Pinnacle 40k bonus's :(

[Flyer1015]

Why have FO's only now began to be vocal about the MEC turning down pay FO pay raises in '07? It seems back then, most of the FO's were ok with it, thinking it would give the union enough leverage, given the hiring situation, to get a TA. Well, it looks like that roll of the dice came up craps. The fact that the union made a decision that back fired does not entitle anyone to a bigger slice of the signing bonus pie.... the signing bonus that was intended to make up for the lost COLA.

You are right, FOs for the most part didnt have a problem with the pay increase LOA being turned down in 2007. We all thought the increased leverage could land all of us a decent TA (yah right, what was I smoking). When the TA did come out, it was sh*tty. It was so crappy, even though the MEC passed it (voted for it 5-3), the union could not say anything about their stance on the contract TA. They were netural. Ball less! You're right, the union MEC decision back fired. Considering that the TA was sh*tty, and blowed for every FO and reserve pilot, the RIGHT thing to do would have been distribute the money more fairly.

Union MEC initially chose to do W2 method for everyone. After an uproar, they considered a 50% as W2 method and the other 50% as months of service since the amendable date. Senior guys would have still done good with this method. But the greed on the MEC prevented this from passing. And guess how the vote went? 5-3 against it. All CAs voted against the 50% W2/50% months of service since amendable date. All FOs voted for this method. Unfortunately, one of the FO reps had upgraded to Captain. Guess which way he voted.

Bottom line is there was no unity here: the CAs voted one way, and FOs voted the other way. "In unity"..... laughable at best.

 

[ultrarunner]

I'm curious, whey even go down the path of negotiating bonuses, etc...stick with Retro pay as a minimum and negotiate the best pay and work rules you can. It sounds like you're willing to give up the latter, for a few extra bucks ( for some ) up front.

That's BS. Retro should be mandated! And not to be used as leverage for anything, IMHO.

 

[dondk]

Bottom line is there was no unity here: the CAs voted one way, and FOs voted the other way. "In unity"..... laughable at best.

There has not been "unity" in the PNCL union in years. Will there ever be unity? You have 4 domiciles with vast differences in opinions and beliefs. Even where there was 3 domiciles you still had 3 diverse, almost diametrically opposed beliefs. It is not that bad with 4, but still diverse.

ASA's actions worked because they had one domicile and could rally the membership for unity, the same with Comair years ago.

Apathy at PNCL is what gives management the edge, sadly they will always have the edge.

 

[Freight Dog]

How is it a problem? Seniority should have its privileges. It's ridiculous to think that a 12-year pilot should get the same vacation benefits as a 2-year pilot.

Agreed.

Come on, B-scales are a very different issue. A B-scale sets a different rate for a 1-year pilot hired today than a 1-year pilot hired yesterday. That's not senoirity, that's second class citizenship.

We don't have "official" B-scales, but they're built in to the disparity of pay. Don't kid yourself otherwise...

Spreading around the misery is no way to build unity. It will do just the opposite. Tell the top half of the seniority list that they need to sacrifice so some of their pay can be redistributed to the bottom half of the seniority list and see how "unified" everyone is. Bad idea.

Right... so the junior guys will just take it in the shorts and we're all "in unity."


Sorry, couldn't help it.

 

[SRMairlines]

How does that make sense? A signing bonus should be loosely based on what retro pay would be, not just some arbitrary number for each month you've worked there.

Exactly.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying that the PCL TA bonus structure was fair (I haven't even really looked at it), but saying that everyone should get the same amount is ridiculous.

At Alaska, our signing bonus was EQUAL for every pilot on the senority list between May 2007 and Apr 2009. It was pro-rated for those on furlough and those who where new hires after May 2007. THAT IS A STANDARD SIGNING BONUS. RETRO BAY OR A SENORITY/LONGEVITY BASED SIGNING BONUS IS DIFFERENT. Our Bonus worked well even though it was 30K short of being retro pay.

I believe that if you are ONE PILOT group then you divide it up equally if it is a signing bonus. Retro pay is retro pay... but a bonus is a bonus. Just like the signing bonus you get from Honda to buy one of their new cars. It was $2,500 on all models a few months ago.

I suppose we should settle grievances in senority order as well now.

If you want the money distributed based on senority or wages then make it "retro" pay. I would imagine that the figure would actually be a little closer than the formula that the PCL TA had. At Alaska they were only a couple thousand apart anyways... with the FO's actually getting a higher amount. The FO pay increase was about 6.5% higher. For whatever reason... retro pay was not introduced and we got the bonus. = EQUAL since we were all Alaska pilots. The retired and furloughees got their prorated share as well.