RAH/F9 et al, Single Carrier Status Announced
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Capt
Posts: 2,049
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 282
#24
If Delta had a problem with this, they would have / should have gone after it many months ago... This in reality changes nothing! The money that RAH/Wexford Capital gleaned from it's major partners has always gone into the purchase and sustainability(cough) of F9/MEA.
Obviously DL and UAL could care less...
We'll see, I guess.
Obviously DL and UAL could care less...
We'll see, I guess.
#25
If Delta had a problem with this, they would have / should have gone after it many months ago... This in reality changes nothing! The money that RAH/Wexford Capital gleaned from it's major partners has always gone into the purchase and sustainability(cough) of F9/MEA.
Obviously DL and UAL could care less...
We'll see, I guess.
Obviously DL and UAL could care less...
We'll see, I guess.
Just because management didn't care, doesn't mean the employees don't. At least this gives the union some ammunition to try and roll back the outsourcing by arguing scope violations.
#26
From the perspective of RJET's legacy partners, nothing has changed.
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,707
wake me up when its over.
Oh, nothing has changed.
cantracts are with the individual certificate carrier, not the holding corporation.
No one will ever have scope where it tells another holding company how to do business. Try to see if you can get one, by the time the smoke clears you will be a travel agency who franchises DELTA AIRLINES, you know like Burger King.
Oh, nothing has changed.
cantracts are with the individual certificate carrier, not the holding corporation.
No one will ever have scope where it tells another holding company how to do business. Try to see if you can get one, by the time the smoke clears you will be a travel agency who franchises DELTA AIRLINES, you know like Burger King.
#28
That's of course if ALPA doesn't move on it.
I'm curious if you could see RAH back track and break off F9 again as its own entity if, as it obviously is, RAH is proven beyond a doubt to be a single carrier and scope clauses are enforced. Would it be better to return to the regional carrier life or continue with the creation of this new Frontier? Could be a win for Frontier pilots.
#29
When I refer to delta, I am also referring to it's pilot union. All of the legacy partners and their pilots should have thrown a fit over scope issues with this.
#30
There could be a chance that nothing happens if ALPA was the only union involved. But you have the APA too, the same union that won the $6.6M lawsuit against RAH to start this whole debacle of multi-certificates. If the APA had a successful litigation then ALPA could no longer acquiesce its own carriers scope clauses due to its need to support both the employees of mainline and those who replace them.
That's of course if ALPA doesn't move on it.
I'm curious if you could see RAH back track and break off F9 again as its own entity if, as it obviously is, RAH is proven beyond a doubt to be a single carrier and scope clauses are enforced. Would it be better to return to the regional carrier life or continue with the creation of this new Frontier? Could be a win for Frontier pilots.
That's of course if ALPA doesn't move on it.
I'm curious if you could see RAH back track and break off F9 again as its own entity if, as it obviously is, RAH is proven beyond a doubt to be a single carrier and scope clauses are enforced. Would it be better to return to the regional carrier life or continue with the creation of this new Frontier? Could be a win for Frontier pilots.
Keep in mind that APA only cares about the pilots of American Airlines. ALPA on the other hand could care less about its dues paying members, and will not want to upset any one not currently paying dues, because their goal is to lure them into to ALPA. There will be no challege here from ALPA! Just watch!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post