Delay of 9E/XJ/9L list

[Raskal]

Problem is... Our reps have a totally different story than is being published here. Some of which stems from our reps being limited on releasing information. I've called them, texted/emailed them, and had dinner with them. There's a large backstory brewing here. Personally, I hope in the end it all comes out.

I agree Murf. I make no claims as to what is true or not, only what I was told when I called. I don't have the same sources/friends as you and I know there is much more to this whole thing than what any of us probably know.

I am a little frustrated from both the forums and the folks I fly with so eager to be angry with this or that when they have never actually involved themselves enough to find out what's happening (to the extent that any of us can anyway). All I can say is that the union is not as secretive as folks think they are, call your rep and ask what you want. They represent you, after all.

 

[CptMurf]

I am going to make only one more statement about this, and then I am done. I have seen the "alleged" emails and the current dispute is NOT about using class date as DOH if what I read is correct. Important things to read to get accurate information are dates. Maybe flyer's email date was changed, or mine was (I have absolutely no reason to doubt my source), but this email talks nothing about the current dispute.

As far as going after the DOH issue to begin with, I don't mind Mesaba's commitee disputing it because everything and their mother was thrown at us. That being said, I think the attempt was made in vain. There is no way I think it will work (just my uneducated opinion).

Obviously you have not read it, because you don't agree with Flyer. Also, since you don't agree with Flyer, you need to call your reps. If they don't agree with Flyer, then they are lying. I gotta wonder what Flyer calls Bloch if he doesn't agree with Flyer.

 

[bri5150]

Obviously you have not read it, because you don't agree with Flyer. Also, since you don't agree with Flyer, you need to call your reps. If they don't agree with Flyer, then they are lying. I gotta wonder what Flyer calls Bloch if he doesn't agree with Flyer.

I'll admit, maybe it was from the first dispute, but then there would be two "leaked emails". I honestly don't have much fight left in me. I am just ready to be done. This he said this and she said that is getting old. I called a rep, and there is only so much they can say. Even then they could be lying to me . There is no way to prove anyones stories, and I am sure we will never know. In fact, once the list comes out, everyone will probably forget about it and look forward. At least I hope so.

 

[SEVEN]

It's already Wednesday, I'm guessing Bloch will want one last updated list from all 3 groups. Please God.....make this end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Flyer1015]

Just the messenger. The info came from reps. not my imagination.

I hope we do too.

How would your reps know the original intent of Letter V? Not every single rep was present on the table when the JCBA was being negotiated. I still do not understand how letter V, in its current form, can be open to misinterpretation. It states clear cut that Pinnacle will have their date of hire adjusted to the beginning of training (class date). Now, one of the side benefits I suppose you could say is that our travel bennies will use this DOH as the date of eligibility. But that is a side, moot point. The original intent was to move the hire date corrected to the class date, so every 9E pilot would be considered to have their DOH on their class date. This was done to match what Colgan and Mesaba already had. It was the #1 issue of concern for every Pinnacle pilot going into the merger, and it was clearly addressed by LOA #2 V.

 

[Flyer1015]

Not to mention, in the XJ's attempt to screw over 9E pilots on their seniority, do you realize what the other (impossible) alternative is? The only other alternative would be to align seniority date with sim date of hire. This would mean your sim date DOH would represent your seniority date, regardless of class seniority. This is the new re-alignment that would come if the XJ dispute was awarded. But think about it. The checkrides did not go in order. I went before 3 other older pilots simply because of the way training scheduling worked it out. Under the new method, you'd have to reorder the entire 9E list, and that is not allowed by ALPA bylaws. Not only that, you'd have many people jump over others they are currently junior to, because they took their sim checkride first. For example, I took mine before 3 guys did who are in my class and currently senior to me. If you XJ people want your wish and dispute to come out true, I would have to jump these 3 pilots in seniority and be considered more senior to them because of my "new" seniority being my date of hire on sim check date. This is against merger policy. You are in a catch-22.

The ONLY fair way, without having to go through the illegal mess above, is to accept Letter V and take every pilot's initial pilot newhire class date as their DOH. This is the only fair, clean way that will ensure that nothing gets ugly.

 

[CptMurf]

How would your reps know the original intent of Letter V? Not every single rep was present on the table when the JCBA was being negotiated. I still do not understand how letter V, in its current form, can be open to misinterpretation. It states clear cut that Pinnacle will have their date of hire adjusted to the beginning of training (class date). Now, one of the side benefits I suppose you could say is that our travel bennies will use this DOH as the date of eligibility. But that is a side, moot point. The original intent was to move the hire date corrected to the class date, so every 9E pilot would be considered to have their DOH on their class date. This was done to match what Colgan and Mesaba already had. It was the #1 issue of concern for every Pinnacle pilot going into the merger, and it was clearly addressed by LOA #2 V.

No, but this particular rep stated that those that negotiated the LOA were upset with the final version, researching their notes, and trying to remember specific conversations from the negotiations.

I don't know if it's true or not, but it could bring some light to the seniority/DOH dispute issues.

How do you know what the original intent was? The LOA goes against the ALPA Merger/Frag policy on DOH. I would think it would supercede it, if that was the intent of the LOA. And I'm fine with that if this is the case. But now there is question if that was the negotiated intent of the LOA. If it was not, then the ALPA policy would stand. This sounds much more like the situation described over 2 weeks of leaked emails, than a total disregard to a signed LOA.

 

[higney85]

No, but this particular rep stated that those that negotiated the LOA were upset with the final version, researching their notes, and trying to remember specific conversations from the negotiations.

I don't know if it's true or not, but it could bring some light to the seniority/DOH dispute issues.

How do you know what the original intent was? The LOA goes against the ALPA Merger/Frag policy on DOH. I would think it would supercede it, if that was the intent of the LOA. And I'm fine with that if this is the case. But now there is question if that was the negotiated intent of the LOA. If it was not, then the ALPA policy would stand. This sounds much more like the situation described over 2 weeks of leaked emails, that a total disregard to a signed LOA.

The original intent was really to remove check ride date completely and have DOH (for seniority, longevity, and benefits) adjusted to day 1 of class. The company wouldn't budge on the financial package but were willing to remove the check ride date completely. So for pass travel and seniority we all have simply class date as DOH. I was in the room for that entire process, and was a voting member on the conclusion. Everyone knew about the seniority and the JNC even presented the fact that we have the seniority and pass travel agreed to but the company was balking at pay raises 6-8 weeks earlier. We settled for seniority and pass travel as a JMEC for parity among the 3 for everything other than the raises. You have a group now grasping at whatever they can to try and help their pilots by screwing another. End result is the unity that was created is now gone.

 

[Flyer1015]

The original intent was really to remove check ride date completely and have DOH (for seniority, longevity, and benefits) adjusted to day 1 of class. The company wouldn't budge on the financial package but were willing to remove the check ride date completely. So for pass travel and seniority we all have simply class date as DOH. I was in the room for that entire process, and was a voting member on the conclusion. Everyone knew about the seniority and the JNC even presented the fact that we have the seniority and pass travel agreed to but the company was balking at pay raises 6-8 weeks earlier. We settled for seniority and pass travel as a JMEC for parity among the 3 for everything other than the raises. You have a group now grasping at whatever they can to try and help their pilots by screwing another. End result is the unity that was created is now gone.

^
|
|
|

CptMurf, yeah... that

 

[CptMurf]

The original intent was really to remove check ride date completely and have DOH (for seniority, longevity, and benefits) adjusted to day 1 of class. The company wouldn't budge on the financial package but were willing to remove the check ride date completely. So for pass travel and seniority we all have simply class date as DOH. I was in the room for that entire process, and was a voting member on the conclusion. Everyone knew about the seniority and the JNC even presented the fact that we have the seniority and pass travel agreed to but the company was balking at pay raises 6-8 weeks earlier. We settled for seniority and pass travel as a JMEC for parity among the 3 for everything other than the raises. You have a group now grasping at whatever they can to try and help their pilots by screwing another. End result is the unity that was created is now gone.

Considering one union went off the reservation with an unendorsed picketing. Then offered an integration method that was essentially a staple. And a last minute attempt to discredit XJs group with the LGA slot swap. I would say there never was any unity. You yourself said the 9E MEC/SLI was out to get the most they could for their pilots. I believe the same could be said here. And last I heard 9L was in on the dispute also.

As I said before, this is just what I've heard from a couple of reps. I am just trying to interpret their statements into the current situation. And it seems to put the dispute in a more rational situation than just saying they are trying to screw you out of seniority and disregarding the LOA.

As a 99 hire, the 6-8 weeks make no difference to me. I would like see this conclude soon. Today would be nice.