And you still believe the company will abide the 10 year contract and will park airplanes to keep the flow flowing...uhummm

 

For those who don't believe it takes a long time let me give you examples. I filed one in November of 2003. Yes 03 not 13 and it was finally heard in February of 2013 yes 9 1/2 years later. Last one was filed in march of 2011 and I just won a few weeks ago, 3 years this time. So why do you think they wont violate anything they want if it saves them money. If its gonna cost them 10 million to park the airplanes but they will violate the flow and then be forced to pay 5 million in damages 5 years later what do you think they are gonna do

 

if they do that then someone better be flying the airplanes to make payments on them because the banks want there money. so which part of the contract will be violated by management, the fleet commitment or the flow commitment which one is cheaper and cause the less effect to the feed.

 

Even if the process does work, it still takes a long time.

On the other hand, parking aircraft (even the old 50 seaters) will cost the company money because the leases must be paid. That kind of violation gets settled in weeks or months, not years like pilot contract violations.

So when it comes down to it, which will the company violate?

If Eagle management is anything like all the other management's out there, then I would expect them to violate your flow in order to keep the planes flying. Not only do they delay the judgement, but they have a decent chance of winning if they can prove that the lack of new hires was unforeseen and outside of their control.

 

Your not seeing the grand scheme here. Ultimately 50% of aag mainline new hire slots will forever goto eagle! now add 25% to psa and maybe 15% to pdt. Suddenly the only off the street hires will be interns military and the friends and family plan.

Delta and even maybe united follow suit and suddenly the guys not at the airlines with the flow are in huge trouble. They are going to do all they can to prop up the low cost regional market as long as they can. If airline management forces everyone in to the cradle to grave model, they can put off the shortage even longer. Keep the musical chairs going in their favor?

 

Excerpt taken from PlaneBusiness Banter by Holly Hegeman, Editor
Friday March 21, 2014, Volume 18, Issue 11

Speaking of the regional airline sector, the pilots at American Eagle continue to vote on the tentative agreement proposal the Air Line Pilots Association MEC put out for a vote. The voting period on the TA ends next week, so we will then have an answer as to whether American Airlines will be using American Eagle to fly those sixty new Embraer E-Jets, or whether the flying will be dispersed amongst the list of regionals that bid for the work. As we mentioned previously, that RFP which breaks the flying up into three sets of 20 aircraft each has already gone out for bids.

I want to take a few minutes and talk about this vote, as I think it is one of the most important union votes we've seen in the industry of late. First of all, I would like to say to the leaders of the ALPA MEC who refused to recommend to members of their union how they should vote on this agreement -- shame on you. Abstention is not an option. (Three members voted to recommend the agreement to members, while six members abstained.) The members of your union elected you to represent them. They don't have the same level of access to management discussions and negotiations that you have. They don't have access to the same information on a national ALPA scale as you have. You were elected to represent them in situations just like this.

For a member of the Eagle MEC to stand on the sidelines, pull the political card, and not provide more guidance to members on such an important vote is, well, shameful.

Hope you guys can sleep at night.

Having said that, I want to say a few things about this proposed contract because there is a lot of bad information out there concerning it. I think American Eagle pilots need to vote yes, not no.

1) The number one misperception about this agreement that I have heard over and over again is that Eagle management will come back to ALPA if the union votes down the deal because no other regional will be able to hire pilots to staf the new flying.

If you are an American Eagle pilot and this is why you are going to vote no, you are in for a rude awakening. Is not going to happen. RFPs are out. There are hungry stand-alone regional airlines out there ready to pounce.

They will find the pilots.

2) On the reverse side of the argument, another misperception is that Eagle won't be able to hire anyone. I decided to ask around and see just how the hiring pool looks at American Eagle. Since we've heard mixed messages from other regional airlines of late, (including some mild hysteria) and since it would stand to reason that a job at Eagle, with a flow-through, would be better than a job at a standalone regional, guess what we found out?

According to more than one source (and they both coincide so I am going to go with the numbers) between the time that the first agreement was reached until the time the MEC voted not to send it out, weekly pilot applications went from 8 per week to 66 per week. Applications then dropped to only about 3 or 4 per week after the MEC voted not to send the deal out. Makes sense.

What does this tell you? It tells me that American Eagle with a pilot contract is looked upon as a desirable place for pilots to work.

How are applications looking now? I was told that after the "new" TA was reached, there was yet another spike in applications. Weekly applications are now back in the 50 to 55 per week range. And I am told the overwhelming majority of those applicants are qualified to fly the airplanes that need to be flown.

3) The flow-through agreement. What is the dif erence between what is in place now and what will be in place in the future if the TA passes?

Today, Eagle provides 50% of the monthly new hire class to American. If the class is 40, Eagle supplies 20. Under the new deal, 100% of the first 30 pilots American hires in a month will come from Eagle. That is a significant improvement, especially if American is hiring smaller classes, like 20 per month. Previously, only 10 would have flowed through to American; under the terms of the new contract, it would be all 20.

So if the class is 30, it is all Eagle. If it is 40, 30 are Eagle. Granted, if the new class is 60, only 30 will be Eagle. But that would still be 50% -- the same as the current agreement.

4) As best I can tell, not one pilot takes a paycut as part of this deal.

First Officers below 8 years and Captains below 12 years will still get step increases, Captains in years 15 to 17 will keep getting annual increases, First Officers who are promoted to Captains will get huge pay increases, and Captains who flow through to American will obviously hit the jackpot.

5) This deal guarantees 170 aircraft. The contract between Delta and Endeavor only guarantees 81.

Oh, and another thing I learned this week. While Endeavor pilots do have flow-through rights -- they only have 12 a month. In addition, they have to interview at Delta. Sources tell me that less than half of them are receiving job offers. All of Eagle's flow-through pilots will get an offer because there is no interview.

So why are pilots telling me they are going to vote no? Two main reasons.

1) "The only way to attract pilots is to raise pay and benefits." (See above. Apparently American is not having trouble getting applications.) I'm sure a lot of people would like to see the entire regional/mainline system gutted and changed -- I know I would. But this contract is not going to do that. Nor will this happen if the contract is not approved. But not approving this contract could make the lives of American Eagle pilots much worse. Sorry. Wish I could say otherwise. So if you want to vote no and "stand for the cause" it's not going to end well. As I said, those RFPs are already out there.


2) "Mainline carriers are making record profits. We want more."

Unfortunately, that is not how the broken regional airline model in the U.S. works. Or doesn't work. How it works right now is this: there are regional airlines out there that will bid on these RFPs at rates lower than the costs contained in this TA. That's a fact. A sad fact. It is the model that is broken. Given the constraints of that broken model, I say a "yes" to this contract beats the alternative.

We'll all find out which way the vote goes next week.

 

Now THAT is laughable. OMG!

Guess you never heard of the APA's "floor" grievance where pilots on furlough for almost ten years counted as "active." How about the EGL ALPA one where the final decision changed 180 from the prelim in just a couple weeks?

Time to take the blinders off and take stock of reality.

 

Anyone listen to Pedro's latest Webinar yesterday? I joined about 30 mins late or so and he sounded like a bumbling fool. Dropping threats about Piedmont taking the planes because their "Q400s" (yes, that's what he said) will be retiring soon and they'll need new planes. I couldn't take it anymore after about 5 mins and left. The desperation in his voice was laughable.

 

Interesting, that is basically the rumor being floated by lower level management at Endeavor right now... Big announcement supposed to arrive beginning of April... No chance of any kind of pay or benefit increase but "what else will get the apps flowing in?"

 

On the flow alone, according to the TA, is 30 a month flow. Thats 360 new hires a year. Does anyone actually believe this is a realistic number? This doesn't even take into account people retiring or leaving for other airlines. Current attrition at AE is close to 50 pilots a month. Thats 600 pilots a year that AE needs to recruit just to maintain status quo.

Management says we have enhanced flow. The TA has zero enhancements to flow. It is still at 50%. The only thing it offers is enhanced metering. This means the company plans on metering pilots if the TA passes. We currently have a grievance on the companies current metering practices. Why we would applaud the company for violating our arbitrated award, by voting yes, is beyond comprehension.
Either way we vote we will shrink. I voted no. Id rather keep my pay while we shrink, than lose pay while we shrink.