9, have they? I'm not certain, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

At the first meeting in Dallas in January of 2010, the RAH pilot's committee expressed serious concerns that all Frontier was bringing was risk that didn't exist in the CPA/FFD side of the business. Our simple solution to their concerns was, OK, let us be separate, we're willing to take the risk and remove the risk to your side of the business. Obviously, that wasn't the way it played out.

Bryan's motivation for purchasing a Branded operation was that he believed the CPA/FFD operation was "a melting ice cube." He wanted to diversify the business in the event that became true.

With the American regional aviation model broken, consolidation is the answer | CAPA

I don't know how you can make that statement. I guess it depends on where in the timeline you start determining that the "animosity" began. For us, as I've said over and over, it began in Dallas in January of 2010, when we met for the "negotiation" part of the process and steadily went down hill from there. If you weren't in Dallas, I don't know how you can declare that what happened there wasn't the beginning of the "animosity."

I agree. But bear in mind that we were in discussions with IBT National over how to best address the representation issue. At one point they told us they were open to the idea of a separate Local for the Frontier pilots. We were trying to work together to come to a mutually agreeable and beneficial solution. It was only after IBT National cancelled the next meeting and told us to pound sand that we started to explore other solutions, such as RPC. We should have started sooner and attempted to get more of a "buy-in" from the RAH pilots, but that would have gone against the spirit of trying to work with the IBT and solving the problem together.

Instead of trying to work with the Frontier group, they finally said, "It's our way or the highway." That didn't help with the level of animosity that had been building.

I agree Pat and his committee were a positive change. I believe that if Pat and his group had been allowed to operate without having to run everything through the Trustee, things could have been much different. The Trustee did everything he could to alienate every Frontier pilot that he spoke with, I don't know if that was intentional or not.

I guess we'll see how the new President and his ExCo do, now that they are out of trusteeship. We haven't heard a lot of positive things about your new President in regards to Frontier or from RAH Management. I'm not going to judge one way or another until Craig has a chance to show us what he's for or against.

I do wonder, if the new Board decides to keep the Trustee, why they would want him and what it will cost the membership to retain him. Has anyone asked what IBT National would charge 357 for his "services?"

You see, we don't feel that it is "our" union. The first thing National did was to sue the Company over our LOA 67. Next, they demanded (twice now) that our Merger Committee drop our suit challenging Eischen's award. Then they ordered our Merger Committee to disperse. Along with that, they tried to fire our Attorneys and DEMANDED that we turn all of our money over to 357 immediately.

Pat was very courageous and accommodating and came to DEN, with Doug, once to meet with the Frontier pilots. I, and many others, were impressed by Pat's willingness to meet with us.

Since that meeting, we have heard NOTHING from the IBT or 357, except for their demands on our pilot group and our old union. If the IBT or 357 really wanted any serious level of participation, doesn't it seem as though they would at least try to establish a dialogue collectively or individually with Frontier pilots?

We feel we got the IBT shoved down our throats and since the IBT has done nothing to earn any level of trust, fraternity, respect or unity.

So, those are my thoughts on the situation.......

At somepoint you'll understand we are going after LOA 67 because it gives BB a way around our scope clause. IBT was voted in by the majority. By the time it came to vote FAPA/RPC had alienated our pilot group. Again. I'm going to take the word of my current representation here. You may not have heard a lot from the 357 because the overwhelming majority of F9 people have not joined.

Unify the groups and lets start the healing.

That is a problem common to all three groups, we pretty much have to, or choose to, take our representative's word on almost all issues. I know everyone has a reason for feeling "special" or that they have more info than others, but I was personally present for the vast majority of the events and conversations I've posted on this board. It's slanted to the degree that it's based on my perceptions but it's not 2nd, 3rd or 4th hand as much of the information here is.

I "believe" less than a dozen Frontier pilots have joined the IBT. I had hoped my last post would help in explaining why that is. Did it help at all or was it a waste of typing? Feel free to be honest.

How do you suggest (real and serious question) we start to unify the groups? What do you, or anyone else, think would get the ball rolling?

I'm sorry I can only see this from my perspective but it seems as though the ball is in the IBT's court (is the IBT's court as nice as Bryan's?). :)

World Travel Awards Names Frontier Airlines 'North America's Leading Low-Cost Airline' for 2011 | Benzinga.com

World Travel Awards Names Frontier Airlines 'North America's Leading Low-Cost Airline' for 2011

Posted on 11/17/11 at 4:36pm by Benzinga Staff

DENVER--(BUSINESS WIRE)--

Frontier Airlines has been named “North America's Leading Low-Cost Airline” by World Travel Awards, the travel industry awards program that has been described by the Wall Street Journal as the “Oscars of the Travel Industry.”

More than 213,000 travel industry professionals from 160 countries participated in the World Travel Awards voting program. This year's award mirrors two awards the airline received from the World Travel Awards in 2010, when Frontier was named the “World's Leading Low-Cost Airline” and “North America's Leading Low-Cost Airline.”

“Travelers can rely on Frontier Airlines for affordable fares all year long. We've worked tirelessly every day for more than 18 years to provide our customers with an affordable, enjoyable, comfortable and safe experience – representing our trademark better and different experience,” said Peter Kowalchuk, director of Corporate Communications at Frontier Airlines. “This award is a tribute to the more than 5,000 aviation professionals whose work made the honor possible.”

This past October, Frontier launched a newly renovated website showcasing their affordable fares and a new calendar shopping feature that makes it easier than ever to find the cheapest days to fly. With user-friendly navigation, travelers are provided the opportunity to compare fares to select the most affordable flight.

Since its inception, Frontier Airlines has grown to more than 5,000 aviation professionals operating from hubs at Denver International Airport, Milwaukee's General Mitchell International Airport and Kansas City International Airport. Currently in its 18th year, Frontier offers service to more than 75 destinations in the United States, Mexico and Costa Rica.

Frontier Airlines is a wholly owned subsidiary of Indianapolis-based Republic Airways Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: RJET [FREE Stock Trend Analysis]).

About World Travel Awards

World Travel Awards was launched in 1993 to acknowledge and recognize excellence in the world's travel and tourism industry. Now celebrating its 18th anniversary, the award is regarded as the very highest achievement that a travel product could ever hope to receive. Votes are cast by 213,000 travel professionals, which include travel agencies, tour and transport companies and tourism organizations in over 160 countries across the globe. Votes are cast globally by industry professionals in over 1,000 different categories. Attended by senior executives from major travel companies, operators and destinations, WTA events are universally respected as providing established, top level networking opportunities, regionally and globally.

About Frontier Airlines

Frontier Airlines is a wholly owned subsidiary of Republic Airways Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: RJET), an airline holding company that also owns Chautauqua Airlines, Republic Airlines and Shuttle America. Currently in its 18th year of operations, Frontier employs 5,000 aviation professionals and operates from hubs at Denver International Airport, Milwaukee's General Mitchell International Airport and Kansas City International Airport. Frontier offers service to more than 75 destinations in the United States, Mexico and Costa Rica.

For in-depth information on Frontier Airlines and to book tickets, visit FrontierAirlines.com.

Frontier Airlines
Media Line, 720-374-4560
[email protected]

Unifying steps.

1.) Who ever is calling the shots for the F9 side publically asks the group to to join the 357.

2.) Local 357 appoints a F9 committee to help streamline the groups.

3.) [Probably the hardest] FAPA Invest must either cease to exist or you have to let all RAH pilots in on the deal. This is the most divisive thing going on right now. This LLC was created purely to get around our scope. Pilots screwing pilots has to stop.

4.) Both sides get matching lanyards showing solidarity to the company that we want 1 equal contract.

5.) Us local 357 guys need to add F9 people to everything we have asap. Welcome with open arms and frankly ignore the past animosity once the F9 group stops the fight.