EMB 170 today at CHQ

[Torpid]

Ok here is where the CHQ pilots TA is very very good. The rates of pay are better than what we had, but here it comes:

THE CONTRACT IS ONLY FOR 4 YEARS!!!!

After that we re-evaluate the state of the aviation community and go from there. + we can open negotiations 6mo. before end of contract.

Who else these days has a 4-year deal??????

We got screw*ed at Skywest. We only got an 18 month contract.

 

[rjcap]

Bluecanoe,

Thanks for the complement, putting CHQ with that group and all. Since we are measured with Eagle, AWAC, Mesaba, Mesa, ASA, and ComAir, however, our 60+ pay is higher than all of them.

You might want to check that for the 70 seat rate. I believe ASA and Comair are substantially higher than your new TA.

 

[BlueCanoe]

Sorry rjcapt. I didn't do my own research, just what my union said. See you in DFW

 

[rjcap]

Sorry rjcapt. I didn't do my own research, just what my union said. See you in DFW

Blue,

I believe there was a link to your TA here somewhere. I recall reviewing the payrates and I would have remembered if your 70 seat rate was higher then Comair or ASA.

Do you have that link to your TA ???

 

[surplus1]

. However, since we are measured with Eagle, AWAC, Mesaba, Mesa, ASA, and ComAir, however, our 60+ pay is higher than all of them(on airplanes we don't have). They have, and are currently operating 60+ seat AC, and all their pay is lower than our proposed rates.

Ahhhh sorry, but your statement is not exactly accurate with respect to Comair (the others can speak for themselves). The actual numbers are as follows for Captains (since your FO rates are much lower I won't even go there):.

CHQ (60 - 78 seats TA) --------- CMR (70-seat 06/03)

1. 53.55 --------------------------- 1. 63.79

5. 64.35 --------------------------- 5. 72.06

10. 74.96 ------------------------- 10. 85.44

15. 87.28 ------------------------- 11. 99.49

18. N/A 18. 108.71

Your TA does not provide an 18/yr rate until 2005. At that time the comparison is:

18. 99.24 -------------------------- 18. 118.22

I am not criticizing your TA, but to say that your rates are higher than CMR is simply less than accurate. There are also many other direct compensation provisions in your TA that are substantially lower, e.g., premium pay - open time (you have none), displacement protection (you have very little), deadhead 75% vs. 100%, rigs (you have none), etc. Your perdiem is also lower and you have no retirement benefit.

Your new contract may very well be beneficial to you, but it is not at all beneficial to us. It will simply increase the pressure for us to make concessions or result in the transfer of more of our flying to you. I'm not saying you shouldn't be happy, but if we are not cheering, try to understand why.

Best wishes.

 

[rjcap]

Blue,

I found your TA. Your payrates are lower then ASA's 5 year old contract.

5th year 70 seat rate ASA 68.01 CHQ 64.35.

I'm not certain but Comair's is something like 72.00


You may want to read the agreement and not just listen to your union reps.

 

[rjcap]

I believe he mis typed and meant 78+ rates.

Exactly which 78 seat jet is it that CHQ is operating ?

 

[surplus1]

Exactly which 78 seat jet is it that CHQ is operating ?

The answere is of course, none. The TA puts money into aircraft that the airline does not operate and that the Scope clauses of ALL its current and potential codeshare partners specifically prohibit. Interesting.

 

[BlueCanoe]

I have read my TA several times, not anyone elses.

Of course after I posted my retraction, surplus1 jumped in. I sincerely hope ASA nor Comair lowers their rates. I think ASA and Comair, while purchased by Delta, yet not integrated into Delta have other things to worry about than us. Then again in your old, and far superior contracts you didn't have 70 seaters did you?

Surplus1, just because your few letters in bold said you weren't criticizing the TA, the rest of your post did. You guys oughta call PSA, Piedmont, Allegheny and Eagle. You know sit in a dark room, ignore the rest of the world and stroke each other. It'll feel good. I promise.

Enjoy being Junior Manned...

 

[rjcap]

Then again in your old, and far superior contracts you didn't have 70 seaters did you?

No we didn't. The issue brought up by surplus is that 78 seat a/c is prohibited by mainline scope from being operated by any DCI regional wholly owned or affiliate. Negotiating a payrate for a nonexistant and restricted aircraft should raise scepticism among your pilots.

Regarding you junior man comment I will simply respond by saying that your TA is weak. You caved in too early.

 

[anon]

CHQ friends ... don't get your hopes up too much.

If you exceed DCI scope limits on aircraft size, you will no longer fly for DCI.

 

[exphojump]

Northwest is not the best example.

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/nsd/nwac/reports/10qq203.pdf

Total stockholder equity is -2.57billion(LUV is over + 4.0 billion)

Second quarter revenue was about 2.3 billion, so it would take at least 11 quarters of 10% profits to bring them equal to ATAs balance sheet.

ATA 757 CA rate(216 seats soon to be 200 seats)

1. 37.50
2. 131.26
3. 132.85
4. 134.45
5. 135.93

FO

1. 37.50
2. 63.66
3. 70.59
4. 77.93
5. 85.35

So why not flame ATA for bringing down the industry. Good grief flying a 200+ seat for less than NWAC pilots are making on the (78seat) DC-9s. While your at it blast Airtran, Frontier, JetBlue, and AWA.

Is Chautauqua's contract a shining example, no? Is it a total cop out like Mesa, no? It's better than Mesa and inferior to Comair(go figure).

Chautauqua sub contracts out to DAL. In order to provide the same seat mile costs as the wholly owned regionals. They have to provide cost+profit margin just to equal Comair's cost. Pilot pay will probably not be equal and still provide the same cost.

JMO

 

[LearLove]

"2/26 Interview
Congrats to us both. I interviewed on 2/26, and heard from Rosa Mosley on 3/5. Got a training date of 3/24.
There are 3 of us that i know of so far that interviewed and got hired.
Now i want to find some info on what to expect during training.
From the week of Indoc. to ground to sim

Look forward to meeting you"

The above post is from PilotRon several months back.

I try to keep my post on this board along the lines of helping others and giving advise which I've been given or generated from 14 years of flying and 6 six short years making my living as a pilot.

However I sit here and read PilotRon's post of the past few days as he beats his chest in ref. to his company and the TA. He posts on here like his Poop smells like roses and can't be touched, when in reality he's a new hire who had nothing to do with the current TA and has barely enough time at CHQ to find the crew room (even if you did work in the industry before CHQ) without getting lost let alone make statements about his companies financial state, its future, and the future of the industry as a whole. Even industry leaders such as Don Carty and others can only speculate about the industry right now and make assumptions based on trends, but you boldly state that you've made the correct choices based on some greater avaition knowledge that we lowly other pilots don't have.

For example:

....because I make good decisions and make smart choices..."

I love it here where he makes ref. to his choice to fly for CHQ. Choice buddy, you were hirred in March 2003. You didn't have many choices of where to go. CHQ was one of the few hirring. Take yourself back 4 years - say United offered you a job and CHQ too, your saying that you would have gone to CHQ over UAL back in 1999.

I say the above to prove a piont many of us here already know too well, listen up, YOUR decision (in ref. to the company you work for) and YOUR future in avaition have little to do with each other. I remember a time when CHQ was down to 7 or so J31's (not sure the exact number) and it looked bleak for you guys. There have also been time in the past where my own company looked bleak and it turned around. We also know there a companies that have't turned around and are now gone, example Pocano. So what am I saying PilotRon, your descision has to due with luck as much as anything else not some chest beating greater then everyother pilot aviation knowledge you claim to have.

About your house: I doubt that at 20 or so bucks per hour and less than 6 months on line that the cash you've made at CHQ has had anything to do with paying off your home. But cudos too you if it's true.

Where does that leave us PilotRon? I don't claim to be a flightinfo saint or some all knowing pilot but I would suggest you hang out for awhile and post where you can help and not beat your chest and trash other guys with less LUCK (look there's that word again - it will become familar during your career). I would also suggest you take example for some of the senior CHQ guys around here, they are the ones that got you this new agreement and will allow you to stay in the 2600 sq ft home.

So please stick around and grow with us, learn with us, joke with us, and grieve with us, but please don't put us down for stuff we have no control over.

Enough Said

PS - CHQ guys - congrats on the TA - anything thats an improvment in this environment is a big accomplishment.

 

[RPA]

KingAirer, your right about this thread getting "out of control". But, a good discussion.

In the spirit of the topic subject, here's more picts of the 170 @ IND:

Pict 5

Pict 6

Pict 7

Pict 8

Pict 9

Pict 10

 

[BlueCanoe]

Nicely done Lear. Sorry to hear US is crapping on you guys. What are the plans over at Allegheny? It's kind of a funny thing. When I started at CHQ, all we had were props. No one in the world would have ever thought we'd have the stroke of luck we've had. I remember being envious of my peers getting hired at Eagle, CoEx and U W/O. W/O and independents all have their ups and downs. If anything bad happens to Allegheny, it'd be a pleasure to fly with you, if our luck continues.

Cheers