Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Alaska
Bailing for greener pastures? >

Bailing for greener pastures?

Search

Notices

Bailing for greener pastures?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-10-2016, 01:02 PM
  #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,286
Default

Originally Posted by N19906
They just told QX that now no Q400s will be leaving.
They're sucking it up and paying for D checks. So all the new Embraers will be new flying, most likely starting out out with increased frequency to current AAG cities. Planning on receiving 13 next year, from Apr~Dec, with one per month after that....
I know this will be just a guess but what do you think that means as far as Alaska's hiring forecast for next year?
ImperialxRat is offline  
Old 10-10-2016, 04:32 PM
  #42  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 784
Default

Originally Posted by N19906
They just told QX that now no Q400s will be leaving.

They're sucking it up and paying for D checks. So all the new Embraers will be new flying, most likely starting out out with increased frequency to current AAG cities. Planning on receiving 13 next year, from Apr~Dec, with one per month after that....


So all these emb175's are growth.....just great. This is exactly why scope is needed.
OCCP is offline  
Old 10-10-2016, 06:13 PM
  #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
2StgTurbine's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,354
Default

I didn't know Alaska didn't have any scope protection. When was there last contract written? Scope isn't a new thing and it blows my mind that any modern pilot contract would pass without a scope section.
2StgTurbine is offline  
Old 10-10-2016, 06:31 PM
  #44  
Gets Weekends Off
 
CassinAK's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: Captain
Posts: 327
Default

Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine
I didn't know Alaska didn't have any scope protection. When was there last contract written? Scope isn't a new thing and it blows my mind that any modern pilot contract would pass without a scope section.


We do have a Scope section. Scope pertains to more than just CPA flying. We have merger protections and a no furlough clause.. and some other stuff. Our section one is obviously lacking Seat/weight outsourcing limits that we desperately need to fix.
CassinAK is offline  
Old 10-14-2016, 06:28 AM
  #45  
Gets Weekends Off
 
luv757's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: 18%er but I’ll enforce UPA23 to the last period.
Posts: 465
Default

Originally Posted by OrionDriver
This scope thing, trying to wrap my head around it (as an outsider). Scope would prevent AAG from flying RJs on traditionally Alaska Airlines routes? Basically preventing a creep of services to low cost carriers under the same colors as Alaska Airlines? What other sorts of things would having a scope clause protect against?
Scope covers the entire "scope" of flying that you will do under your bargaining agreement (contract). In short, how much outsourcing can the company do? How much can be outsourced to RJ operators, how big an airplane can be outsourced, how many codeshares can you enter into, how much flying as part of a joint venture with an overseas carrier must be in house? It's much more than just RJ's and how big. The scope section is what keeps your airline an airline and not becoming a ticket broker.
luv757 is offline  
Old 10-14-2016, 06:14 PM
  #46  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,286
Default

Originally Posted by N19906
They just told QX that now no Q400s will be leaving.
They're sucking it up and paying for D checks. So all the new Embraers will be new flying, most likely starting out out with increased frequency to current AAG cities. Planning on receiving 13 next year, from Apr~Dec, with one per month after that....
I don't have a mind for management, but what if these Q's are staying so that when they finalize a scope clause in the new contract it is one of these ... "we have X number of planes already operating (Q's+EMB's) so it will be this number plus a certain percentage" type bargain.
ImperialxRat is offline  
Old 10-15-2016, 09:55 PM
  #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 784
Default

Delta now has a 4 month upgrade. Why would anyone with the qualifications stay at this mess of a merger now and swing gear indefinitely for super low pay.
OCCP is offline  
Old 10-15-2016, 10:37 PM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: May 2016
Position: 737 tiller master
Posts: 288
Default

How times are changing! Less than 1 year upgrade on the mad dog out of JFK! $200+/hour at year two in the left seat is pretty tempting, IF you can get hired at Delta. I suppose if you love living in Gig Harbor and don't mind making less than $100/hour until year three, Alaska may just suit you right. Die hards and rejects......
Arctichicken is offline  
Old 10-15-2016, 10:49 PM
  #49  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2014
Posts: 273
Default

Originally Posted by Arctichicken
How times are changing! Less than 1 year upgrade on the mad dog out of JFK! $200+/hour at year two in the left seat is pretty tempting, IF you can get hired at Delta. I suppose if you love living in Gig Harbor and don't mind making less than $100/hour until year three, Alaska may just suit you right. Die hards and rejects......
Delta is hiring 2 year regional FO's with 0 TPIC; I know 2 people personally that has been hired in the past 3 month's with those quals.
BeechPilot33 is offline  
Old 10-16-2016, 06:16 AM
  #50  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 443
Default

I wouldn't call them rejects. It's mathmatically harder to get hired at Alaska than United and Delta. I know 10 guys who had AS as their #1 choice and after years of doing the job fair game gave up and went to UA and DL.

On another note what was with all the cancelations at SEA yesterday? The winds peaked around 35 knots right down the runway. Not much of a storm and no one else cancelled.
shfo is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SkyPig09
Military
57
10-20-2012 06:30 AM
Check Essential
American
45
10-07-2012 10:18 AM
renman95
Cargo
22
08-15-2012 02:38 PM
Seeburg220
Hangar Talk
1
07-23-2007 10:00 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices