Pinnacle, Mesaba, Colgan get TA

[WIPilot]

We don't have contractual refusability on junior assignments. Lots of people refuse to do them and management doesn't seem to care but its not because the contract gives us that ability.

I was told incorrectly then...I'll take your word for it

 

[CptMurf]

Therein lies the problem, all this talk about "quality work rules". Work rules are used when convenient and tossed when they aren't. Grievances are basically useless when you need Wednesday off and end up with two comp days 6 weeks from now (actual example).

The problem is people have completely lost the definition of "QOL". "Quality of Life" is directly related to how much you are paid for the lack of it. I don't go to work for days off, I go to work for money.

XJ has had the luxury of Mgmt. following the contract and honoring our work rules, for the most part (there are exceptions). It will be the pilots responsibility in this merger to enforce the contract, and MAKE managment follow it. If people let them disregard the contract, it becomes status quo, and unenforceable. This is an area where we, as pilots, must educate ourselves on the contract, and not accept anything that is not legal. The more we stick together in this area, the better it will become for everyone.

 

[Crowing Rooster]

Assignments that are now called 'extensions' in the current book can be refused once a month, nine in a year. The JCBA redefines these and lumps them in with 'junior assignments.' The number of refusals is limited to three a year, vs nine currently. This also puts a hard limit on JA refusals - something that is not even in the current book. This will force pilots to husband their refusals until they really need them. Pilots will learn to keep at least one of them unused until December. This will more than likely result in a significant drop in the number of refusals. Perversly, the company will have a greater degree of certianty these assignments will be accepted than they do now.

I know exactly what is in the 'current book'.

Sink rate this is not a step back with JA's. The reason is this, if you look at the whole of the summary. The whole strategy of it is to make it so costly for the company to continue opperating like they are that they are going to change practice to save money. How so? If they JA on a day off they must pay a min day of 4 hours and pay it at 200%. Now we will have to read the language very carefully to see if there is wiggle room around the intent but this will put financial pressure to staff normally. With the health insurance per employee less for the company they may make out better to hire more pilots. In the long term you'll be lucky to use those JA refusals, just a guess.

 

[Smarta$$]

You appear to be chasing money. Look at the line awards when they come out. Most pilots say they want the money and then choose the time off. Go figure. Right now the company is offering FO's five hours of CA pay to sit in the sim for 3 hours. None of them are taking them up on it. They choose to keep their day off instead. The company is useing check airmen on their days off - because they can make them do it and a few volunteer CA's.

For pilots with families the commitments they have on their days off are substantial. Once the company forces them to break an important commitment once their entire family lives in fear of another junior man. Kid's ask 'do you really mean it this time?' It's that fear that is so corrosive to family commitments - not the actual junior man itself. And that is why the majority of pilots chose time off over pay.

Your original question is essentially - what price can we buy your family life for? Most pilots will answer it's not for sale - period. And that is why there are so many extension and junior man refusals. And why this topic is so hotly debated.

If you are going to schedule someone for 11 days off you should really mean it. TA1 ensured reserve pilots received their days off - period, could get home on their last day of work and kept them in domicile instead of a hotel in where ever. None of this indian giving stuff. They could work over time - if and only if it was their choice, not the company's.

The pay rates in this TA are an improvement - and it will no doubt be ratified. However - the current '99 book gives all pilots more control over their life than the JCBA TA. Everyone should understand what they sold and at what price.

What a Fu$&ING joke this post is. TA1 had 10 (TEN) DAYS OFF. You were guaranteed TEN. And you got paid 75 hours for 20-21 days of work.

Now, you GUARANTEED 10 days off, but with 87 hours of credit. If they don't JA you, which I went years on reserve without being JA, then you get 11 (ELEVEN) days off, and still get 75 hours pay for 19-20 days of work.

Either way, we are guaranteed 10 days off. The difference is under JCBA, we either get an additional day off to TA1 or 12 hours of pay above guarantee.

You have NO argument here at all. It is a huge improvement, unqualified. You are still trying to put lipstick on that pig that was TA1.

You couldn't convince us then that it was acceptable, and history will be no kinder to TA1.

 

[higney85]

XJ has had the luxury of Mgmt. following the contract and honoring our work rules, for the most part (there are exceptions). It will be the pilots responsibility in this merger to enforce the contract, and MAKE managment follow it. If people let them disregard the contract, it becomes status quo, and unenforceable. This is an area where we, as pilots, must educate ourselves on the contract, and not accept anything that is not legal. The more we stick together in this area, the better it will become for everyone.

Very good post, all 100% true and needed. "wheeling and dealing" may help a guy make a couple extra bucks but down the line can screw everyone, including the pilot that made the deal the previous month.

 

[RJLoser]

XJ has had the luxury of Mgmt. following the contract and honoring our work rules, for the most part (there are exceptions). It will be the pilots responsibility in this merger to enforce the contract, and MAKE managment follow it. If people let them disregard the contract, it becomes status quo, and unenforceable. This is an area where we, as pilots, must educate ourselves on the contract, and not accept anything that is not legal. The more we stick together in this area, the better it will become for everyone.

Good post. This is where 9e guys need help. Hopefully XJ will show some of the weaker spines here a little guidance!

 

[sinkrate]

Sink rate this is not a step back with JA's. The reason is this, if you look at the whole of the summary. The whole strategy of it is to make it so costly for the company to continue opperating like they are that they are going to change practice to save money. How so? If they JA on a day off they must pay a min day of 4 hours and pay it at 200%. Now we will have to read the language very carefully to see if there is wiggle room around the intent but this will put financial pressure to staff normally. With the health insurance per employee less for the company they may make out better to hire more pilots. In the long term you'll be lucky to use those JA refusals, just a guess.

You assume management cares about direct operating costs. Currently management is leaving a lot of open time and offerring 200% for volutary trip pick ups. It is going mostly to senior pilots at the highest rates. Management doesn't care - they have no plan to increase staffing over the current levels. What might that suggest about your assumption?

A thorough understanding of how the service agreement with Delta generates revenue, what expenses are pass though that they make margin on, what they are penalized for, what expenses they must bear themselves, etc would be required to answer this question. Since that document is confidential we can only look at history for a guide. That history shows that PCL has always persued a business plan of absolute minimal staffing. They have repeatedly paid revenue penalties for failure to perform and have no qualms bout paying double time. The only times they have ever done anything to change staffing levels is when they were in danger of completely losing their contract with Delta for non performance. This would indicate that a strategy that does not affect their operating performance will probably not have much effect on staffing.

 

[Crowing Rooster]

The reason they keep staff at bare minimum is to reduce operating cost, no other reason. With the last agreement it was the cheapest thing to do.

Question now is, with the new agreement, what is the least cost approach?

The reason for the latest problems, 200% for PU's, is not because they don't care about the cost. It's because even with their foresight they can see that they should wait until the merger is done, then hire more pilots if needed. Why should they spend in the short term? Train a bunch of new pilots, then furlough in the future because they hired too many to fix a short fall today.

 

[MACH-TUCK]

You appear to be chasing money. Look at the line awards when they come out. Most pilots say they want the money and then choose the time off. Go figure. Right now the company is offering FO's five hours of CA pay to sit in the sim for 3 hours. None of them are taking them up on it. They choose to keep their day off instead. The company is useing check airmen on their days off - because they can make them do it and a few volunteer CA's.

Why put yourself in a jeopardy situation if you don't have too?? From past experiences with some of the APD's in Memphis, you couldn't pay me Delta CA pay to go sit in the SIM in Memphis on my day off!!

 

[siuflightboy]

You don't buy a car for the sticker price, and I'm not buying this lemon. I'll let the real negotiating begin after I vote no. The Q payrates have a lot of room to grow. Remember, this airplane is advertised as the "Q400 Turboprofits". They are making money when this aircraft flies at 30% load factor. This is a 74 seat aircraft and should be paid accordingly. A vote for "YES" on these payrates is a vote for "NO" toward your next job at the majors. Let's not accelerate outsourcing/lowering the bar. Demand fair pay for flying large aircraft. It's as simple as that. Don't settle.

 

[bri5150]

You don't buy a car for the sticker price, and I'm not buying this lemon. I'll let the real negotiating begin after I vote no. The Q payrates have a lot of room to grow. Remember, this airplane is advertised as the "Q400 Turboprofits". They are making money when this aircraft flies at 30% load factor. This is a 74 seat aircraft and should be paid accordingly. A vote for "YES" on these payrates is a vote for "NO" toward your next job at the majors. Let's not accelerate outsourcing/lowering the bar. Demand fair pay for flying large aircraft. It's as simple as that. Don't settle.

What if the sticker price is going to go up? Would you buy the car sooner rather than later? We have more leverage now then we ever will (in my opinion).

 

[suupah]

You don't buy a car for the sticker price, and I'm not buying this lemon. I'll let the real negotiating begin after I vote no. The Q payrates have a lot of room to grow. Remember, this airplane is advertised as the "Q400 Turboprofits". They are making money when this aircraft flies at 30% load factor. This is a 74 seat aircraft and should be paid accordingly. A vote for "YES" on these payrates is a vote for "NO" toward your next job at the majors. Let's not accelerate outsourcing/lowering the bar. Demand fair pay for flying large aircraft. It's as simple as that. Don't settle.

I Whole heartedly agree with you, in priniciple. I don't think it is possible right now. The graduated increase up to 50 seat RJ pay (which was established as industry norm years ago) is really the best we can hope for right now. Considering the costing involved and the small size of the fleet at the moment.

Looking ahead, as the popularity of faster, more efficient tuboprops proliferates, the rates will become completely separate. Establishing a split rate like the one in this TA is the first step in getting that done.

This is a victory in the first battle of the TP payscale war.

 

[Captainzero1]

Good post. This is where 9e guys need help. Hopefully XJ will show some of the weaker spines here a little guidance!

But the get out of jail card for mgmnt is to do it then grieve it.

 

[xjhawk]

lets just say that half the Mesaba pilots hate this new TA and half the Pinnacle pilots hate it as well. I must say that with colgan getting such great QOL and pay increases they will most all vote yes. So that means this is a done deal as long as the union reps vote to go forward. I must also say we need to be careful from now on because the company already tried to get one past the union by writing differnt language in the TA that was not agreed upon in negotiations. I know our Reps are looking for this type of thing when they review. Just some food for thought

 

[CoATP]

Typical 9E mgmt tactic. DW says "This is what we really meant" and then writes it either differently or iwth loose language. Decision should be based on what is written. Beware of "Best Efforts" language.

 

[GRAAB HIRBOUBI]

Typical 9E mgmt tactic. DW says "This is what we really meant" and then writes it either differently or with loose language. Decision should be based on what is written. Beware of "Best Efforts" language.

I know that the XJ people are going to be reading this agreement very carefully. I have to believe that 9E has learned valuable lessons with the conditional language when it comes to extensions and JM's. There will be examples in the contract showing the real intent hopefully eliminating a lot of this "what we really meant" BS.

For myself I am becoming more uncomfortable with the 2 SAAB rates. Some of them are nearly $4.00 (5%) an hour different. I don't understand the narrower differences at the in the less years of service and the most years of service with the biggest differences in the 5 to 10 year ranges.

The fact that there is a bell curve looking pay scale has me really wondering whats going on...I mean I don't currently fly the SAAB (don't really expect to) but what else is funny like this.

The summary is very hopeful and I can support most it but the actual agreement is where the decisions will be made.

 

[WSurf]

You don't buy a car for the sticker price, and I'm not buying this lemon. I'll let the real negotiating begin after I vote no. The Q payrates have a lot of room to grow. Remember, this airplane is advertised as the "Q400 Turboprofits". They are making money when this aircraft flies at 30% load factor. This is a 74 seat aircraft and should be paid accordingly. A vote for "YES" on these payrates is a vote for "NO" toward your next job at the majors. Let's not accelerate outsourcing/lowering the bar. Demand fair pay for flying large aircraft. It's as simple as that. Don't settle.

More reason the Q's rate are important.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...icts-gallon-gas-energy-shortages-decades-end/

 

[Smarta$$]

More reason the Q's rate are important.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...icts-gallon-gas-energy-shortages-decades-end/

What a disgustingly politically slanted article. Our supply is a very small drop in a very big bucket (global oil supply and demand). It is a GLOBAL oil market. Not drilling our small oil reserves will be just as likely to cause rationing everywhere else in the world as it would here. What is the price per barrel of U.S. oil vs. the broader market?

That former oil CEO, the article, the news (not really) network all have a specific political agenda. Period.

 

[BoilerUP]

An "analyst" or energy executive (current or former) has a financial agenda in predicting the cost of oil and/or gasoline - its called a "self fulfilling prophecy" and happened a LOT in 2008. Every time some dumbass Goldman Sachs hack wrote a "research note", oil jumped $3-10/bbl.

Only a fool would think that energy prices won't increase, but the former President of Shell talking about such an imbalance of gasoline supply & demand that hearkens back to the 70s oil embargo is speaking from his posterior.

Counterpoint to idiotic C-level executive trying to bolster the value of his investments - this one supported by the current president of Exxon
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101220/ap_on_bi_ge/us_guzzling_less_gas