I just lost all respect for JetBlue

AAPalmTree

Well-Known Member
Company newsletter:
IMG_5976.PNG
 
One aspect of this letter shows the inability of ALPA to be all things to all pilots. JetBlue management wants into slot controlled markets, ie. DCA, but they can't get the slots and won't pay for them. So let's ask our ALPA members to write letters to their congress men to take slots away from other ALPA, APA, SWAPA member airlines.

Delta MEC Chairman and later ALPA international president Lee Moak, said during US Airways bankruptcy, "The answer to profitability on the East Coast is if US Air would just go away." Here is the later ALPA international president saying that another long time ALPA carrier should "just go away". ALPA stood by and allowed a former ALPA lawyer to engineer a American Airlines takeover of TWA and forced all the TWA unions to give up their Allegheny Mohawk seniority integration rights. ALPA has a long history of conflict between strong and week companies and pilot groups.

ALPA now has a major effort going on to stop "Flags of Convenience" (Norwegian) and the Gulf Carriers. However I do not see ALPA leadership working strongly at the other end of the spectrum. Lee Moak was a perfect example of ignoring the RJ carriers. He simply called them "fee for service carriers" and Delta ALPA essentially stood by while Comair was gutted.

ALPA will always have these problems to deal with. Deregulation changed the model of how airlines operate but ALPA has not changed it's structure to mirror the change to the airline business environment. I have no answer to that challenge but I do see that ALPA misses opportunities to better bind the membership together despite the economic problems of one ALPA group gaining at the expense of another.

One thing ALPA could do to help strengthen the membership is by looking out for the little guy, instead of always protecting the top of the list, the international wide body pilot group. ALPA is now on the 1500 hour band wagon but the 1500hour rule was brought to you by CAPA, not ALPA. Why isn't ALPA more committed to training and certification at the bottom end? They have forfeited their leadership the University Aviation Association, who are backing the change to reduce hours. Leadership at the University of North Dakota had a major leadership role in getting South Dakota Senator John Thune to lead the fight to reduce flight hours.

http://buffalonews.com/2017/06/28/powerful-gop-senator-seek-changes-flight-3407-safety-law/

The ALPA training and safety national committees know more about training airline pilots than any other organization on earth. These national ALPA, major airline, and large regional,training department ALPA committee members have written the curriculum and know what it takes to train an airline pilot. The University Aviation Departments are full of we educated people who don't really have much of an airline background, if any, their programs turn out very qualified light airplane pilots.

I criticize ALPA for not being in a leadership position with these University organizations more actively. They do have a representative at the University Aviation Association, but he doesn't do much of anything. There is an old saying in politics and it is true in Union work as well, "if you are not in the room when the sausage is being made you will get only what they give you." ALPA should have taken, and should take a greater leadership role in addressing the pilot shortage by addressing the training and certification of airline pilots. No one understands airline training like they do as most of the ALPA training leadership comes from the member training departments.

The end result of positive action on this will be to maintain high standards and yes to maintain pilot compensation and carrier outlook. This is not a career for everyone. As was stated by APA president Dan Carey at a SWAPA event, "You can fit every Airline Pilot in America (74,000) inside AT&T stadium, with 15,000 seats to spare, that's how rare our profession is.

It now appears that an hour reduction will occur without any real input from those who best understand what it is to be an airline pilot. By the way that is not the FAA and flight school Universities. The Airlines themselves and yes ALPA have been in the forefront of much of the safety and training changes in the last decades. IMHO, they are missing the boat here.

Here endith the ranting...
 
Last edited:
Delta MEC Chairman and later ALPA international president Lee Moak, said during US Airways bankruptcy, "The answer to profitability on the East Coast is if US Air would just go away." Here is the later ALPA international president saying that another long time ALPA carrier should "just go away".

If this is really true, that's a bullschwix statement to make! US Air was a good addition to ALPA, and several of the highest spots in ALPA management were held by US Air guys. I'd find it pretty offensive if my own union, a group I'm paying dues to, would suggest that the west coast would do better if VX/AS would just go away. I know US Airways left ALPA after the West/East SLI, but maybe ALPA had it coming.



I assume the negatives are that jetBlue either doesn't or can't get slots to restricted airports and are limited in terms of where they can grow. That's why their acquisition attempt of VX was important, but failed in the end when Alaska won the bidding war. The reality is jetBlue is very strong on the east coast, but not so on the west. SFO and LAX are among the biggest and busiest markets on the west coast and even if they are not slot restricted per say, it's still very hard to just enter overnight and start service. You need space and gates and those aren't easy to come by at LAX/SFO. So I can see what jetBlue is trying to drive at with that newsletter. I'm assuming the reason they're losing respect is because jetBlue is saying we should support the ME3 and Norwegian and their goals for entry to the US for flights? My views on this are pretty clear, and unpopular. I was against Norwegian - that is until the day they offered US pilots, a US-based job at FLL, with full compliance of US-labor laws. Now it just becomes an emotional argument. Before, it was a legit thing with a Norwegian named airline, flagged/certificated in Ireland, crew contracts from Thailand, and Asian flight attendants. But if the pilots are US based, in full compliance with US labor laws, then from a pilot perspective I don't see it as an enemy. It's another opportunity for a US-based pilot job. The market will decide. If their pay is too low, US pilots won't accept the FLL-based job. The pay will have to come up to attract US pilots to be FLL-based. Now if they start basing non-US citizens at FLL, I'll be the first to picket against that move.

ALPA's argument against ME3 is to protect their widebody flying at Delta, American, and United and those 3 legacy airlines are against them. But SWA, jetBlue, and Alaska/Virgin have no widebodies and codeshare with the ME3 and support their right to access the US airports. Weird how that works out.
 
Lee Moak, stated: “Several years ago when I stood in this Body, or in the back of the room here, and said the solution to the airline business was that if US Air would just go away we would be able to affect pricing in the Northeast Corridor,..." [Page 384, Certified Transcript-Air Line Pilots Association 101st Executive Board meeting (special), ( US Airways Council 41 Trusteeship), March 28, 2008]

ALPA had every right to defend itself against the "raid" by USAPA. It is in any union's best interest to do so and is supported by case law. The PHL ALPA LEC 41 was placed into trusteeship by ALPA National, in accordance with the ALPA Constitution and bylaws because the ALPA reps were supporting USAPA. This is all on the "up and up", however Lee was not paying attention that everything he said was being taken down by a certified court reporter as every part of the hearing and it is in the record. The then Delta MEC chair and later ALPA National president showed his true colors.
 
If this is really true, that's a bullschwix statement to make! US Air was a good addition to ALPA, and several of the highest spots in ALPA management were held by US Air guys. I'd find it pretty offensive if my own union, a group I'm paying dues to, would suggest that the west coast would do better if VX/AS would just go away. I know US Airways left ALPA after the West/East SLI, but maybe ALPA had it coming.




I assume the negatives are that jetBlue either doesn't or can't get slots to restricted airports and are limited in terms of where they can grow. That's why their acquisition attempt of VX was important, but failed in the end when Alaska won the bidding war. The reality is jetBlue is very strong on the east coast, but not so on the west. SFO and LAX are among the biggest and busiest markets on the west coast and even if they are not slot restricted per say, it's still very hard to just enter overnight and start service. You need space and gates and those aren't easy to come by at LAX/SFO. So I can see what jetBlue is trying to drive at with that newsletter. I'm assuming the reason they're losing respect is because jetBlue is saying we should support the ME3 and Norwegian and their goals for entry to the US for flights? My views on this are pretty clear, and unpopular. I was against Norwegian - that is until the day they offered US pilots, a US-based job at FLL, with full compliance of US-labor laws. Now it just becomes an emotional argument. Before, it was a legit thing with a Norwegian named airline, flagged/certificated in Ireland, crew contracts from Thailand, and Asian flight attendants. But if the pilots are US based, in full compliance with US labor laws, then from a pilot perspective I don't see it as an enemy. It's another opportunity for a US-based pilot job. The market will decide. If their pay is too low, US pilots won't accept the FLL-based job. The pay will have to come up to attract US pilots to be FLL-based. Now if they start basing non-US citizens at FLL, I'll be the first to picket against that move.

ALPA's argument against ME3 is to protect their widebody flying at Delta, American, and United and those 3 legacy airlines are against them. But SWA, jetBlue, and Alaska/Virgin have no widebodies and codeshare with the ME3 and support their right to access the US airports. Weird how that works out.


The Market will decide, and if the Regional Airline Association and Airlines for America don't like the market's decision, it's easy just change the market. One of the ways that US Pilots will end up accepting the FLL-based job is if the regional airline association and Airlines 4 American have their way and are able to flood the market with cheap 250 "Riddle Ranger" wunderkind pilots who all want to move up as quickly as possible. The regionals will go back to paying low wages and having bad working conditions and it will quickly "trickle up" to Norwegian. By not paying attention to the bottom of the market ALPA is going to allow someone else to change the market.
 
Meh.
No CBA yet, so those matters are way beyond our control. Question, how many JVs does DL/AA/UA have with other carriers? I get what the Big 3 are saying and I agree but realize we as pilots are:
IMG_0042.JPG
 
The Market will decide, and if the Regional Airline Association and Airlines for America don't like the market's decision, it's easy just change the market. One of the ways that US Pilots will end up accepting the FLL-based job is if the regional airline association and Airlines 4 American have their way and are able to flood the market with cheap 250 "Riddle Ranger" wunderkind pilots who all want to move up as quickly as possible. The regionals will go back to paying low wages and having bad working conditions and it will quickly "trickle up" to Norwegian. By not paying attention to the bottom of the market ALPA is going to allow someone else to change the market.

I like when pilots talk about the market deciding.


******EYEROLL****+********!!1/
 
Back
Top