Pinnacle and Colgan seniority lists?

[CptMurf]

I agree, I am glad it worked out this way. Don't go off point. You can't use an 11 year old contract against us. It was soon to be updated with or without you to something close to JCBA or current Mesaba+. If we had achieved our contract 3 months ago, we all still would have had something similar to JCBA for a joint contract anyway, and XJ and 9E both would have seen minimal gains with JCBA.

You know what, I see your point, and somewhat agree. 9E WAS allowed TA1 as a baseline entering the JCBA negotiations, and I can give credit for that too.

From now on, I will not claim a double digit increase for 9E with the JCBA. But it was an increase over TA1, and a larger increase than XJ. I don't know how you would qualify it then, not a windfall..."yet." But much closer to one than XJ. 9L, well, I don't know how you wouldn't consider the entire merger a windfall, the only thing they may or could lose is seniority and "career expectations." of course, we've all lost the later over the last 10 years.

 

[sinkrate]

Every one assumes the JCBA has improved work rules over the current 9e contract - and they haven't even seen the entire thing yet. From what has been released its a mixed bag for a junior to mid seniority pilot at 9e. Currently a 9e pilot can can refuse 9 extensions a year - that will be reduced to 3 a year. Currently extensions are done without respect to seniority and are spread around - now they must be done in seniority. The junior line holders are going to get hammered. Currently junior mans on a day off can be refused. The JCBA for the first time has limits on that. Insurance and medical expenses are increasing in a big way. The JCBA is concessionary from the current vacation system. Currently you can take a week of vacation and turn it into two weeks off - thats gone. With what has been announced so far the only clearly beneficial thing the JCBA does for a 9e line holder is flashy pay rates. For reserves it is a mixed bag also. They gain a day off but gave up reserve out of domicile. So far all they see is the extra day off but they'll learn the hard way. They will also bear the brunt of dual qual when it happens.

A lot of the language that affects the life of a line pilot on a daily basis looks like language from 9e's '96 contract. It kind of looks like the worst of both to me - Mesaba's involuntary assignment language for line holders and Pinnacles reserve system. It looks like 'pay for productivity' and reduced benefits to me. Gee, where have I heard that before.

Now, if some one can please explain to me in concrete terms how this new contract is going to improve things compared to the current contract, never mind the failed TA, I'm all ears. But please wait until the entire thing is out.

My point is a lot of Mesaba pilots think they just laid a great contract in the laps of the 9e pilots. It ain't so. It's very different, it rewards single pilots at the expense of the family guys, it moves involuntary assignments from the entire pilot group to the junior pilots and gives the company and the senior pilots better tools to enforce that, but in the end it ain't 'better'. Just different with more money for most.

So stop claiming you should get credit for this in the SLI. That argument is full of arrogance, not fact, and is really tiresome.

 

[Kaman]

I heard a remark from a Delta 767-400 Captain on integration/contracts...If everyone is slightly unhappy then it was a good agreement for everyone. Hopefully, our powers that be will strive for that kind of solution. If one group of the three gets really hosed, it will not bode well for the rest.

 

[CptMurf]

Every one assumes the JCBA has improved work rules over the current 9e contract - and they haven't even seen the entire thing yet. From what has been released its a mixed bag for a junior to mid seniority pilot at 9e. Currently a 9e pilot can can refuse 9 extensions a year - that will be reduced to 3 a year. Currently extensions are done without respect to seniority and are spread around - now they must be done in seniority. The junior line holders are going to get hammered. Currently junior mans on a day off can be refused. The JCBA for the first time has limits on that. Insurance and medical expenses are increasing in a big way. The JCBA is concessionary from the current vacation system. Currently you can take a week of vacation and turn it into two weeks off - thats gone. With what has been announced so far the only clearly beneficial thing the JCBA does for a 9e line holder is flashy pay rates. For reserves it is a mixed bag also. They gain a day off but gave up reserve out of domicile. So far all they see is the extra day off but they'll learn the hard way. They will also bear the brunt of dual qual when it happens.

A lot of the language that affects the life of a line pilot on a daily basis looks like language from 9e's '96 contract. It kind of looks like the worst of both to me - Mesaba's involuntary assignment language for line holders and Pinnacles reserve system. It looks like 'pay for productivity' and reduced benefits to me. Gee, where have I heard that before.

Now, if some one can please explain to me in concrete terms how this new contract is going to improve things compared to the current contract, never mind the failed TA, I'm all ears. But please wait until the entire thing is out.

My point is a lot of Mesaba pilots think they just laid a great contract in the laps of the 9e pilots. It ain't so. It's very different, it rewards single pilots at the expense of the family guys, it moves involuntary assignments from the entire pilot group to the junior pilots and gives the company and the senior pilots better tools to enforce that, but in the end it ain't 'better'. Just different with more money for most.

So stop claiming you should get credit for this in the SLI. That argument is full of arrogance, not fact, and is really tiresome.

If you believe that the TA is not up to par, or a loss in work rules than don't vote for it. The contract has to be good on its own merits, right or wrong, good or bad.

This discussion however, assumes that the TA passes. If it does, than gains from the JCBA should be considered in the SLI. If you broke the 3 companies into 2 parts (CA and FO). Then looked at those six components for gains (read windfalls). I believe the order would be...
1. 9L CAs
2. 9L FOs
3. 9E CAs
4. 9E FOs
5. XJ FOs
6. XJ CAs
There should be SOME significance to the fact that the XJ CAs have gained the least (if any) from this JCBA. To say otherwise, "is full of arrogance, not fact, and is really tiresome."

 

[suupah]

If you believe that the TA is not up to par, or a loss in work rules than don't vote for it. The contract has to be good on its own merits, right or wrong, good or bad.

This discussion however, assumes that the TA passes. If it does, than gains from the JCBA should be considered in the SLI. If you broke the 3 companies into 2 parts (CA and FO). Then looked at those six components for gains (read windfalls). I believe the order would be...
1. 9L CAs
2. 9L FOs
3. 9E CAs
4. 9E FOs
5. XJ FOs
6. XJ CAs
There should be SOME significance to the fact that the XJ CAs have gained the least (if any) from this JCBA. To say otherwise, "is full of arrogance, not fact, and is really tiresome."

Is there any precedent for considering benefits gained from a JCBA when formulating a solution for an SLI?

Aren't the two issues considered separately? Our JCBA could be negotiated away in five years, or earlier through LOA's or a bankruptcy. SLI will have to be lived with forever.

 

[CptMurf]

Is there any precedent for considering benefits gained from a JCBA when formulating a solution for an SLI?

Aren't the two issues considered separately? Our JCBA could be negotiated away in five years, or earlier through LOA's or a bankruptcy. SLI will have to be lived with forever.

I'm not sure if you weren't a negotiator that anyone would know if they was a precedent. Here's the merger section from the administrative manual.
http://www.wearealpa.org/about/adminmanual/Section_045_Merger_and_Fragmentation_Policy.pdf
Note this has been amended. Here's an overview of the changes.
http://www.alpa.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=WpYTk6T1Hs0=&tabid=3345
Note that it says negotiators, arbitrators, and mediators are free to consider other factors they deem appropriate. Pretty sure the lopsided increase in pay is going to be brought up.

 

[CptMurf]

Is there any precedent for considering benefits gained from a JCBA when formulating a solution for an SLI?

Aren't the two issues considered separately? Our JCBA could be negotiated away in five years, or earlier through LOA's or a bankruptcy. SLI will have to be lived with forever.

Now the JCBA does have to be negotiated separate to SLI. They can't even talk about it till 29 days after a contract. It has to stand on it's own merits.

The contract should only be enhanced through negotiations. The SLI should be fair from the get go. They problem is there are 3,000 definitions of fair here. Relative seniority is not fair to those that have spent the time to make their contracts/companies successful over the years. DOH is not fair to those that took advantage going to a growing company in an effort for a quick upgrade or more seniority (read QOL).

 

[efc]

Happy New Year to all and wishes for a better 2011.

Sorry for piggy backing on this thread but I'm trying to find a friend that flies at Pinnacle. His name is Angel Mercedes, last I spoke to him he was based in NY. Any help will be appreciated.

Thank You!