Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

CCair

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Beantown

Ex Chicken
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
564
A contract vote at Charlotte-based CCAir has become the focus of a bitter
fight between the airline pilots union and the airline's top executive, an
entrepreneur who has built a business operating small jets at low cost.

About 100 CCAir pilots are deciding whether to approve a new contract in
voting that began last week and concludes Wednesday. Operating as US Airways
Express, CCAir offers 30 daily departures from Charlotte to 12 small cities.

CCAir has said it will be forced to shut down if it can't reduce labor
costs. If the new contract is approved, executives say, the airline -- which
now flies 12 turboprops seating 19 to 39 passengers -- can enter the growing
business of flying 50- to 90-seat small or regional jets.

Although it offers incentives, including a year of pay for furloughed pilots
and a signing bonus, the proposed contract generally reduces wages and
tightens work rules. The reductions and changes are so severe, says the
national president of the Air Line Pilots Association, that the national
union can't approve it.

Without that approval, the contract cannot take effect, which means the vote
is essentially meaningless. "The contract is too flawed to accept," ALPA
President Duane Woerth said in an interview.

CCAir is operated by Phoenix-based holding company Mesa Air Group, which is
headed by Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Jonathan Ornstein. Woerth
compares Ornstein to Frank Lorenzo, whose bitter fight with union employees
at Eastern Airlines led to the airline's shutdown 11 years ago.

"Ornstein is following a classic playbook, a union-busting playbook," he
said. "He bought the company and shrank it, and now he says, `We'll grow it
again, but first you have to be the cheapest people in aviation.' "

After buying Eastern in 1986, Lorenzo moved key assets to a sister carrier,
Continental Airlines, which had lower costs. Woerth said Ornstein wants to
follow a similar course at three Mesa-owned airlines, directing new small
jets to the airline with the lowest wages.

Ornstein rejected the comparison with Lorenzo.

"If I felt there was a shred of truth to it, it would bother me," he said.
"But there's only one person saying it, and if Captain Woerth had taken as
much time as I have to know what our pilots want, he would know it was
untrue."

The contract battle has become a crucial issue for the Air Line Pilots
Association, the 64,000- member union representing pilots at 43 airlines in
the United States and Canada, because the use of small jets is increasing
rapidly.

"Even though CCAir is a relatively small player, it could become a chapter
in the history books, because the new frontier of airline labor relations is
being defined at regional carriers," said David Field, Americas editor of
Airline Business magazine.

Field called the outspoken Ornstein a trend-setter in the small-jet
industry, noting, "What he does should be closely watched."

Small jets became popular in the 1990s. They allow airlines to serve routes
that don't have enough traffic for bigger jets. But, historically, pilots at
the major carriers have opposed their use. Because small jets are flown by
small carriers with lower wages, major airline pilots fear the flying they
do will be transferred to the lower-cost alternative.

This puts ALPA in a tough situation, because it represents pilots at small
carriers such as CCAir and sister carrier Mesa Airlines, as well as at major
airlines. "ALPA has a moral obligation to represent all of its members, and
it's not easy," Field said.

Last year, more than one out of every eight U.S. airline passengers flew on
small or regional jets seating 50 to 70 passengers, according to the
Regional Air Service Initiative, a group of manufacturers and suppliers.
Airlines now fly about 800 small jets and have ordered 946 more.

The national union stepped into the CCAir battle last year, after CCAir
pilot union officials agreed to reopen a contract previously scheduled to be
in effect until November. In February, the national union refused to sign
off on a tentative contract agreement reached by local officials. A
tentative new agreement, with slight alterations, was negotiated in March.

Woerth said if CCAir needs financial relief, the union will provide that --
but not for the five-year term of the proposed contract. "I'm willing to
address near-term survival, but not with a blank check that has nothing to
do with the near term," he said.

CCAir President Carter Leake said changes are desperately needed at CCAir,
which is losing $700,000 to $800,000 a month after suffering a $7 million
pre-tax loss in 2001. Because pilots are the highest-paid labor group, their
contract is the key to reducing costs. CCAir has 142 pilots, including 80
slated for furlough and about 42 not eligible to vote on the contract
because they have less than a year on the job

The contract offer represents an effort to reduce CCAir's pilots wages to
more closely match those at Mesa Airlines. The differences are small in some
cases, but significant in others. Pay for a five-year first officer on a 20-
to 39-seat plane would fall from $31 to $24 hourly.

CCAir pilots normally fly about 1,000 hours a year; wages vary from about
$20 to $55 hourly.

Leake argues that, in some respects, the contract is better than the Mesa
contract. For instance, it includes a signing bonus of several thousand
dollars and a year of no-furlough protection. He said if CCAir survives and
gets contracts to fly small jets, pilots would be paid more than they earn
for flying turboprops.

"Captain Woerth has grossly underestimated this pilot group's resolve to
determine their own destiny, and he will quickly learn that the CCAir pilots
are not about to follow him into some quixotic campaign against Mr.
Ornstein," Leake said.

But a CCAir pilot, who asked not to be named, said the vote, being conducted
online, could be close. "A lot of people are clearly opposed to this
contract, but others are not," he said. "Really, it's hard to tell where
people stand. It's hard to know what they will do in the privacy of their
den."
 
Hey guys and gals,

The reason that I posted this was to get everyone's feelings about ALPA's power. Should they be able to reject a contract that the pilots ratify. We at CCair were taking steps to get rid of ALPA no long ago and in the ALPA meetings senior officials kept telling us how AlPA is run from the ground up. Each carrier and there MEC make the decisions. We (ALPA) just are here to advise and give legal advice.
We at CCair decided to stay with ALPA (at least in the near term) and then they come up with this crap. The new TA at CCair may or may not pass but if it passes and Mr. Woerth does not sign it, he is setting a BAD precedent that ALPA is all about ALPA and not each carrier and THEIR best interests. What do ya think? -Bean
 
Didn't J.O. dangle the ERJ/CRj carrot in front of you guys before, but requiring that the pilots take a pay cut then. Also, at one time, wasn't it CC Air the only one of the three Mesa Air Group certificates that was making money?
 
Steve, When Mesa bought CC three years ago, we were much bigger (well relatively speaking 22 planes and 240 pilots or twice as big) and he offered us all the east coast erj flying if we would take concessions to our contract. ALPA national told us to hold fast and you will get the planes anyway. We did. Well that plan bombed bad. Oriensten moved Mesa to the east coast and now they do all the flying of the erj's. Many at CCair remember this and don't trust ALPA national and there hold fast policy for good reason. They are still telling to not take concessions and that it will all work out in the end. Only this time CCair won't lose the jets, we will lose our jobs! -Bean
 
Beantown:

I wish the best for you guys. I have noticed that standard practice with Mesa is to pit one group against the other. When he was dangling the carrot in front of you guys three years ago, he was hinting that he would send the ERJ's out to you guys if the Mesa pilots didn't meet some of his terms.

On another note, why didn't he transfer the rest of the DHC-8-200's to you guys?

Best of luck.

SC
 
Beantown,

How can you not see that what ALPA is doing IS in your best interest? If you (and the rest of the pilots at CC Air) can't see what Ornstein is up to, that he is constantly making promises (not only at CC Air, but at all the Mesa group carriers) IF you will make concessions...in an attempt to find the absolute bottom dollar that any pilot group is willing to work for, then give that group the lion's share of the flying....and hopefully turn the pilot group against the union, and then break the union...then maybe you SHOULD take steps to get rid of ALPA. Then you will wind up with what you really deserve and Ornstein will get exactly what he wants. Another bargain-basement, non-union pilot group that will work for whatever pittance he is throwing your way this week.
 
trainerjet,
It is easy for you and ALPA to say b/c your jobs aren't on the line in this post 9/11 environment. Without some concessions, CCair is history. They have us by the balls. We are so small now we have no leverage. I was an economic major in Collage and some times companies and specifically employees, have to take a step back to move forward. If we get a few jets on the property we will be worth something and then we can get what we deserve. I understand exactly what Orienstien (sp) is trying to do but there is not much we can do about it if we want the company to survive. We all would like to have a merger list but it is not going to happen and we all know that. I will not be a martyr for ALPA. Not in this hiring environment. I have a house and bills and am not going to put myself on the street to say that I hung tough against Mgmt but they won anyway buy just shutting us down. J.O will still have Freedom to whipsaw the Mesa boys with so it will not solve that problem either.
We don't want Mesa's flying we want new growth flying. If it ends up that we get some of Mesa's jets so be it. They have no problem taking our flying and our routes (which they have done alot of in the last year.
And lastly, no one has answered my original question, Should National ALPA have the power to reject a contract that the pilot group voted in? -Bean
 
Just so everyone knows who your dealing with, and what his motives and tactics are.


Local airline plans non-union upgrade
Mesa fleet stays aloft in economic ill wind



Jack Kurtz/The Arizona Republic

Jonathan Ornstein, the risk-taking CEO of Mesa Air Group Inc., is launching a non-union carrier, Freedom Airlines, in a creative move to double the company's regional jet fleet and to sidestep labor restrictions from pilots unions.

By Hal Mattern
The Arizona Republic
March 24, 2002


During his career as an airline executive, Jonathan Ornstein has gained a reputation as a blunt-spoken risk-taker with a knack for rescuing troubled airlines and building employee morale.


Now he can add another adjective to his resume: shrewd.

Ornstein, chairman and chief executive officer of the Phoenix-based Mesa Air Group Inc., is launching a non-union carrier, Freedom Airlines, in a creative move to sidestep labor restrictions that threaten to ground his plans to nearly double Mesa's regional jet fleet.

The expansion plans come at a time when pilots unions and airlines across the country are battling over the growing use of regional jets, and when relations with the Mesa pilots union appear to be deteriorating.

That has led to speculation that Ornstein also is using Freedom to head off union efforts to exert more control over who can fly the jets and how much they are paid.

But Ornstein insists that creating the airline is purely a business move designed to assure the continued growth of the company.

"It's ridiculous that we have to go through these gymnastics for something that is good for the company, but we have no choice," he said. "We certainly aren't going to give up the business."

Ornstein said Freedom is being started to operate 40 new 64- and 84-seat Canadair regional jets that Mesa already had agreed to acquire over the next few years to fly routes for Tempe-based America West Airlines. Mesa flies regional routes for the airline under the America West Express name.

Ornstein said the planes are being shifted to Freedom to circumvent a restriction stemming from Mesa's partnership with US Airways to fly 50-seat regional jets in the East. A clause in the contract between US Airways and its pilots restricts the size of the jets the airline's regional partners can operate, even if they fly them for other carriers. That means Mesa cannot fly the bigger jets for America West Express, Ornstein said.

The only way to get around the union clause is to create an airline that is independent from Mesa and has no contractual ties to US Airways, he said. Plans call for deliveries of the new planes to begin later this year, and they are expected to generate $350 million in annual revenues once the expansion is completed.

Ornstein also defends his plan to establish Freedom without union representation, which he said is allowed under Mesa's current pilot contract. He said he plans to offer the pilots better pay rates and work rules at the new airline. If he fails to deliver, he said, they can always vote to unionize later.

"The pilots are going to be stunned by what I offer," Ornstein said. "I'm going to give our people the opportunity to fly these airplanes. If they don't want to, I'll have to hire someone else."

Union concerns

Officials of the Air Line Pilots Association representing Mesa pilots say they haven't received any offers from Ornstein, but they have made it clear that they wouldn't support a non-union Freedom. They want one collective bargaining agreement that covers all of Mesa's divisions - Mesa Airlines, Air Midwest, CCAIR - as well as the new airline.

"We don't care how he sets up his corporate structure," said Andy Hughes, chairman of the union representing Mesa pilots. "We're only concerned that we have one contract for all our pilots."

Hughes and Robert Henry, union vice chairman, sent a strongly worded letter to Ornstein last Tuesday, informing him that they wouldn't attend the airline's annual investor meeting this weekend in Telluride, Colo., a mixture of business and skiing designed to schmooze the financial community.

They accused Ornstein of failing to acknowledge the union's concerns about Freedom and criticized his handling of contract negotiations with pilots at CCAIR, a tiny Mesa division that flies five turboprops for US Airways out of Charlotte, N.C. They said Ornstein is threatening to shut down the money-losing division in July if its pilots refuse to accept concessions.

The union officials also said that Ornstein has used tactics designed to alienate and intimidate the pilots, and that by attending the meeting they would send an erroneous signal to investors that they fully supported management's business strategies.

"Clearly, labor relations have veered way off track at Mesa Airlines," they wrote.

There is speculation in the industry that by starting the airline, Ornstein is trying to block efforts by America West Airlines pilots to negotiate an agreement allowing them to fly the bigger regional jets. There apparently are concerns that the national pilots union will pressure Mesa pilots to support such an agreement, which would complicate contract negotiations with both carriers.

None of the parties would comment publicly on such speculation.

Ornstein's decision to start a new airline to dodge union restrictions is a prime example of the labor strife in the industry stemming from the increased use of regional jets. Airlines across the nation are using smaller planes, which essentially are stretched-out business jets that seat from 50 to 90 passengers.

They use them to replace turboprops on short feeder routes into their bigger airport hubs, and to serve markets with too few passengers to fill their large planes. The travel slowdown after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks accelerated interest in using the smaller planes.

Airline officials say regional jets are more economical to operate, especially on routes where their big planes are flying half empty. They also say that business travelers prefer the faster, quieter regional jets to turboprops.

Union members, however, contend that they lose jobs when airlines contract out routes to regional carriers, which use their own pilots, flight crews and mechanics. Pilots have negotiated so-called scope clauses in their contracts, forcing many airlines to restrict their use of the smaller planes.

Industry competition

Ray Neidl, an airline analyst at ABN Amro, said that the US Airways scope clause is one of the most restrictive in the industry. It limits the airline to only 70 regional jets that seat 50 passengers each, making it difficult to compete with low-cost carriers such as Southwest, AirTran and JetBlue.

"They're getting killed by everybody because their costs are so high," Neidl said.

Now that financial pressures are forcing the wider use of regional jets, negotiations are under way at some airlines to lift the scope clauses and allow the use of more small planes. As a trade-off, pilots unions are insisting on "jets for jobs" agreements that would allow their members to fly at least some of the new regional jets instead of letting the airlines farm out all the business to regional carriers like Mesa.

Such a proposal at US Airways would require that half of any new regional jets be flown by pilots furloughed by the carrier after Sept. 11. The change likely would lift the restriction on the size of the jets Mesa could fly, and could boost the number of flights it operates for US Airways. But negotiations stalled earlier this month.

Ornstein said that because US Airways and its pilots are unlikely to resolve the issue soon, he is proceeding with plans to start Freedom, which is awaiting certification from the Federal Aviation Administration. He said he is confident that an agreement will be reached with Mesa's pilots, and suggested that he would be willing to include the new airline under the pilots union contract if the right terms could be negotiated.

Still, Ornstein, who blames labor demands for the financial problems at many major airlines, said he won't allow the union to derail Mesa's expansion plans.

"I'm not anti-union," he said. "But Mesa is one of only four airlines that were profitable (after Sept. 11), and we're the only ones buying the bigger regional jets right now. The other airlines can't because their unions won't let them. I'm not going to let that happen here."
 
Beantown said:

And lastly, no one has answered my original question, Should National ALPA have the power to reject a contract that the pilot group voted in? -Bean

I'll give it a try. In a word, the answer to your question is, YES! That power is vested in the President by the Constitution of the ALPA.

If you read other threads on this board you will know that I've have quite a few axes to grind with the ALPA so, I'm not just taking their side.

As far as I know, it is extremely rare for this to happen. However, it has happend before. That doesn't mean that ALPA is right in the specific decision, but the authority to do it does exist. If you'd like to do some research, take a look at what happened when American left ALPA. Look also at what happened with the original Frontier. In those cases, I think ALPA was wrong. In your case I think ALPA is right.

In your specific case, I understand your concern about losing your job. I don't know what your TA contains, but let me ask you this. If you accept the contract that the Company wants, does it include any guarantee of how many jets you will receive and when you will get them? Does it include what you will be paid to fly them? Are those two questions answered specifically in your proposed contract or are the answers just promises? I think I know what your answer will be, but I'd like to hear it from you.

I believe your management is deliberately playing you against the other pilot groups in the other airlines that they own. You seem willing to allow them to do that in order to keep your job. I think that is a major error. Perhaps it will result in your keeping the job for a while. Is there anything to prevent JO from shutting down the company after you've signed? Please don't tell me that it's your one-year no-furlough clause. A no-furlough clause means nothing when the company shuts down.

You said:
I was an economic major in Collage and some times companies and specifically employees, have to take a step back to move forward. If we get a few jets on the property we will be worth something and then we can get what we deserve.

Congratulations on your education. Now, how much of your economics training focused on the airline industry? Were your professors pro union, anti-union or neutral? Unless you attended a very unusual school, the probability is that your training was "business" oriented, i.e., from the management perspective. While you cannot ignore that perspective, you are now labor, not management. There aren't too many managers concerned about your job security and the CEO of your particular Company isn't one of them.

The jets you might get today, can be moved again tomorrow when the next group undercuts your new contract. You will NOT get what you deserve, you will get what you negotiate and usually, less than you THOUGHT you negotiated.

As professional pilots we have risks related to job security that are legend. We all have bills, mortgages and families to feed, just as you do. Sometimes we have to take concessions to help the Company survive. Those concessions, if we take them, should have a date certain on which you will be returned to "normal". It's like making a loan. When the bank lends you money, you must agree to repay it at a specified time. When you lend the Company money in the form of a contract concession, the Company must agree to repay you at a specified time, with interest. If your new TA does not do that (I suspect it doesn't), then there's a scam in progress and YOU are the victims.

Do not let 9/11 panic you. There are jobs available in your category. If you have the qualifications, you will get one, just like you got the one you have now. What would you do if you lost your medical tomorrow? Give up? I certainly hope not. There is no need for you to give up now.

Your desire to take what is being offered appears to be motivated by a fear that is normal and that we all have in this business from time to time. If you plan to make a career of airline flying, you must learn to overcome that fear and stand up with your brothers for what is right! Don't sell out for what is expedient. If you do, you will live to regret it.

As you point out, your company is small. It could dissapear and the industry would not notice. You will of course and I can appreciate that, but sometimes we have to bite the bullet and do what is right even if we suffer a temporary personal loss. I think your decision is in that category.

If your contract is bad enough to where the President of the union is actually refusing to sign it, examine what you do very carefully. Do not allow the company to convert what is really a struggle between you and them, into a struggle between you and your fellow pilots. That is the Company's objective. It's not about wanting to give you jets in preference to someone else.

Keep this in mind. What the union can do or should not do is really not what's important here. What you will do to fellow airline pilots, in your own airline and in others is what really matters.

Maybe, just maybe, your concessions will "save CCAir", though I doubt it. After you've made them, ask yourself if CCAir is worth saving? If things are that bad, I suspect it isn't.

Yes, I know it's easy for me to say that but I'm serious. I come from a Company that was among the biggest and definetly the strongest regional airlines in the business. One year ago, almost to the day, my pilot group risked the whole thing and walked the picket line for 89 days for what we knew was right! With all due respect, we had a lot more at stake than you do today. Bottom line is this: If you know that contract isn't what it should be (I think deep down you do know that), then don't take it! If that means the Company will go out of business, then let it. Start looking for a new job NOW.

JO is trying to sell you ocean front property in Arizona. Don't buy it. It's not often you'll get me to say that DW is right about regional pilot issues, but this time I think he is.

I wish you all the very best.
 
Beantown:

Another question to ask yourself, has J.O. ever followed through with anything he has promised your pilot group? Have you ever heard the words "industry standard" and "you will make more money than you ever made before". If so, beware.
 
I was reading that article from the Arizona Republic that trainerjet posted above. I noticed the quote from JO: "The pilots are going to be stunned by what I offer." I second Steve Canyon---BEWARE!
 
Dear Mr. Bean,

I am assuming that you are a junior pilot at this company....you and your fellow junior pilots that are able to vote better wake up! I was here when we had no contract and this place was crap to work probably one of the worst.It has taken many years and several contracts to get what we have today.This thing J.O. is offering is worse than our first one,he is not doing you any favors only himself.This company was doing just fine until he came along,then he reduced all our flying ,got rid of aircraft and claimed we weren't making any money.Well ,I guess not ,if you are a economics major then you know you do not reduce in size to make a profit.ALPA on the other hand is not going to leave you out in the cold. They have stood by us for the last 16yrs. so who would you trust.Jobs may be over at Mesa but we'll still have jobs.He also has 70 or so million dollars in CCAir how does he justify shutting us down to the board.It is not entirely his company,don't be fooled by these tactics believe me if you have a family you will never see them or be able to afford anything,unemployment would be better.He is a Frank Lorenzo clone with exactly the same plan.We must stand together to win.....This is a poker game gentleman. Do not blink!!!
 
calling the bluff?

Observations from an industry outsider . . .
Intruder One,
It may be a poker game but sounds like you want to call JO's bluff with someone else's chips.

surplus 1
" . . . you are now labor, not management." Maybe it would be more helpful to view labor and management as necessary partners instead of as perennial adversaries. Where do you think all the jobs come from anyway?

I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating. I don't think many people here are looking at the REALLY big picture. Jobs come from profitable companies, not broke ones. Really good jobs come from really profitable companies. Profits=jobs. Simple.
I'm not anti-union but they are often very unreasonable. Income re-distribution didn't work in the old Soviet Union (they called it socialism . . . from each according to their ability to each according to their need). Didn't work there, won't work here. If you as a pilot are not willing to work for peanuts why should the one who has risked his own capital?
9/11 and the recession accelerated the problems ALREADY going on in this industry. If ALPA or whichever union holds fast to show those fat capitalist pigs whose boss, well, you'll have more Freedom Airs.
And by the way, how on God's green earth can one union fairly represent major and regional pilots whose interests are often in opposition to each other?
Face it, the industry is evolving to meet new needs and adjust to new economic realities. That's a much greater force than all the unions combined. The sooner everone faces up to that the sooner everyone will be flying again, and profitably.
Now that that's solved, think I'll go talk to Arabrat and Sharon.
 
BTW . ..

. . . I forgot to say, best of luck to all the CCAir pilots.
 
Prodigal...

Let me clue you in on management pilot relations at a airline,they will never give you anything you don't negotiate for.Comair for example turned down several contracts with a overwhelming majority and finally had to strike before they got a decent contract, but they finally did.And I know all about post 9/11 but that dosen't mean we all of a sudden have to work for nothing.We don't have to have the Comair contract but its has to be more reasonable than the one he's offered.
 
Prodigal is obviously clueless. The airline industry has been and always will be volitile and cyclical. Periods of huge profits followed by periods of financial struggles and furloughs followed by huge profits. During those periods of huge profits, do the airline managements, out of their kind capitalistic hearts, decide to bestow windfalls upon thier employees? Hardly. So, are now the employees to give back what's been negotiated, simply because they demand it? For the "promise" of what they might give you if you do? Strong companies and strong unions have survived this industry and will survive this industry. The Lorenzos and Ornsteins and their "Freedom Airs" will not. The industry has always evolved to meet new needs and adjust to the "new economic realities" of the day. I'd hate to think where this profession would be without ALPA and the other pilot unions. Invariably, whenever you see a "non-union" company operated by the likes of Lorenzo or Ornstein, how long before that pilot group is desperate for representation?
 
I thought you right on surplus1.

And for the person that quoted JO as saying"the pilots are really going to be suprised by what I offer." Well he was right, if it would have came out on Monday insted of Wed. I wouldn't have had to buy any ass wipe for the week. Take the mesa contract if you can call it one, change a few things, label it a Skywest type comtract, and give it to us come on. Gave my notes from the meeting to my 3 year old brother, two minutes latter he did what I wanted to do to them on the way home.
 
Unions

This is probably a gross overgeneralization, but, for what it's worth, I'd say this: Beware of the stories that management tells you. More than likely, they are just that, stories.

I've said on previous threads and will say again: a course(s) in American Labor History should be required for the Aeronautical Science degree along with ground school, systems, aerodynamics and flight phys.

Thanks, folks, for posting the newspaper articles. The articles are some of the best explanations of the controversies I've seen.

Lots of luck in dealing with "management."
 
clueless?

trainerjet,
By your own statement, the airline biz is highly cyclical, and pilots should get more when things are good. Does it not also follow by your own example that when things are bad there needs to be some give in order to assure the viability of the companies?
Give and take. Now may be the time to give a little in order that there may still be company around later from which to take when things get better.
 
Prodigal,

Contracts are negotiated and then become amendable after a period of years. Often companies ask for some type of relief via LOAs or concessions in subsequent negotiations during the down cycles. It has been my experience that once something is given up to the company, it is very difficult to get it back. Certainly, not without giving something else up in return. Even rarer is the company that approaches the pilot group when times are good offering to sweeten the pot. Give and take would be a great idea, but only at the most elightened of companies is this type of atmosphere a reality. I very seriously doubt that Ornstein's Mesa Air Group is this type of company.
 
Trainerjet your comments are right on ,couldn't have said it any better.......As for Prodigal...you may not have ever worked for a airline I don't know but as far as the CCAIR vs.Mesa goes yes sometimes you do give up things to keep a company afloat,but that is not the case here.Mesa bought us ,they control everything about us,yet they themselves are making tons of money and I have a stockholders report to prove it.This battle is not about survival its about pitting one pilot group against another....clear and simple.
 
No one wants to answer my original question! SHOULD ALPA HAVE THE RIGHT TO REJECT A CONTRACT THAT A PILOT GROUP RATIFIED WITH A MAJORITY?

As for the rest of this crap, I understand what J.O is doing and I don't like it. But as I said before, he has us by the balls and until we have some leverage, there is not much we can do about it. The fact is that IF we sign this contract and IF we get jets, almost all of us will be getting a raise over what we have now. It will create some growth and people will start moving up therefore making more money. Those of us that have higher aspirations then to work of a regional will be able to become captions and get the PIC time we need to move on. CCAir has alot of very senior captions (15+ years) who have been capped a $54.64, will now be able to make over $85.00 an hr. The new jet rates in the TA are BETTER then the jet rates in our current contract which top out at $75.09 an hr. As a second year jet FO I would make $27.70 an hr under the TA vs.. $26.06 under our existing contract. Yes, the TA sucks, and there is more bad then good but it is not all bad. You don't hear ALPA talking about the good in the meetings.
That leads me to another sore spot. I can't stand that MY union, won't tell me the truth or at the very least is trying to skew EVERYTHING to the negative instead of just giving me the facts and letting me make the vote that is best for ME. All they care about is National ALPA and there agenda, not what is best for CCAIR.
Many of the older guys at CCAir just want things to stay the same. A small little company that flys Dash8's and J32's. They are afraid that they can't make the upgrade to a Jet or just don't want to put in the effort. Hell, we have captions that can't even make the jump from J32 to the Dash. You think they have any shot at making it in the Jet? I din't think so. They want all this to go away and to keep status quo. They don't understand that things are changing in the regional industery and CCair has been left behind. They blew it three years ago when J.O offered us the ERJ's for very small consessions in our contract and now we are paying bigtime. -Bean
 
Beantown,

Surplus 1 did a very thorough job of answering your original question several posts up on this thread.
 
Re: clueless?

prodigal said:
Does it not also follow by your own example that when things are bad there needs to be some give in order to assure the viability of the companies?
Give and take. Now may be the time to give a little in order that there may still be company around later from which to take when things get better.

The only problem with what you say is this. There IS no guarantee that the company will be around later.

A recent example is TWA. They gave and Icahn took. They gave again and Ichan left with a sweeheart deal the crippled the company. They gave again placeing themselves among the lowest paid for what they did. Three bankruptcies and today? There is no TWA. That is only one example.

It this case, the real Company is not CCAir, it is Mesa. Mesa is not in "need" and is in no danger of going out of business. CCAir is a paper organization that Mesa uses as a tool to control costs at Mesa. Before the contract that Mesa pilots now have (which is not good) there were many more shell companies under Mesa used in the same way that they are using CCAir today. Mesa pilots sacrificed much to end it. Now management is doing it again.

I know that what I say doesn't directly help CCAir pilots. They are d***ed if they do and d***ed if they don't. Victims in the game of corporate manipulation.

Their TA offers them a few more bucks and a "promise" of some job security that is not at all guaranteed. Those few bucks will undoubtedly come at the expense of their fellow pilots at Mesa and (although they don't appear to see it or at least one of them doesn't) at the expense of all regional pilots.

Ornestein (sp) doen't "own" CCAir and he personally wont lose a nickel if it goes under. He came to Mesa from another company where he helped to take advantage of the pilots there too. If he really wants CCAir to survive, he can merge it into Mesa and give the pilots credit for their seniority.

This game of shell corporations is a ploy of CEO's who want to defeat unions at the expense of employees, while they continue to feather their own nests. We as pilots need to stop it and we start by saying NO to shady deals like this one.

It may cause some immediate pain for some, but it is one more step in curing the cancer for all.

Beantown,

YES, I think ALPA SHOULD have the right to say no. I also think you as a group should have the wisdom to say NO without any help from ALPA. In this case, the issue is really not ALPA it's the chicanery of JO. You seem to be thinking about today. Think about tomorrow too, if you plan to make airline flying your career. If it's just your hobby, move on the pursue your career in economics. Avoid damaging other pilots in the process.

Ornesteing is tryin to get away with this because he KNOWS you all are divided. Come together and stand against him as one. Don't do it for ALPA, do it for yourselves.
 
"There is no TWA"

Those pour pilots, they have to go fly for American. What a bad deal! They could have not taken the pay cuts, gone bankrupt long ago, gotten bought by no one and been on the street.
-Bean
 
Surplus 1 does another admirable job of trying to explain the situation to Beantown...but it's obvious he doesn't get it, and it's obvious he's not going to get it. I think he started this thread with his original post hoping to get someone to agree with him that ALPA shouldn't have the right to refuse a contract that the pilot group ratified. That really didn't happen, and after many attempts to explain the realities of what's going on and the reason's for ALPA's refusal to buy off on this sham, Beantown proves once again that there are some people who are only going to see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear. Hopefully there are enough other pilots at CC Air that see this for what it is. Good luck to you all.
 
Mr. Bean........you sadely mistaken if you think any of us senior pilots want status que.I did not start here thinking I would be stuck here either.All you young wonder boys come into this industry thinking oh......it will never happen to me,I guess my 10.000 plus hours and a college degree didn't impress anyone,you guys have alot to learn.What happens 4 or 5 years from now if you don't get out ,J.O. sells us and another Lorenzo takes his place and wants to cut your pay ,when are you going to stand up to these type tactics.
Back to your earlier question ALPA should have the right to vote down a contract.Unlike you they have 60,000 plus pilots that this contact could hurt in the furture,that's why it is a union association not a me,me,me association.You know we are using a password to vote and everyone's is different so screw alpa now and see what happens to your big airline career!

THe lifestyle you so want in this industry has been made by ALPA for the most part if you can't support them when times get a little tough maybe you should consider you another career!
 
Trainerjet wrote "I think he started this thread with his original post hoping to get someone to agree with him that ALPA shouldn't have the right to refuse a contract that the pilot group ratified"
-----------------
I started the post to get everyone's opinion. Nothing more nothing less. Surplus 1 has made many good points and I very much understand his point of view. I don't necessarily agree with him, I but I do GET IT. Your right, because he makes articulate, well thought out points, should I fold like a tent and kiss his as@. I don't think so. I believe, no matter what the context or the situation, if a Pilot group (or any group in a democratic environment) votes with a majority on anything, that there will should be upheld. There has been nothing said in this thread to convince me different.
I think Duane Woerth and his threats are no better then Mgmt and there threats. It is sad to see ALPA stoop that low. -Bean
 
Bean,

It is funny how the President of the US has veto power and you don't believe that the President of ALPA should.

I can't believe you actually believe in what you are writing. First you were not there three years ago when the ERJ situtaion was going on. So you only know what you have heard. Which since I work for CCAir also I know was not the whole truth. Second I can't believe you actually think some of our senior pilots don't want this because they can't make the upgrade to a jet. That type of comment is what keeps us separated at this company and keeps us from standing together against management. Management has you right where they want you. They have you doubting the people you should be trusting. You need to forget about what people say about the past and look at the real situtation in front of us now. Why do you think the senior guys would be out to get you? They are the ones who hold the seniority and they gain nothing from hurting you.

I want to know why you believe so strongly against a union that has done nothing but protect your safety, and worked for a better future for all pilots. That contract will take 15 years to recover from and because ALPA has been around the block a few times why are you not willing to conceed they know more than you about this? This fight is not just over your job. This is about thousands of pilots. Your selfishness is unexplainable to me.

Why don't you make your decision on the vote not with emotion but with the facts. And the facts are we have been offered a 5-year substandard contract (you have to agree with that). That contract offers no promise of you keeping your job, nor does it offer jets! What are you going to do when you lose pay cause now we fly 1900's and DH-8's. I hope you enjoy going back down to $18.00 with a top out of $23.63. You are buying into promises that are not backed up on paper. Give me just one guarntee you have on anything from the contract.

I know that some people don't agree with how things have been working in our ALPA for the last few years. But those same people are the ones that have never been to a meeting or done anything to help until now and now it's too late. Quit blaming others for things that we all should have done.

Our survival does not really depend on this contract. It depends on us as a pilot group standing with each other. To fight for what is right, for what we deserve. We must believe that everyone really wants the same things. A job where we want to go to work. I will not want to go to work under that new contract. Now you tell me why you do!
 
Beantown said:
Surplus 1 has made many good points and I very much understand his point of view. I don't necessarily agree with him, I but I do GET IT. Your right, because he makes articulate, well thought out points, should I fold like a tent and kiss his as@. I don't think so.

Thank you, Beantown. All I was trying to do is give you my perspective. You listened and I am appreciative. I don't expect you bend over and worship at the grail. Actually that would dissapoint me. However, I do hope you will give the matter more serious thought before you make your final decision. I'm sure you will.

I believe, no matter what the context or the situation, if a Pilot group (or any group in a democratic environment) votes with a majority on anything, that there will should be upheld. There has been nothing said in this thread to convince me different.
I think Duane Woerth and his threats are no better then Mgmt and there threats. It is sad to see ALPA stoop that low. -Bean

You have a very valid point with the above. The democratic process should not allow your majority vote to be ignored, but in this case it does.

Compare it to the anomaly of the Electoral College if you will. The people cast individual votes for the President. Those votes do NOT decide who becomes President. If they did GWB would not be in the Whitehouse today. The Electoral College is supposedly based on a plurality withing each State. To this day, we don't really know exactly what happened in Florida but there is considerable evidence that GWB was NOT the winner of Florida's popular vote (and no I don't want to debate it). The decision was essentially made by ONE man in the Supreme Court. Bottom line = Bush is President and we as Americans have to accept the result beacause that is the system that WE put in place.

ALPA is not a true democracy. It is acutally ruled by a handful of major airline pilots. That is not a good system and I happen to be an advocate of changing it. Like you, I don't think it is right. If I had the clout to do it, I would change the structure and install checks and balances. I might still give the ALPA President veto power over your contract, but I would also add a mechanism that could override that veto. Much like Congress can override the President's veto. That's what I would LIKE to do, but we don't have that right now.

Under the present system you have two choices: a) Accept the Presidential authority to override your popular vote; b) Decertify the union and set up a new one that is free from that procedure.

I believe your group recently tried to decertify but you lost the vote. Therefore, you have to accept the current situation. You don't have to LIKE it or agree with it but it isn't going to go away because of that. Attempts to change it would probably be fruitless simply because it is entrenched and your group is too small and has no influence. Democracy is a complex form of government. True Democracy doesn't exist in our national government. If it did, the rights of the minority would cease to exist overnight and eventually the Republic would fail. That may well come to pass in ALPA, but it's going to be a long time. The "little people" like you and me, simply do not have the political power to change it.

Perhaps the ALPA President is using "pressure tactics" to steer your course along his lines of thinking. That is a common political practice. Your group is free to call his bluff if you believe you should. Then we'll see if he will really refuse to sign your contract or if it is just a "threat". Before you'll know that, you must have the votes to pass the TA and pass it by a wide margin. Until DW actually declines to sign an agreement that the pilots have voted for by a substantial majority, you have no case. You have to put the cart before the horse. If you pass the TA and he refuses to sign it, you MAY have grounds to sue. I would warn you that it will be virtually impossible to win such a suit.

I wish you the best of luck. But I still think that you shouldn't fall for that TA. The promises that attract you are promises with no guarantee. I don't trust the maker. Apparently you do. That is where we really differ.

As the gambler sang "You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em". Just the same, I admire you for being a man of principles.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom