Its to my advantage, I have a couple years left. Flying something bigger than a C7 would be nice.

Please edumacate me too. You need to be educated. J/k

But no seriously. Me and possibly some others want to hear good points for why it is a yes. Why it's beneficial to vote yes. What are we missing that your/we are going to get out of it?

Remember... The captains who waited 9-10 years to upgrade thought in 2002 they'd only be here for a year or two, just like you mentioned. Things happens with the industry. The corporation. Outsourcing. Fleet shrinkage. The economy. And unfortunately other crazy things like 9/11. I would strongly suggest you be very careful stating you'll be here for another 2 years. Especially if you aren't competitive to go to a major or major cargo airline by being a FO.

Dont think that those things I mention in italics are prevented by this contract.

Edit: I just realized that your likely a captain so ya ur likely competitive to go on. By why screw the group?

From my understanding other than AE management giving the MEC a sheet of paper titled 1113, they management have nothing filed in the BK. AE management has not spent one day in court, so in order for AE to begin they will have to submit a business plan and the why's for the cuts.

A NO vote does nothing negative to the pilots since this is all being done outside of the court jurisdiction. A no vote will require the company if it chooses to go to court and file. This what AE/AMR want to avoid in doing because it will light the fires at APA and every other union at AA when they actually see the business plan for AE.

A vote NO only pushes management where they dont want to go, they would have to either sweeten the pot or roll the dice on AE going to court.

AE cannot justify there position in BK court because every other regional management is stating publicly that AE is the number one profitable regional today with its current contracts.

If AE is to get screwed over it can only happen by AA/AMR, so they would have to take an opposite position to the one AA/AMR have taken on AE and that wont happen.

So a vote NO does nothing but go back to the table.

We have 1500 flights a day. It's not going to disappear in a few years. Where's it going to go? Half or one-quarter of our flying will be very difficult for an regional to pick up. Remember some airlines (pinnacolaba) has no money to invest in an expansion. Psa just announced vacancy and hiring.

If AMR wants feed. Which it HAS to get for the AA flights, they need people to fly da planes.

Garton knows this and that's why (a year ago?) he sent a multiple page document arguing 1500 hour rule and rest. They know it.

What might be a good point for somebody to vote yes might be a point for somebody to vote no. Think about it like this, pay banding might not be a bad thing for a older CA in the EMB that doesn't want to go to the CRJ but can now get CRJ pay. But for somebody like me pay banding is a bad thing because I will never get CRJ pay even if I fly the CRJ. For somebody with less then 7-8 years left the TA is going to be better then anything we get from the judge. Some points suck for everyone and some are good for everyone, but most can go either way based on the person.

This just in...
 

I found This quote from the latest union email to be just rich considering what happened at Comair in '09....


Guaranteed aircraft is the same thing as guaranteed jobs; it is a specified allotment of aircraft that yield a corresponding number of employed pilots.

Samballs have you seen this yet?

They are right, but I am also the same person who kept telling people a fleet plan is meaningless. So yes guaranteed jobs and a fleet plan are the same in the fact they are both meaningless numbers.

All AE pilots should read this. I believe only DFW pilots receive this email and all system wide pilots should be aware of this.

------Original Message------

*
*
*
*********************************
August 24, 2012
*
*
Fellow DFW Pilots,
*
The MEC chairman decided that he wanted a DFW pilot teleconference to address pilots' concerns about the AIP.
*
We told the SPC Committee chairman that we did not want this teleconference scheduled because we would not be able to moderate the call nor were we assured that the opinions of your elected leadership would take precedence over the opinions of the MEC chairman.
*
Additionally, none of your LEC officers are available to conduct any type of teleconference at the appointed time.
*
When we asked the SPC chairman to reschedule this teleconference so that our concerns could be addressed, we were told that the MEC chairman wanted the meeting in our domicile at this time and that he would not reschedule it.
*
I cannot explain the actions of the MEC leadership, nor do I understand the rush. What is clearly apparent to me is that the MEC chairman wants to bypass your elected leaders and communicate directly with you. You must make your own judgment on this.
*
We will schedule a LEC meeting soon so that you can speak directly with the leaders that you elected and not have the filters of the MEC officers.
*
Fraternally,
*
[deleted private info]

My biggest reason for changing my mind to yes, I want an enforceable, consensual agreement exiting bankruptcy. I don't want to enter into mergers/spinoffs/standalones without an agreement.

Yup, I remember that. We got a nice line guaranteeing aircraft not pilots. They parked 37? And furloughed the crap out of comair. Im voting no, but I'm sick and tired of hearing people say AA can't find a carrier to pick it up. Yes they can and they will. When DL did it to comair, rah, mesa, etc. Just came to cvg and hired the furloughs. How does anyone think gojets is covering all they're new flying? Simple they hired comair management and hired comair pilots. Its not hard to do. Only ones who can't figure it out are the people saying it can't be done. With that said lets vote this turd down, and show management what suck feels like. Sorry if this post sucks but typing on my phone and Google seems to be owning my spelling and overall sentence building ability!