Let's pressure ALPA to NOT sign MESA TA

[surplus1]

Please explain, in your mind, how it is that having two or more pilot groups doing flying for "Delta", is good. I am anxious to be "educated".

Sorry, but I'm not capable of "educating" you or anyone else. Not smart enough. Let's just say that I am not eager to have my pilots on the street, so that our airplanes can be flown by Delta pilots. If we were merged, that is exactly what would happen. They would be employed and I would be unemployed. I'm sorry, but that prospect doesn't thrill me at all.

I do have a question though. Which one of the carriers that MESA flys for do you think you should be "one" with? Is it AAA, AWA or UAL? Since it is not "good" for you to be separate, maybe you would like to give those guys the job that you have? At least two of them could use that job?

I really don't want to argue about this. You are entitled to your opinions and I am entitled to mine. Obviously, they are not the same.

And judging by your response to the "Jets-For-Jobs" senario, you are completely unfamiliar with it's implementation. Unless of course you think that Mesa is somehow "entitled" to jet flying for AAA.

Again, I am not an expert and do not pretend to be. I have read the agreement between ALPA and USAirways that is known as the "jets for jobs protocol." I may not know what it "means", but I certainly know what is says. My opinions are based on the text of that agreement. Perhaps you have a different view of what it means. That's OK with me. I'm not trying to convince you of anything or to "sell" you anything. Apparently ALPA has already sold you a pig in a poke. Go ahead and believe whatever you choose.

I do not think that MESA is entitled to anything. I also do not think that U pilots are "entitled" to 50% of the jobs at any other airline, whether or not that airline has a contract with USAirways and whether or not they are furloughed. Maybe you think they are. That's OK with me too, as long as nobody tries that garbage at my airline.

No pilot group can "give" U pilots the "right" to 50% of its "new" jobs, without first abrogating the seniority of its own pilots. No pilot group can permit its own members to be furloughed, while U pilots remain on property, without abrogating the seniority of its junior pilots. I know that the "higher pay" has been changed and removed, but that part of the original was also a crock of you know what.

I'm not asking you to accept my views and will not be uspset if you don't. Different strokes for different folks. If you think that the U pilots are "entitled" to ALL the new jobs at MESA, go ahead and give it to them. While you're at it, you can give whatever you don't give them to the America West pilots and you can also give the new turboprop flying in DEN to the furloughed United pilots. Whatever turns you on.

Remember, these are just my opinions. I'm not mad at you or at any MESA pilots. I see you as "victims" and, if anything, I feel sorry for you, not angry with you.

Best of luck.

 

[Uncle Don]

Re: Re: VOTE NO for the sake of the industry!!!

Again, if Eagle had the same scope clause as is in our TA, there would be only one list for ALL of AMR

Yea, and if AMR had your TA, I'd be fly a 777 with 9 days off, and $1.15/hr per diem.

VOTE NO!!! It is a piss poor TA that is the for-runner for a RACE FOR THE BOTTOM.

I KNOW YOU GUYS CAN GET A BETTER DEAL THAN THIS! There is no reason the anyone needs to give 75% of their month to a company, and spend 25% of their time with their family. Unless they are making 1.5millon a year, and when I read your TA, you would be making about 15k a year.

FOR THE SAKE OF THE INDUSTRY.......VOTE NO!!!

 

[dickie q]

I see you as "victims" and, if anything, I feel sorry for you, not angry with you.

Best of luck.

With all due respect, I feel sorry for those of you that do not understand the value of scope. The writing is on the wall, open your eyes and take a long, hard look at the industry around you. Most obvious is Republic, but mark my words, this is only the beginning, many more will follow. I feel fortunate that we were able to secure industry leading scope in this TA without a concessionary contract, I only hope ya'll will be as fortunate. Good luck. I cast my YES vote today.

 

[nimtz]

With all due respect, I feel sorry for those of you that do not understand the value of scope. The writing is on the wall, open your eyes and take a long, hard look at the industry around you. Most obvious is Republic, but mark my words, this is only the beginning, many more will follow. I feel fortunate that we were able to secure industry leading scope in this TA without a concessionary contract, I only hope ya'll will be as fortunate. Good luck. I cast my YES vote today.

My lord you have no respect for this profession at all do you! Hey we are just glorified bus drivers after all! Give yourself another big old bonus Johnny O! You deserve it...

 

[surplus1]

With all due respect, I feel sorry for those of you that do not understand the value of scope. The writing is on the wall, open your eyes and take a long, hard look at the industry around you. Most obvious is Republic, but mark my words, this is only the beginning, many more will follow. I feel fortunate that we were able to secure industry leading scope in this TA without a concessionary contract, I only hope ya'll will be as fortunate. Good luck. I cast my YES vote today.

With equal respect to you, and speaking only for myself, it is not the value of Scope that I fail to understand. I am pleased that you obtained the Scope that you feel you need and that we should all have. However, I also think that the price you are paying to get it, is higher than it should be, i.e., too high.

Yes, I'm aware of Freedom and also aware of Republic. Yes, there will be more to follow. These alter egos have come into existence as a management reaction to ALPA policies. Since ALPA helped to create these monsters, it should be able to defend you as ALPA "clients" from the consequences. Apparently it is doing so by giving you (at MESA/Freedom) a Scope clause, at the expense of 50% of your new flying and NO significant improvement in the rest of your CBA. In the case of Republic, since CHQ's union pilots are not ALPA, it simply turns its back, while furloughed ALPA pilots get jobs at the expense of Chautauqua's pilots. One "union" taking from another union. That's rotten to the core.

ALPA's "scope policy" is the culprit in the case of Freedom and ALPA's "jets for jobs protocol" is the culprit re Republic. The whole mess is the result of dirty politics at its worst. ALL regional pilots will suffer as a direct result of these misguided ALPA policies.

To tell me that your contract is not concessionary is technical double speak and nonsense. Your contract was "concessionary" before you started negotiations and your TA merely forces you to keep it that way. Over at CHQ, it is probable they will be forced to emulate you. PDT/ALG/PSA have been coerced into to giving up their contracts; the principal reason being "jets for jobs". Jets, by the way, that they are not likely to get and that YOU will get instead. The rest of us will ultimately be "forced" to give up the gains that we have made as fallout from this. Does that give you solace? Even to the most imaginative, there is NOTHING GOOD about any of this.

With all due respect to you, if you fail to recognize what ALPA has really done, and how you and the rest of us are being "used" to further the interests of others, you are extremely naive. My friend, your new Scope is a hollow victory at best. Scope IS important, but at the grocery store it is not a substitute for food stamps.

As I said before, I feel sorry for the victims, i.e., regional pilots. We could not have a union less willing or less capable of representing our interests; nor more culpable of thrashing those interests. That's reality and it is also a sad state of affairs.

Good luck to all of us. Once this TA is ratified it won't be long before the rest of us will experience the "benefits" of your new Scope in the form of significantly reduced compensation, lost work rules, reduced benefits and NO Scope (which we already do not have). I wouldn't call that praiseworthy. Neither would I call it progress.

The difficulties at the "legacy" carriers may be the product of bad management and a poor economy. The problems of the regionals are the consequence of overt action by the labor union that allegedly represents them. Shameful and disgusting!

 

[mckpickle]

With all due respect, I feel sorry for those of you that do not understand the value of scope. The writing is on the wall, open your eyes and take a long, hard look at the industry around you. Most obvious is Republic, but mark my words, this is only the beginning, many more will follow. I feel fortunate that we were able to secure industry leading scope in this TA without a concessionary contract, I only hope ya'll will be as fortunate. Good luck. I cast my YES vote today.

I feel sorry for someone who cant see past one issue. Your like the FO who turns to the wage section of the contract and decides to vote yes or no. Your not seeing th big picture. All JO has to do is declare bankrupcy and you scope is GONE!!!. GONE. If you dont stand up to JO now he will rise like his mentor Lorenzo.

I feel sorry for guys who cant help themselves.

Good luck feeding you family on scope. we got industry leading scope oh boy look at us.........SHUT YOUR HOLE.

 

[mckpickle]

Surplus 1,

I hope you guys at CHQ have more of a spine than the Mesa guy from above. You will have our support.

 

[surplus1]

Surplus 1,

I hope you guys at CHQ have more of a spine than the Mesa guy from above. You will have our support.

Thanks for supporting the Chautauqua guys, they need all the help they can get.

For the record my airline is not CHQ. I am with Comair.

 

[dickie q]

Good luck to all of us. Once this TA is ratified it won't be long before the rest of us will experience the "benefits" of your new Scope in the form of significantly reduced compensation, lost work rules, reduced benefits and NO Scope (which we already do not have). I wouldn't call that praiseworthy. Neither would I call it progress.

Please, when your management comes to you looking for concessions, it won't be because of Mesa, it'll be because Delta pilots won't stand to be the only ones taking a pay hit.

And in response to that bozo with the bankruptcy argument, ANY section of the contract can be affected by a bankruptcy.

As a final note before I go to work, the price of Freedom is admittedly a high price, but it is a price that desperately has to be paid. I go to work and see Freedom flying everyday, my flights have been canceled because of them and I know that they are only getting bigger. With adequate scope Freedom will never happen again and our union will remain strong.
What does it matter if we hire off the street for new AAA flying or give half the new jobs to furloughed AAA pilots and let them keep thier recall rights? Nobody is jumping anyone on the senority list, they are all at the bottom.
I guess now if the pattern in pattern bargaining isn't big enough, than it's a concessionary deal......whatever. We don't have the luxury of bargaining during unprecedented growth. This enviornment is increasingly difficult not only because of the state of the industry but Freedom as well. These are realities, not just concepts, and our union, because of limited scope, has little power left. I am convinced that job transfer and furloughs would have continued without our acceptance of this TA.

Believe what you want, but when my MEC tells me that this is THE BEST deal that we can get from MESA today, I believe them. My MEC speaks for me.

Please remember also that your percieved problems are caused by JO led Mesa management and not Mesa pilots.

 

[mckpickle]

Believe what you want, but when my MEC tells me that this is THE BEST deal that we can get from MESA today, I believe them. My MEC speaks for me.

In 98 the coex neg com came to us with a TA ans said "this is the best that we can get from the company", we said go Shat in your hats and turned it down by85%.

Just admitt that you arent up for a fight.

Not only will scope not buy food is sure as heck wont buy you a bit of respect.

 

[surplus1]

Please, when your management comes to you looking for concessions, it won't be because of Mesa, it'll be because Delta pilots won't stand to be the only ones taking a pay hit.

You seem to have missed completely or chosen to ignore my repeated effort to say that I do not blame MESA pilots for anything. I say again, you did not cause these events, you are victims of them placed into this untenable position due to the actions of ALPA.

If our management comes to us for concessions, it will not be because of the Delta pilots. It will be because a number of regional carriers with whom we compete, have far lower costs due, to a large extent, to substandard collective bargaining agreements. Your TA merely adds fuel to the fire.

The Delta pilots themselves are facing that same problem, not because of what we do, but because USAirways, United an others to come, have made or will make concessions that place the cost of their compensation packages 30% or more, below the Delta pilots. That is precisely what your TA will do, as well as the contracts at Eagle, TransStates and Chautauqua.

I don't "blame" MESA pilots for this, but I fail to comprehend why you can't understand or won't acknowledge the principle.

Your reaction to Freedom is necessary and I fully understand the dilemma. What annoys me so much is the fact that Freedom would never have been created, were it not for unreasonable Scope at USAirways, placed there as a direct consequence of ALPA policy and fully supported by ALPA. Likewise, Republic has been created at Chautauqua specifically because of yet another ALPA action.

What does it matter if we hire off the street for new AAA flying or give half the new jobs to furloughed AAA pilots and let them keep thier recall rights?

That's an excellent question, but it begs the issue. I'm not opposed to your (or anyone else) hiring furloughed pilots in preference to "off the street" pilots. On the contrary, I believe that we should do just that when we can. However, that is NOT what the Jets for Jobs protocol requires. To pretend that it does, is to misrepresent the facts.

Nobody is jumping anyone on the senority list, they are all at the bottom.

Really? If that is true, then you haven't accepted the "Jets for Jobs protocol" or you don't understand it. Explain to me please how you avoid jumping seniority, when 1/2 of the new captain positions will go to furloughed pilots from another airline? Don't pilots at MESA have the right to upgrade in order of seniority? Explain to me how you are not jumping seniority. when First Officer positions in jets and with higher pay, will go to pilots from another airline, while your own First Officers are frozen into the B1900 until they make CA? Explain to me how you avoid jumping seniority, when the J4J protocol essentially exempts some pilots hired under it from furlough while at the same time permitting the furlough of MESA pilots who are "technically" senior?

If, as you try to say, the Jets for Jobs protocol does not abrogate seniority, then please explain to me WHY it cannot be implemented at any union carrier whose pilots do not first "agree" to it?

These furloughed pilots that you hire under J4J may have bigger "numbers" (lower seniority) than your own pilots on the list, but they get access to the best jobs in your airline, in preference to your own pilots. In other words, they acquire the right to "super seniority". What entitles them to that, their good looks?

I've been in this business way too long to be sold that bill of goods. The J4J protocol clearly violates the seniority rights and contracts of the receiving pilot groups. If that were NOT the case, it could be readily implemented without your consent. Why is Chautauqua going to the "trouble" of creating the alter ego Republic? Simple; because Chautauqua pilots refused to give up their rights and J4J cannot be imposed upon them without their consent because it abrogates their seniority and CBA.

In every instance where this protocol has been "accepted", that acceptance has been coerced by the ALPA in conjunction with management. It's as close to extortion as you can get without actually crossing the line and the coercion violates ALPA's Duty of Fair Representation.

If you want to cover your eyes with your hand and pretend that there is no sky because you can't see it, be my guest. Just don't try to convince me that J4J is anything less that politically motivated theft.

This enviornment is increasingly difficult not only because of the state of the industry but Freedom as well. These are realities, not just concepts, and our union, because of limited scope, has little power left. I am convinced that job transfer and furloughs would have continued without our acceptance of this TA.

You are probably correct about that and I do not argue the point. The union did not create the economic conditions that we all face and I don't pretend that they did. That doesn't change the fact that the additional problem of having to deal with an alter ego, at the same time, is the direct result of actions, past and present, orchestrated and pursued and supported by the Air Line Pilots Association as a part of its agenda. Were it not for Freedom, you would not be in the pickle that you are and you would not have to subject yourselves to the hegemony of ALPA national, the UMEC and J4J. In short, you would not be devoid of the leverage you say, and I agree, you don't have.

Believe what you want, but when my MEC tells me that this is THE BEST deal that we can get from MESA today, I believe them. My MEC speaks for me.

Spoken like a trooper! I see you have a good memory. I admire your confidence in your MEC and I have no problem at all with your voting your conscience. This may very well be the best deal that you can get under the circumstances. I don't know. What abhors me is not the recommendation of your MEC, it is how your MEC and you got put into that untenable position and by whom. That's what I'm angry about.

Please remember also that your percieved problems are caused by JO led Mesa management and not Mesa pilots.

I agree that the problems, perceived or otherwise, are not caused by Mesa pilots. I've said that repeatedly. I agree also that your mangement has taken full advantage of the opportunities it was given. What p!sses me off is the fact that your management was handed these opportunities on a silver platter, by the union you pay to represent your interests. When a robber baron is invited into your house, who is to blame if he leaves with most of your belongings? Yes, he's still a thief but, in my book, so is the person that knowingly extended the invitation. I know who that is and I'm not afraid to say it. I hope you and others can figure it out.

Best wishes.

 

[hhab]

I really doubt that most of you guyes never was familiar with our current contract and even less the proposed one.
There will always be some that do not like contract carriers, PERIOD. and some that voice their opinion without being familiar with the facts.

I hear some ague that the if the contract proposal is voted in, we would actually take a pay-cut..... Just not the case.

Some of the improvements I see when going trough the proposal is:

-Scope: from even having scope mentioned, we get Industrial leading Scope. Some might argue that the management would bankrupt the company to avoid complying, but so can they with any items in any contract. The question is: Will mng take a profitable company, bankrupt it so that all investors loose all their money just to avoid a single issue in a contract? In the end, the Judge still has to approve it.

-Succsessorship and transfere off assets: again, old contract did not mention these items. The new contract gives good protection if Mesa was to sell a part of the company or aquire another company.

Also: increase in compensation w/ increase every 18 months, cancellation pay, expenses when moving, sick leave buy back, illness protection, days off for lineholders, call me first / call me last for reserve pilots, commuter policy, among others.

Some of the above are better improvements than others, but they are all improvements. I am not going to give all #s on the above. I do not have the time. If you disagree with Mesa Pilots decition on the proposal and wants to write DW, I could care less. But do yourself a favor and be intelligent enough to first obtain info about our current contract and the proposal, learn the history of Mesa airgroup current company economy etc.

Looking over the proposal I can not find any sections that Mesa Pilots is going to be worse off the our current.
The question is: Is this proposal good enough?

Is this a good contract? No. .

Is this favorable times to negotiate a contract? No.

If this contract gets voted down, it is my guess that JO will sweeten the deal. How much will depends on the margin it gets voted down by I guess. I would be very surprised if it gets voted down by a large percentage..... A couple of % and the new proposal MIGHT will be sweetened with give dimes and nickles allthough Mesa have a history of always offering less second time.

If the % is large, Freedom will continue their expantion. The threat from them is there right now and will only increase.
Forget about being released for selfhelp ( strike ) by NMB for the next year or year and half since the company and the negotiation commite had met a agreement. How large could Freedom Airlines then grow? Does Freedom encourage other CEOs to follow same pattern? Take a guess.......

It amazes me how little pilots here values a solid scope language. Specially since I belive most pilots responding on this link have lost flying/pay in one form or another due to weak scope language.

IF this proposal get voted in, then it is because that the majority of Mesa pilots realize that we have to pay for, and wants to trade other parts of the contract with good scope. Nothing more, nothing less.... It enables us job security, enables us to merge ( if not terminate ) Freedom Airline certificate, put their pilots back to the seats they belong, and ( also very improtant ) get CCairs 100+ pilots back their jobs and being intergrated in our seniority list.

Thank you Freedom Pilots................

 

[Intruder One]

Your new T/A,yes I've seen it,you better read it again.Scope is a joke.There are many ways around it and if there wasen't JO would not be going along with it.Cancellation pay......think again you will never see it.All the conditions that have to be met first will be manipulated by Mesa on paper,it will never happen.As far as the CCAir pilots,you may be doing some at the bottom a favor but most have 10yrs. plus and they will go to 3yr. pay........GEE THANKS.I have spoken to several of them,the deal sucks for them and you.I've worked on several contracts and believe me this one (HAS NO TEETH)basically no work rules at all.Management has many was to interpret it the way it is written.......what do you think they will dPEN YOUR EYES FOLKS!Go ahead vote yes......and have almost 5yrs. to learn the hard way,I guess in reality that is the best teacher.

 

[surplus1]

I've now read what is purported to be the TA that Mesa pilots will be voting on.

The alleged "ALPA dream Scope" that some have mentioned, gives the impression that the dream may turnout to be a nightmare. A lot of carefully worded legalease that raises as many questions as it answers.

There is nothing in it detailing what will happen to the Freedom pilots. Do any of you know? I wonder why the "letter from Ferveda and Woerth" were not included for your reference?

The Definitions section was missing. The Seniority Section and the Furlough and Recall Sections were both missing.

The rest of it wasn't exactly exciting. I don't envy you guys and the decision you have to make. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.

When you go to your road shows, ask the spin doctors why the words "unless otherwise indicated" and the phrase "existing subsidiaries" are included so many times in Section 1? Ask them why the Recognition Clause doesn't list Freedom, Inc as one of the many "subsidiaries" and the only reference is to the F/W letter that is NOT included. Ask them if Mesa Air Group is really bound by this Agreement and where in the document is the specific proof of that. Ask them why it doesn't include any details of how the J4J thing will really work (I wonder if that has anything to do with why there is no Seniority section and no Furlough & Recall section?)

Maybe I'm looking at the wrong document? Would a Mesa pilot please tell me if I'm reading the wrong thing? Thanks.

 

[big dog1]

Just finish voting, A Big NO!!

 

[j41driver]

When are the results of the vote coming out?

 

[g159av8tor]

My fellow pilots,

The Mesa TA is a tricky and complex issue. What a double-edged sword--only figuratively, because it's more like a three-pronged sex toy (what's the third one for?). As I see it, you have ALPA (aka mainline pilots) versus "small jet" pilots; the government versus collective bargaining; and the economy, LCCs, RJs, Scope, JO, and more versus the piloting profession.

That's far more than my primitive brain can handle.

In my humble opinion, this TA is not how well JO will screw his labor; it's not how mainline pilots fare from scope enforcement or how deep regional piots get the shaft; it's not even about how much do we lose as professionals as Freedom continues to operate. There is so much riding on this vote--so much so that everyone who has participated in this thread has shed some light and added value to this issue demonstrating its industry-wide scope, no pun intended.

In 1978 it was dereg and in the early 80s hub-and-spoke blossomed. In the mid and late 80s, commuters become the mainline feeders that became the current regionals. Codeshare, RJs, scope...Nobody ever thought in 1991 the RJ would have such a diverse impact on our profession, but it threw a screw in my career aspirations.

This TA comes about during the dawn of a new era in airline flying, the maturing of the LCC. With this TA, all airline pilots-mostly those not directly involved today-will eventually be affected, adversely.

The big question is, what good does the Mesa TA do for the piloting profession?

Tailwinds...