Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Your feeding into the political propaganda posted on Internet message boards. The issue wasn't with the entire groups method of DOH, but over 100 DOH adjustments between the original list shared at the start of negotiations, and the updated list shared Monday. The idea of adjusting the DOH to class date is not in question, in fact that's defined in the JCBA contract. That idea is just a internet board distraction. Basically, this was sprung last minute, albeit legal by the terms of the negotiations LOA.Pinnacle's method of DOH couldn't have been a surprise to XJ and 9L... It was one of the first things the pilot group brought to our negotiators.
To say that we sprung this last minute is preposterous.
I just wonder if Blotch hadn't requested the updated lists, what would have happened to the guys affected. It's a very bad situation that was caused solely by the 9E SLI committee. Had they done their due diligence we would not be here. I'm happy the discrepancy came to light and we had the time to fix it before the ISL was published. But to blame the XJ SLI committee for disputing the list is asinine. It needed to be disputed to verify and fix the discrepancies in the 9E list, otherwise those 9E pilots would have paid the price.
The idea of adjusting the DOH to class date is not in question, in fact that's defined in the JCBA contract.
The errors were identified on Monday and corrected by Tuesday morning. There are no more known errors. XJ and Colgan still dispute the PCL list because they don't acknowledge that our posted company hire dates changed with the ratification of the JCBA. Everyone will have their different proposals on the methodology of the list sorting but what XJ and Colgan are trying to do is manipulate the factual data that is applied to the methodology to disadvantage PCL pilots in case DOH has anything to do with the award
.
Mesaba and Colgan's position on interpretation of ALPA merger policy just don't fit. PCL new hires have been being paid in training since around 2007. Colgan has a known lack of pay during training over the past 20 years and I'm sure that over the past 30 years Mesaba has had varying pay schemes for its pilots during training. If XJ and CJC want a strict application of the DOH definition in merger policy it will require a full investigation into every last pilot's pay treatment during training and the reordering of all three lists.
Just checked with a 23 year guy and a 26 year guy. XJ has paid from day one that far back.The errors were identified on Monday and corrected by Tuesday morning. There are no more known errors. XJ and Colgan still dispute the PCL list because they don't acknowledge that our posted company hire dates changed with the ratification of the JCBA. Everyone will have their different proposals on the methodology of the list sorting but what XJ and Colgan are trying to do is manipulate the factual data that is applied to the methodology to disadvantage PCL pilots in case DOH has anything to do with the award.
Mesaba and Colgan's position on interpretation of ALPA merger policy just don't fit. PCL new hires have been being paid in training since around 2007. Colgan has a known lack of pay during training over the past 20 years and I'm sure that over the past 30 years Mesaba has had varying pay schemes for its pilots during training. If XJ and CJC want a strict application of the DOH definition in merger policy it will require a full investigation into every last pilot's pay treatment during training and the reordering of all three lists.
yeah the guy "DoingTime" is just pulling crap out of the air-where is he getting this crap? Do your research and find out if Mesaba has changed any pay during training over the last 30 years. ANyone on our list was a full employee and fully paid all through training. Period. It is not Mesaba holding this up, it is guys like DoingTime and their MEC/SLI committee who just make crap up, lie, try to screw over Colgan and Mesaba (don't even tell me that is false). You Pinnacle guys can go ahead and try and change your DOH in your minds, but I am sure a company like Pinnacle is not going to change it because it would cost them a lot of money. Let me ask you this-I really do not know. Were you paying ALPA dues when you were not an employee and not getting paid before your hire date? When you proposed to change your DOH, did you also propose to pay back dues for that time? Oh you did not? Then you are all not in good standing-![]()
yeah the guy "DoingTime" is just pulling crap out of the air-where is he getting this crap? Do your research and find out if Mesaba has changed any pay during training over the last 30 years. ANyone on our list was a full employee and fully paid all through training. Period. It is not Mesaba holding this up, it is guys like DoingTime and their MEC/SLI committee who just make crap up, lie, try to screw over Colgan and Mesaba (don't even tell me that is false). You Pinnacle guys can go ahead and try and change your DOH in your minds, but I am sure a company like Pinnacle is not going to change it because it would cost them a lot of money. Let me ask you this-I really do not know. Were you paying ALPA dues when you were not an employee and not getting paid before your hire date? When you proposed to change your DOH, did you also propose to pay back dues for that time? Oh you did not? Then you are all not in good standing-![]()
higney- I see what you are saying but the information I have gotten-I was not in the room-is that it was only for travel benefits as it cost too much as per the Pinnacle to give you an adjusted official DOH. I was always for that adjustment you talk about to keep everyone even, but hearing the things I have heard-mainly the final proposal to screw so many people that pinnacle put forth-and hearing that making everyone even was not agreed upon-hearing that there were issues with the dates giving more longevity to 9E pilots-and just the general talk from most of the pinnacle pilots who would say to my face they want our planes, want our seniority, who wrongly think they bought us-who wants to screw me for their benefit at the expense of my family-I say screw your 3 months-serves you right. Oh and if it were as easy as you say-as someone said, it would be done by now.
But in the end, you may get your 3 months-none of us know even if DOH will be given in any way. But all I want to know is why 9E did not choose DOH when it benefits so many 9E pilots? Greed-I hope that was evident to Bloch-
higney- I see what you are saying but the information I have gotten-I was not in the room-is that it was only for travel benefits as it cost too much as per the Pinnacle to give you an adjusted official DOH. I was always for that adjustment you talk about to keep everyone even, but hearing the things I have heard-mainly the final proposal to screw so many people that pinnacle put forth-and hearing that making everyone even was not agreed upon-hearing that there were issues with the dates giving more longevity to 9E pilots-and just the general talk from most of the pinnacle pilots who would say to my face they want our planes, want our seniority, who wrongly think they bought us-who wants to screw me for their benefit at the expense of my family-I say screw your 3 months-serves you right. Oh and if it were as easy as you say-as someone said, it would be done by now.
But in the end, you may get your 3 months-none of us know even if DOH will be given in any way. But all I want to know is why 9E did not choose DOH when it benefits so many 9E pilots? Greed-I hope that was evident to Bloch-
dude, seriously. The PCL proposal should not cloud your view of what is fair. For them to have the same DOH methodology as the rest of us is just plain fair. It is how it should be.
Hey XJHawk,
How long have you been with Mesaba? Not trying to nail you down on DOH or anything....just ball-park, so I can try an understand your mindset with this SLI. Thanks
well said-I still cannot figure out what was the intentions of Pinnacle's MEC other than being greedy and trying to screw others for their own gain. Do they really think Bloch is going to side with them just because they are delusional and tried to use the argument that they bought us? I am speculating on that account-but have heard they never showed up with boxes of documents backing up their claims-just a folder/notebook.
Nobody (except FA's) actually took the "we bought you" mindset. We are all an equal part of the "Corp" family. You guys are financed through Delta. Suffice to say, we are on the same page.
FA's think "we bought Mesaba". I have flown with a few union reps, one to the point where she got visibly upset with the words "Allegheny/Mohawk and Mckaskill-Bond act of 08". That is another thread where our side is out to lunch.
Our guys (9E) are trying to protect OUR interests. Do I agree as a line pilot.... Do you agree...? Do other 9E pilots agree...? They are autonomous of the MEC working for ONLY 9E pilots. This is FAR different than the JNC that is close and the JMEC that "has it's good and bad moments".
This is Bloch's decision, Bloch's court. We have all fought to the end over seniority. Is DOH good? For some! Does the 9E proposal protect 9E pilots? Well.. yea! Does the CJC proposal take care of their pilots? Yup...!
If Bloch reaches a decision that is entirely from one side I think we will all say "Did that just happen!?". This is arbitration with NO REASON to not go FULL BORE to protect each group. That's the nature of the beast. As soon as we all understand that fact and know that nobody will get the way that they "think" it should be, we will all face reality. Personally, I just want to be based back in MEM as a CA eventually (Currently DTW). I fully expect to NEVER get off reserve before having the resume (time) to leave.That's my "Career expectation", yet there are plenty of 9E guys that are NOT leaving. XJ has their group too (much more longevity). I can't speak of CJC- that group is junior and frankly I don't know enough people to pass judgment.
I think 9Es position to go into negotiations with no intentions to actually negotiate, and full intentions to force this to arbitration is just wrong. That is what you have implied in your responses both here and the other forum. Yes it's your MEC/SLI responsibility to protect your group as much as possible, but lopsided integration proposals, no willingness to move in negotiations, and propagating inaccurate (whether intentional or not) lists is not the way to get there.
The other airlines proposals added protections for their pilots, and although not perfect, were a lot closer to a fair integration method than 9Es staple proposal. Status and Category could have been used, just don't imply that pilots would rather be a jet FO than a turboprop CA. Most of us have a preference bid setup like 900CA, 200CA, Q-CA, SF-CA, 900FO, 200FO, Q-FO, SF-FO. That is how the groupings should have been setup. More realistic to pilots expectations. Even that leaves 9L till the 3rd group though, since they had neither of the first 2. So still not fair to their senior guys.
Seems to me something more is going on with this list problems too. From what I understand, and a lot of information from your posts, is that on Mon. a new list was published with new dates and a re-titling of a column or something like that. But that the dates in question were corrected by Tue. If that were the case, then where's the list? Something else seems to be blocking this, or there's more to the story. At this point, I would assume 3 lists... Certified, Monday list, and Tuesday list. Are we just waiting for the Tuesday list to be verified/certified or have more dates/column titles been changed on that too? Others on the boards have also stated there is a challenge to ALPA definition of DOH vs 9Es definition vs LOAv2 definition. Is that the hold up? I heard 9L had to change some dates on their list too, but that was before it was certified, and reflected ALPAs definition. Will they get to change theirs too if 9E can? This has become a mess. Seems to me those lists should have been correct from the get go. XJs was right, 9Ls was corrected and right at the start of negotiations, and 9Es has wrecked the entire process.
I think 9Es position to go into negotiations with no intentions to actually negotiate, and full intentions to force this to arbitration is just wrong. That is what you have implied in your responses both here and the other forum. Yes it's your MEC/SLI responsibility to protect your group as much as possible, but lopsided integration proposals, no willingness to move in negotiations, and propagating inaccurate (whether intentional or not) lists is not the way to get there.
The other airlines proposals added protections for their pilots, and although not perfect, were a lot closer to a fair integration method than 9Es staple proposal. Status and Category could have been used, just don't imply that pilots would rather be a jet FO than a turboprop CA. Most of us have a preference bid setup like 900CA, 200CA, Q-CA, SF-CA, 900FO, 200FO, Q-FO, SF-FO. That is how the groupings should have been setup. More realistic to pilots expectations. Even that leaves 9L till the 3rd group though, since they had neither of the first 2. So still not fair to their senior guys.
Seems to me something more is going on with this list problems too. From what I understand, and a lot of information from your posts, is that on Mon. a new list was published with new dates and a re-titling of a column or something like that. But that the dates in question were corrected by Tue. If that were the case, then where's the list? Something else seems to be blocking this, or there's more to the story. At this point, I would assume 3 lists... Certified, Monday list, and Tuesday list. Are we just waiting for the Tuesday list to be verified/certified or have more dates/column titles been changed on that too? Others on the boards have also stated there is a challenge to ALPA definition of DOH vs 9Es definition vs LOAv2 definition. Is that the hold up? I heard 9L had to change some dates on their list too, but that was before it was certified, and reflected ALPAs definition. Will they get to change theirs too if 9E can? This has become a mess. Seems to me those lists should have been correct from the get go. XJs was right, 9Ls was corrected and right at the start of negotiations, and 9Es has wrecked the entire process.
Blochs' definition of "career expectation" should be based on making a career at this airline. Ie. Compensation/QOL received for working here until retirement. Not how fast you can upgrade and get out. There is now way to judge that. 12 years ago XJ upgrades were as quick as 9Ls are today, now look at us. Your "personnel expectation" might be how quick you can get out, but your career expectation should be based on staying. The list, the airline, the pay should not be devalued for your personal gain. Some of us might be here awhile.