Jetblue and the PVC
04-09-2013, 08:21 AM
#112
SDQ Base Chief
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: 320 CA
Posts: 5,665
I agree. This AA/JB Codeshare will be a moot topic soon when Parker turns us down and uses PHL as the northeast connect hub. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me to see the new AA re-focus on BOS and winning back what they gave up to JetBlue.
04-09-2013, 09:00 AM
#113
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 27
More flying at what cost? I hear the revenue stream is anticipated at 100 million. With the least restrictive code sharing, JB will become dependant on the income and will end up having to compete, or bid for further revenue with other potential carriers. Thus will end up with a chunk of flying that puts JB into a Regional carrier status. Your future will be competing against lowest bidder. Sound familiar?
Even if the flying isn't threatened, you will hear from leadership the threat of losing revenue if you are paid too much. Have fun with that!
Even if the flying isn't threatened, you will hear from leadership the threat of losing revenue if you are paid too much. Have fun with that!
Yes the economics on the American deal favor us right now. What about when Republic opens up an independent brand that operates E190's for way less. Oh wait they already do. Two way code share goes both ways.
Better to keep that genie in the bottle if able. It certainly hasnt hurt the southwest guys.
Better to keep that genie in the bottle if able. It certainly hasnt hurt the southwest guys.
And remember its up to us to consider each thing seperately as per the protocol. JB will try to present it all lumped together to get you to feel like it's a package deal, but it's not.
PEA Amendments: most obviously will include Pay rates, Premium Trigger. JB can survey pilots, solicit PVC input, but they can offer whatver they want to the pilots. You show your approval or disapproval with your pen. If the rates are not good enough, don't sign it. JB will be left in a position where they will still be underpaying pilots, and guys will be leaving. And that's a problem they'll still be forced to fix.
Code Sharing: This is PPA. Any changes JB/PVC eventually pound out must get sent to us for a vote. And we are free to say no. It's seperate to pay. They will try to paint a no vote as causing grevious harm to the company, by denying them access to huge revenue stream,but this will be a career vote for us. (Btw, we were supposed to be closing the gaps in the 5 docs, not widening them.) At the end of the day though, I don't think it's realistic to expect us to have zero code-sharing. It's gonna be more about the protections and guarantees we get, to prevent the whole thing from de-volving into a lowest-bidder mess. And us understanding that authorizing something like this will mean our route map probably won't look much different than it currently does in the future.
04-09-2013, 12:54 PM
#114
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by Rock177
If the rates are not good enough, don't sign it. JB will be left in a position where they will still be underpaying pilots, and guys will be leaving. And that's a problem they'll still be forced to fix.
04-09-2013, 02:02 PM
#115
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,920
By the way, why do you prefer a regressive tax system?
04-09-2013, 03:48 PM
#116
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
By the way, why do you prefer a regressive tax system?
04-09-2013, 05:18 PM
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Left,Right, Left, Right,Right,Left, Right, Left
Posts: 3,150
04-09-2013, 07:38 PM
#118
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,920
04-09-2013, 10:50 PM
#119
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
Despite what that website says, the Fairtax is not regressive. It's simple math.
04-10-2013, 05:14 AM
#120
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,920
From the middle income level and up, I believe it is more regressive than that website shows. It is common sense. Those at the lower end of the income spectrum (forget the very poor because of the prebate) spend more/most of their incomes and save very little. As income approaches the super rich level, they spend more money, but a much smaller percentage of their income each year. They save and invest much higher percentages of their income, thus avoiding taxation all together.
