Today's Meeting With Alpa< Bruce Lakefield,

[robbedagain]

but with 4000 jobs out the door, more will be on the way once all 21 plus my city (which wasnt on the list) are done being outsourced as many employees will either go to another hub (hmmm hmmm phl hmmm hmmm) or leave all together. i will be leaving usair when my city gets outsource and i will refuse to show any one new cheap paid dude how to do anything pertaining to my job

 

[supercruiser]

By the way, I'm still trying to figure this part out:
I can't decide if this is just a typo or a slap at the W/O'ed pilots because they don't fly "big" airplanes and thus are not considered "real" ALPA pilots.
Jim

[post="254661"][/post]​

Jim,

The beef is the furloughed mainline pilots that ended up at MDA are on first year MDA pay, whereas if a W/O'd pilot goes from his/her airline to MDA they get to keep their longevity for pay. A former 8 year PSA pilot now flying at MDA is getting 8 year pay, obviously earning more than the former mainline pilot who is on first year pay.

supercruiser

 

[BoeingBoy]

I agree with the beef (though I thought all furlougned mainline MDA F/O's were TOS), just wondered where the "mainline pilots are ALPA but W/O'ed pilots aren't" came from.

Jim

 

[fr8tmastr]

Jim,

The beef is the furloughed mainline pilots that ended up at MDA are on first year MDA pay, whereas if a W/O'd pilot goes from his/her airline to MDA they get to keep their longevity for pay. A former 8 year PSA pilot now flying at MDA is getting 8 year pay, obviously earning more than the former mainline pilot who is on first year pay.

supercruiser

[post="254813"][/post]​

One big error in your theory is the WO guys are all FO's and the most they can make is 37 an hour. There is not one WO guy making more than an APL guy.

 

[PITbull]

Larkfield's statement that Delta's simplifares are suicide is ridiculous. The move has been revenue positive in CVG, and will be system wide within a short time.

What IS suicidal is the constant promotion of artificially LOW fares, ie. $29 and $49 on trips which COST over $100. With RATIONAL fares, averages WILL increase, more people will fly, and the overall picture will improve--I don't know how much, but it will improve.

Time to get with reality, folks....

[post="254602"][/post]​

GoFares are more than killing our airline iwth any possibility of even survival. Where the company imposes "simplified fares", will just null and void any prospects of break even, having the "GoFares in key places like PHL and other important key hubs cities.

This is just not going to work out for us. Company needs to pray to find an investor that is stupid enough to throw money they don't want at an airline.

With fuel prices rising to unimaginable levels, not even a sane stock trader would touch an airline, let alone an investor in the company itself.

The only investor I can fathom that would toss money our way and purchase on the "cheap" would be another regional that is looking to expand their route system.

I remember Siegel saying a few times that the employees at U would find it much harder to find a job that would replace their income; but senior managment, on the other hand could easily find jobs that pay even higher than what they receive.

Last I looked, rank and file are bailing. And now the Pilots are reaching historical levels of attrition, and its just not MAA.

Funny, none of senior managment ranks are leaving thier 10-25,000 monthly pay checks. After all, where can you make that kind of salary running a company in the ground?

 

[Peeky]

Well said, Pitbull. It seems U management is just sailing by the seat of the pants from day to day. No real planning or forethought into any decisions they make.

GoFares are more than killing our airline iwth any possibility of even survival. Where the company imposes "simplified fares", will just null and void any prospects of break even, having the "GoFares in key places like PHL and other important key hubs cities.

This is just not going to work out for us. Company needs to pray to find an investor that is stupid enough to throw money they don't want at an airline.

With fuel prices rising to unimaginable levels, not even a sane stock trader would touch an airline, let alone an investor in the company itself.

The only investor I can fathom that would toss money our way and purchase on the "cheap" would be another regional that is looking to expand their route system.

I remember Siegel saying a few times that the employees at U would find it much harder to find a job that would replace their income; but senior managment, on the other hand could easily find jobs that pay even higher than what they receive.

Last I looked, rank and file are bailing. And now the Pilots are reaching historical levels of attrition, and its just not MAA.

Funny, none of senior managment ranks are leaving thier 10-25,000 monthly pay checks. After all, where can you make that kind of salary running a company in the ground?

[post="254853"][/post]​

 

[Art at ISP]

There is a significant distinction between GO Fares and simplified or rationalized fares. While GO Fares are artificially low and do cause the significant losses, a rationalized fare structure can minimize these low end fares, and allows pricing more tied to actual costs.

For example, LGA-CLT is about 540 miles. At 10 cents a mile average CASM, it costs US $54.00 to transport one person on that route. If you allocate 5 seats below that level, and the rest at 4 or 5 levels above, topping out at let's say $299 one way, you would find most of your seats earning a profit. Furthermore, the people who object to paying $400 or $500 each way might reconsider at $299. This is simplified, but the logic is sound.

What needs to happen is to totally reinvent yield management. I agree with PITBull--GO Fares are a disaster. Rational fares done right could actually help. America West and Alaska did it a while ago, and it is apparently working for them. Delta did it in CVG first, and it has proven to be revenue positive in the long term.

Frequent fliers like myself (and almost all of the travelers I meet on the road) don't care about GO fares--those are tied to stealing customers from Southwest etc. With a FAIR fare structure, we get what we want, which is value, and the company gets more of what they want which is increased revenue and profit potential.

I believe Simplifares is being attacked because of fear---fear that change might be a good thing in this case.

We don't need CHEAP--we need FAIR.....what is so hard to understand about that?????

My best to you all.....

 

[flyin2low]

The beef is the furloughed mainline pilots that ended up at MDA are on first year MDA pay, whereas if a W/O'd pilot goes from his/her airline to MDA they get to keep their longevity for pay. A former 8 year PSA pilot now flying at MDA is getting 8 year pay, obviously earning more than the former mainline pilot who is on first year pay.

The 8 year PSA (Jetstream) pilot was in the system for eight years, the APL guy was with CHQ for 2-3 years and mainline for 2 years. 8=8 ...........3+2=5. BTW there isn't any PSA guys at MDA.

 

[TBONEJ4J]

There are no PSA Pilots at MDA because their airline got replacement equipment. PDT and ALG did not.

The only reason the WO pilots, also ALPA pilots, got longevity for pay is because nobody at AAA ALPA or Management thought for one moment that a WO pilot would end up at MDA. At the very worst, they thought a trickle would show up somewhere around 2008. The longevity pay was a pseudo reach-around so ALPA National could say that they really didn't screw-over the WO pilots, because look here, they get credit for all their years of service to the US Air Group.

APL Pilots should of course get longevity for pay. No doubt.

But there is NOT a single WO Pilot at MDA, some of them with 20+ years of service to the US Air Group, earning more than an APL guy.

The vast majority of APL guys are in the left seat, while all CEL/WO pilots are flying as FO. This is not likely to change anytime soon. :down:

 

[mlt]

• The company is focusing on short-term versus long-term decisions. These decisions may not be the best for the long-term, but are quick and thoughtful and are necessary for survival.

• Lakefield does not like to pull aircraft from the fleet plan or shut down routes. However, he must preserve cash and save as many jobs as possible.

USA320 Pilot,

Now that you are facing life as a reserve first officer do you continue to think signing the latest concessionary agreement was the right thing to do? Is this why your bed-wetting MEC buddies are considering a rotating reserve system for all pilots?

 

[aafsc]

• The company is focusing on short-term versus long-term decisions. These decisions may not be the best for the long-term, but are quick and thoughtful and are necessary for survival.

• Lakefield does not like to pull aircraft from the fleet plan or shut down routes. However, he must preserve cash and save as many jobs as possible.

USA320 Pilot,

Now that you are facing life as a reserve first officer do you continue to think signing the latest concessionary agreement was the right thing to do? Is this why your bed-wetting MEC buddies are considering a rotating reserve system for all pilots?

[post="254954"][/post]​

Is that what he is now, a reserve FO?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Is that what he is now, a reserve FO?

[post="255065"][/post]​

No, although with the planes scheduled to leave that could change.....

Jim

 

[Dea Certe]

The company is focusing on short-term versus long-term decisions. These decisions may not be the best for the long-term, but are quick and thoughtful and are necessary for survival.


Is any one else as baffled as I am about this statement? Will not the short-term quick fixes come back to bite us in the future?

h34r:

Dea

 

[BoeingBoy]

Dea,

In order, no & yes.

No, not baffled. All the attention is on surviving to see tomorrow, next week, next month. Six months from now, next year, five years from now - all don't matter if we liquidate next month.

Yes, they may well come back to bite us. Losing mainline planes makes it harder to lower the CASM (and could result in increasing it). Air Wis could call Lakefield July 1 and ask where they're to fly the 70 RJ's cause they just found out they've lost the UAL contract (Indy Air has demonstrated how successful a fleet of RJ's can be). Heck, AWAC really didn't loan us $125 million - we'll pay them at least $3.5 million in interest if we exit BK by the end of June so we're really only getting $121.5 million or less.

Jim

 

[Dea Certe]

Thanks Jim. I know I'm sort of simple-minded but, is this like having a flat tire on the freeway, putting on that crazy little "spare" tire so you can get to the next exit where you hope a service station might be?

Geez, I hope we're in an incorporated area and not driving across the Mojave....



Dea