Strikefinder
Captain Backfire
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2002
- Posts
- 114
I'll never be the guy to tell anybody that they're stupid to vote either way on something as important as this TA we're being faced with. I think there's a certain amount of merit to either side of the issue, and that it's worth investigating both sides before coming to any logical conclusion about the validity or lack thereof of this offer.
I attended the road show and found it informative. I'd like to think I asked a lot of rather difficult questions, and for the most part (though not entirely), I felt that my concerns were explained. I agree that there is a certain amount of propaganda coming from our union group, but no less so than the "You bastards are as bad as Mesa" stuff that's gotten flung around here. We all see such agreements first through our own context before really being able to appreciate the impact on others, whether you are a CHQ employee or not.
There are some issues that compel me toward an affirmative vote on this TA. I understand how popular it is to discount external, specific factors that our pilot group faces with regards to these negotiations, but I believe that there is at least some merit to some of these situations. Republic, for instance, does exist. They've taken possession of their hangar in SDF, and from what I understand they've started to train pilots. No, they don't have a certificate yet, but the company has invested millions of dollars in the development for the company, and I believe that they intend to see their investment come to fruition.
From what I seem to remember, the Republic pay scales would mirror PSA's wage rates. Once again, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe PSA's wage rates aren't that great, and are pretty universally less than our TA across the board. They're paid $1.40 per diem. They're reserves are only guaranteed 72 hours. Their deadheads are paid at 50%. I believe it is a distinct possibility that should we refuse the contract presented to us, Republic would begin operation and the ComAirs, ASAs, and CoExs of the world would not have to worry about competing with CHQ's "inferior TA", as Republic would be able to effectively undercut us for the same business because their wage rates are even less. I also don't know if USAir mainline and ALPA will continue to support our fight against Republic; If they believe that our contract was reasonable (and likely they will, as the J4J guys will have gotten a better deal than going with PSA rates), they'll probably loosen their stance against mainline USAir. There is no guarantee that this will happen, I admit, but remember that it *did* happen with Freedom, and there is no doubt in my mind that it is possible for it to happen again. Mesaba's stand sure isn't helping them stop Pinnacle, either, is it?
The pay rates are not ComAir's, and that gets pounded into all of our heads all of the time. However, they exceed Air Wisconsin, Piedmont, Mesa, Eagle, Allegheny, PSA, ACA's concessionary contract (which, I admit, is not currently in effect, though ACA is asking its pilots to re-sign the concessions exclusive of the United agreement), TSA, Pinnacle, CoEx, and basically ties ASA. Our per diem is horrible? It's better than Air Whiskey, CoEx, Piedmont, Mesa, Allegheny, and PSA, and ties Eagle. Yes, we've escaped Junion Manning, which is a big deal breaker for me. Our sub-standard 401(k) plan basically matches ComAir's, and even exceeds it after year 6 (ComAir contributes 50% of 5%, or effectively 100% of 2.5%, throughout a pilot's tenure. After year 6 CHQ contributes 100% of 4%, and after year 13 it becomes 100% of 6%).
The lack of extension of FO pay scales was a bargain for the company, as our J4J agreement stipulates that FOs are paid the highest available wage rate from day one. If we had a wage rate that was, say, ten dollars an hour higher than our top FO rate, the company would be spending an incredibly larger amount of money to bring the J4J folks on to our property instead of Republic's. It's a calculated risk. As an FO who would be affected by this cap before the end of the contract, if ratified, I admit there's a possibililty of things happening to preclude my upgrade before then. However, the pay I'd lose over a few years would hardly compete with the pay I'd lose if we ended up losing one-quarter of the growth that we expect that would be diverted to Republic to gain a fifth and sixth year pay rate.
Finally, I don't believe, by my understanding of the structure of the NMB, it's as easy as everyone thinks for us to just "start the cooling off period and go on strike." Remember that our rejection of the first TA was, by IBT bylaws, a strike vote. We've had almost two years with an outstanding strike vote, and we haven't been able to get to the cooling off period. The NMB generally does not release airlines for strike during peak times, such as holidays (any holidays you know of in November and December?). The earliest we'd see a cooling off period would be January or February, and with labor's position in this conservative government, I doubt that we'd see the cooling off period start then. Then 30 more days... do you think Republic can be up and running in the next six months? Remember our last TA that was voted down? We'll go back to the table, and get it fixed in a few months! Here we are, two years later, currently earning the bottom wage rates, and would continue to do so for some time should we vote this contract down. Remember, folks, we don't just go back and renegotiate pay rates or PDOs if we vote this down; The whole process starts from scratch. I'm willing to bet the company will open up every section of the contract to delay the process as long as possible, too, as they should. We're already getting paid less than everybody else, aren't we?!
I will not ever contend that this is a perfect contract. It's not. There are some things I'm not happy about. But from my rose-colored glasses, I think that under the circumstances we're faced with, it's a reasonable deal. It's a building block. It improves our current situation drastically. It's achieved improvements in the face of an alter-ego, a terrorist attack, and many concessonary contracts signed by our competitors (people who live in glass houses...). And I truly believe that no matter what contract we get, somebody out there will call us a bunch of bottom feeders. So be it. You're still welcome in my jumpseat (well, if and when it becomes "my" jumpseat), and I wish you the best of luck. As I'm fond of saying, I'm not going to lose any sleep over the issue.
If I've presented any information inaccurately, I did not mean to do so, and I hope somebody would (politely) correct me. We all need the most accurate information to make these decisions. And though some of you might not want to listen to a bunch of contrary "propaganda", I'll listen to anything you have to say (I need not shut out others' opinions to justify my own).
In the meantime, everybody do your homework before you check 'yes' or 'no', and when it's all over and done, whatever the outcome, lets move forward.
I attended the road show and found it informative. I'd like to think I asked a lot of rather difficult questions, and for the most part (though not entirely), I felt that my concerns were explained. I agree that there is a certain amount of propaganda coming from our union group, but no less so than the "You bastards are as bad as Mesa" stuff that's gotten flung around here. We all see such agreements first through our own context before really being able to appreciate the impact on others, whether you are a CHQ employee or not.
There are some issues that compel me toward an affirmative vote on this TA. I understand how popular it is to discount external, specific factors that our pilot group faces with regards to these negotiations, but I believe that there is at least some merit to some of these situations. Republic, for instance, does exist. They've taken possession of their hangar in SDF, and from what I understand they've started to train pilots. No, they don't have a certificate yet, but the company has invested millions of dollars in the development for the company, and I believe that they intend to see their investment come to fruition.
From what I seem to remember, the Republic pay scales would mirror PSA's wage rates. Once again, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe PSA's wage rates aren't that great, and are pretty universally less than our TA across the board. They're paid $1.40 per diem. They're reserves are only guaranteed 72 hours. Their deadheads are paid at 50%. I believe it is a distinct possibility that should we refuse the contract presented to us, Republic would begin operation and the ComAirs, ASAs, and CoExs of the world would not have to worry about competing with CHQ's "inferior TA", as Republic would be able to effectively undercut us for the same business because their wage rates are even less. I also don't know if USAir mainline and ALPA will continue to support our fight against Republic; If they believe that our contract was reasonable (and likely they will, as the J4J guys will have gotten a better deal than going with PSA rates), they'll probably loosen their stance against mainline USAir. There is no guarantee that this will happen, I admit, but remember that it *did* happen with Freedom, and there is no doubt in my mind that it is possible for it to happen again. Mesaba's stand sure isn't helping them stop Pinnacle, either, is it?
The pay rates are not ComAir's, and that gets pounded into all of our heads all of the time. However, they exceed Air Wisconsin, Piedmont, Mesa, Eagle, Allegheny, PSA, ACA's concessionary contract (which, I admit, is not currently in effect, though ACA is asking its pilots to re-sign the concessions exclusive of the United agreement), TSA, Pinnacle, CoEx, and basically ties ASA. Our per diem is horrible? It's better than Air Whiskey, CoEx, Piedmont, Mesa, Allegheny, and PSA, and ties Eagle. Yes, we've escaped Junion Manning, which is a big deal breaker for me. Our sub-standard 401(k) plan basically matches ComAir's, and even exceeds it after year 6 (ComAir contributes 50% of 5%, or effectively 100% of 2.5%, throughout a pilot's tenure. After year 6 CHQ contributes 100% of 4%, and after year 13 it becomes 100% of 6%).
The lack of extension of FO pay scales was a bargain for the company, as our J4J agreement stipulates that FOs are paid the highest available wage rate from day one. If we had a wage rate that was, say, ten dollars an hour higher than our top FO rate, the company would be spending an incredibly larger amount of money to bring the J4J folks on to our property instead of Republic's. It's a calculated risk. As an FO who would be affected by this cap before the end of the contract, if ratified, I admit there's a possibililty of things happening to preclude my upgrade before then. However, the pay I'd lose over a few years would hardly compete with the pay I'd lose if we ended up losing one-quarter of the growth that we expect that would be diverted to Republic to gain a fifth and sixth year pay rate.
Finally, I don't believe, by my understanding of the structure of the NMB, it's as easy as everyone thinks for us to just "start the cooling off period and go on strike." Remember that our rejection of the first TA was, by IBT bylaws, a strike vote. We've had almost two years with an outstanding strike vote, and we haven't been able to get to the cooling off period. The NMB generally does not release airlines for strike during peak times, such as holidays (any holidays you know of in November and December?). The earliest we'd see a cooling off period would be January or February, and with labor's position in this conservative government, I doubt that we'd see the cooling off period start then. Then 30 more days... do you think Republic can be up and running in the next six months? Remember our last TA that was voted down? We'll go back to the table, and get it fixed in a few months! Here we are, two years later, currently earning the bottom wage rates, and would continue to do so for some time should we vote this contract down. Remember, folks, we don't just go back and renegotiate pay rates or PDOs if we vote this down; The whole process starts from scratch. I'm willing to bet the company will open up every section of the contract to delay the process as long as possible, too, as they should. We're already getting paid less than everybody else, aren't we?!
I will not ever contend that this is a perfect contract. It's not. There are some things I'm not happy about. But from my rose-colored glasses, I think that under the circumstances we're faced with, it's a reasonable deal. It's a building block. It improves our current situation drastically. It's achieved improvements in the face of an alter-ego, a terrorist attack, and many concessonary contracts signed by our competitors (people who live in glass houses...). And I truly believe that no matter what contract we get, somebody out there will call us a bunch of bottom feeders. So be it. You're still welcome in my jumpseat (well, if and when it becomes "my" jumpseat), and I wish you the best of luck. As I'm fond of saying, I'm not going to lose any sleep over the issue.
If I've presented any information inaccurately, I did not mean to do so, and I hope somebody would (politely) correct me. We all need the most accurate information to make these decisions. And though some of you might not want to listen to a bunch of contrary "propaganda", I'll listen to anything you have to say (I need not shut out others' opinions to justify my own).
In the meantime, everybody do your homework before you check 'yes' or 'no', and when it's all over and done, whatever the outcome, lets move forward.
Last edited:
