Bigger than NetJets

Imissmypilot

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Posts
536
Total Time
7500
Kenn Ricci claims his goal in 5 years is to be bigger than Netjets while also declaring the pilot shortage does not exist in the fractional world.

I'm willing to be fair. His plans for customer and airframe acquisition sound spectacular. I'm all for it.

The problem is in no world does more business mean less work for the pilots. If you think we are working out asses off now, how will his plan help us be fairly treated and safely operated?

To compete with NetJets we will need 1500 more pilots. That is impossible on many levels. How is it that Warren Buffet sees the reality but Kenn can't regarding the shortage? How can you train 1500 pilots in 5 years? Starting today, we would have to have 25 pilots start training every single day for the next 1825 days. We can't even fill a classroom once a month.

Know this: Kenn's plans to compete with NetJets are exciting. However, unchecked they will come at the expense of the pilot group unless we negotiate protections NOW.

With the right CBA there is no reason to not support Kenn's plan but I'll be damned if I am gonna to support it without protecting myself and my family first.

Kenn just gave every pilot at OneSky the reason and permission to support our Union. We don't have time to waste on these petty self sabotage tactics. It not only hurts the pilot group, but it sounds like it could hurt the plan.

Isn't that a strange turn of events.
 

Imissmypilot

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Posts
536
Total Time
7500
Sorry about the typo my post above - I meant 25 pilots a month... and we can't even get that much in 1 month now let alone for the next 5 years.

Including expected attrition that means we are needing to hire at the rate of One Pilot a day for the next 5 years. Reasonably speaking, are there even enough sim slots Nationwide in our aircraft types to do that?
 
Last edited:

Imissmypilot

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Posts
536
Total Time
7500
Your vacation has been cancelled. Thanks for your understanding. L$.
GC I know you know but just in case someone doesn't, the only reason they are playing fast and loose with the vacation interpretation is because we are so understaffed they can't afford for us to take it. I have verified with union officials a simple LoA has been in management's hand for months that would simply allow vacations to stay as is.

You are getting screwed out of vacation because the company is choosing it. No strike that, because management has to do it to keep planes staffed. Go back and read the OP now. Now way we can be anything other than a FLOPS reincarnation without some serious negotiation taking place.

If Kenn really wants to be Netjets competitive in 5 years now is his opportunity to prove it with a CBA that will attract good candidates.
 

Groucho

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
199
Total Time
lots
All,

I am a current 121 guy at a major and retiring in a few months. I will be looking for a flying job to allow me to get my retirement situation to where it needs to be. I have been reading this board regarding Flex and the current actions of management. One thing I stumbled across was the recent 6th Circuit decision in FLight Options LLC / V. Teamsters 1108.

What was the company's real rationale for not accepting a negotiated Seniority List? If the parties agreed, why would the company oppose? The listed reason; that they would be liable for a DFR filing doesn't make sense. Allegheny Mohawk Section 13 states: “insofar as the merger affects the seniority rights of the carriers’ employees, provisions shall be made for the integration of seniority lists in a fair and equitable manner, including, where applicable, agreement through collective bargaining between the
carriers and representatives of the employees affected.

So management had to negotiate, regardless of what they state in their brief, but the respective committees have already agreed on a list. What's the company's real motive to not accept the list?

 

Bjtdrvr

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2015
Posts
180
Total Time
10000
Because in an effort to get rid on the union after the merge they moved senior FO pilots over to the bottom of the Flexjet seniority list and promised them certain things. They then upgraded them to pic positions in the International Red Lable program. Originally those pilots were going to have to make a choice as to which list they were going to use for the final integration and at first there was going to be a penalty. I believe the Union did not make that penalty but the company still opposed it anyway because that is what they do.
 

gunfyter

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 25, 2002
Posts
3,778
Total Time
11000+
All,

I am a current 121 guy at a major and retiring in a few months. I will be looking for a flying job to allow me to get my retirement situation to where it needs to be. I have been reading this board regarding Flex and the current actions of management. One thing I stumbled across was the recent 6th Circuit decision in FLight Options LLC / V. Teamsters 1108.



There is current legislation apparently backed by Berkshire Hathaway that may require current fractional pilots to retire at age 65. The day after the bill passes I am told. Right now it may only affect NJA as the size of the operation has to meet certain number of t/o and land operations NJA pilots may be looking to go to FlexJets after we are FIRED at Age 65.
 

hawkerfun

Active member
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Posts
34
Total Time
10,000
There is current legislation apparently backed by Berkshire Hathaway that may require current fractional pilots to retire at age 65. The day after the bill passes I am told. Right now it may only affect NJA as the size of the operation has to meet certain number of t/o and land operations NJA pilots may be looking to go to FlexJets after we are FIRED at Age 65.

It is not just NJA it is ALL 135, 91K and 91 fly for hire. No more getting paid after 65
 
Top