CCAir TA

[dashtrasher]

Subject: CCAir Pilots Reach Tentative Agreement on New Contract

Press Release

SOURCE: Air Line Pilots Association, International

CCAir Pilots Reach Tentative Agreement on New Contract

CHARLOTTE, N.C., April 18 /PRNewswire/ -- Union leaders of CCAir pilots,
represented by the Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), yesterday
announced that they have reached a new
tentative agreement with the airline's management.

The tentative agreement -- reached as CCAir pilots faced the threat of job
terminations on May 15, 2002, and a July 1, 2002, shutdown of the carrier's
operations -- includes job security provisions and pay
increases over the duration of the five-year deal. The tentative agreement is
now subject to an expedited ratification vote by the pilot membership.

Brian Billups, vice chairman of the ALPA CCAir Master Executive Council (MEC),
stated, ``While the tentative agreement is less than we had hoped for, it
includes several improvements over the previous
proposal that was recently voted down by the CCAir pilots. It also provides
management with the ability to address a number of its financial concerns.''

Despite the fact that the current CCAir pilot contract does not become amendable
under the Railway Labor Act until November 6, 2002, CCAir management reported
economic difficulties that challenge the
viability of the company, and sought contract relief from the 140-member pilot
group. ``CCAir pilots may not stand up and cheer for the terms of this tentative
agreement,'' stated Billups, ``but I believe we all
understand that our job security requires some sacrifice.''

CCAir is a subsidiary of the Phoenix-based Mesa Air Group and operates as a US
Airways Express carrier, based in Charlotte.

Founded in 1931, ALPA is the world's oldest and largest pilot union,
representing more than 62,000 cockpit crewmembers at 42 airlines in the U.S. and
Canada. Visit the ALPA website at
http://www.alpa.org .

SOURCE: Air Line Pilots Association, International

 

[surplus1]

ATTN: Beantown

See, you didn't lose your job after all. Guess old JO was bluffing maybe?

 

[Jetscream32]

I don't believe that it was a bluff. We were scheduled, and still are, to furlough up to seniority number 64 out of 146 on May 1st. If it would have been voted down 90% then we wouldn't even have had a second chance. By the way the "new" offer only puts provisions in for two jet rates and a 2% pay increase every 18 months. They took away the stock options deal and no furlough for one year clauses. It is basically the same contract except that this time ALPA basically told everyone that we should pass it. I bet it passes by about 75% this time since "National" has put its stamp on it and told us that the company really was going to shut down.

 

[surplus1]

ALPA's press release said that the new TA contains job security provisions.

Are you telling me that it doesn't?

 

[Beantown]

Surplus1, What jetscream said is all true. What ALPA call's job protections and what the average line pilot call job protection are different. They took away the no furlough clause, and I will be furloughed May first with 70% of the pilots no matter what happens with the new TA. There is a clause in the new TA that says if any assets transferred from CCAir to another company, the pilots flying that aircraft will go with that aircraft. This makes it hard to whipsaw the two groups by moving aircraft within the Mesa air group. ALPA calls this job security. I call a no furlough job security. You can call it what you like. -Bean

 

[tintube]

Surplus1, What jetscream said is all true. What ALPA call's job protections and what the average line pilot call job protection are different. They took away the no furlough clause, and I will be furloughed May first with 70% of the pilots no matter what happens with the new TA. There is a clause in the new TA that says if any assets transferred from CCAir to another company, the pilots flying that aircraft will go with that aircraft. This makes it hard to whipsaw the two groups by moving aircraft within the Mesa air group. ALPA calls this job security. I call a no furlough job security. You can call it what you like. -Bean

-------
Sorry, but I can not see how this prevents Mesa Mng from whipsaw Mesa / CCR, unless it meant that AC to be transfered from Mesa to CCR AS WELL ( and not only the other way around ) the pilots will go with that ac.

Mesa has only one rate on jet ( 50 - 59 seats ) but CCR will have 2. Can you please tell me the scale / rates?

Take care.

 

[Jetscream32]

tintube,

the jet rate is restricted to those jets of a MTOW of 85,000. However, the "second jet rate" is only a 7.5% override paid to Captains flying greater than 50 seaters. Since there is no way that we would ever fly the larger RJ's under U it looks as if mgmt is setting it up for us to fly 70/90's under another code share partner (possibly). I for one would much rather see us grow additional flying under U while Mesa keeps what they have and is allowed to fly the 70's/90's as HP express thus alieviating the need for Freedom Air.
As far as the rates for the 0-50 seat jets I am not quite sure what they are but figure 1-1.5% below industry average with FO's topping out after 5 years and captains after 15. What I am hoping for is eventually when Mesa signs their new contract it will include a scope that puts all flying under the Mesa Air Group (YV, ZV, and CC) on one seniority list and finally we can have one group with one contract.

 

[tintube]

tintube,

the jet rate is restricted to those jets of a MTOW of 85,000.
-----

Yes, that should qualify to fly ac included the CL-900.
My guess is that Mesa mngt will put the 700 / 900 on CCR. ( and transfere Jetstreams + -8's to Mesa Cert if U still will hold on the scope-restriction ) I am not convinsed that Mng will be patient enough to wait for a Freedom air cert.

Pushing it further, I also guess that Mesas CL200 will be transfered over as well. This way they can whipsaw Mesa during their contract talks, since what Beantown mentioned above, the promise of Transfering the pilot together with type only applies to AC going from CCR to Mesa and not the other way. Or does it apply to Mesa as well?

Thanks again for info and take care.