Search

Notices
SkyWest Regional Airline

Skywest

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-22-2015 | 08:09 PM
  #10181  
JustAMushroom's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
From: Capt
Default

Originally Posted by StuckMike
I'm voting yes because the regional industry is changing; pilots are harder to find and we need to stay competitive and attract pilots....
Plus, if we can continue to attract lots of pilots while other regionals struggle and even shrink, there will be growth here and that means more opportunities for everyone here.

Do I wish it was more? Sure, but we can't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs (well, perhaps silver, er...make that bronze)
Oh dear god. I just vomited in my mouth. I can't believe there are still people like this around.

Do us all a favor man and read a couple of books and talk to some people who have been around for a while! If we are ever going to make a gain it is going to be now. There will not be a time like this again in the next decade, perhaps career. If you are holding out for a better time you're never going to get it. And as someone else said, the only thing that is going to change is Chipaway can get a solid gold umbrella holder and another house. You aren't going to see a better QOL, better staffing, better hotels, or a faster upgrade.

There are limits to how fast SW will grow or extend themselves. Ask guys who have been around a while. Ask about the flying they gave up when UA asked for both a IAD and ORD base. Why? Because they thought it was too much to handle. They were probably right.

Ask if the sims are at capacity. Ask if a LCA has ever flown with anyone other than a student in the last 3 years. If you want to prostrate yourself for SGU, go right ahead. Just don't do it thinking they appreciate you for putting your family second.

I'm not suggesting getting greedy or unreasonable. But I am hoping we all can shed the beaten spouse syndrome and demand the respect we are due.

TFAYD
Old 04-22-2015 | 09:08 PM
  #10182  
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,934
Likes: 0
From: EMB 145 CPT
Default Skywest

Originally Posted by Hou757
No extra vacation day anymore. That was temporary..

Check 21.A2

What you are talking about was for the company not restoring days off within the current bid period. A whole separate issue that has nothing to with reserve staffing.
Old 04-23-2015 | 02:11 AM
  #10183  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Default

I ran the numbers on the new pay proposal. For the amount I typically work, with the per diem & pay increase and essential decrease in compensation via reduction of 401k match through vesting %, I would make the same with or without the new contract. There is nothing in it for me to lock myself into a four year agreement with a zero sum gain. I urge everyone to do your own assessment.
Old 04-23-2015 | 04:59 AM
  #10184  
24/48's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Default

If the Skywest pilots vote no, what's to stop the company from simply implementing whatever they want?
Old 04-23-2015 | 05:46 AM
  #10185  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,481
Likes: 1,055
Default

Originally Posted by 24/48
If the Skywest pilots vote no, what's to stop the company from simply implementing whatever they want?
I would imagine Skywest management knows that if they start implementing unpopular contract terms, there is a real risk of that pilot group unionizing.
Old 04-23-2015 | 06:04 AM
  #10186  
24/48's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by CBreezy
I would imagine Skywest management knows that if they start implementing unpopular contract terms, there is a real risk of that pilot group unionizing.
Management is driven by ego. They've thwarted Union drives in the past so they can do it again, at least in their minds. It sounds like this is more of a play to prospective pilots, getting "meat in the seat" so to speak. Skywest knows they're heavily weighted with 50 seaters, UAL just announced more 50 seaters being parked in 2016 as leases come up. Without a steady flow of new-hires due to stagnation as they park more airplanes Skywest will become less attractive during the RFP process.

Don't take my statements as a supporter of a "yes" vote, but without NMB/RLA it doesn't really matter, management can simply do what they feel is necessary.
Old 04-23-2015 | 06:14 AM
  #10187  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by 24/48
Management is driven by ego. They've thwarted Union drives in the past so they can do it again, at least in their minds. It sounds like this is more of a play to prospective pilots, getting "meat in the seat" so to speak. Skywest knows they're heavily weighted with 50 seaters, UAL just announced more 50 seaters being parked in 2016 as leases come up. Without a steady flow of new-hires due to stagnation as they park more airplanes Skywest will become less attractive during the RFP process.
If only there was a company owned by Skywest (but not skywest itself). That was properly staffed, had qualified pilots, and in need of new airplanes.........
Old 04-23-2015 | 06:14 AM
  #10188  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by 24/48
Management is driven by ego. They've thwarted Union drives in the past so they can do it again, at least in their minds. It sounds like this is more of a play to prospective pilots, getting "meat in the seat" so to speak. Skywest knows they're heavily weighted with 50 seaters, UAL just announced more 50 seaters being parked in 2016 as leases come up. Without a steady flow of new-hires due to stagnation as they park more airplanes Skywest will become less attractive during the RFP process.

Don't take my statements as a supporter of a "yes" vote, but without NMB/RLA it doesn't really matter, management can simply do what they feel is necessary.
CRJ2 is making money (lots of it). You don't park planes that make money unless someone wants you to fly planes that make even more money (and the E-175 is not it...yet). Why else did SkyWest just grow by 12 CRJ2s for Delta? I know, I know, every industry pundit and pilot and CEO wants to tell you the 50-seaters are gas hogs and money losers and they can't get rid of them fast enough. And yet, they are still going. If the CRJ2 is a money loser, then Air Wisconsin is going to be feeling the heat long before SkyWest will.
Old 04-23-2015 | 06:49 AM
  #10189  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,544
Likes: 0
From: 175 CA
Default

Originally Posted by tothebigblue
If only there was a company owned by Skywest (but not skywest itself). That was properly staffed, had qualified pilots, and in need of new airplanes.........
As far as I'm aware expressjet is not properly staffed, Even though they are losing airplanes their attrition is making up for it (last I heard 70 a month to I'm sure nevets will rah rah Union in a sec and give a better number . I think this will be more parking of 145s for tsa and expressjet than our 200s. Apparently were cheaper than expressjet, so that makes us the clear choice providing we can staff which so far we are (need more reserves in some bases)

Last edited by Squallrider; 04-23-2015 at 06:51 AM. Reason: Adding
Old 04-23-2015 | 09:15 AM
  #10190  
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,934
Likes: 0
From: EMB 145 CPT
Default Skywest

Originally Posted by NVUS
CRJ2 is making money (lots of it). You don't park planes that make money unless someone wants you to fly planes that make even more money (and the E-175 is not it...yet). Why else did SkyWest just grow by 12 CRJ2s for Delta? I know, I know, every industry pundit and pilot and CEO wants to tell you the 50-seaters are gas hogs and money losers and they can't get rid of them fast enough. And yet, they are still going. If the CRJ2 is a money loser, then Air Wisconsin is going to be feeling the heat long before SkyWest will.

There will probably be a market for about 400 fifty seat aircraft industry wide once it's all said and done.


Originally Posted by Squallrider
As far as I'm aware expressjet is not properly staffed, Even though they are losing airplanes their attrition is making up for it (last I heard 70 a month to I'm sure nevets will rah rah Union in a sec and give a better number . I think this will be more parking of 145s for tsa and expressjet than our 200s. Apparently were cheaper than expressjet, so that makes us the clear choice providing we can staff which so far we are (need more reserves in some bases)

And we can ALL be cheaper together but certain people don't want that. The last aircraft that will be parked are Skywest owned aircraft. And that includes zero 145s.

Was that rah rah good enough?
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ghilis101
SkyWest
72
06-11-2019 03:53 PM
Lbell911
SkyWest
16
04-19-2015 08:19 AM
Splanky
Regional
47
01-28-2011 07:59 AM
Jack Bauer
Regional
25
11-01-2008 02:29 PM
geshields
Major
2
08-16-2005 03:00 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices