ACA Pay Cut TA Passes

davetheflyer

New Member
The Official press release:

Atlantic Coast Airlines Pilots Approve
Revised Conditional Contract


Dulles, VA, (June 24, 2003) - Atlantic Coast Airlines, the Dulles, VA-based United Express and Delta Connection regional carrier (ACA) (NASDAQ/NM: ACAI) announced it has been informed by the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) that ACA’s pilots have ratified a revised conditional contract that includes reductions in pay rates and work rule improvements—designed to allow ACA to present an even more competitive cost structure to its partners. This new agreement is conditional in that it would go into effect only if and when ACA and United Airlines enter into a revised United Express agreement and that agreement receives required bankruptcy court approval.



Atlantic Coast Airlines President Tom Moore said, “The results of this vote are a clear representation of the spirit of teamwork between ACA and our pilots. We all know that these have been extraordinarily challenging times for our entire industry, and once again our pilot group has demonstrated that they are willing to take the lead in creating solutions that meet these challenges head on.”



Chris Thomas, Chairman of ACA’s Master Executive Council which represents the company’s 1,700 pilots said, “We look forward to working cooperatively to achieve greater job security and opportunities for future growth.”



ACA operates as United Express and Delta Connection in the Eastern and Midwestern United States as well as Canada. The company also operates charter flights as ACA Private Shuttle. ACA has a fleet of 148 aircraft—including 118 regional jets—and offers over 830 daily departures, serving 84 destinations.



Atlantic Coast Airlines employs over 4,800 aviation professionals. The common stock of parent company Atlantic Coast Airlines Holdings, Inc. is traded on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol ACAI. For more information about ACA, visit our website at www.atlanticcoast.com.



***
 

ERAU_Intern

New Member
It sure did, and suprisingly by a pretty strong margin. Roughly 70% of the pilots who voted were in favor of the TA. This clearly shows that ACA's employee (pilot) group knows what is good for the company, and in their best interests. I am personally very excited about this, because it brings a GREAT company one step closer to regenerating the phenominal growth that it had prior to United Airlines going bankrupt. Watch out folks! ACA is playin for keeps!
 

pilot602

If specified, this will replace the title that
[ QUOTE ]
This clearly shows that ACA's employee (pilot) group knows what is good for the company, and in their best interests.

[/ QUOTE ]

That remains to be seen.

Pay at regionals is already ridiculously low. Want to really cut costs? Go after fuel prices, equipment prices etc. I can't, and won't, bash ACA though because if I remember correctly management took a 20% paycut before they asked the pilots to do so. So, in that regard, it's as "cool" as a paycut can be I suppose.

[ QUOTE ]
I am personally very excited about this, because it brings a GREAT company one step closer to regenerating the phenominal growth that it had prior to United Airlines going bankrupt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, this just helps the airline stay afloat. Unfortunately only demand from passengers, and in turn higher capacity, is the only thing that can get them "one step closer to regenerating the phenominal growth that it had prior to United Airlines going bankrupt." And that holds true for all the airlines. Cutting costs are a reactive measure. Figuring out a way to start generating demand and getting seats filled is a proactive measure. Airlines, however, are traditionally reactive.
 

ERAU_Intern

New Member
Well, that is true, nobody is making money unless people buy tickets. What I meant was, we are one step closer to renewing our contract with United to operate as an Express carrier. You see, ACA works on a "pay per departure" system, so once our contract is renewed, it doesnt matter if a plane pushes back with 1 passenger on board or 50. ACA will make the same ammount of money regardless. As for "equipment" and "fuel" costs, United management and ACA management have had numerous meetings regarding cost cutting. The LARGEST problem at ACA, according to United is crew costs. So that is why the pilots took a pay cut.
 

pilot602

If specified, this will replace the title that
[ QUOTE ]
You see, ACA works on a "pay per departure" system, so once our contract is renewed, it doesnt matter if a plane pushes back with 1 passenger on board or 50.

[/ QUOTE ]

It does matter because eventually if demand is low enough United is going to tell ACA to start cutting flights. I don't really envision United signing a contract forcing them to pay for empty flights. If demand is down the number of departures follows along with it.

[ QUOTE ]
The LARGEST problem at ACA, according to United is crew costs.

[/ QUOTE ]

All airlines say crew cost is the number one problem. It simply isn't.

However, in reality that fact doesn't mean much. But then that's the kind of thinking that allows these airlines to go bankrupt in the first place.
 

jtrain609

I'm a carnal, organic anagram.
I'm glad to see this for one reason only; it is tied to United. If it were not, and it was just a paycut with no reasoning or limitations I think it'd be horrible.

Glad to see that someone in managment has their head screwed on tight.

Cheers


John Herreshoff
 

say_speed

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You see, ACA works on a "pay per departure" system, so once our contract is renewed, it doesnt matter if a plane pushes back with 1 passenger on board or 50.

[/ QUOTE ]

It does matter because eventually if demand is low enough United is going to tell ACA to start cutting flights. I don't really envision United signing a contract forcing them to pay for empty flights. If demand is down the number of departures follows along with it.

[ QUOTE ]
The LARGEST problem at ACA, according to United is crew costs.

[/ QUOTE ]

All airlines say crew cost is the number one problem. It simply isn't.

Off course not, taking a 7.5% pay cut decreases ACA's operating coasts by less than10 cts ASM... Like this is going to save UAL from going under? With that TA signed by the pilot group, UAL will save about 7 Million a year; now, remind me again how much money UAL lost per month not even 2 months ago??
That TA was nothing less than a scare tactic by ACA management and the union group, saying that if it was voted down, that would mean massive furloughs, CA going back to right seat...
ACA is now the Mesa of UAL regional carriers.
Go fly 80 hours a month a multi million $ airplane, and shopping using your food stamps!
 

ERAU_Intern

New Member
Quite right John! Management will be the saving grace for ACA at this point. The terms United is asking of ACA regarding renewal of our contract are currently unacceptable. But the CEO of ACA is certainly up to the task of suggesting "alternatives" to these terms. Unfortunately as DavetheFlyer posted earlier, United hired a consulting firm, "Baine and Associates", to help them out of their financial woes. And this firm is all about the "Bottom Line". So as you can imagine, there is quite a battle going on right now.
 

say_speed

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately as DavetheFlyer posted earlier, United hired a consulting firm, "Baine and Associates", to help them out of their financial woes. And this firm is all about the "Bottom Line". So as you can imagine, there is quite a battle going on right now.

[/ QUOTE ]


UAL being in bankrupcy protection, they have a very strong leverage position, but that Baines company DOES NOT make the final decision. There is not just a $ vallue associated to that, they will also look at performance, etc...
Even in difficult financial times, when you have to choose between 2 products (regional flying is nothing more than a product), you won't necessarily go for the cheapest one, you will also take long term investment into consideration. Believe me, Baines does not have the final word in UAL decision. If UAL chooses another carrier to replace ACA, that TA was useless, AND if UAL chooses ACA, they would have done so without that TA, no doubt! Same for Skywest, had they voted down their TA, UAL already had plans for them. SKW is a scary company for UAL, they have millions of $ in the bank, and could start a low cost airline, talk about competition for UAL on the west coast!
That pay cut was just about making the pilots at UAL feel good about their 30 to 40% pay cut they took (take a 30% cut, plus a downgrade in equipment, some took a 40% cut), why should they be the only ones to suffer from problems in the industry? they want their regional carriers to suffer too. What you have to remember, is that when an FO is making 30K a year, and takes a pay cut on top of that, how can you reimburse the money you borrowed for your flight training? plus pay for your house, feed the kid and be away from home 19 days out of the month??
I don't know how you intern guys do it, when you are being used for no compensations, who pays for your training at ER?
The industry is in a bad position, but UAL IS EXPECTED TO EMERGE FROM BANKRUPCY THIS FALL!!!! so why again pay cut?
I believe that the next carriers for UAL will remain the same as they have been, plus Mesa, just because...
I hope you get a job at ACA within the next 2 years, so does your bank!!
 

ERAU_Intern

New Member
Keep one thing in mind about this TA. It is conditional on the renewal of our Express contract with United. In other words, no contract, no paycut. But I am sure the loss of the United contract would warrent measures much more serious than a pilot pay cut! As far as my training at ERAU, the bank is paying some of it, and the rest is personal savings. Yeah, its tough not being compensated, but sometimes you have to look beyond the present for an opportunity in the future. And I think that is probablly a philosophy that at least some of ACA's pilots share at this point.
 

pilot602

If specified, this will replace the title that
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, its tough not being compensated, but sometimes you have to look beyond the present for an opportunity in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

No offense, but sometimes it's just exploitation. There are NO Federal laws or oversight of internships and if you don't think that companies exploit that fact you're sorely mistaken.

Case in point.

I was touring KMOV (CBS affiliate in St. Louis) and they were telling us about getting a "job" with them. Starting pay for a news writer was something like $4.00/hr (this was after the hike to $5.XX for minimum wage) working something like 60 hours a week. However, they classified as an "internship" and were able to get away with it. Many internships require near full-time hours yet pay NOTHING. Many, many times - especially in journalism - you'll find the interns doing far more work than the paid employees.

People do it because in the fields where "internships" are prevalent because they need one to get a job later down the road. That need, however, does not make the internship any less exploitative and or deamining.

There is a giagantic difference between "paying your dues" and being exploited.

I don't know your position and I'm in now way saying your being exploited but most internships provide far more benefit to the employer than the intern ...
 

ERAU_Intern

New Member
That is very true. You made some valid points there, but let me explain to you the thinking of a none too foolish intern. The internship that ACA offers has historically been an extremely good opportunity. ACA has hired somewhere to the tune of around 90% of its interns as pilots. Times being what they are, it may take a bit for this percentage to hold true for current interns, but that is the name of the game. Besides, if you can find a better way to get an airline job with 600tt and 100me, let me know. In addition, this is a great education for most of us. No classroom can teach you as much about part 121 ops as real world experience can.
 

IrishSheepdog

Sitting in the median
I dunno, my internship provided the opportunity to learn and observe all aspects of an airline first hand. Not only that, I got 3 credit hours for it. Sure I worked 40 hours a week, and jumpseated in between. But I came back to school with more experience and knowledge about the actual inner-workings of the airline industry than I could have ever imagined.

There is no need to say interns are "slave-labor." Far from the case. The way I see it, people doing internships are highly motivated to learn and succeed in their chosen career.

Also should note, not all internships are free. SWA pays $9/hr to their interns. Plus, those interns who would like to return as pilots have a shoe-in at one of the best companies in airline industry history.
 

ERAU_Intern

New Member
FlyChicaga is a walking talking example of why an internship at an airline is a worthwhile experience! 'Nuff said.

By the way FlyChicaga, have a blast on the Saab! Im sure you earned it.
 

pilot602

If specified, this will replace the title that
Note: I did not say internships were "slave labor." Nor did I say not to do them. I didn't even say they weren't beneficial to the intern at some point. And, in your case Chicaga you got class credit - MANY internships don't even provide that.

I merely pointed out that not all internships are the pot of gold companies try to pass them off as. I did an internship when I was in J school and I saw first hand how many interns were exploited (I was too). Yes you get to learn things you otherwise wouldn't which is why in many fields they are essential to landing a job. However, at the same time you're "learning" many companies take advantage of the situation and place job duties and expectations on the intern they have no right in doing.

In particular, in journalism, many more than not are unpaid internships. I have no qaulms whatsoever with paid internships (even if it's just minimum wage or near it - internships need not follow miminum wage) the internships I'm leary of are the unpaid kind.
 
Top