Jet for Jobs - NWA Airlinks

[avrodriverj85]

Has everyone seen the NWA MEC proposal they want to take to the company regarding what is essentially a Jet for Jobs deal? It would screw both Pinnacle and XJ pilots and any chance of a future or upgrades.

Thanks ALPA.

 

[festus]

How about posting it?

 

[festus]

Disregard last post.

 

[flyn96]

!

Actually the message said that 70 seaters would be staffed by NWA crew. It said nothing of a NWA Captain and Mesaba FO or a J4J deal. It said it would staffed by a NWA and that is it. This is a good thing!

I'd rather have a job someday flying a 70 seater under a NWA contract and payrate instead of Mesaba contract.

I hope this sets the standard and all mainlines follow NWA's lead (yea I know how many times has NWA been a trend setter).

Its about time mainline stepped up to plate and accepted the fact that if they want to protect NWA jobs they need to come up with rates for 70 seaters of their own.

 

[InclusiveScope]

flyn96,

Will you still feel that way when mainline underbids CMR and Horizon rates to get the aircraft? This is what USAirways mainline did.

Can someone please post the details?

 

[flap operator]

avrodriver85 - what proposal did you read? The posting on our ALPA website that JM put up had nothing to do with a J4J agreement. From how I interpreted it, it seems that mainline wants to stand firm on their scope and if NWA wants new 70 seat jets, NWA pilots will fly them. They aren't touching the avro agreement and it sounds like they want to make provisions for a "flow up" agreement for PNCL and XJ. This is still in proposal form, so I think its a little knee jerk like, to start saying the sky is falling.

Inclusivescope - I think the NW pilots have far more leverage than the USAir pilots do. I seriously doubt a mainline NW dude would underbid Comair. Though it will be interesting to see what ALPA deems as "competitive" for their 70 seat pay proposal. I would imagine that the 70 seat pay would follow their current pay formula, which would put them higher than COmair and the rest of the 70 seat pay scales.

FO

 

[avrodriverj85]

flapoperator, you're right, it's probably jumping the gun. Besides our MEC would never do anything to screw this pilot group. After all, pilots flying under the red-tail are one big happy family. ~ RIGHT !!!!

 

[flap operator]

Haha... I sense a little sarcasm. I am very cautious with this one, after our contract debacle. But at face value it seems like a fair deal. I almost don't want to form an opinion on this because we really don't have all the info. In my synical view, you and I as FOs, will get screwed... again. My optimist side thinks that this is our key to mainline, but with a price. What's that price? who the heck knows. I'm getting antsy that's for sure... we signed our "growth" contract... where the fuc$ is our growth?

Inclusive scope - I'm not sure that there are any details to post. All the info that we have is a copy of an email sent to the NWA pilots. even that was a rough outline of the proposal. More info will be forthcoming to them. What you've read here is basically all that was said in that email. I don't know if that email is even public information.

FO

 

[JohnDoe]

Avrodriverj85:

That email said nothing about "jet for jobs" whatsoever.

Flap operator got it right. It simply said that the NWA MEC was not going to give in on the 70 seat scope. Any 70 seaters that NW wants, with the exception of the "grandfathered" avros, would be flown by mainline.

 

[avrodriverj85]

Now it makes sense why there was never a 70 seat rate negotiated in the last contract.

So, let me get this straight - it's Jet for Jobs when ALPA demands that mainline USAirways flies 70 seat jets at PSA, but when NWA ALPA is demanding the same, it's somehow different? No, this is cut from the same cloth, a typical ALPA snafu to save mainline. A few years back mainline pilots wouldn't fly a CRJ, now they are all over it. The only way this is good for an XJ pilot if this plays out, is for the top 200 pilots and Wychor.

 

[dondk]

I read the memo too.. found the number "72" to be an odd number. We all know they have about 100 more options.

The million dollar question though will be at what rates. Will this be a "B" scale for NWA pilots or prorated based on seats in comparison to the -9 fleet?

Personally.. I think the NWA guys see the writing on the wall, those 9's are starting to run out of steam and a bus does not fill all of the void the 9 will leave. XJ and 9E would be in position to take 70 seat aircraft if NWA offered them to us. Our rates would "hopefully" be competitve with horizon, CMR, ASA and anyone else flying 70 seat aircraft, but knowing our individual companies.. they would try to low ball it.

NWA relax's the scope, ensures the 70 seat flying stays in house at a rate they can live with (or on) and throw a bone to the airlinks for flow-through.

I have heard this story from several NWA guys lately.. they REALLY want any flying that will be above 55 seat aircraft in house. They will play ball to secure 70 and 90 seat aircraft.

 

[flap operator]

Dude... avrodriver, I don't see your logic. J4J at UsAir is about sending mainline pilots to the regional affiliate (PSA) and a newly formed carrier MidAtlantic to fly the planes. The NWA proposal is only following their scope, by having NWA pilots fly the 70 seat planes. This is scope that was negotiated a long time ago. Can you blame the NWA pilots for not wanting to relax their scope and farm their jobs out further? I'm still skeptical, because it seems too good to be true for the NWA pilots to honestly have our best interest at hand. But I'm not going to draw far fetched conclusions, especially before we have all the info!



FO

 

[InclusiveScope]

The final result will likely look different than the proposal. Once again, ALPA is most likely going to repeat the same mistake it makes over and over again. At least they are consistent. Thank you sir, may I have another......

 

[avrodriverj85]

Ah, the ole' flow-through carrot re-appears. When will we ever learn? We will never get a NWA seniority # as long as we wear the XJ or 9E uniform. But it's nice to dream I guess.

 

[WhiteCloud]

Ah, the ole' flow-through carrot re-appears. When will we ever learn? We will never get a NWA seniority # as long as we wear the XJ or 9E uniform. But it's nice to dream I guess.

Flow through doesn't seem so bad as long as the "flowing" takes place at the bottom of each other's list. I'd hate to see NWA's entire seniority list tacked on top of the list anywhere I worked.

 

[dondk]

Ah, the ole' flow-through carrot re-appears. When will we ever learn? We will never get a NWA seniority # as long as we wear the XJ or 9E uniform. But it's nice to dream I guess.

I second this... if we ever got flow-through, I would expect restriction's upon restrictions.. Although.. the flow back would be wide open and they'd all be Captain's coming back down...

 

[JohnDoe]

quote:
"So, let me get this straight - it's Jet for Jobs when ALPA demands that mainline USAirways flies 70 seat jets at PSA, but when NWA ALPA is demanding the same, it's somehow different? "


Ummmmm.......yes it is different because NWA Alpa is not demanding the same thing as UsAirways. These are not aircraft that would be placed at Mesaba or Pinnacle with a certain number of seats to be given to NW pilots. These are aircraft to be placed at mainline, per the scope they negotiated, what, almost 6 years ago now??



"A few years back mainline pilots wouldn't fly a CRJ, now they are all over it."

Thats a bunch of horesh!t and you know it. A good portion of mainline newhires (everywhere) hired prior to the furloughs came from the regionals, and to imply that they wouldn't want to "lower" themselves and fly a CRJ is absurd. If the pay and workrules are right, I'd go back to flying a 172.


"I have heard this story from several NWA guys lately.. they REALLY want any flying that will be above 55 seat aircraft in house. They will play ball to secure 70 and 90 seat aircraft."

You have heard that because I believe that is what the scope language says........anything above 55 seats (could be 50, not sure), with the exception of the avros, goes to mainline. There is no "securing" the 70 to 90 seat aircraft.....it is already secured.

 

[fam62c]

I'm not sure this will work for the NWA pilots. I've heard countless times on these boards about major airlines being able to operate small jets if the union can negotiate "competitive pay rates." First off, you would need competitive rates for the FA's, machanics, dispatchers, ramp and gate people as well as the pilots. Once you have the rates set then you would need to get "total compensation" competitive by adjusting the benefits and work-rules downward. Even if you could do all of this the CASM's for the 70 seaters would still be high because of the overhead from the rest of the operation. It's the same set of problems that makes it almost impossible for a large major to get CASM's near the level of the LCC's even if the pilot pay rates are matched.

I'm convinced that the major airline unions will never agree to do what would be necessary to fly 70-100 seat planes competitively. In the end, I think the major airline pilots will try to hold on to the best pay and work rules they can for the 100+ seaters and let the smaller planes go. I think that the most likely scenario will be totally new, seperate divisions for the smaller planes with displaced and furloughed major pilots having first choice at the jobs and the choice of flowing up as jobs become available at the "mainline." These new divisions will have pay rates appropriate to the smaller planes and simplified contracts and no DB retirement plans. We'll see what happens at NWA. NWA is more insulated from the discounters because DTW and MSP are better protected for now so the NWA pilots may have a little more leverage than everyone else, but the company still isn't making money and that can't go on forever. The next couple of years will be interesting.

 

[dondk]

quote:

You have heard that because I believe that is what the scope language says........anything above 55 seats (could be 50, not sure), with the exception of the avros, goes to mainline. There is no "securing" the 70 to 90 seat aircraft.....it is already secured.

If it is "secured" so to speak.. then why:

NWA MEC developing RJ flying proposal

July 2, 2004 – Northwest Airline's Master Executive Council today announced a proposal to address NWA management’s desire to fly 70-seat regional jets within the NWA system.

According to a memo sent to all NWA pilot, their management has proposed, “we [the pilots] relax our current job protection language to allow NWA to outsource up to 72 total 70-seat jets. While we recognize NWA may have a competitive need for aircraft of this size, the MEC will not agree to changes which allow outsourcing of that flying. NWA pilots have already ‘bought and paid for’ the rights to all flying in aircraft larger than 55 seats, and any such aircraft flown in the NWA system will be flown by NWA pilots. An exception is for 36 AVROs containing 69 seats currently flown by Mesaba Airlines, a Northwest Airlink carrier.

The NWA MEC Negotiating Committee is developing a counterproposal to provide a structure within which NWA pilots would fly 70-seat jets flown with NW code (except for the current MSA AVROs and others currently permitted by Letters of Agreement).

If you "secured" the right's why negioate? You have them (mgmt) right where you want them. I see a counterproposal as way to regain control of the regionals.

When the orginal scope was written the regionals had 36 Avro's and a bunch of Saab's. Now you have 129 RJ's, 36 Avro's and a bunch of Saab's. More RJ's, rumor a new aircraft (prop-70 seat version (under the scope limitations)) on the horizon. Dang... 9E is doing point to point service.. something I'd I thought I would never see.

I see the willingness as a wakeup call to secure that XJ and 9E don't grow to much. I find it strange though, that NWA MEC with such strong scope language is even considering relaxing it for 70 seat aircraft.

 

[JohnDoe]

dondk:
"I find it strange though, that NWA MEC with such strong scope language is even considering relaxing it for 70 seat aircraft."

I'm not quite understanding you. Where are you getting that we are relaxing the scope on 70 seaters? As a matter of fact, the statement says the exact opposite:"While we recognize NWA may have a competitive need for aircraft of this size, the MEC will not agree to changes which allow outsourcing of that flying. "

The statement also goes on to say, twice, that any 70 seaters would be flown by mainline.

The proposal for up to 72-70 seaters came from management, not the MEC.

Any negotiating going on right now with regards to the 70 seaters, as far as I can tell, are going to be about things like payrates, workrules, etc. etc..