Republic May Now Be Worse Than You Know Who...

[kellwolf]

I don't know what Republic's contract is, but this is how that would go down at Pinnacle. Let's say Pinnacle starts flying DC-9 routes. Well, we don't want to do that since it kills our career aspects. So we informally decide no one's going to bid it. Fine. Company displaces the most junior guys into the domicile. What can they do? Quit or fly it, pretty much. If they refuse to fly the trips, they'll get MTed with pretty much no recourse. Same would happen if they started mixing the routes in with MEM, DTW, ATL or MSP pilots. We could refuse to fly them, but we'd be MTed. Nothing we can do about it, and nothing the union can do about it either. It's not struck work. The union could fight for our jobs back, but odds are they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

So, someone tell me how this would help ANYTHING other than reducing the staffing at Pinnacle (or Republic).

[jtrain609]

Originally Posted by meritflyer

Broseph,

Maybe you forgot about the regional airline we used to fly for that competed with mainline?

Justin,


Are you going to post anything of substance on the forums again, or are you going to continue to ###### it out? You know that what you're saying doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the topic at hand, and you're just trying to ruffle feathers and make me look like some kid that doesn't have a clue, when you are in fact younger than me.

We flew 50 seaters, got paid the best 50 seat rate in the industry and competed against...nobody. Southwest came in and tried to compete on some of the routes we were flying, but we AVOIDED them as much as possible, hence the ONT/SAT bases instead of PHX/DAL.

I'm not sure how you could even attempt to relate it to this situation. But that wasn't really your point eh?

[Nick]

Originally Posted by jtrain609

Justin,


Are you going to post anything of substance on the forums again, or are you going to continue to ###### it out? You know that what you're saying doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the topic at hand, and you're just trying to ruffle feathers and make me look like some kid that doesn't have a clue, when you are in fact younger than me.

I agree. I have unfortunately not seen anything useful out of meritflyer in months and it is quite noticeable against the posts in the past. Hopefully that will change; there used to be some good stuff posted.

* * *

I agree that XJT is not competing against anyone other than other 50 seat operators. CAL doesn't fly 50 jets and does not contract them out to compete against themselves. The XJT, CHQ, and Colgan fleets are part of the team and they complement mainline. This is so basic I almost consider the other notion flamebait.

Anyway, XJT's competitive contract raises the bar for their category in the industry, not lowers it. Their only competitors are those vying for the same type of flying.

[deadstick]

Originally Posted by Velocipede

The bottom line is they didn't and are now enjoying increased flying, increased upgrades at the expense of Midwest pilots who are on the streets. If the Midwest pilots had been on strike, RAH pilots would be nothing more than scabs.

Luckily for RAH pilots, that was not the case. I leave it to each of you to decide exactly how much difference there is between these scenarios.

Originally Posted by BobDDuck

I dunno Velo, you may want to check with your Contact Administrator. I'm pretty certain a Union telling their pilots to refuse to fly a set of routes that are not currently struck, or (thanks to the new United injunction) member pilots telling others not to fly some routes would be considered an illegal job action.

As I recall there were several RAH (IBT) pilots walking with the Midex (ALPA) pilots in MKE, and the MECs have been working together since this bs deal went public. Pilots are but pawns in this game. When Skywest took Skyway flying, much of the heartburn was from a few egotistical, SJS brats bragging about putting Skyway out of business.

If it's not struck work, then the pilots have no recourse. They DO have power over flying their contract...to the letter and not being dix about replacing the other pilot group.

On another point, I remember when Mid Atlantic came around. My first reaction was confusion. There is/was a Caravan freight operator in NC named Mid Atlantic. I thought "Dang...go from a 208 to a 170?!"

[zmiller4]

Originally Posted by jtrain609

I'm not sure how you could even attempt to relate it to this situation. But that wasn't really your point eh?

I don't think it related to the topic at hand (a regional airline potentially taking over a national) either. I did like the word Broseph a lot though. I do think it's a really, really bad precedent, and hope it doesn't happen.

I do think, though, that there's a pervasive attitude on here that if you fly a 50 seat jet or a 70 seat turboprop, you haven't contributed at all to the shift of flying to the regionals from mainline, and that's just not true. While a 50 seater has 26 fewer seats than the biggest operated by most regionals, they still get used by all regionals on a *ton* of routes that used to be exclusively mainline. The same is true for the Q400. I think that might have been his point.

[meyers9163]

So at the end of the day are we saying this is not RAH's pilots fault based on choice? I would agree they have no choice in the matter and if Midex folds perhaps they get the flying. We are also forgetting the other OPTION here. It is possible that Midwest folds and they dissolve and they just do not continue in any capacity. If that were to happen we will be talking about a whole other issue and that's more of our fellow pilots on the street. Either case this is a lose lose situation. And in my humble oppinion its much like the younger guys at Gojets. They had NOTHING to do with the scabs who crossed the picket line. They are a different generation yet we seem to lump them in with those who crossed. It just amazes me how quickly we throw people under the bus and use our powers as a Captain at an arline to use the jumpseat for political reasons. So RAH gets this flying, Midwest folds, we going to start denying RAH guys a jumpseat?

None of us know whats going to happen here. So how about we sit back and wait and see. Lets hope for the lesser of two evils, Midwest keeps their planes and Skywest and RAH fly as a connection carrier. And not either of the two alternatives. Midwest totally dissolves and both RAH/Midwest guys on the street. Or Midwest folds, RAH takes over at subpar rates (sorry I dont see any regional paying what Midwest guys were making per seat even Mr BB himself) and we all complain saying their pilots put Midwest guys on the street.

[falconvalley]

I highly doubt Midwest folding would result in RAH taking over. Someone other than RAH would have to be at the controls. BB is still looking to grow the company, but RAH just doesn't have enough to be exposed like that. Besides, I don't think the mainline customers would be very happy about it. There probably would be null and void contracts if that occurred. It just doesn't make sense that BB would want to take the company in that direction at this point, especially since we're talking about a failed business in a slow market.

It'd be different if we were talking about a ton of cash and we had an airline that just had a bad business model, but some good load factor. If BB wanted to brand something and take a chance at losing some flying elsewhere, it would be more likely in a situation like that.

[Kingairer]

Velo is off his meds again, he's ventured off to fantasy land.

[MusketeerMan]

Originally Posted by Kingairer

Velo is off his meds again, he's ventured off to fantasy land.

You'd think for someone who is so "versed" in union dealings, he'd know what is legal and what's not. It's as if he expected our whole pilot group to get fired, "cause it's the right thing to do".

I don't look into his posts too much anymore...

[deadstick]

Originally Posted by falconvalley

If BB wanted to brand something and take a chance at losing some flying elsewhere, it would be more likely in a situation like that.

I don't think the plan is to have RAH branded flying, but a separate carrier with large "regional" jets on the certificate. I still think the $35M was a deposit to TPG and Dick Schifter for the cert.

[jtrain609]

Originally Posted by zmiller4

I don't think it related to the topic at hand (a regional airline potentially taking over a national) either. I did like the word Broseph a lot though. I do think it's a really, really bad precedent, and hope it doesn't happen.

I do think, though, that there's a pervasive attitude on here that if you fly a 50 seat jet or a 70 seat turboprop, you haven't contributed at all to the shift of flying to the regionals from mainline, and that's just not true. While a 50 seater has 26 fewer seats than the biggest operated by most regionals, they still get used by all regionals on a *ton* of routes that used to be exclusively mainline. The same is true for the Q400. I think that might have been his point.

I dunno about that, I lost my job in many ways due to those 70 seat turboprops eh? I'm not exactly a fan of the Q, their pay rate, or what Colgan is doing to the industry with them.

But I don't honestly think any Colgan pilots on here think that things are fine and dandy with Q pay rates.

[kaudbron]

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but I believe in RAH's contract there is a clause that states no flying struck work. I was hoping Midwest pilot group was going to burn the place down...

[surreal1221]

Originally Posted by deadstick

I don't think the plan is to have RAH branded flying, but a separate carrier with large "regional" jets on the certificate. I still think the $35M was a deposit to TPG and Dick Schifter for the cert.

So now with Midwest Express slowly declining in product quality (from 717s to ERJs, etc), how will RAH (or whatever variant ran by RAH flying under the midwest certificate) be able to compete with 717 or 737 quality products brought in by AirTran or even potentially Southwest.

It'll be an interesting case study to evaluate how things play out over the next few years.

[deadstick]

Originally Posted by surreal1221

So now with Midwest Express slowly declining in product quality (from 717s to ERJs, etc), how will RAH (or whatever variant ran by RAH flying under the midwest certificate) be able to compete with 717 or 737 quality products brought in by AirTran or even potentially Southwest.

It'll be an interesting case study to evaluate how things play out over the next few years.

If they succeed on getting E170s on the cert at Midex, I'd bet they would use it as a stepping stone to the E190/5, and THAT is what BB would be going after -- a clean, different certificate. That way, it's separate from the 170s at Republic and Shuttle.

[surreal1221]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the long standing opinion that BB has always wanted to run a larger airline than a sub-contract basis company?

[Polar742]

Originally Posted by surreal1221

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the long standing opinion that BB has always wanted to run a larger airline than a sub-contract basis company?

From what I've read on here, I think that's only my long-standing opinion.

And, if you think the Ejet is less comfortable than a 737 or a 717 from a pax point of view, IMHO, you smoke crack.

That being said, BB won't get caught in the orphan fleet scenario with the 717 like US and AA did with the F100...

[MusketeerMan]

Originally Posted by Polar742

From what I've read on here, I think that's only my long-standing opinion.

And, if you think the Ejet is less comfortable than a 737 or a 717 from a pax point of view, IMHO, you smoke crack.

That being said, BB won't get caught in the orphan fleet scenario with the 717 like US and AA did with the F100...

Polar..you have a way with words. I'm really trying hard to bight my tongue in this...

On another note, I absolutely love the title of this thread!!

[SoCalAprch]

Jtrain I would like to know how you think that when you guys started branded flying that you weren't competing with mainline routes. Just because they failed doesn't mean that its OK. Also saying it was ONT instead of LAX/SNA/BUR doesn't hold any weight.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by kaudbron

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but I believe in RAH's contract there is a clause that states no flying struck work. I was hoping Midwest pilot group was going to burn the place down...

Unless the Midwest pilots go on strike, there's no struck work. If Midwest goes under, there's no struck work seeing as there'd be no work period. There's really nothing the Midwest pilots can do to stage a legal strike, either, to trigger struck work.

[falconvalley]

Originally Posted by deadstick

I don't think the plan is to have RAH branded flying, but a separate carrier with large "regional" jets on the certificate. I still think the $35M was a deposit to TPG and Dick Schifter for the cert.

I spose. Trying to figure out what RAH would use it for. Would it be for a SUPER scope violation? Right now, they got Airways 175s scoping it up on the Republic cert. People keep saying BB wants to keep growing the company.

[RWH1986]

Originally Posted by Polar742

From what I've read on here, I think that's only my long-standing opinion.

And, if you think the Ejet is less comfortable than a 737 or a 717 from a pax point of view, IMHO, you smoke crack.

That being said, BB won't get caught in the orphan fleet scenario with the 717 like US and AA did with the F100...

Agreed, I would rather fly a 170 than a smaller express plane or even larger narrow bodies. Flew NW over Christmas break and the 170 from PHX-MEM was the most comfortable of all 4 flights. The other planes were buses and run down and terrible. I'm glad Delta plans on improving them.

[SpiraMirabilis]

I JS on Shuttle America quite often and the E170 is a damn comfy airplane.

[jtrain609]

Originally Posted by SoCalAprch

Jtrain I would like to know how you think that when you guys started branded flying that you weren't competing with mainline routes. Just because they failed doesn't mean that its OK. Also saying it was ONT instead of LAX/SNA/BUR doesn't hold any weight.

So let's say that branded WAS competing with mainline.

On a per seat basis, flying 50 seat aircraft, ExpressJet captains are paid more than Continental captains (I've done the math in here before, so you can search for it if you like, but pound for pound we were getting paid more per seat than Continental guys are). Also, the ExpressJet contract has better work rules than half the mainline carriers out there (Northwest prior to the merger, Airways and Continental).

But either way, the point was to AVOID competing with anybody. The guys up top weren't stupid, they knew that the couldn't go head to head with ANY mainline carrier and win while flying EMB-145's around. The point was to serve medium sized markets that nobody else was doing, such at Ontario to Spokane, or San Diego to Oklahoma City.

So again, I fail to see how branded was even an attempt to compete with mainline. Branded was trying to stay under the radar of the bigger carriers, knowing that if they pulled a FlyI and tried to go head to head with a mainline carrier they'd lose, quickly.

[Velocipede]

Originally Posted by falconvalley

Velo talks like we knew this was happening and had a chance to refuse it. We didn't. Our union didn't. It was thrown at us. Our management has a clue.

Of course! You're all innocent. You put 300 pilots on the street, but it isn't your fault. You've got your upgrades. Your fuloughees are working. However, YOU undercut 300 good jobs by 30% thereby dooming yourselves to a top career pay rate of $96 an hour. Hope you can put your kids through college on that. I guess you'd better downgrade your dreams a little. Like 30%.

You all act like I'm saying RAH pilots should have unilaterally refused to fly these routes. Have you ever heard of sideletters to the contract? I guess the IBT doesn't do that, especially since they have a history of subverting ALPA for the benefit of the IBT.

It would be entirely legal for your Union to enact a sideletter that says your pilots will not fly subcontracted work from airlines currently undergoing contract negotiations and/or in disputes with their pilot groups.

You are not innocent. Your last line says it all. Your management knew exactly what you'd do...you'd grab all the Midwest flying you could like a two-bit hooker on a $20 bill.

A MEC is only as good as its people.

Very true. And the RAH MEC has demonstrated their "solidarity" with their Midwest brothers by...

Originally Posted by deadstick

As I recall there were several RAH (IBT) pilots walking with the Midex (ALPA) pilots in MKE...

...walking the "informational" picket line one day and flying their routes the next. That's speaks for itself. Its called hypocrasy.

Originally Posted by Kingairer

Velo is off his meds again, he's ventured off to fantasy land.

And you've just added your typical input to a debate...nothing.

Originally Posted by MusketeerMan

You'd think for someone who is so "versed" in union dealings, he'd know what is legal and what's not. It's as if he expected our whole pilot group to get fired, "cause it's the right thing to do".

Again, YOU need to look a bit deeper into the whole issue than "We have no choice to fly or get fired." As I said earlier, how about thinking outside the box and getting a sideletter to YOUR contract that says you NOT fly subcontracted work from pilots in disputes.

Oh, can't do that. It might affect your upgrade time to you REGIONAL airline Captain job. Hope it isn't the final step in your career, but if you keep eliminating Midwest caliber jobs, it very well might be.

[MusketeerMan]

It's amazing to me Velo. You pull out another line post after post, when you realize you're wrong and act like that's what you mean the entire time. Aye aye aye...

Please..cut & paste it here from the ALPA handbook or your contract where it discusses a sideletter so we can then show you once again that it doesn't apply. Me thinks you'll be too busy or you can't find it..

Now..you better get back to trolling.