Freedomb all ready taking Mesa flights

[skybuda]

The one thing I don't get is how Freedumb underbid mesa. They must be working for 7 days off a month and $14,000 to start. Maybe Jo offered them room and board, a small weekly allowance, and all the beer you can drink. I wouldn't be surprised if Ornstein offers to shut down Freedumb in exchange for another substandard contract out of Mesa. I'm sure the mesa guys would go for it.

You are not far off. I think it was 9 or 10 days off and $20.47 for the FO's, $55.50 for the Capt. CLX pay if less than 2.5% of the flights are CLX, in other words if there are alot of CLX then you dont get it but if they complete all of there flight then they get CLX pay.

If you have time and want a good laugh then go to

WWW.Freedomairline.com

and goto the pilots section and take a look at the pilots handbook (contract). Before eveyone starts I know our contract here at mesa sucks but that is why we are in the middle of getting a new and better one. Not excepting this as there new contract.

To all the Freedom people have a good time and I will just say we told you so.

 

[mckpickle]

If you eat at McDonalds instead of the local restaurant that employs union labor then you must be a scab according to some of the logic in this thread.

There is no god given right to union protection. Some companies have them, some don't. If you choose to work at a company that does, then you enjoy certain protections, but at a cost. When the economy goes south so will the jobs that cost business the most, namely union jobs.

It isn't illegal, unethical, indecent, or against the law to work for a nonunion shop. Too bad if the union 'brothers and sisters' don't like it.

Capitalism is a risky way of life. Sometimes you do well. Other times somebody else figures out a way to do things cheaper and they get what used to be your customers. As union laborers we aren't and shouldn't be immune from the risks. Every single pilot furloughed today would still be working if collectively their union locals would have agreed to concessions. When business is slow management holds all the aces, when business is booming and they need labor we are in the power seat.

Two years ago when pattern bargaining was in it's heyday and everybody was topping everybody else I didn't hear anybody complaining. The rules haven't changed. It's managements turn to pattern bargain back the other way.

If you don't like the terms of employment at Freedom then don't apply to work there but nonunion employees have ZERO obligation to support union employees.

I have chosen to work in a union shop, but I accept the risks involved. I am fully aware that my company may outsource my job to a lower bidder. In the meantime I enjoy a pretty decent way of life.

your missing the point. Bottome line plain and simple. Mesa signed an agreement that said if you do this, this and this, than we will agree to do this this and this. One of the things Mesa managment agreeded to do was not establish another airline for the purposes of avoiding the Colective Bargaining Agreement. I dont know Mesa or thier politics, but I know that the managment there is breaking an agreement. Bottom line, plain and simple.

 

[DoinTime]

...like the dockworkers shutting down shipping in a bad economy...

The dockworkers did not shut down the docks.....management locked out the dockworkers.

 

[RJFlyer]

Everyone seems to want to ignore the fact that this entire situation was brought on by the USAir mainline MEC and their PWA which denied JO and Mesa the ability to fly 70- and 90-seaters for any company, not just USAir. If not for that scope clause in the USAir mainline contract, Mesa would be flying those jets now. JO is not trying to get around Mesa's contract, he's trying to get around USAir's. ALPA brought this on themselves.

And how exactly is Freedom any different than Mid Atlantic? The only difference I see is that ALPA has sanctioned Mid Atlantic, because it's staffing the jets with ALPA (read USAir) dues-paying pilots. Are you going to deny your jumpseat to those Mid Atlantic pilots who "stole" the jobs of the USAir WO's?

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

[CRJ200FO]

Everyone seems to want to ignore the fact that this entire situation was brought on by the USAir mainline MEC and their PWA which denied JO and Mesa the ability to fly 70- and 90-seaters for any company, not just USAir. If not for that scope clause in the USAir mainline contract, Mesa would be flying those jets now. JO is not trying to get around Mesa's contract, he's trying to get around USAir's. ALPA brought this on themselves.

And how exactly is Freedom any different than Mid Atlantic? The only difference I see is that ALPA has sanctioned Mid Atlantic, because it's staffing the jets with ALPA (read USAir) dues-paying pilots. Are you going to deny your jumpseat to those Mid Atlantic pilots who "stole" the jobs of the USAir WO's?

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

And how exactly did ALPA bring this on themselves? By trying to protect U pilot jobs with scope? Why should U pilots give up even more jobs so that Mesa pilots can fly 90 seat jets? They were only trying to protect their own jobs, just like the Mesa pilots are now. Sounds to me like Mesa pilots need more scope, not U pilots need less.

How is Freedumb different than Mid Atlantic? You answered the question yourself. It's an ALPA carrier. The sole purpose of Freedumb is to break the union at Mesa. Big difference. Mid Atlantic will help to keep UsAir in business and give furloughed pilots jobs at the same time. Sounds like you need to stop listening to the RJDC so much.

 

[RJFlyer]

And how exactly did ALPA bring this on themselves? By trying to protect U pilot jobs with scope? Why should U pilots give up even more jobs so that Mesa pilots can fly 90 seat jets? They were only trying to protect their own jobs, just like the Mesa pilots are now. Sounds to me like Mesa pilots need more scope, not U pilots need less.

How exactly does scoping Mesa from flying 70- and 90-seaters for America West protect USAir jobs? If America West scope allows it, who are the USAir pilots to say that they can't do it?

How is Freedumb different than Mid Atlantic? You answered the question yourself. It's an ALPA carrier. The sole purpose of Freedumb is to break the union at Mesa. Big difference. Mid Atlantic will help to keep UsAir in business and give furloughed pilots jobs at the same time.

So as long as the pilots are ALPA, then alter-ego airlines are okay? So if the Freedom pilots took a vote and became ALPA members it would all be okay, then?

Sounds like you need to stop listening to the RJDC so much.

I don't listen to the RJDC. I read the facts and form my own opinions. Maybe you should try it, instead of "listening to the (ALPA) so much."

 

[CRJ200FO]

How exactly does scoping Mesa from flying 70- and 90-seaters for America West protect USAir jobs? If America West scope allows it, who are the USAir pilots to say that they can't do it?
So as long as the pilots are ALPA, then alter-ego airlines are okay? So if the Freedom pilots took a vote and became ALPA members it would all be okay, then?
I don't listen to the RJDC. I read the facts and form my own opinions. Maybe you should try it, instead of "listening to the (ALPA) so much."

You completely miss the point of this entire issue. The problem isn't that Mesa Air Group wants to fly 70-90 seat jets for AWA. The problem is that they want to create a non-union carrier to do it while at the same time trying to bust the Mesa pilot's union. If JO wants to fly 70-90 seat jets for AWA, I say more power to him. But he has to do it within Mesa and use Mesa's union pilots. This is classic Lorenzo-style tactics. Those planes were supposed to go to Mesa and pilots on the Mesa seniority list were supposed to fly them. How would you like it if DCI took the remaining 70 seaters to be delivered to ASA and created a new company to fly them with non-union pilots. Something tells me that you might object just a little.

P.S. I don't blindly follow ALPA. I also form my own opinions using the facts. It just so happens that the facts support ALPA about 99.9% of the time. Wish I could say the same for the RJDC.

 

[DoinTime]

You completely miss the point of this entire issue. The problem isn't that Mesa Air Group wants to fly 70-90 seat jets for AWA. The problem is that they want to create a non-union carrier to do it while at the same time trying to bust the Mesa pilot's union. If JO wants to fly 70-90 seat jets for AWA, I say more power to him. But he has to do it within Mesa and use Mesa's union pilots.

The point is that Mesa COULD NOT fly 70 or 90 seat jets for ANYBODY due to scope with one of their code share partners, US AIR. Had it not been for this ridiculous scope provision by US Air, Freedom may not have even existed.

 

[tintube]

The point is that Mesa COULD NOT fly 70 or 90 seat jets for ANYBODY due to scope with one of their code share partners, US AIR. Had it not been for this ridiculous scope provision by US Air, Freedom may not have even existed.


-------

Sorry, you are wrong.
Mesa Air group had 3 different certificates before Freedom. ANY of these certificates could have been used to avoid the U scope with some adjustments to their certificates. I am real sure that these adjustments wold have cost mesa far less $ than starting a new one.
Even if there was really a need to start freedom then why not put pilots from Mesa Air Groups ( seniority list ) to do the flying?

Because it is all about $$$ and breaking the union.

 

[CRJ200FO]

The point is that Mesa COULD NOT fly 70 or 90 seat jets for ANYBODY due to scope with one of their code share partners, US AIR. Had it not been for this ridiculous scope provision by US Air, Freedom may not have even existed.


-------

Sorry, you are wrong.
Mesa Air group had 3 different certificates before Freedom. ANY of these certificates could have been used to avoid the U scope with some adjustments to their certificates. I am real sure that these adjustments wold have cost mesa far less $ than starting a new one.
Even if there was really a need to start freedom then why not put pilots from Mesa Air Groups ( seniority list ) to do the flying?

Because it is all about $$$ and breaking the union.

Thanks Tintube, you took the words right out of my mouth. U's scope would not have affected Mesa's ability to operate 70-90 seaters for AWA with some very minor corrections to the certs. I can't believe other regional pilots are actually putting the blame on U pilots and scope instead of JO.

 

[Rush Limbaugh]

Reading this thread is like watching a couple of schoolgirls in a cat fight. Trying to convince everyone that Joe Blow can help the industry more by not working is ridiculous. You people are asking pilots to change careers before they even get started. Would any of you have done that? "Sorry Rush, but that pilot group over there really wants a fat paycheck and if you just forget about flying and go to work for McDonalds, they just might get it." Why should I care about them? I doubt they care much about me and my career.

The only time a union is in a position to demand anything is when there is a shortage of qualified applicants. That isn't the case right now so why should management ever even consider caving to ALPA, especially at a regional. Someone mentioned that airline pilots are underpaid, underappreciated and overworked. Maybe you folks need to consider that you just may overappreciate yourselves which makes you think you are underpaid and overworked. I am not paid anywhere near what a major airline pilot gets paid but I don't complain about it because I knew what I was getting into when I started. The regionals have paid next to nothing as long as I can remember so why are all of you complaining now that you aren't begging for a job?

 

[DoinTime]

Sorry, you are wrong.
Mesa Air group had 3 different certificates before Freedom. ANY of these certificates could have been used to avoid the U scope with some adjustments to their certificates.

I'm sorry but you are the who is wrong. Mesa does have three separate operating certificates but every one of them code shares with US Airways therefor they all fall under the provisions of US Airways scope. I don't know if Freedom would have been formed if Mesa would have been allowed to put the big CRJ's on one of their existing certificates and unfortunatly we'll never find out. Seeing is that JO had to spend the money to start up a new certificate you can bet that he would find a way to get that money back. I'm not defending that worthless heap of sh!t but US Air scope gave him the perfect opportunity to put the screws to organised labor.

 

[jetdriven]

And your job is not more important than mine.

Who has the "me first" attitude?

what I am saying is you have no right to come here to mesa and be senior to me or to step into that 70-seat jet which was paid for by the pilots already here. You have no right to cause me to be furloughed because you start off senior to me. Do you think you can go over to CAL or SWA and start off flying FO for captain's wages and get preferential captain's slots? Anyone is welcome to work here but you start at the bottom just like everyone else here.

Mesa is still planning growth (half of 20 RJs is still an INCREASE of 10 RJs).

You must have a problem reading because I said AWA is noticing us to remove CRJ-200's as the 700's come on line. If 10 jets get removed from the AWA side and come over to the USAirways side then there is no net gain. ZERO..I work for MESA I know this.

you are all correct when you say mesa airlines in its current form could not fly 70-seat jets for AWA. I have no issue with the certificate called "freedom air". Neither does our MEC. The only thing we asked was that all Mesa Air Group flying be performed under the same contract and with the pilots of the mesa seniority list. Why couldnt JO do that?? Because he's a Bill Franke (btw JO admitted to "having dinner" with on more than one occasion) wannabe union buster.

 

[jetdriven]

Airways pilots not in good standing @FAL

and for all of you who think airways pilots are in good standing when going to Freedom then think again. Read more below, from the MESA MEC...

Topic: Mitch Grace on Freedom Airlines (5 of 7), Read 20 times
Conf: Negotiating Committee
From: ROBERT HENRY [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 03:41 PM

Some facts about freedom pilots, and their fate, First , The Us Airways MEC Passed a resolution at their Meeting in FL last week that revokes the benefits negotiated for Furloughed Pilots that go to Freedom. These benefits include Job Search Assistance, Travel Privileges, Web Access, and Cobra Payments. The Airways MEC has publicly stated their position that they support our efforts to capture the flying under our agreement, They included in their resolution the consideration of Article VIII charges against any pilot furloughed accepting a position at Freedom. With that said, WE need to focus on the Task at hand, OUR Contract and the protection of ALL MAG flying under one list and contract. At this TIME this should be our only focus, do not let Freedom Airlines shift our focus, we must remain united to achieve that Goal.
Point two; As soon as the company publishes a Mesa Seniority List with the Freedom Pilots on Leave we will remove their access to the Web and ALL ALPA resources. This is not a punitive step, its ALPA policy.

 

[D8drvr]

The arguements keep changing their focus. Let's see if I can respond in a way to tie them together.

First, I am not talking about applying to Mesa; if I did, and got hired, I would be junior to everyone else there. I am talking about working for Freedom, a seperate company with its own seniority list.

It is interesting to me that many years ago Mesa and USAirways started a business relationship. In that relationship they each agreed to abide by certain rules. One of those rules, like it or not, was the USAirways scope language. Because of the relationship, Mesa enjoyed many years of growth (with USAirways as its biggest partner). Some of that growth was even on the backs of ALPA pilots. Now, that scope language has become a problem for Mesa. So, JO finds a way to sidestep part of an ALPA contract (with the very airline that encouraged Mesa's growth). I am told that the Mesa pilots would have NO problem with the sidestep of an ALPA contract if THEY get the flying (once again growth on the backs of ALPA pilots). BUT, since they don't get the flying, they cry foul as loudly and with as many arguements as they can.

These arguements include telling unemployed pilots to stay unemployed. (We have no picket line crossing). Calling them scabs if they want to work for a start-up airline.

Another arguement claims the lose of Mesa jobs. I believe Mesa will still grow. Let's try the math with numbers provided by a previous post:

"Freedumb has orders and options for 70 aircraft. MESA did sign an agreement for 20 Jets4Jobs aircraft, but only 10 of these will be staffed with mesa pilots. These 10 aircraft are from the AWA system being pulled down to make room for 70-seat flying. AWA noticed us on 4 CRJ's this year and an additional 2 more in feb."

Freedom = 70
Mesa = 20 (J4J so we cut that in half) = 10 - "4 CRJ's this year" - "an additional 2 more in feb" = 4 additional Mesa aircraft. Not a big number, but still growth. USAirways is still furloughing and AWA will only be hiring for attrition, not growth.

The last arguement I'll talkabout in this post is:

"...to step into that 70-seat jet which was paid for by the pilots already here."

How did you "pay" for the 70 seaters? By taking ALG pilot jobs years ago. Or, by supporting JO when he wanted to side step an ALPA contract? Maybe payroll deduction? By doing your job, getting paid, and enjoying your life?

 

[jetdriven]

Mesa = 20 (J4J so we cut that in half) = 10 - "4 CRJ's this year" - "an additional 2 more in feb" = 4 additional Mesa aircraft. Not a big number, but still growth. USAirways is still furloughing and AWA will only be hiring for attrition, not growth

if you call 4 new planes in a year and 1/2 growth here's the other part of it. AMW just pulled down 3 1900D's this month alone, and are looking at pulling down 4-6 more. Two years ago we had 57 B1900D's, now we are going with 37. If you want to see growth just look at every other regional out there besides mesa.

FGA never "took" ALG's flying. they were a separate company under no ties to ALG. Just as if AirWis decided to replace us some routes, that would be ethically right. Freedom is CONTROLLED by Mesa Air Group, the parent company of Mesa, AMW, CCAir, and Freedom. there's no "fair" competition when all the companies are centrally located. Ask a CC pilot why a CC flight is cancelled then a Mesa DHC-8 does the same run 15 minutes later with a MESA flight number. AMW is getting charged 250$ per hour by Mesa for accounting when the market rate is 100$. it's all a big shell game. Was JEDI or Chewie2 or any of the other partnerships not controlled by ENRON? same thing here.

How did you "pay" for the 70 seaters? By taking ALG pilot jobs years ago. Or, by supporting JO when he wanted to side step an ALPA contract? Maybe payroll deduction? By doing your job, getting paid, and enjoying your life?

JO's siren song is how low wages equals future growth. So we bought into that crappy idea then he gives the "growth" to another division and locks us all out of it! we never took ALG's runs just like SWA didnt "take" BOS-LAX.

Freedom was created to work around the Mesa pilots contract. If it were one seniority list and one contract you bet your A$$ we would have bid over there! The best they got was a handful of managent pilot buttkissers and about 25 line pilots. Out of 1250. We voted with our feet, alright. we might get to vote again that way.

 

[got_jumpseat?]

Freedom Fighters!

Freedom Fighters! The true defenders of Freedom; NOT the airline. NMB is about to settle this issue once and for all. The buck has got to stop somewhere. Mesaba Pilots & all other airline pilots should thank the Mesa Freedom Fighters for drawing a line and saying THE BUCK STOPS HERE.

 

[RJFlyer]

You completely miss the point of this entire issue. The problem isn't that Mesa Air Group wants to fly 70-90 seat jets for AWA. The problem is that they want to create a non-union carrier to do it while at the same time trying to bust the Mesa pilot's union.

No, it appears you are missing the point. This situation would probably not have existed if it weren't for U scope. It just resulted in the side benefit (in Mesa mgmts eyes) of screwing the Mesa pilots. Whether you like it or not, the pilots who go to work for Freedom are NOT scabs and do not deserve to be looked down upon just because they're not ALPA and not on your seniority list.

If JO wants to fly 70-90 seat jets for AWA, I say more power to him. But he has to do it within Mesa and use Mesa's union pilots.

Once again, he CAN'T because of U scope. How hard is that to understand?

How would you like it if DCI took the remaining 70 seaters to be delivered to ASA and created a new company to fly them with non-union pilots. Something tells me that you might object just a little.

I wouldn't like it a bit, but that situation is in no way relevant to yours. Why don't you ask a USAir WO pilot what he thinks of the J4J deal? Same situation, just happens to be an "ALPA shop."

P.S. I don't blindly follow ALPA. I also form my own opinions using the facts. It just so happens that the facts support ALPA about 99.9% of the time. Wish I could say the same for the RJDC.

Is that so? How then do you explain a quote such as this:

"We employed 500 nonpilot flight engineers on EAL, and we had taken care of them. But Robertson (FEIA president) called them out, all 500, and we had no choice but to break them."
- Capt Jerry Wood, EAL, as quoted in Flying the Line p. 185

This is in reference to the non-ALPA, non-pilot flight engineers being called out to strike, and ALPA replacing them with ALPA members to break their strike (can you say "scab?"). This must be that one time in 1,000 when ALPA's been wrong, though, right?

Don't get me wrong, I think it's crappy that JO is doing this to you guys. But to sit here and gripe about the pilots who choose to work there - and blaming it on them - is missing the point. It's not their fault, and they can't be expected to pass up a jet job simply because you disagree with JO's methods. IT"S NOT THEIR FAULT. Instead of lambasting them, why don't you try to bring them into the fold and effect some kind of seniority list merger (DOH would work for you, wouldn't it?)?

 

[D8drvr]

FloridaGulf and Allegheny were under the USAir Group, just like Mesa and Freedom are under the Mesa Group. Your assertion is that noone should work for Freedom because the "work" is being taken from Mesa. My assertion is that FloridaGulf KNEW the "work" was being taken from Allegheny and said "I don't care, me first".

 

[jetdriven]

FloridaGulf and Allegheny were under the USAir Group, just like Mesa and Freedom are under the Mesa Group.

that's where you're completely wrong. FGA was a MESA OWNED COMPANY. CONTROLLED BY MESA from the start. Allegheny WAS NOT. Separate companies, just as separate as Air Wisconsin and Skywest, even though they fly under the same code.

Are you saying that SWA "TOOK" the BOS-LAX runs from USAirways?