~~~^~~~
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Posts
- 6,137
Within a percent or two - here is the damage. I'm sure others will clean up my post as I don't have much time to post anything long:
70 Seat Pay down 12.5% (FO down 13%) = roughly SkyWest
90 Seat pay is 70 seat plus 2%
50 Seat Pay down 7.5% = Between SkyWest and Mesa
COLA at 1.5% beginning on 08
Profit sharing based on Company's profitability/margin limited to 5% of pay in 07
Per Diem $1.55
Short Call reserve 90 minutes, then 9 hours and 12 hours
Deadhead at 75% unless part of initial line construction
Preferential Bidding under Carmen system
401K Match = 2% until year 10. Then 3%. (= Mesa's until year 10)
No uniform allowance
$82.5 million bankruptcy claim held by ALPA and distribution to be determined by the Comair MEC
Scope:
My take - it stinks. However, the fact Delta is now a party to an agreement with the Comair pilots is an important distinction. Further, the future growth guarantees appear to be a good use of scope language to secure new growth.
Now when your airline's negotiating committee says binding the parent company to the contract and forcing them to commit to growth is impossible - the correct response is "wrong" and here is your example.
I say kudos to the Comair MEC who must have had to battle ALPA as much as management to secure this scope language. If ALPA wants to sign up the SkyWest pilots then they have to push for an equal percentage of new SkyWest flying to be awarded to ASA commensurate with our percentage contribution when we were purchased. When the SkyWest guys learn that a collective bargaining agreement can shape the future growth of an airline without a tie in to concessions, they will want some of what ALPA has to offer.
Comair's growth means probably little new flying for ASA while Mesa goes cheaper and E170's go to Shuttle/Republic, but what the heck, kudos to Comair anyway.
70 Seat Pay down 12.5% (FO down 13%) = roughly SkyWest
90 Seat pay is 70 seat plus 2%
50 Seat Pay down 7.5% = Between SkyWest and Mesa
COLA at 1.5% beginning on 08
Profit sharing based on Company's profitability/margin limited to 5% of pay in 07
Per Diem $1.55
Short Call reserve 90 minutes, then 9 hours and 12 hours
Deadhead at 75% unless part of initial line construction
Preferential Bidding under Carmen system
401K Match = 2% until year 10. Then 3%. (= Mesa's until year 10)
No uniform allowance
$82.5 million bankruptcy claim held by ALPA and distribution to be determined by the Comair MEC
Scope:
- Maintain current 70 seat aircraft (15) fleet
- Maintain 90% of current CRJ200 fleet
- Minimum of 40% of all new flying to be awarded to Comair through 2/08
- Minimum of 30% from 3/08 to 3/09...
- Delta held to agreement
My take - it stinks. However, the fact Delta is now a party to an agreement with the Comair pilots is an important distinction. Further, the future growth guarantees appear to be a good use of scope language to secure new growth.
Now when your airline's negotiating committee says binding the parent company to the contract and forcing them to commit to growth is impossible - the correct response is "wrong" and here is your example.
I say kudos to the Comair MEC who must have had to battle ALPA as much as management to secure this scope language. If ALPA wants to sign up the SkyWest pilots then they have to push for an equal percentage of new SkyWest flying to be awarded to ASA commensurate with our percentage contribution when we were purchased. When the SkyWest guys learn that a collective bargaining agreement can shape the future growth of an airline without a tie in to concessions, they will want some of what ALPA has to offer.
Comair's growth means probably little new flying for ASA while Mesa goes cheaper and E170's go to Shuttle/Republic, but what the heck, kudos to Comair anyway.
Last edited: