Chautauqua TA vote

[SizzleChest]

Yes it is there reread the first part of compensation... don't believe what you hear.

 

[LearLove]

From the TA

"A. Pay Scales

Pilots will be paid for flight time based on status and longevity in
accordance with the hourly rates below. In computing hours for pay purposes, the actual time flown or the scheduled block time, whichever is greater, will be used."

Yes I see this in page 3.1 but page down to B and I see...

"B. Line Guarantee
When the Company achieves a ninety-eight point five percent (98.5%) completion factor for the month, a pilot who has been available for duty during the entire month will receive the greater of one hundred percent (100%) of his final bid award line value or his actual flight time, adjusted for trip trades or drops."

I'm not the best at reading this type of stuff but too me it says that the company has to get a 98.5% CF to get block or better. If its less than 98.5, you only get what your line is blocked for.


Anyway - just my thoughts, also congrats on the holiday pay, I also like the customs and drug testing pay. Both can be a pain in the butt so a few $$ makes up alittle. As for the drug testing pay now there is an excuse not to have to pee right away.

 

[Skull-One]

That means that a pilot awarded a trip worth 81 hours will be paid at *least* 81 hours if the company completes 98.5% of its flying, even if a cancellation occurs, so long as the pilot is available for assignment.

As it stands now, your line could be worth 81 but you are only guaranteed 75. Thus, if you show up to work and they cancel a day of flying because of Mx you lose the six hours. That is remedied in the new contract.

It's not really an issue. Until last week I have not had a cancellation in two years, and I didn't break guarantee so it was a free cancel.

 

[Strikefinder]

Skull, you're a lucky one. I lost 11 hours of flying in August, and worked my butt off. It was a 90 hour line, and I was really excited to get that, since I needed the extra money but felt uncomfortable picking up company-sponsored overtime with guys on the street. Now, I don't know if we met the 98.5% target, but had we done so the line guarantee clause would have put several hundred dollars back in my pocket. All said, the past few months I've lost at least 20 hours of pay.

Outside of the line guarantee, we have block or better by leg (a CoEx guy told me it's by trip for them, though I don't know if that's true. I know Mesa is block or less...). However, in my situation (11 hours cancelled), I'd be paid the higher of my original line award and actual flying. In other words, I either get 90 hours of pay, or 79 hours of pay plus the "better than block time", which amounted to an hour or two. I'll take the 90, thank you.

 

[surplus1]

Now, I don't know if we met the 98.5% target, but had we done so the line guarantee clause would have put several hundred dollars back in my pocket.

I understand your reasoning, but not your logic. Granted, what you call the "line guarantee" is better than what you have now, however consider this.

1. You just said you "don't know if we met the 98.5% target" .... I am wondering (out loud) ___ how are you going to "know" in the future if you "met the 98.5% target"? I guess the Company will tell you. I can't help but wonder how often your performance will happen to turn out to be, let's say, 98.4% ... close, but not close enough. I bet that will relate rather directly to how many "lines" are awarded above "guarantee".

2. The provision makes it clear that the Company doesn't trust you. They have tied your potential compensation to a cancellation/performance rate that you can't control. That means that they suspect (enough to actuall put it in your TA) that some, if not most, of the "cancellations" are dependent on pilot decisions (that you should not make), plus the one's that they should not make, you pay for too. If the WX gets too tight and "you don't go", it's your fault and you lose pay. If the aircraft mechanicals and "you don't go", it's your fault for writing it up and you lose pay. If the Company decides to cancel for "operational necessity" or whatever they call it, it's your fault and you lose pay. If the FA doesn't show, it's your fault and you lose pay. And so on and so forth. Better they had just told you "we won't pay for cancellations __ the pilots must share the cost of our doing business."

While this provision may be better in appearance than what you have now, it is actually just the same, with a whole lot of not so subtle pilot pushing thrown in. There's nothing like offering you a few bucks to make the "right" decison, is there?

No, I'm not suggesting you should "vote no" for this or any other reason. I am suggesting that you might take a closer look at what you've been "given" and why (across the board). "All that glitters is not gold."

 

[Greg]

Management's bonus is dependant on that 98.5% CF. If we don't get it, they don't get the green. On-time perf and Completion factor is in every company update and in the past 12 months we've made in 9 of those. I doubt the company is gonna start lying to us (it'll be too obvious.)

Go to LGA on a crappy wx night and look at the board. Red Cancel is next to every flight except (majority) CHQ's. We'll take a 7.5 hour delay and run two flights to the same destinantion within 2 minutes of each other so BB and company get their reward. I doubt this trend will cease because of the contract.

 

[TWAER]

Greg, you are 100% correct. Management at CHQ is VERY dependent on completion factor and on-time performance. I really doubt they would walk over a dollar to pick up a penny in this instance. But you know everyone at every other regional knows everything about how this TA is a piece of crap. You might as well vote no just to make them all happy. After all, they are after YOUR best interest.

 

[Skull-One]

Skull, you're a lucky one. I lost 11 hours of flying in August, and worked my butt off. It was a 90 hour line, and I was really excited to get that, since I needed the extra money but felt uncomfortable picking up company-sponsored overtime with guys on the street. Now, I don't know if we met the 98.5% target, but had we done so the line guarantee clause would have put several hundred dollars back in my pocket. All said, the past few months I've lost at least 20 hours of pay.

Ouch! Bummer on the 11 hours lost. That's pretty harsh.

I guess STL has it a little easier with the newer airplanes. MCO seemed to be fine, too. Again, brand new airplanes mostly. I think the Airways side deals with a lot more issues than the STL and MCO sides do. I know that in STL we are only one leg away from MX access no matter where we go, but out on the East Coast you do a lot of round robin stuff... (My latest cancel was on the U side, FWIW.)

Don't get me wrong, I am very glad to have the 98.5% guarantee. Even if it only helps one crew one time every four years it is worth it. But from my limited exposure it hasn't been a make-or-break item in terms of my vote. In this instance I'm happy for the rest of you guys that will benefit from its implementation but am indifferent in terms of how it affects me (this will change as the airplanes start to break more often, no doubt!).

If Block or Better went away this contract would be voted down 497 to zip...

 

[Strikefinder]

As was stated earlier, management's bonus from our partners is tied to the same completion factor. You could argue that they have no more control over a massive, quarter-country wide power outage, or a solid line of thunderstorms, or a bad air conditioning mixing valve (all things that caused my 11 hours of cancellations). And often times, the flights still ran, but just not with me on board. So the completion factor may not have been affected in many situations. For instance, we got trapped in Rochester, NY for the air conditioning valve, and were supposed to go back to PIT and then to MKE. Another crew picked up the MKE round trip and we picked up ERI, as it left a few hours later. However, I lost the difference in flight times (which was like an hour and a half). For that day and for that situation, our company's completion factor was 100%, but I lost an hour and a half of pay (which somebody else picked up).

It's true that the company dictates the numbers, and they theoretically could lie about them. There's absolutely nothing I can do about that. Once again, it's something I'd like improved on, but I have to weigh the likihood that it will be improved upon if this contract is voted down versus what we stand to lose if it is not ratified. We voted down the last TA, and we got lower rates, but many improved work rules. Was it worth it? I don't know, but I doubt there's such a thing as a free lunch here. We might get a better contract by voting this one down, but we might also lose business, take larger concessions, or work for a very long period of time under our current (and, compared to the TA, REALLY crappy) contract. It's called a risk assessment, or a gamble, if you'd like. I can't tell the future, neither can any of you, but we can (and do) go on about what we think is more likely than not, and make decisions based on the probabilities of outcomes.

 

[surplus1]

Management's bonus is dependant on that 98.5% CF. If we don't get it, they don't get the green. On-time perf and Completion factor is in every company update and in the past 12 months we've made in 9 of those. I doubt the company is gonna start lying to us (it'll be too obvious.)

Go to LGA on a crappy wx night and look at the board. Red Cancel is next to every flight except (majority) CHQ's. We'll take a 7.5 hour delay and run two flights to the same destinantion within 2 minutes of each other so BB and company get their reward. I doubt this trend will cease because of the contract.

Thank you for the information. You have confirmed my suspicions. I agree with you, the trend won't cease because of the contract. What you said makes it rather obvious what the motivation to pilot push really is.

Originally posted by TWAER

Greg, you are 100% correct. Management at CHQ is VERY dependent on completion factor and on-time performance. I really doubt they would walk over a dollar to pick up a penny in this instance. But you know everyone at every other regional knows everything about how this TA is a piece of crap. You might as well vote no just to make them all happy. After all, they are after YOUR best interest.

I did not say nor did I imply that your TA was "a piece of crap" and I didn't mean that either. How you vote is completely up to you and none of my business.

However, that doesn't change the fact that the particular provision of your contract is designed to pilot push. Since "management's bonus" is dependent on completion factor, that makes it all the more obvious.

I thought I smelled a mouse. The two of you have made it clear that it was really a RAT.

Best wishes.

 

[rjcap]

CHQ pilots.

Suppose you guys start flying into ATL in the near future. Not only will your completion factor drop but your on time performance will hit rock bottom. You will never ever see 98.5 % completion if you begin flying out of ATL.

Think very hard about voting your approval of this TA.

 

[Avi8tor2000]

Last I heard CHQ is not allowed to fly into ATL as per the aggreement with Delta. That's why the AirTran deal went to Air Whiskey before...

 

[rjcap]

Last I heard CHQ is not allowed to fly into ATL as per the aggreement with Delta. That's why the AirTran deal went to Air Whiskey before...

I interpret that to mean CHQ could not fly for Airtran due to restrictions by Delta on the DCI agreement. That is exactly why CHQ will more then likely to fly into ATL nxt year. At that point you guys at CHQ will learn what insanity really means !

Think before you vote.

 

[chqcapt75]

CHQ can't fly into ATL, that's one of the reasons they came up with Republic.

 

[stlflyguy]

Ask a United, American or Air Whisky pilot how good their contract is. Seems to me they have been negotiating contracts for a few years and look what they have now. More the reason to get every last dime you can when you can.

I guess hook phonics didn't work for me.

Two cents here...that's all I have left anyway being on the street. But....

--The economy is in an upswing. Don't look to what's happening this year but look to the trend three years from now. Where will your contract be? And will the economy be softening at THAT point?

--The American contract stunk even before the concessionary contract. Granted, we had "okay" hourly pay, but ask many former TWA guys how their lifestyle was prior to working for American and they'll tell you that QOL was everything...and some made even more than their American counterparts while making less per hour.

--It's all relative...and like someone said, there's always a shorter term contract.

--Does your scope clause cover anything about transferrance of flying?

All things to think about.

stlflyguy

 

[TWAER]

Surplus, I was not talking directly to you. End of story.


CHQ start flying to ATL in NOV. for AA. CHQ can fly to ATL but cannot open a base there. If you don't believe me go to www.aa.com and see we will be operating 5797 and 5799 to ATL.


ATL will not affect our completion factor or on-time performance.

rjcap, you obviously don't have a clue about CHQ. Look at our base why don't ya. LGA, PHL, STL just to name a few that are worse than ATL. Anyway, I don't think that 2 or 3 flights a day are going to do anything to our completion factor that LGA and STL don't already do.

Nice try!!! See ya in Nov.

 

[Cracker]

Outside the obvious delays like weather or flow control...I've seen our pilots truly go above and beyond our jobs to make sure that our flights get out on time. While it would directly affect our paychecks, it's safe to say that we work like that for the passengers first. I've always had the philosophy of "Customers first, paycheck second"...the first affects the latter, not the other way around. I'm sure other company's crew members think the same way.

This really has no impact on this thread...it was just my chance to say "GO TEAM!!"