Am I the only one disgusted by the scabs list?
07-27-2006, 07:35 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: AMR Big one
Posts: 177
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
I never applied to Mesa because I knew my skill & ability as a pilot was worth more than their contract said. Same with Pinnacle, same with Trans States.
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
I have a friend that went to GoJet because he is from STL. That was his personal decision and its his career, but every time I talk to him I make sure he realizes the affect his employment has on our mutual friends that are now furloughed from TSA. I make sure to tell him he is a REPLACEMENT WORKER.
Its not personal, its business...bit when your decisions (or those of another pilot group) start affecting someone else's quality of life, compensation or career expectations, it gets personal real quick.
Its not personal, its business...bit when your decisions (or those of another pilot group) start affecting someone else's quality of life, compensation or career expectations, it gets personal real quick.
Originally Posted by hifly
TSA is furloughing, or at least they were furloughing. They have cancelled the August group. They furloughed for a couple of reasons.
1. Pilots are being displaced from the J41. None of the J41's were United flying.
2. TSA lost San Antonio flying because it was a pay per passenger contract with United as opposed to pay per departure. Because of the loss of routes, they have had to park some airplanes. The San Antonio flying for TSA was a completely different route structure than GoJet's San Antonio flying.
If United wants 70-seaters on their routes instead of 50-seaters, then that is what they are going to get, with or without Trans States Holdings. Yes, in the future, there may be routes taken from TSA and given to GoJet. Unfortunately, TSA pilots should have forseen this and signed on with GoJet. I'm not saying it was a good deal, but I think it would have been better than the alternative.
1. Pilots are being displaced from the J41. None of the J41's were United flying.
2. TSA lost San Antonio flying because it was a pay per passenger contract with United as opposed to pay per departure. Because of the loss of routes, they have had to park some airplanes. The San Antonio flying for TSA was a completely different route structure than GoJet's San Antonio flying.
If United wants 70-seaters on their routes instead of 50-seaters, then that is what they are going to get, with or without Trans States Holdings. Yes, in the future, there may be routes taken from TSA and given to GoJet. Unfortunately, TSA pilots should have forseen this and signed on with GoJet. I'm not saying it was a good deal, but I think it would have been better than the alternative.
Originally Posted by FlyHiToo
GJ caused your furlough??? I though the TSA MEC made it very clear that NO FURLOUGHS were a result of GJ.
This from the TSA VARS...
D.M. TSA MEC Chairman:
"... As per conversation with Capt. W, the cause of these furloughs are a direct result of a loss of SAT flying being performed for our UAL code share partner. It was made very clear to the MEC that this loss of this flying was not a result of transfers to the Go-Jet operation. TSA mngt concluded that the SAT routes were not profitable enough, and therefore decided not to persue serving these routes, causeing us to park 2 EMB-145s over the next couple of months..."
Also GJ has hired only 6 pilots in the last 2 months. So even if TSA was doing the flying there would still be furloughs as a result of the lose of SAT flying and USAIR J41 flying. GJ has had the same amount of pilots (150) since adding the other 5 a/c back in April. 2 months before TSA furloughed.
So the furloughs happened b/c of fleet reduction at TSA.
This from the TSA VARS...
D.M. TSA MEC Chairman:
"... As per conversation with Capt. W, the cause of these furloughs are a direct result of a loss of SAT flying being performed for our UAL code share partner. It was made very clear to the MEC that this loss of this flying was not a result of transfers to the Go-Jet operation. TSA mngt concluded that the SAT routes were not profitable enough, and therefore decided not to persue serving these routes, causeing us to park 2 EMB-145s over the next couple of months..."
Also GJ has hired only 6 pilots in the last 2 months. So even if TSA was doing the flying there would still be furloughs as a result of the lose of SAT flying and USAIR J41 flying. GJ has had the same amount of pilots (150) since adding the other 5 a/c back in April. 2 months before TSA furloughed.
So the furloughs happened b/c of fleet reduction at TSA.
07-27-2006, 08:21 AM
#22
The NeverEnding Story
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,512
So I'm pompus because I know my worth as a pilot, and call a spade a spade...interesting.
I've read the same drivel posted by GoJetters on this board and others about how TSA furloughs were not caused by GoJet. Whether or not their statements are true, these things I know are FACTS:
I know that while GoJet was hiring and adding CR7s Trans States was parking 145s (as well as the J41s) and furloughing.
TSA UAX 145s fly the same routes as GoJet CR7s, even picking up flights that were originally scheduled to be flown by GoJet.
The same management team that negotiated that "unprofitable" SAN flying for Trans States negotiated the "profitable" flying for GoJet. I cannot accept that as a concidence.
I've read the same drivel posted by GoJetters on this board and others about how TSA furloughs were not caused by GoJet. Whether or not their statements are true, these things I know are FACTS:
I know that while GoJet was hiring and adding CR7s Trans States was parking 145s (as well as the J41s) and furloughing.
TSA UAX 145s fly the same routes as GoJet CR7s, even picking up flights that were originally scheduled to be flown by GoJet.
The same management team that negotiated that "unprofitable" SAN flying for Trans States negotiated the "profitable" flying for GoJet. I cannot accept that as a concidence.
07-27-2006, 09:11 AM
#23
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Posts: 74
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
I know that while GoJet was hiring and adding CR7s Trans States was parking 145s (as well as the J41s) and furloughing.
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
TSA UAX 145s fly the same routes as GoJet CR7s, even picking up flights that were originally scheduled to be flown by GoJet.
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
The same management team that negotiated that "unprofitable" SAN flying for Trans States negotiated the "profitable" flying for GoJet. I cannot accept that as a concidence.
Look, if United wants 70-seaters on their routes, their going to put 70-seaters on their routes, with or without GoJet. That means if GoJet didn't exist, TSA would still loose the flying, only to other regionals. GoJet isn't affecting TSA's route structure, United is.
07-27-2006, 10:08 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: AMR Big one
Posts: 177
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
I know that while GoJet was hiring and adding CR7s Trans States was parking 145s (as well as the J41s) and furloughing.
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
The same management team that negotiated that "unprofitable" SAN flying for Trans States negotiated the "profitable" flying for GoJet. I cannot accept that as a concidence.
A friend of mine at GoJet, whom is furloughed from the MD80, tells me that, GoJet flys to SAT from ORD, DEN, IAD. So does SkyWest and MESA. TSA never has done thoughs routes.
If the TSA MEC has said that GoJet has not caused Furloughs at TSA, what better, more accurate info and knowledge do you have that has slipped by the MEC?
07-27-2006, 10:26 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: AMR Big one
Posts: 177
BoilerUP,
I know you are new to the industry. I know you are probably about 22 or 23 and from the eco-boomer generation where success is tied trying your best. I know your generation has grown up with a silver spoon and have been hidden from failure. But welcome to the real world. Sometimes life takes a crap on you no matter how hard you have tried to make it, especially in this industry.
Now as far as scabs go... GoJet is not. Not ideal situation, but I do know that the TSA pilots had couple of chances to get control of the flying. That was more than the TWA pilots had.
Would not getting control of the flying now and renegotiating the contract in 4 years been better than trying to find a lifeboat on the sinking ship of 50 seat a/c?
I will let you have the last word. There is far more to life that *****ing on this board. Lots of luck to you. Have good days.
I know you are new to the industry. I know you are probably about 22 or 23 and from the eco-boomer generation where success is tied trying your best. I know your generation has grown up with a silver spoon and have been hidden from failure. But welcome to the real world. Sometimes life takes a crap on you no matter how hard you have tried to make it, especially in this industry.
Now as far as scabs go... GoJet is not. Not ideal situation, but I do know that the TSA pilots had couple of chances to get control of the flying. That was more than the TWA pilots had.
Would not getting control of the flying now and renegotiating the contract in 4 years been better than trying to find a lifeboat on the sinking ship of 50 seat a/c?
I will let you have the last word. There is far more to life that *****ing on this board. Lots of luck to you. Have good days.
07-27-2006, 10:30 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: CR7 Capt
Posts: 1,621
Originally Posted by Packer Backer
Let's not forget about Pan Am (aka Boston Maine). They started off as an alter ego for Pan Am. They then laid off all the Pan Am pilots and transfered all assets to Boston Maine. So Boston Maine, original Freedom list pilots, Go Jets, and scabs will NEVER get a ride from me. And I'll do everything I can to keep them from getting hired.
07-27-2006, 12:04 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: Part 121, 135 & Military background
Posts: 379
Young lad.... listen to some of these voices like rick777 and Jiffy lube, but if not, please go read flying the line and pilot without an airline. Get the real history. I'm former military, Embry Riddle Grad, couple of types and knocking on 10,000 hours and running for my life from the industry as soon as I can find a good job not flying people........... and it breaks my heart.
07-27-2006, 01:52 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: Sofa Stress Tester
Posts: 614
Originally Posted by stickwiggler
Young lad.... listen to some of these voices like rick777 and Jiffy lube, but if not, please go read flying the line and pilot without an airline. Get the real history. I'm former military, Embry Riddle Grad, couple of types and knocking on 10,000 hours and running for my life from the industry as soon as I can find a good job not flying people........... and it breaks my heart.
Now, I'm confused. Who should we listen too? Rick and Jiffy are saying two different things. Personally, I'm with Rick on this one. Jiffy, I'm surprised by your opinion on this subject, especially being a major airline pilot.
We pilots must stick to together, and stop cutting each other's throats. Obviously, the "long-timers" have learned this and now have the responsibility to teach this to the new-comers.
(P.S. I do not consider myself a long-timer, but understand this concept.)
07-27-2006, 02:14 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: Sofa Stress Tester
Posts: 614
Originally Posted by flynavyj
we talk about not cutting each others throats, yet we use a list that further divides the pilot community and then justify it by said reason?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
