eaglefly

That depends on what plan Parker has for the "Eagle" network as mentioned above. One of those possibilities might involve spinning off all or part of a present Eagle WO to the shareholders and reinventing that segment in a new role as a Domestic New Entrant carrier under code sharing or opting to code share with such a carrier outside the WO's. AAG has a 15% Domestic ASM limit which if using say 100-seaters could mean 100-150 aircraft. If our present code share with Alaska ceases, then those ASM's are available for transfer leading to more aircraft and Alaska is about to get much bigger. Theoretically, that could take a big chunk out of AA pilots present flying and of course, wouldn't be good for the flow. But, if Envoy were such a target for that, it would make it interesting as a 1500 pilot airline flying E-190/195's, MRJ's or CS series might be an attractive place to be. If (and we are talking IF) such a scenario were to occur, would a flow to AA survive such a corporate change of that nature. If it couldn't, then many pilots there would end up lifers as not all regional pilots will find slots at legacies even with the coming retirements. Many more might even want to stay for lifestyle and/or job security (seniority). For others, it could mean a longer wait as AA wouldn't be hiring in big numbers until a later period, so that would impact the overall slots available at the legacies. Such a carrier would then truly be more of a lateral player to the LCC's and so moves by such pilots to those might now be not so attractive.

Is this "thinking outside the box" ?

Absolutely, but many events in this world should remind us all that one needs to think outside the box and consider all possibilities to better anticipate and react to unforeseen situations. I'll bet if one were to present the 9/11 scenario to 10,000 people on September 10, 2001, 99% + would have laughed and said such a thing was pretty far-fetched.

eaglefly

Yes, I agree that some of my considerations are perceived as inflammatory, but I think that is in large part because many simply cannot tolerate consideration of that which they percieve to be unfavorable to their interests. Regarding the flow and mergers/acquisitions and resulting SLI's, Envoy has the highest number of flows in bodies, but in percentages it's not that superior to the other WO's. The "career expectation" of that is really only the minimum flow rate and what would that be for PP's, 25/month or about 17% of the pilot group per year ? If merged with another WO, I don't think that aspect of career expectation would have enough difference to alter seniority that much, but even so, I don't see special treatment for Envoy pilots in an SLI based on that. Just my opinion though. An SLI with a non-owned regional might involve a more senior pilot group with better status and category weight. It might be that AAG would make any integration including Envoy contingent on agreement by ALPA for equal benefit for AA flow to all based on the final ISL.

How much leverage do Envoy pilots really have going forward ?

I know it might be painful to face, but you simply have to consider that possibility. Envoy's fleet assets really only presently include 40 jets that would be of value (E-175) as the CRJ's are still likely to leave for fleet commonality purposes and the rest are obsolete birds that will dissolve as the pilots needed to fly them disappear, which like it or not continue to leave making Envoy still a presently shrinking airline. What if only a partial merger occurs with Envoy (or is even offered as the even less attractive option if ALPA demands special consideration in flow slots in an SLI) ?

Would ALPA or Envoy pilots pick the best of two options or the worst ?

Personally, while I know it's more comfortable to slam your fist down so to speak in believing what you "own" regarding the future flow, I think that's simply another aspect of being more cautious on expectations so as to avoid future disappointment. Again, this is simply my opinion, so hopefully it shouldn't be too upsetting.

boiler07

The ending percentage of post-DOS pilots is roughly equal to other WOs' but the protected pilots' is greater. So while I agree that a post-dos pilot would likely experience a more seniority based integration, that's less likely for those that are PP. I also find it amusing that the despised management letters touting the flow could be used to assist in establishing what exactly the career expectations were. Clearly neither of us are on this hypothetical committee, but it's evident that such a process would be heavily focused on exactly this.

As far as outside attrition goes, it's surprisingly flat according to ALPA.

As the company continues kicking the proverbial CRJ-can down the road, it has become clear that PSA is unable to accept those planes without altering their current delivery schedules. There has been no announcement of that, so at this point it's reasonable to say that those 700s aren't going anywhere soon.

Apparently things are now moving quickly at the RAH bankruptcy. Someone posted a letter basically saying that 20 some AA planes would be cut. They referenced a late april deadline so we'll see what happens. That could affect how they deal with the aforementioned CRJs.

The 145s have some drop dead date that is years from now so that's not really a factor in any of this. It's too far down the line. There will be consolidation before that happens. They added 2 (I believe) from the desert this month to use for revenue...

No one is slamming their fist down. You just elicit a similar response from people for other reasons. I don't see why you'd be concerned about future disappointment for envoy pilots.

boiler07

I was unaware of their codeshare abilities.

I would add that the flow does have provisions for divestiture, buyouts, etc.

The negotiating team at the time was keenly aware of that considering how often the topic came up in the past. To put it simply: they can't shed it.

eaglefly

Sounds like we're both comfortable where we are on this subject and so we should leave it at that. Detente, if you will..........

eaglefly

Again, you are obviously comfortable with the belief the Protected Piot flow is bulletproof. You should sleep easy in the future.

boiler07

The point was not that it's bulletproof. The point was that you can't paint the entire flow with a broad brush as you are attempting to do. I'm sorry that was lost on you.

eaglefly

My point was that its future cannot be defined with razor sharp precision as you and others seem to insinuate it is and I'm also sorry that was lost on you. Again, we obviously have polarized positions on the flow and so we each should accept that and see what the future holds.

Perhaps we'll both be surprised ?

sublime259

So eaglefly is still obsessed with the flow? The more things change, the more they stay the same....

BTW has anybody actually claimed that the Protected Pilot flow is bulletproof?

eaglefly

...and many of you are still obsessed with me. The more things change, the more they stay the same....

Yes, the implication by many of you is (and has been in rebuttal to my comments) that the contractual provisions of the Protected Pilot Agreement in your CBA are rock solid, i.e., have no reasonable method or possibility of being altered and thus every pilot included is essentially guaranteed to become an AA pilot under any and all considerations. If you DON'T think it is bulletproof, then please explain why. If you won't then that must mean you cannot come up with any reason it is not and thus my assertion is valid. Every example that I have discussed that might place that provision in jeopardy of alteration (or even elimination) has been met with vehement disagreement.