Colgan new aircrafts

[Lear70]

CAREFUL I believe those 140 some CRJs are OWNED by Northwest airlines flown on routes OWNED by Northwest airlines.

Are YOU, a 9E pilot, ALSO trying to screw Northwest pilots? Sounds like you're bordering on it by jusifying your own good fortune.

Now wait I know that your at Airtran, but please think about what you are saying. Your acusing this guy of the same thing you were happy to be part of at 9E.

Nope. Not quite the same scenario.

Northwest pilots GAVE UP their scope and didn't give a rat's a*s about the CRJ's UNTIL their pilots started getting furloughed in DROVES.

Pinnacle also furloughed some (me included), then brought us back and started add a bunch more CRJ's.

Some NWA pilots were mad. Understandably so, but HERE is where the story differs:

They had no one to be mad at but THEMSELVES. They had ALREADY GIVEN UP THIS FLYING OF THEIR OWN ACCORD knowing FULL well we were getting them and would be flying them for Northwest.

They only wanted it BACK when it benefited them.

Believe it or not, I was one of the guys that said, "Fine, I'll go back to Lear charter or Supplemental 121 Boeing freight; I'll take a voluntary furlough, in exchange for a FULL flow-through agreement with mainline Northwest. Those guys can have these jets, as long as I get a mainline seniority number".

Funny how they wouldn't even BEGIN to discuss a REASONABLE and EQUITABLE arrangement that benefits BOTH sides.

Again, you post that of which you know naught of.

 

[gooseman13]

Just to play devil's advocate here...
The phrase is "It is ANYTHING that is purchased and operated by Pinnacle Airlines, its subsidiaries, or its successors."
Someone mentioned that the contract predates Pinnacle Corp, so the originial "Pinnacle Airlines" is Pinnacle, Inc. Colgan is obviously not a "subsidiary" of Pinnacle, Inc, so the only language remaining in the scope is "successors," which some people have said should include Pinnacle, Corp. But the definition of successor is "a thing or person that immediately replaces something or someone." But Pinnacle, Inc still exists...thus Pinnacle Corp has not replaced it.
Thats not to say its definitely interpreted in this way...but there's clearly a chance it could be.

 

[Prop2Jet]

1.3 you just SUCK.

 

[ToiletDuck]

Don't vent your frustration over your own impotence and inability to get a foothold in negotiations over YOUR contracts by trying to win a fight over here. WE will take care of ourselves.

So you're saying you stood up and shouted for non-union and lowest paying wages? Sign me up for Colgan!!!

 

[ToiletDuck]

I would fly pcl's rj's for half of what the pcl pilots get paid cause i love jets!!!

Then you're a tool and everything that's wrong with the industry. If jets were so imporatant you should have wait just a little longer rather than applying as soon as you met the lowest minimums out there.

 

[better up here]

I love the ATL.

 

[Flyer1015]

I would fly pcl's rj's for half of what the pcl pilots get paid cause i love jets!!!

OMG LOL!!!



<---------- I'm sure PT the Clown LOVES you!

 

[Lear70]

Just to play devil's advocate here...
The phrase is "It is ANYTHING that is purchased and operated by Pinnacle Airlines, its subsidiaries, or its successors."
Someone mentioned that the contract predates Pinnacle Corp, so the originial "Pinnacle Airlines" is Pinnacle, Inc. Colgan is obviously not a "subsidiary" of Pinnacle, Inc, so the only language remaining in the scope is "successors," which some people have said should include Pinnacle, Corp. But the definition of successor is "a thing or person that immediately replaces something or someone." But Pinnacle, Inc still exists...thus Pinnacle Corp has not replaced it.
Thats not to say its definitely interpreted in this way...but there's clearly a chance it could be.

Oh I'm absolutely certain that's a similar tactic to what PT and NT (labor attorney he retains on full-time basis) are going to say.

Everything is about intent. It was intended to be binding on the company no matter what they did.

Unfortunately, we've already seen at MSA what can happen with a holding company. That's probably what gave Nonconnah the idea to begin with (they don't really get original ideas, they just skew some old ones, including old Eastern Airline tactics from their ex-EAL pilots on middle-management payroll).

I don't know how labor-friendly VA is, but they'll definitely have to take it to court somewhere. I hope it's Nashville, would love to show my support and come testify again against PCL management.

 

[redflyer65]

Guys, As much as you don't want to admit it, the scope is pretty solid. There is no way that it could have been written better in '99. It names ANY successor, not PCL holding or the ABC company. It says ANY. Once you agree to the successor clause then all flying done by the successor should be done by the PCL pilot group.

In no way is this meant as a slam toward the Colgan guys. You didn't ask for any of this, it's just the way the contract was written way back in 1999. PCL knows they are on thin ice with this but decided to roll the dice anyway.

Hey Lear, have you also thought about the fact that Phil actually came to the MEC and ASKED for scope relief about a year before all this? Do you think he knew then that the scope was pretty good? It's really a low risk gamble for him. The only think he might be out is attorney fees for the defense, but they could fold the hand at any time.

 

[suupah]

Guys, As much as you don't want to admit it, the scope is pretty solid. There is no way that it could have been written better in '99. It names ANY successor, not PCL holding or the ABC company. It says ANY. Once you agree to the successor clause then all flying done by the successor should be done by the PCL pilot group.

In no way is this meant as a slam toward the Colgan guys. You didn't ask for any of this, it's just the way the contract was written way back in 1999. PCL knows they are on thin ice with this but decided to roll the dice anyway.

Hey Lear, have you also thought about the fact that Phil actually came to the MEC and ASKED for scope relief about a year before all this? Do you think he knew then that the scope was pretty good? It's really a low risk gamble for him. The only think he might be out is attorney fees for the defense, but they could fold the hand at any time.

If what you say is true, what is phil's tactic here? Is it to get the planes on property before he loses the court battle? All the time knowing that the groups would have to merge eventually? Would he have been able to get the planes with just you guys since you are still in contract negotiations?

How quickly would a federal court case be decided?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

I just finished 6 days of reserve flying at Pinnacle...two days off then it back to Shawshank.... my new mantra is....

Dealing with airline management is like trying to reason with your rapist.....

 

[JT12345]

Are YOU, a Colgan pilot, ALSO trying to screw Pinnacle pilots? Sounds like you're bordering on it by justifying your own good fortune.


It is ANYTHING that is purchased and operated by Pinnacle Airlines, its subsidiaries, or its successors.

CAREFUL I believe those 140 some CRJs are OWNED by Northwest airlines flown on routes OWNED by Northwest airlines.

Are YOU, a 9E pilot, ALSO trying to screw Northwest pilots? Sounds like you're bordering on it by jusifying your own good fortune.

Now wait I know that your at Airtra, but please think about what you are saying. Your acusing this guy of the same thing you were happy to be part of at 9E.

The northwest pilots and every major airline pilot screwed themselves when the first 19 seat turboprops came on their porperty almost 20 years ago, and they allowed their egos to get in the way of having one list for their colors. They didn't want this flying until they started losing jobs over it. They made their bed, and they have the real power to change it with an average pilot group of 6000 strong.

We are just learning from their mistakes, and not allowing this to happen again.

 

[XJohXJ]

Guys, As much as you don't want to admit it, the scope is pretty solid. There is no way that it could have been written better in '99. It names ANY successor, not PCL holding or the ABC company. It says ANY. Once you agree to the successor clause then all flying done by the successor should be done by the PCL pilot group.

In no way is this meant as a slam toward the Colgan guys. You didn't ask for any of this, it's just the way the contract was written way back in 1999. PCL knows they are on thin ice with this but decided to roll the dice anyway.

Hey Lear, have you also thought about the fact that Phil actually came to the MEC and ASKED for scope relief about a year before all this? Do you think he knew then that the scope was pretty good? It's really a low risk gamble for him. The only think he might be out is attorney fees for the defense, but they could fold the hand at any time.

Funny how managers try that game. At Mesaba, Mesaba mgt tried to use bankruptcy to throw out our scope clause with MAIR. The judge said "NO. No way, absolutely not". Which leads one to believe mgt thought it was a pretty solid scope and they'd have to fight it. So, now we find MAIR in some s-kicking Texas courtroom trying to throw the scope out, AGAIN, while mailing the MSA MEC a letter saying, essentially : "your scope means nothing to us, and we are now cancelling it".

This begs the question: If it is a meaningless scope, why are you going to court twice to try to throw it out?

 

[redflyer65]

Nicely said. I find the Mesaba case really interesting because I specifically remember the bankruptcy judges ruling as being without predjudice. Which usually means that its a slam dunk, do not comeback and ask again type of ruling.

I would think this first ruling will go along way in any further rulings no matter what. Good luck.

 

[XJohXJ]

Thanks. Good luck to you guys, too: PCL AND Colgan. We're all in this together.

Interesting times, indeed....

 

[Lear70]

If what you say is true, what is phil's tactic here? Is it to get the planes on property before he loses the court battle?

Phil's tactic is going to be to try and get by the Scope clause using the "holding company is different than the airline" technique.

He saw it work for Mesaba, and is going to give it a try. He has an outside change at winning it, and loses nothing in the process.

All the time knowing that the groups would have to merge eventually?

Not if he wins the court battle and can do whatever he wants with the holding company. Keep 'em separate and whipsaw them to death.

Would he have been able to get the planes with just you guys since you are still in contract negotiations?

Yes, he just would have had to accept whatever the MEC wanted for the planes.

We went down that road in 2002. For mainline Northwest Scope reasons, they started purchasing 44 seat jets. We didn't HAVE a 44 seat jet rate at the time.

Management tried to force a lower pay scale for the 44 seaters. We knew they were coming and held our ground (something ELSE a union is good for that we couldn't have done without it).

Management ended up having to pay the same rate for both aircraft in order to start flying them. I don't think they liked being powerless in that situation and is probably yet another reason they're trying to get around Scope.

How quickly would a federal court case be decided?

Oh God, who knows. I'm certain they could tie it up for quite a while; at least half a year, maybe even longer.

Hey Lear, have you also thought about the fact that Phil actually came to the MEC and ASKED for scope relief about a year before all this? Do you think he knew then that the scope was pretty good?

I'm certain he did and still does. If he wasn't worried about it, he wouldn't have been pursuing it in negotiations the last 3 years.

It's really a low risk gamble for him. The only think he might be out is attorney fees for the defense, but they could fold the hand at any time.

Nikki Tinker is held on retainer as a full-time employee. No extra attorney fees.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Wait till Philco starts shifting cash to Colgan and declares Pinnacle BK.... oh that already happened at XJ.........

 

[PCL_128]

Nikki Tinker is held on retainer as a full-time employee. No extra attorney fees.

I would be very surprised to see Nikki used in any sort of major court battle. For something like this, Phildo would go to the big guns. I would expect a Lorenzo-era lawyer like their current negotiating lawyer, Joe Manson.

 

[Lear70]

I would be very surprised to see Nikki used in any sort of major court battle. For something like this, Phildo would go to the big guns. I would expect a Lorenzo-era lawyer like their current negotiating lawyer, Joe Manson.

He already has, and she's lost quite a few of the wrongful termination suits which had near 7-figure settlements.

So possibly you're right, he may end up using someone with a better track record, but maybe only when it comes down to court time...? Who knows.

Either way, he's still trying to screw you and it's a large ROI if he wins with relatively little risk.

 

[Smarta$$]

Are YOU, a Colgan pilot, ALSO trying to screw Pinnacle pilots? Sounds like you're bordering on it by justifying your own good fortune.


It is ANYTHING that is purchased and operated by Pinnacle Airlines, its subsidiaries, or its successors.

CAREFUL I believe those 140 some CRJs are OWNED by Northwest airlines flown on routes OWNED by Northwest airlines.

Are YOU, a 9E pilot, ALSO trying to screw Northwest pilots? Sounds like you're bordering on it by jusifying your own good fortune.

Now wait I know that your at Airtra, but please think about what you are saying. Your acusing this guy of the same thing you were happy to be part of at 9E.

Pinnacle operates NO aircraft in violation of NWA scope. Not the same as managements scope violation of the 9E pilots.

Tool.