Skywest

[Retired in SAN]

Call them. They're some of the friendliest people I have ever spoke to. Call me naive but I think the applicants really are in their better interest. Good folks based on my limited experience..

 

[Autothrust Blue]

If you think it's just about one list, you obviously don't get it. Let me get you up to speed.

Skywest has TWO pilot groups, and the ALPA group is the larger of the two. And if that group ends up being the cheaper of the two, what's going to stop the company from giving flying to the ALPA group and not you guys? For that matter, what's going to stop the company from moving airplanes from your side to the XJT side?

While I disagree with Jimmy about how effective SAPA is (I give it a lot more credit than he does), he's got a point when it comes to scope issues, unless your SAPA agreement speaks to scope and I'm unaware.

So yes, one list; but also consider that the moment you guys are too expensive, you're going to shrink. The same goes for our side. So don't be mistaken, we all work for Jerry, just in different capacities.

Someone who did our SAPA speech during initial said that we were looking at getting a scope clause; of course, I'm not a lawyer, so I'll leave it to someone who is. I vaguely remember (from the haze of initial training) some discussion of a scope clause during our "this is SAPA" discussion, but that was a year (plus) ago and in the haze of initial.

My advice, though, if you want to work here, is "Don't worry about it."

No, I'm serious, don't worry about it. I can think of a whole boat-load of things more important to worry about.

You're going to be up to your eyeballs worrying about everything else; fuss about these things when you're on line and sitting in a hotel room somewhere—and maybe don't even do that. This is truly a great place to work, and our issues are pretty much like everyone else's issues in this sector. There's plenty of butthurt to go around; sample it, even dish out a little bit, but keep focused on doing what is going to work for you.

One list? Sure, just so I can sling gear for @jtrain609 .

 

[BobDDuck]

. I vaguely remember (from the haze of initial training) some discussion of a scope clause during our "this is SAPA" discussion, but that was a year ago.

Scope clause for what?

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Scope clause for what?

The PPM.

Again, this is in a haze of initial training combined with a certain level of indifference on my part. Regional ALPA has demonstrated that it's willing to bend over backwards for a CR9 or a flow agreement, so I can't really tell the difference most days.


AFIS LINK ACK

 

[BobDDuck]

The PPM.

Again, this is in a haze of initial training combined with a certain level of indifference on my part. Regional ALPA has demonstrated that it's willing to bend over backwards for a CR9 or a flow agreement, so I can't really tell the difference most days.

Not entirely sure what the PPM is.

 

[B767]

I'm guessing Pilot Policy Manual.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

I'm guessing Pilot Policy Manual.

Correct.

 

[BobDDuck]

Ok. Well, that still doesn't clear anything up. What exactly is the scope for? Your company can already farm out all of the flying currently being flown by Skywest Airlines pilots to another company (alter ego style) and there is nothing you could do about it. You don't need to give them scope to do that. They already have unlimited scope.

What you are talking about is language that states that all flying performed for Skywest Inc will be flown by pilots on the Skywest pilot seniority list. That's boilerplate language in all ALPA (and probably non ALPA) CBAs, however, I doubt you will find it (or be able to legally get it) in a policy manual.
And even if you did manage to get it in there, it would be in direct conflict with language already in the ExpressJet/ASA CBA that says pretty much the same thing, although it isn't binding on the holding company (Inc). As you may recall, this was the poison pill that the ExpressJet MEC decided to do away with when they were being acquired by ASA nee: Skywest Inc. Their language WAS binding on the holding company, which meant that in theory, the minute the deal was signed, all Skywest flying would become theirs.


EDIT:

TL;DR: Scope is what you allow the company to give to other companies to fly. If you give them no scope relief, all flying is yours.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Ok. Well, that still doesn't clear anything up. What exactly is the scope for? Your company can already farm out all of the flying currently being flown by Skywest Airlines pilots to another company (alter ego style) and there is nothing you could do about it. You don't need to give them scope to do that. They already have unlimited scope.

What you are talking about is language that states that all flying performed for Skywest Inc will be flown by pilots on the Skywest pilot seniority list. That's boilerplate language in all ALPA (and probably non ALPA) CBAs, however, I doubt you will find it (or be able to legally get it) in a policy manual.
And even if you did manage to get it in there, it would be in direct conflict with language already in the ExpressJet/ASA CBA that says pretty much the same thing, although it isn't binding on the holding company (Inc). As you may recall, this was the poison pill that the ExpressJet MEC decided to do away with when they were being acquired by ASA nee: Skywest Inc. Their language WAS binding on the holding company, which meant that in theory, the minute the deal was signed, all Skywest flying would become theirs.


EDIT:

TL;DR: Scope is what you allow the company to give to other companies to fly. If you give them no scope relief, all flying is yours.

Yeah, I'm aware. We actually have larger fish to fry than that, too.

My own personal forecast is that the entire capacity purchase/fee for departure market will be gone by 2025 at the latest, at which point we'll just laugh at all of this stuff.

 

[etflies]

Yeah, I'm aware. We actually have larger fish to fry than that, too.

My own personal forecast is that the entire capacity purchase/fee for departure market will be gone by 2025 at the latest, at which point we'll just laugh at all of this stuff.

Hopefully from the front end of something mainline by then.

And I'll be participating in someone else's line check. Again.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Hopefully from the front end of something mainline by then.

And I'll be participating in someone else's line check. Again.

Every time you go up there, you're unsafe.

 

[etflies]

Every time you go up there, you're unsafe.

*Bite!*

 

[Autothrust Blue]

*Bite!*

Did you eventually get to, well, anywhere you were going last night?

Happy birthday too.

 

[skyvan]

Anyone have any info on the Channel Island career fair? Do you guys think its worth going to? Anyone going? Thanks for all of the info everyone has been putting up.

 

[Seggy]

Regional ALPA has demonstrated that it's willing to bend over backwards for a CR9 or a flow agreement, so I can't really tell the difference most days.


AFIS LINK ACK

Time out.

You work for a nonunion carrier, which, in negotiations, is used as an example of some where flying will be shifted to if cuts aren't made at unionized carriers.

So @juxtapilot, even though I may not agree with his expectations, can bitch and moan all he wants about the situation he's in 'thanks' to ALPA. You really can't critique what ALPA is or isn't doing.

 

[etflies]

Time out.

You work for a nonunion carrier, which, in negotiations, is used as an example of some where flying will be shifted to if cuts aren't made at unionized carriers.

So @juxtapilot, even though I may not agree with his expectations, can bitch and moan all he wants about the situation he's in 'thanks' to ALPA. You really can't critique what ALPA is or isn't doing.

Unless I'm mistaken, the recent agreements at alpa carriers are being referenced during our own negotiations and therefore have an effect on our pay and QoL, so we absolutely have a right to an opinion about alpa and their successes and failures just like others have a right to about us.

 

[Seggy]

The recent agreements at alpa carriers are being referenced during our own pay negotiations and therefore have an effect on our pay and QoL, so we absolutely have a right to an opinion about alpa and their successes and failures just like you are entitled to yours about our non-union carrier.

How can you have lawful negotiations at an airline when you don't have a legally recognized collective bargaining unit?

 

[etflies]

How can you have lawful negotiations at an airline when you don't have a legally recognized collective bargaining unit?

According to the website for our bargaining unit, they do have some protection under the RLA as a recognized employee workgroup negotiating on behalf of our pilots but that protection is not specified.

It goes on to say that while not a certified union, according to the NMB if the pilots chose a body recognized by the company to represent them (i.e. SAPA, at SkyWest) any resulting agreement signed by the company and the representing body is, in fact, legally binding.

Not sure if that's what you are looking for but its the best I can find at the moment!

 

[Seggy]

According to the website for our bargaining unit, they do have some protection under the RLA as a recognized employee workgroup negotiating on behalf of our pilots but that protection is not specified.

It goes on to say that while not a certified union, according to the NMB if the pilots chose a body recognized by the company to represent them (i.e. SAPA, at SkyWest) any resulting agreement signed by the company and the representing body is, in fact, legally binding.

Not sure if that's what you are looking for but its the best I can find at the moment!

Your negotiations are nothing more than a farce because even if the company and your student council agrees on something, the company can change their mind ten minutes later and your student council has no recourse.

You can't do that with a legally binding contract negotiated by a collective bargaining unit certified by the NMB.

Which brings me back to my original point. Unless you work at a unionized airline, you shouldn't be talking about what ALPA is doing right or wrong.

 

[etflies]

Your negotiations are nothing more than a farce because even if the company and your student council agrees on something, the company can change their mind ten minutes later and your student council has no recourse.

You can't do that with a legally binding contract negotiated by a collective bargaining unit certified by the NMB.

Which brings me back to my original point. Unless you pay dues, you shouldn't be talking about what ALPA is doing right or wrong.

Our agreements are legally binding. Or was that missed in my first response to your question? SAPA is recognized as our official bargaining unit. They negotiate with the company and when an agreement is reached and signed by both sides it is legally binding. It cannot be changed "ten minuets later." Because said agreement is legally binding. Like I said in my first response to your question.

To my knowledge items agreed upon can be renegotiated at any time but cannot be changed willy nilly.

The outcomes of ALPA negotiations affect our pilot group as well, my original point stands.