|
Originally Posted by AxialFlow
(Post 1437971)
Pinnacle pilots didn't REQUIRE concessions either, but they still took them. Much as we all suspect SKW pilots will.
|
Originally Posted by Slats
(Post 1437490)
Hey, kinda like you eh Capt?
|
Originally Posted by Slats
(Post 1437984)
I highly doubt OO pilots will vote yes to anything that resembles Pinnacles contract... We're profitable, Mesa and Pinnacle filed BK and Pinnacle was "threatend" with a shutdown, big difference...
|
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
(Post 1438056)
SKW pilots "vote". That's rich. Their "vote" means about as much as an Airbus pilot's inputs on the stick.
|
Originally Posted by Jet87
(Post 1437348)
OO will park another 11-12 CRJ 200s for delta this fall, I personally think management has a plan for them... the 100 planes that come off for United are not being parked, they are just coming off contract (there is an opportunity to renew these contracts), so this is what management has been saying is we need to be competitive to keep the flying we have with United, and the 175s will be growth, if we don't renew flying with United with the CRJs then 175s will be replacement, and United doesn't hate the 200 like delta does, there is potential to keep it around. SkyWest is also really liking this pro rate thing, they will probably keep 200s just for that.
|
Originally Posted by Surprise
(Post 1438078)
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
(Post 1438056)
SKW pilots "vote". That's rich. Their "vote" means about as much as an Airbus pilot's inputs on the stick.
|
Originally Posted by mking84
(Post 1438101)
To say that SKYW will be immune from a 50 seat reduction is pretty ridiculous. Do you honestly think all these parked 200's are going to find homes with all carriers shedding 50 seat lift? The fact is Inc as a whole (SKYW and XJT) are going to be much smaller in 5-10 years, we are not immune to the changes in the industry. The quicker you put the kool aid down and take a look at things you'll have a much better idea of where this place is headed. SKYW is NOT afraid to shrink to make more money.
Will there be a reduction in 50 seaters? Yes. Are they all going to go in the desert immediately? No |
Originally Posted by Nevets
(Post 1438134)
That's because federal law requires it and was conducted under the auspices of the NMB, not by the company.
|
They could place some of the 200's on EAS contracts up in Montana. They would have to of course win the contracts, but SkyWest has had pretty good luck recently.
|
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
(Post 1438056)
SKW pilots "vote". That's rich. Their "vote" means about as much as an Airbus pilot's inputs on the stick.
Our SAPA is somewhat like a “student council” but I bet you if you do some unbiased research, which you’re obviously incapable of, you’ll find our Mgmt. group has respected our agreed upon policies far better than any other regional Mgmt. has respected their ‘union’ contract. Since you can’t, try taking a look around these boards and see how many disgruntle SkyWest pilots there are and compare that to how many disgruntled other pilots there are. "Proofs in the pudding" as they say. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:35 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands