Seaport Airlines hiring 500hr mins

No he is referring to me.

The base chief pilot and the company chief pilot are both working hard to support the pilots. Both fly the line regularly. Both are good guys.

We are not a perfect company but there are a lot of great people working hard to make us a safe and fun operation. We do have a couple of nuckelheads who can make working there a struggle but for the most part it's a great opportunity. I can't argue with what striker172 said. In all honesty that has happened. I got a time and duty violation and accept full responsibility for it. Yep I got one of those letters. But SeaPort, specifically our chief pilot, went to bat for me with the FAA through our ASAP program. The company is on the hook for as much as $50,000 as a result. I screwed up and will take my licks for it. I had as much responsibility as scheduling did for the assignment.

But pilots are given the same training to know when they can and can't fly. To my knowledge no one is forced to fly unsafe aircraft. And no one is forced to fly out of compliance with regs. Our dispatch has some training issues that are being reviewed for improvement but pilots are given the training needed to know when to accept an assignment and when not to accept and assignment. At no point are they forced to accept anything not in compliance with regulations.

135 is not for everyone. It can be a chaotic environment. if you can handle the change then 135 aviation is probably not a place for you. SeaPort isn't any different from any other 135 operator, we are probably better than most due to guys like Noel and Bebe looking out for thier pilots. if you can handle the change and are on top of your regulations you'll do just fine here. And probably have a great time doing so.
 
Stryker172 said:
Not at all. I, like just about everyone else that went to seaport was thrilled about the idea of flying a turbo prop and building time quickly. I had no idea how dangerous it was to pilots careers. If you decide to accept an offer, BE CAREFUL!
Click to expand...

This, infinitely. In fact, I'll take it further: Stay the frak away from this scumbag outfit.

-Fox
 
All Alaska operations are gone. Tupelo, Nashville, and Muscle Shoals are gone in a couple weeks. Kansas City, Salina, Great Bend... gone. All that will be left in Memphis is the Harrison turn and the Houston route.
 
Tupelo, Muscle Shoals were failing markets. How many went in before Seaport and failed there. We weren't the first and we wont be the last. We still fly into Kansas City, Salina and Great Bend. We are announcing some expansion in the next few weeks.
So don't count us out yet. These are just markets where we aren't turning a profit.

Again, not saying we don't have our problems, we certainly do. But dropping markets where we aren't making money is a sign of good decision making not bad. In some cases it probably should have happened a lot sooner.

I think we will be here a while longer. We have some great employees who work hard to keep this company moving in the right direction.
 
The Seaport business plan is to suckle off of the government teat with essential air service contracts. The only legitimate operation they had going for them was the Wings of Alaska outfit in SE Alaska...and they ran that into the ground fairly quick. Seaport either needs to die out like the dodo or give its management over to a competent group of people.

Pilot shortage? Im sure they have one. Most companies nowadays have a pilot shortage due to how the industry has been as well as new government regulations. The pilot shortage at Seaport won't get any better with their atrocious pay and treatment of the employees. I've seen a loyal company pilot be grounded, not once but several times in a summer due to lost paperwork by the company CP. But the company was gracious enough to pay him his daily pilot salery ($160/day) if he would go sling bags with cargo (which was also horribly understaffed).

As for Wings of Alaska, I am glad to see that it will no longer be “A Proud Part of SeaPort Airlines.” Being a part of Seaport was a joke. The company ruined a good company. I was happy to see that it was sold and hoped that it could once again become a valuable asset to SE Alaska. Then I saw whom it was sold to. The new owner (as named in the news article) was the manager at Wings a few years ago. Shady is one way to describe him. I have seen him try to push some unsafe situations. The only reason he didn't is because employees pushed back. Now as the owner, woe to anyone who works there. Wings could be a great place to work and fly now that Seaport is out of the way. But with the new owner, I would doubly suggest that people stay away from working there.
 
av8tr1 said:
Tupelo, Muscle Shoals were failing markets. How many went in before Seaport and failed there. We weren't the first and we wont be the last. We still fly into Kansas City, Salina and Great Bend. We are announcing some expansion in the next few weeks.
So don't count us out yet. These are just markets where we aren't turning a profit.

Again, not saying we don't have our problems, we certainly do. But dropping markets where we aren't making money is a sign of good decision making not bad. In some cases it probably should have happened a lot sooner.

I think we will be here a while longer. We have some great employees who work hard to keep this company moving in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Northwest managed to operate in those markets (GLH, TUP, MSL) very well prior to the merger with Delta.

Delta's decision to park the Saab and operate those routes with a 50 seat CRJ resulted in fewer flights per day, thus allowing the market to wither away.

Silver was a ray of hope that withered away as they refused to support/market those cities.

SeaPort was probably the final nail in the coffin for those cities to hope to have air service under EAS. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if the government wanted to cut them they way they did MKL and ATH.


As far as SeaPort leaving a market where they were not turning a profit... last I heard, they were asked to end their contract with those cities due to poor performance.

Honestly, I think SeaPort needs to step back and regroup. Getting rid of Wings might be a part of that, but their reputation is fast becoming tarnished and something needs to be done (and done quickly) before there is nothing left to save.
 
Again not arguing that we don't have our issues but my understanding is those markets were not profitable for us and there is history of others having the same issues.
 
Youre drinking the company koolaid. SeaPort didnt give up those destinations for lack of profit, SeaPort was given the boot for poor performance as ctab said.
 
I just hope someone sees my application to SeaPort I submitted on October 4th. I haven't had confirmation it was received just the web site acknowledgement it was submitted..
 
Korey said:
The only legitimate operation they had going for them was the Wings of Alaska outfit in SE Alaska...and they ran that into the ground fairly quick. Seaport either needs to die out like the dodo or give its management over to a competent group of people.
The pilot shortage at Seaport won't get any better with their atrocious pay and treatment of the employees.
As for Wings of Alaska, I am glad to see that it will no longer be “A Proud Part of SeaPort Airlines.” Being a part of Seaport was a joke. The company ruined a good company.
Click to expand...

Bolded, italicized, and quoted for absolute truth. Ran it into the ground, flaps up, full power. Everyone in Alaska was working four times as hard trying to make up for the steady-state disaster that SeaPort management wrought, and they treated us like disobedient children when their changes failed, or when anyone spoke up.

Almost all of the senior pilots bailed in the spring—I would have gone, myself, but I felt I owed them the summer for letting me stick around during the winter... and sticking around was almost a huge mistake.

-Fox
 
av8tr1 said:
Again not arguing that we don't have our issues but my understanding is those markets were not profitable for us and there is history of others having the same issues.
Click to expand...

http://bizbuzz.djournal.com/2015/08/21/seaport-agrees-to-withdraw-service-from-tupelo/

From the article:

SeaPort Airlines has agreed to end its service in Tupelo, said Cliff Nash, executive director of the Tupelo Regional Airport.

Last week, the Tupelo Airport Authority asked the Portland, Oregon-based airline to end its federally subsidized, two-year contract, citing poor performance problems since service began last October.


Nash said the airport authority asked SeaPort to end its service in 90 days. SeaPort hasn’t yet filed with the U.S. Department of Transportation, but Nash said it would.

The airline also agreed to withdraw service from Muscle Shoals, Alabama, whose airport also asked the airline to end its service early.
 
av8tr1 said:
Again not arguing that we don't have our issues but my understanding is those markets were not profitable for us and there is history of others having the same issues.
Click to expand...

Those cities have been EAS cities for a long, long time.

Delta didn't want to mess with the EAS cities, so they decided to reduce, then cut service all together.

When Silver started and flights were initially running on time and there were almost zero performance issues, the loads were more than than good enough to profit from the routes.

In other words, the "history" of others having profit issues is primarily Silver Airways, simply be caused they refused to support or effectively market the operation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top