Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

First SLI thread of the day

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
higney85 said:
3. Status/Category was done at the regional level purely by pay. At the majors you use widebody/narrowbody due to pay.
Click to expand...

So, a Q and SF cap at CJC pays less than all FO positions at PCL? News to me.

So maybe, as many theorize, the carve out on Q pay was to help make it easier to screw CJC Q pilots at SLI time...

higney85 said:
. I sincerely apologize if some guys have their head in the sand about this "purchase". We did not buy you. Corp owns all 3 of us. It's as if Pinnacle, Inc. was the family dog; Colgan showed up as a stray and didn't play with us in the yard; and now XJ got picked up at the pound. We are all in the same yard and each one wants to be the "Alpa dog". In the end we are all in the same situation with the same amount of influence.
Click to expand...

Colgan played with PCL MEC quite well. They share an office in MEM if i'm not mistaken.
 
As an aside, all this arguing is not really my style. I generally like people and actually look forward to sharing brews and crews with all of you guys once this drudgery is through.
 
suupah said:
As an aside, all this arguing is not really my style. I generally like people and actually look forward to sharing brews and crews with all of you guys once this drudgery is through.
Click to expand...
THATS IT!!!!!!! The new slogan, "Brews with Crews."
 
higney85 said:
1. The 9E guys did negotiate. They are the only group that actually changed their proposals through the entire process. There is no point to NOT negotiating in front of an arbitrator.
2. The list had no "additions" or "changes". The column that had the checkride date was simply removed in accordance with the JCBA leaving class date as DOH in seniority order. There was no re-shuffling or changes. The list was the same as the one used in negotiations from 7/1/10 with the exception of all NH's and XJ furloughs added below in DOH (only class date) order per the process/protocol agreement.
3. Status/Category was done at the regional level purely by pay. At the majors you use widebody/narrowbody due to pay.
4. There has been no comms between groups, between bloch, nobody. We have all been waiting on Bloch since tuesday after everyone responded to the list/disputes.
5. I sincerely apologize if some guys have their head in the sand about this "purchase". We did not buy you. Corp owns all 3 of us. It's as if Pinnacle, Inc. was the family dog; Colgan showed up as a stray and didn't play with us in the yard; and now XJ got picked up at the pound. We are all in the same yard and each one wants to be the "Alpa dog". In the end we are all in the same situation with the same amount of influence.
Click to expand...
Not all this info matches what I have been told. What I am hearing is that even the last list has DOH changes on it, that were not identified on either of the first 2. I'm sure there was no reshuffling (it would be obvious) nor am I charging that the changes were intentional. But I am disappointed that your SLI committee cannot get their list straightened out. That was their responsibility, not the companies, and XJ/9L integration methods depended on accurate information. The fact that the list was wrong, has been wrong, and maybe still is wrong, basically negated the entire negotiation process. 9L was forced to change their list too, to follow ALPA guidelines for DOH, and obviously had enough time to accomplish this prior to submitting the certified lists. The fact that yours was incorrect shows volumes of the character and integrity of you SLI committee to represent your pilots fairly. If a mistake 2 months into negotiations was found, understandable, it should have been brought to light immediately not on the last day.

Status/Category
Status/Category works at the majors this way, because they have similar fleets (DC9 vs MD80). We do not. Maybe it should be base on seats or weight. Then the Q ranks higher than the 200. Your definition by pay doesn't work as Suupah stated, the Q and SF CAs make more than ANY FO. Maybe you could have group the Q and 200 CAs in the same group....as equals. Still not fair to the '99/'00 9L guys. They could hold 900 CA at either 9E or XJ, but would not have any slots to merge into that group.
 
I guess it doesn't matter anymore. It's in Blochs' hands. Hopefully he can see through the actions of a few for the greater good of the combined pilot group. And I sincerely hope, whatever the ruling, that there is not a continuation of the situation into a USAir/AmWest debacle.

I do agree with Hawk in one area though, if I am at all in a position to make it to the meeting to nominate and vote, it will not be for a past or current 9E rep. ***Notice I didn't rule a 9E or 9L guy/gal out*** You guys have made your disorganization, lack of responsibility, and leadership inaptitude very apparent. I always heard this prior to the merger, but gave it no thought. Now I see it, and I do not want that type of union representation speaking for me in the future. Nothing personal to ANY individual, but as a collective group, I give a vote of no confidence.
 
higney85 said:
It's as if Pinnacle, Inc. was the family dog; Colgan showed up as a stray and didn't play with us in the yard; and now XJ got picked up at the pound. We are all in the same yard and each one wants to be the "Alpa dog". In the end we are all in the same situation with the same amount of influence.
Click to expand...
Horrible analogy BTW. You make it seem like the 9E group is the pedigreed, AKC registered dog, and belittle the others with "stray" and implied mutt. The SLI was our opportunity to negotiate a fair and equitable ISL, not force someone else to arbitrate it for us. Your so called "dog" was trying to piss off the owner so that we all get swatted with the newspaper. We are all together in this, when this list is done, we will all be one. There is no "Alpha Dog", not unless you are discussing the strengths of our merged union against the other airlines in the US regional "yard."
 
CptMurf said:
Horrible analogy BTW. You make it seem like the 9E group is the pedigreed, AKC registered dog, and belittle the others with "stray" and implied mutt. The SLI was our opportunity to negotiate a fair and equitable ISL, not force someone else to arbitrate it for us. Your so called "dog" was trying to piss off the owner so that we all get swatted with the newspaper. We are all together in this, when this list is done, we will all be one. There is no "Alpha Dog", not unless you are discussing the strengths of our merged union against the other airlines in the US regional "yard."
Click to expand...

It's sad, but the actions and verbal comments of many at 9E show they really feel that way
 
Maybe the analogy was off. If you took it as one being a pedigree, it would be my fault for not explaining. My wife and I have dogs and they are loved the same regardless of their past and situation around getting them.

I never said I agree with the stat/cat setup. This whole situation is a mess, that was a known quantity at the beginning. The hope is Bloch can take everyone and put us together in a fashion where we are all equally ticked off. From there I think we can all move on. The jet/tprop debate has been one around for decades. I fully expect the Q to pay more than the -200 on the next contract. CJC makes this stat/cat interesting because of the tremendous longevity difference. If it was simply XJ/9E I'm sure the methods proposed would have been different.
 
CptMurf said:
Horrible analogy BTW. You make it seem like the 9E group is the pedigreed, AKC registered dog, and belittle the others with "stray" and implied mutt. The SLI was our opportunity to negotiate a fair and equitable ISL, not force someone else to arbitrate it for us. Your so called "dog" was trying to piss off the owner so that we all get swatted with the newspaper. We are all together in this, when this list is done, we will all be one. There is no "Alpha Dog", not unless you are discussing the strengths of our merged union against the other airlines in the US regional "yard."
Click to expand...
Sounds to me that someone is a little sensitive. Your rebuttal reeks of projection.

You project your own sense of inferiority when you look at the analogy and assume home = purebred and pound puppy = mutt. He did not say nor imply anything of the sort... and the only insults in Higney's thread are the ones your head.

Now if you have problem being a pound puppy, too bad. You are the new dog to this yard. And yeah, I sympathize... but that's the way the industry works.

Next time, it'll be my turn.
 
Flyprdu said:
Sounds to me that someone is a little sensitive. Your rebuttal reeks of projection.

You project your own sense of inferiority when you look at the analogy and assume home = purebred and pound puppy = mutt. He did not say nor imply anything of the sort... and the only insults in Higney's thread are the ones your head.

Now if you have problem being a pound puppy, too bad. You are the new dog to this yard. And yeah, I sympathize... but that's the way the industry works.

Next time, it'll be my turn.
Click to expand...
Not too many pure breads in the pound, and you seemed to have forgotten the stray. Seems your the one with projection problems, since were talking about achieving an ISL and not our next family pet.
 
Flyprdu said:
Sounds to me that someone is a little sensitive. Your rebuttal reeks of projection.

You project your own sense of inferiority when you look at the analogy and assume home = purebred and pound puppy = mutt. He did not say nor imply anything of the sort... and the only insults in Higney's thread are the ones your head.

Now if you have problem being a pound puppy, too bad. You are the new dog to this yard. And yeah, I sympathize... but that's the way the industry works.

Next time, it'll be my turn.
Click to expand...

Sensitive maybe, but how many shots across the bow does it take for you to realize somebody is shoting at you
 
Flyprdu said:
Sounds to me that someone is a little sensitive. Your rebuttal reeks of projection.

You project your own sense of inferiority when you look at the analogy and assume home = purebred and pound puppy = mutt. He did not say nor imply anything of the sort... and the only insults in Higney's thread are the ones your head.

Now if you have problem being a pound puppy, too bad. You are the new dog to this yard. And yeah, I sympathize... but that's the way the industry works.

Next time, it'll be my turn.
Click to expand...
You're in over your head. Time to stop now. I'll throw in the towel for you. Your welcome. And FYI, we are taking over the yard.....just in case you weren't sure.
 
higney85 said:
1. The 9E guys did negotiate. They are the only group that actually changed their proposals through the entire process. There is no point to NOT negotiating in front of an arbitrator.
2. The list had no "additions" or "changes". The column that had the checkride date was simply removed in accordance with the JCBA leaving class date as DOH in seniority order. There was no re-shuffling or changes. The list was the same as the one used in negotiations from 7/1/10 with the exception of all NH's and XJ furloughs added below in DOH (only class date) order per the process/protocol agreement.
3. Status/Category was done at the regional level purely by pay. At the majors you use widebody/narrowbody due to pay.
4. There has been no comms between groups, between bloch, nobody. We have all been waiting on Bloch since tuesday after everyone responded to the list/disputes.
5. I sincerely apologize if some guys have their head in the sand about this "purchase". We did not buy you. Corp owns all 3 of us. It's as if Pinnacle, Inc. was the family dog; Colgan showed up as a stray and didn't play with us in the yard; and now XJ got picked up at the pound. We are all in the same yard and each one wants to be the "Alpa dog". In the end we are all in the same situation with the same amount of influence.
Click to expand...

Higney, I appreciate your willingness to serve. You stepped up to the plate. I don't know the finer details of the Pinnacle MEC, but from what I have seen personally now (and not rumor) The place was and is a train wreck. The list is long with mis-steps and I am not shy to rise up against the leadership of them. I am sure they have the same goals as myself in this industry, but their methods and discipline of reaching those goals is horrific.

With that said I absolutely seperate the Pinnacle MEC and LEC reps from the rest of the Pinnacle pilot group. I look forward to working with each and every one of them. Even the ****************************** bags, cuz we got a few too. I feel that your pilot group has been beaten down for so long that all the group knows is disapointment and dispare. It is not their fault for feeling this way. You beat somebody down for so long and that is all they know. I am looking forward to change. We all are being served on a platter of change from the CEO all the way down to the line pilots, bases, and equipment.

Now for the SLI, points you made. As to addition and changes. Yes, their were. Ask J.H. if terminated pilots were added to the last list submitted. Ask him if some pilots were not even on the last list submitted (lets just call that the PM list) Yes their was at least one pilot that was left off the list due to a lack of oversight from Pinnacle SLI committee. And he was found by our SLI committee. I got his name if you want it?

Ask JH if their were email exchanges on the 25th and what he wanted. There is more to the story of checkride data point, DOH data point, and senority date data point.

Please engage JH or even better yet cross check his answers given to you based on verifable data from a seperate source.

My last point of this aurgument is this. JH blamed the company for bad data. Do you know who actually owns a senority list? It is ALPA and not the company. We are the ones responsible for making sure it is correct and if the company cannot come up with a proper list it is ALPA that corrects it. I suppose it is a joint responsability, but ALPA owns the document. So JH's excuse for the company giving bad data doesn't fly with me, it is ultimately his responsability.
 
Simon Says said:
Higney, I appreciate your willingness to serve. You stepped up to the plate. I don't know the finer details of the Pinnacle MEC, but from what I have seen personally now (and not rumor) The place was and is a train wreck. The list is long with mis-steps and I am not shy to rise up against the leadership of them. I am sure they have the same goals as myself in this industry, but their methods and discipline of reaching those goals is horrific.

With that said I absolutely seperate the Pinnacle MEC and LEC reps from the rest of the Pinnacle pilot group. I look forward to working with each and every one of them. Even the ****************************** bags, cuz we got a few too. I feel that your pilot group has been beaten down for so long that all the group knows is disapointment and dispare. It is not their fault for feeling this way. You beat somebody down for so long and that is all they know. I am looking forward to change. We all are being served on a platter of change from the CEO all the way down to the line pilots, bases, and equipment.

Now for the SLI, points you made. As to addition and changes. Yes, their were. Ask J.H. if terminated pilots were added to the last list submitted. Ask him if some pilots were not even on the last list submitted (lets just call that the PM list) Yes their was at least one pilot that was left off the list due to a lack of oversight from Pinnacle SLI committee. And he was found by our SLI committee. I got his name if you want it?

Ask JH if their were email exchanges on the 25th and what he wanted. There is more to the story of checkride data point, DOH data point, and senority date data point.

Please engage JH or even better yet cross check his answers given to you based on verifable data from a seperate source.

My last point of this aurgument is this. JH blamed the company for bad data. Do you know who actually owns a senority list? It is ALPA and not the company. We are the ones responsible for making sure it is correct and if the company cannot come up with a proper list it is ALPA that corrects it. I suppose it is a joint responsability, but ALPA owns the document. So JH's excuse for the company giving bad data doesn't fly with me, it is ultimately his responsability.
Click to expand...

Sigh......:erm:
 
So when's the first "Brews with Crews" roundup? And what city? Maybe a floating kegger setup by volunteers in each domicile. Doesn't need much organization, just a date, and a location. BYOB or restaurant/bar of course. 9L/9E/XJ and significant others only, we are trying to meet our new coworkers, not talk shop with other airlines.

Any suggestions?
 
I like the idea. I have only met a couple Colgan pilots and the great majority of the Pinnacle guys and gals are stand up people. So once this thing is done, let have a drink together and leave this crap in the past. Once the list is out, its done. Heck we did vote it in already. When the list comes out, lets have a week to bitch about and then forget about it. Then the drinking can begin. two dates per domicile-one weekend date and one weekday date. That covers us all.

Know tihs si 4 u partypartyprnces......wii shuold al get togather 4 their is no bettre ting to do to promute our pilots so the're able to get to no each other better
 
Hey pinnacle merger comm., stop being morons!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've had enough of the Pinnacle clowns. Do your freaking job morons!!!! If Bloch wants another copy of the list (no matter how dumb this is) just give it to him in a timely fashion (the same day just like Colgan and Mesaba) so we can get the stupid list already!!!!!! Stop stalling!!!!!!!!!! And yes, you will be voted out shortly!!!!!!!




SLI Update – June 1, 2011

Monday evening Arbitrator Bloch asked for an updated seniority list from the three Merger Committees. By noon Tuesday, both the Mesaba and Colgan Merger Committees provided Mr. Bloch their respective up-to-date seniority list as he requested. As of this writing, Mr. Bloch is still waiting for an updated seniority list from the Pinnacle Merger Committee. After he receives their updated list, he will be able to issue his award in short order. We do not know when the Pinnacle Merger Committee will be able to provide Arbitrator Bloch an up-to-date seniority list. We remain committed to providing you with Mr. Bloch’s decision as soon as it is received.
 
Things are hard to get done "immediately" when the sli guys aren't released from trips. I've been told the list (from 9E) should be in bloch's hands today.
 
higney85 said:
Things are hard to get done "immediately" when the sli guys aren't released from trips. I've been told the list (from 9E) should be in bloch's hands today.
Click to expand...

The time for excuses has expired! They have used them all up. Their lack of timeliness and consideration for ALL the pilot groups involved is staggering to say the least.
 
SEVEN said:
The time for excuses has expired! They have used them all up. Their lack of timeliness and consideration for ALL the pilot groups involved is staggering to say the least.
Click to expand...

Going back in time and Monday quarterbacking I have a few questions... perhaps some Pinnacle people can answer.

Why is the pinnacle pilot group saying it's the companies responsibility to keep on top of the list when Colgan and Mesaba seem to agree that it's the individual merger committee members responsibility to maintain the list?

While I understand there being some question as to what DOH (PC completion of first day of class) to use ON the list, I don't understand why Pinnacle pilots won't answer our concerns there were actual recording keeping mistakes (140 apparently) on their list. DOH concerns aside, LOA 2 concerns aside, what is has been the problem with list upkeep?

Why would Pinnacle even trust the company to maintain their seniority list in the first place?

Is this a little too strange for anyone else?
 
jynxyjericho said:
Going back in time and Monday quarterbacking I have a few questions... perhaps some Pinnacle people can answer.

Why is the pinnacle pilot group saying it's the companies responsibility to keep on top of the list when Colgan and Mesaba seem to agree that it's the individual merger committee members responsibility to maintain the list?

While I understand there being some question as to what DOH (PC completion of first day of class) to use ON the list, I don't understand why Pinnacle pilots won't answer our concerns there were actual recording keeping mistakes (140 apparently) on their list. DOH concerns aside, LOA 2 concerns aside, what is has been the problem with list upkeep?

Why would Pinnacle even trust the company to maintain their seniority list in the first place?

Is this a little too strange for anyone else?
Click to expand...
1. Each MEC will maintain a system seniority list including at least the following data:
seniority number, name, date of hire, and date of birth. (AMENDED - Executive Board May
1998)
2. The merger representatives shall be responsible for determining the date of hire, date of
birth, seniority number, furlough time and leaves of absence time for each flight deck crew
member on its current seniority list utilizing Company payroll records and/or other records
as necessary. Clerical and staff help may be utilized to compile this data. Each furlough
and leave of absence or any intervening periods of service other than as a flight deck crew
member with this Company shall be listed separately with an explanation covering the
period. Furlough time directly related to a labor dispute or work stoppage, ALPA leaves,
military leaves, FMLA (or Canadian equivalent) leaves and sick leaves shall not be​
included. (AMENDED - Executive Board September 1988; Executive Board May 1998)
4. The date of hire shall be the date upon which a pilot first appears upon the Company’s
payroll as a pilot and also begins initial operational training required to perform such
duties in airline operations. Pilots who initially function as flight deck crew members in
positions other than that of a pilot, but whose working agreement allows normal
progression in accordance with seniority to pilot status, shall be considered as being
employed as a pilot for purposes of this Section. Persons who initially function as flight
deck crew members, but in a classification which did not allow normal progression to pilot
status in accordance with seniority, and who have subsequently gained the right of
progression to pilot status by agreement with ALPA, shall acquire date of hire as a pilot as
of the date specified by such agreement. Those veteran flight engineers who gained the
right of progression to pilot status in accordance with seniority by agreement with ALPA
but who, as of November 20, 1970, are prohibited by their Company policy from exercising​
such rights, shall for the purpose of this policy be regarded as not possessing entitlement to
pilot positions. Where an initial date of hire as a flight deck crew member is different from
an initial date of hire as a pilot as defined above, both sets of data, together with
explanations, shall be compiled for the purpose of resolving any inconsistencies among the
parties to the merger with respect to special rights for such individuals. (AMENDED -​
Executive Board May 1998)

Seems pretty clear to me. MEC committe responsible for list. SLI commitee responsible for verification and correctness. And DOH explenation. Straight out of the merger/fragmentation policy.

LOAv2 challenges the ALPA Mer/Frg policies definition, most likely it will be honored, since we all voted the TA in with the LOA attached.
 
CptMurf said:
1. Each MEC will maintain a system seniority list including at least the following data:​

seniority number, name, date of hire, and date of birth. (AMENDED - Executive Board May
1998)
2. The merger representatives shall be responsible for determining the date of hire, date of
birth, seniority number, furlough time and leaves of absence time for each flight deck crew
member on its current seniority list utilizing Company payroll records and/or other records
as necessary. Clerical and staff help may be utilized to compile this data. Each furlough
and leave of absence or any intervening periods of service other than as a flight deck crew
member with this Company shall be listed separately with an explanation covering the
period. Furlough time directly related to a labor dispute or work stoppage, ALPA leaves,
military leaves, FMLA (or Canadian equivalent) leaves and sick leaves shall not be​
included. (AMENDED - Executive Board September 1988; Executive Board May 1998)
4. The date of hire shall be the date upon which a pilot first appears upon the Company’s
payroll as a pilot and also begins initial operational training required to perform such
duties in airline operations. Pilots who initially function as flight deck crew members in
positions other than that of a pilot, but whose working agreement allows normal
progression in accordance with seniority to pilot status, shall be considered as being
employed as a pilot for purposes of this Section. Persons who initially function as flight
deck crew members, but in a classification which did not allow normal progression to pilot
status in accordance with seniority, and who have subsequently gained the right of
progression to pilot status by agreement with ALPA, shall acquire date of hire as a pilot as
of the date specified by such agreement. Those veteran flight engineers who gained the
right of progression to pilot status in accordance with seniority by agreement with ALPA
but who, as of November 20, 1970, are prohibited by their Company policy from exercising​

such rights, shall for the purpose of this policy be regarded as not possessing entitlement to
pilot positions. Where an initial date of hire as a flight deck crew member is different from
an initial date of hire as a pilot as defined above, both sets of data, together with
explanations, shall be compiled for the purpose of resolving any inconsistencies among the
parties to the merger with respect to special rights for such individuals. (AMENDED -​

Executive Board May 1998)

Seems pretty clear to me. MEC committe responsible for list. SLI commitee responsible for verification and correctness. And DOH explenation. Straight out of the merger/fragmentation policy.

LOAv2 challenges the ALPA Mer/Frg policies definition, most likely it will be honored, since we all voted the TA in with the LOA attached.
Click to expand...

Stop "skewing" the facts. :rolleyes: According to RJLoser, that's all we do.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom