Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Pinnacle gets TA

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
3. The contract was so horrible in the first place that it was never reasonable to expect an industry-leading contract to come out of these negotiations. You guys had an industry-average agreement and were trying to make improvements from that. The Pinnacle guys were starting from 10 steps back, and there was just no way they could catch up in a single agreement. They had to fix something as basic as block-or-better, for heaven's sake!
Keep in mind, though, that it's always the lowest paid group that always has the most bargaining leverage, not the other way around. If the cheapest guy in town refuses to do the work for crap wages anymore, his boss has no other alternatives.

We all don't know the details of your TA, but the rest of the industry is expecting absolutely nothing less than at least industry average from you guys, if not a little above average. Anything less and you're selling out, and no better than Mesa.
 
Keep in mind, though, that it's always the lowest paid group that always has the most bargaining leverage, not the other way around. If the cheapest guy in town refuses to do the work for crap wages anymore, his boss has no other alternatives.

We all don't know the details of your TA, but the rest of the industry is expecting absolutely nothing less than at least industry average from you guys, if not a little above average. Anything less and you're selling out, and no better than Mesa.

You can't say that, as PCL-128 clearly states most of the TA was settled back 3 years or more. You can't go back in and say "I changed my mind", lets RE-negotiate. The company would be screaming bargaining in bad faith and be justified.

This TA is not industry leading, not completely industry standard either. It is close, but after 4+ years at the table it HAS to be short. No one is going to get a leading or standard contract after 4 years at the table. For that to happen they would have to had been so far above standard to start with.

It is a 5 year deal from what I have heard. Which as someone else stated means it probably will last more than 5 years. Will it be signed? no one knows yet, but the argument to toss it back at the risk of another 2 years is something that group has to decide.

While it is nice to think that the lowest paid has all the control, they don't. IF the carrier can't make end meet they shed crews before increasing labor costs. Even if they increase labor cost, they still will most likely shed crews. With DCI cutting back and the potential higher crew cost I don't see the 9E guys holding control. Heck the company even wants to split the signing bonus in 2 payments, is that a sign of industry leading?
 
Wasn't it the head of ALPA that said We're taking it back!

Now ALPA is trying to tell us how hard it is to create an industry standard contract.

ALPA reminds me of the kid down the block that shouts and tells everyone how tough he is, but when you face him down he runs away. Then he starts yelling about how tough he is all over again.
 
You can't say that, as PCL-128 clearly states most of the TA was settled back 3 years or more. You can't go back in and say "I changed my mind", lets RE-negotiate. The company would be screaming bargaining in bad faith and be justified.

This TA is not industry leading, not completely industry standard either. It is close, but after 4+ years at the table it HAS to be short. No one is going to get a leading or standard contract after 4 years at the table. For that to happen they would have to had been so far above standard to start with.

It is a 5 year deal from what I have heard. Which as someone else stated means it probably will last more than 5 years. Will it be signed? no one knows yet, but the argument to toss it back at the risk of another 2 years is something that group has to decide.

While it is nice to think that the lowest paid has all the control, they don't. IF the carrier can't make end meet they shed crews before increasing labor costs. Even if they increase labor cost, they still will most likely shed crews. With DCI cutting back and the potential higher crew cost I don't see the 9E guys holding control. Heck the company even wants to split the signing bonus in 2 payments, is that a sign of industry leading?

The 9e guys are a bunch of nancies. Look to the history of NetJets if you don't think you can go from worst to first contract-wise. You pillow-biters need to grow a spine. This isn't gulfstream anymore. Your PFT days are supposed to be over.
 
Wasn't it the head of ALPA that said We're taking it back!

Now ALPA is trying to tell us how hard it is to create an industry standard contract.

ALPA reminds me of the kid down the block that shouts and tells everyone how tough he is, but when you face him down he runs away. Then he starts yelling about how tough he is all over again.


Democracy allows you to vote no. Politic your fellow pilots to vote the same... if the TA passes... whom do you blame?
 
The 9e guys are a bunch of nancies. Look to the history of NetJets if you don't think you can go from worst to first contract-wise. You pillow-biters need to grow a spine. This isn't gulfstream anymore. Your PFT days are supposed to be over.


The fractional business model is different and gave NJA better leverage...
 
If the TA isn't what you think you deserve then vote it down. Simple enough.
 
To everyone who thinks that the Obama NMB should not only allow 9E to get a new contract within a few months of being appointed but should also enable them to go from one of the bottom contract to the very top, I am wondering if you have read the paper lately. I hear that there is a bit of a recession. Wonder if that affects bargaining? Weren't the majors still hiring when ASA made their agreement?

As far as the duration, that is 5 years and in my mind probably the biggest failure of this TA. Accepting a mediocre contract during bad economic times is a lot more palatable if you will get the chance to improve it again in 2-3 years.

Turbo
 
Just got the skinny on a bunch of points to the TA. They got stuff they should have, but FAR from even industry average on a lot of rules. Didn't discuss pay rates so don't know what those look like.
 
Just found out that pay raises are only 1% and capped at industry average. To me, this is the biggest failure of the TA, and I would vote NO simply on that basis if I were still at Pinnacle. We will never improve the lives of regional pilots if they can't at least get a COLA raise.
 
From what I've heard about the TA, I really don't expect the MEC to approve it. COLA's that don't even pretend to keep up with inflation, ridiculous. Sad, the FO's would see an immediate improvement in their quality of life just based on the hourly rate going up. I wonder how long it would take to redo this contract? Would it be cost efficient to have to live with the old contract for another 2 years?
 
Probably better than living with this TA for 5(!) years. Maybe if it was only 2 or something. Even mesa's is only 2.
And if the PCL pilot group would get together on this it wouldn't last 2 years. When ASA decided to fly the safest airplanes in the industy and follow the FOM to the letter, it took 2 weeks to TA our contract. But you can't be the most on time airline and expect mgt to just reward you for your efforts.
 
Last edited:
Just found out that pay raises are only 1% and capped at industry average. To me, this is the biggest failure of the TA, and I would vote NO simply on that basis if I were still at Pinnacle. We will never improve the lives of regional pilots if they can't at least get a COLA raise.

Doesn't sound like they "took it back"...Quick...get Prater on the phone!
:rolleyes:
 
Probably better than living with this TA for 5(!) years. Maybe if it was only 2 or something. Even mesa's is only 2.
And if the PCL pilot group would get together on this it wouldn't last 2 years. When ASA decided to fly the safest airplanes in the industy and follow the FOM to the letter, it took 2 weeks to TA our contract. But you can't be the most on time airline and expect mgt to just reward you for your efforts.
It took you guys 5 years to get to that point so stop pretending like you are the greatest pilot group ever. What were you doing the previous 4 years?
 
It took you guys 5 years to get to that point so stop pretending like you are the greatest pilot group ever. What were you doing the previous 4 years?

Nothing! That is the point! NO ONE IS PRETENDING ANYTHING. The ASA pilot group was weak as he!! for years, but at that time the industry was nothing like it is today. I want offer advice on what PCL could do if they wanted to. What I'm telling you is that when ASA actually got together (over 5 years later!) it took no time to get things done. I know PCL will pass this crap. And more than anything I think that ALPA has failed if they actually let this pass. I want to hope that PCL's MEC will reject this before it gets a vote, but I doubt it. Mesa was bad enough, but "take it back?" Come on. If you take this crap then what? 5 freaking years! Only 1% increase in pay!? No flight/duty rigs? 75% deadhead pay? What??? You have 122+ 200's. What is the pay raise for them? (16 900s?). A 2 year FO at ASA makes a low wage of $35. PCL?
 
Last edited:
From what I've read, they didn't push for flight/duty rigs because it really wouldn't make that much of a difference. Pilots at Pinnacle know that generally, we're scheduled fairly tightly. Yes, there might be a 4 hour sit, but usually a 4 day trip will be scheduled near 29 hours. In the future with future rest rules, now, that might be when duty rigs would be really nice. What bugs me the most is the near lack of reserve rules. A big part of our pilot group will continue to suffer under scheduling's grip.
 
What bugs me the most is the near lack of reserve rules. A big part of our pilot group will continue to suffer under scheduling's grip.

That was also ASA's biggest problem with the old contract. There were almost no rules whatsoever, you were scheduling's slave. Reserve rules are now light years ahead of what we used to have, to the point that often some pilots who could hold a decent line actually bid reserve. That's the way it should be. DON'T THROW YOUR JUNIOR GUYS UNDER THE BUS---DON'T SETTLE!!!
 
Correction to my post.

Currently you cannot "refuse" a JA, you can be unavailable (unlimited times) for a JA less than 72 hours. The new language now allows for an outright refusal.

It was a all or none deal, 3 LOA's as a package. ASAP and FOQA were desired by the union, extension language by the company. The ASAP program has been pulled by the union a few times. Mgmt has stated they would love to see it go away. Raw FOQA data was used to fire a pilot about a year ago.

Basically all of those LOA's could be considered a failure.

Let me correct your correction: There is no contractual ability to refuse a junior assignment in the current agreement. The "right", if you wish to call it that, is contained in a mgmt. policy.

Raw FOQA data was not used. Mgmt attempted to use the FOQA software and was twarted by the VP Safety. They subsequently went to the FDR and has an engineer read the raw data stream. This incident created the negotiating position that resulted in an agreement in TA that protects pilots even if the FOQA program disappears.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top