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/Mesaba/Colgan SLI!
- Thread starter fowingman
- Start date
- Watchers 33
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
SEVEN
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2006
- Posts
- 1,563
Not sure this announcement is about the SLI. Different announcement if you will.
SEVEN
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2006
- Posts
- 1,563
I was in a band in the mid nineties called Your Mom.
SEVEN
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2006
- Posts
- 1,563
No. Still hoping this is one big nightmare and I will wake up in a crappy outstation Motel. Paycheck still says Mesaba......for now.
This law basically was concieved after the 2001 TWA screw job by American and was passed sometime later. Regarding mergers and aqcuisitions:
"The McCaskill-Bond amendment requires "provisions shall be made for the integration of seniority lists in a fair and equitable manner" and that disputes over seniority be submitted to binding arbitration."
I don't know how some think that the LOA can be applied. This law is more restrictive and was passed after the LOA and it requires things like career expectations to be considered.
This is off the thread but personally I don't know how an arbitrator can avoid some type of fencing of aircraft. For Example: other than roughly the top 75 pilots at 9E who are already captains on the 900, what 9E pilots realistically had the career expectation to jump up to the 900 and fly it out of DTW, MSP, MEM? Similiarily, what Mesaba Saab Captain had the expectation to be a captain on the Q400 anywhere?
Even if one looks at relative seniority, a 9E 2002 hire could go ahead of a 1999 hire at Mesaba. So now the 2002 9E 200 captain gets a 900 captain slot in DTW, MSP, MEM and also gets all the perks of the new contract. That would be a windfall to the 9E guy at the expense of an XJ guy.
"The McCaskill-Bond amendment requires "provisions shall be made for the integration of seniority lists in a fair and equitable manner" and that disputes over seniority be submitted to binding arbitration."
I don't know how some think that the LOA can be applied. This law is more restrictive and was passed after the LOA and it requires things like career expectations to be considered.
This is off the thread but personally I don't know how an arbitrator can avoid some type of fencing of aircraft. For Example: other than roughly the top 75 pilots at 9E who are already captains on the 900, what 9E pilots realistically had the career expectation to jump up to the 900 and fly it out of DTW, MSP, MEM? Similiarily, what Mesaba Saab Captain had the expectation to be a captain on the Q400 anywhere?
Even if one looks at relative seniority, a 9E 2002 hire could go ahead of a 1999 hire at Mesaba. So now the 2002 9E 200 captain gets a 900 captain slot in DTW, MSP, MEM and also gets all the perks of the new contract. That would be a windfall to the 9E guy at the expense of an XJ guy.
Carl_Spackler
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2005
- Posts
- 705
Where does a 1999 hire at xj bid on the 900 in msp? In the 200 in msp for 9e the 2002 hire would be in the top 50. If it were me I would not make the move and sacrifice the qol for a few bucks an hour. It could even be considered a windfall if a mid seniority 900 guy went to the 200 and bid near the top.
I'm a 99 hire. I'm not in the top 50 in MSP, and I'm would not be in the top 1/3 of the XJ 200s. With straight RS I would be online with a June 03 (end of training) 9E pilot, which you are telling me would not even put me in the top 50 of your 200 list. In NO WAY could this be considered a windfall.....for me anyways.
SEVEN
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2006
- Posts
- 1,563
Pinnacle Dispatch : Wednesday, May 11, 2011
A Message From Doug Shockey, Chief Operating Officer
I want to give you an update on the status of our transition and let you know of a specific change to our plans related to the process for combining our turboprop fleets.
We continue to make progress; and along the way, we’re getting regular feedback, not only from the FAA but also from our mainline partners.
As you might know, Delta has adjusted its plans to wind down Saab flying a number of times, and we were hopeful Delta might reconsider. However, it’s become clear Delta will stick with its plans to eliminate Saab flying from operations by the early part of 2012. This impacts 21 of the 28 Saabs currently operated by Mesaba, which ultimately will be returned to Delta under the terms of our lease. With Delta’s decision, it just doesn’t make sense to go through the cost and manpower of moving Colgan’s aircraft to Mesaba when the vast majority of the end-state turboprop fleet is currently operating at Colgan.
We still plan to combine our turboprop fleet under one airline, and that airline will still be called Mesaba. However, rather than move the Colgan aircraft under the Mesaba operating certificate as originally planned, we will keep the Colgan aircraft (32 Saabs and 29 Q400s) under the Colgan operating certificate and add the seven Mesaba Saabs flying for US Airways. The Mesaba certificate will continue to support the Delta Saab operation as that fleet winds down, and then that certificate will be retired. In the end, the Colgan operating certificate will be used to house this combined fleet and will be renamed to Mesaba.
In addition to being easier and less expensive because of fewer aircraft to move, this change will allow for easier FAA approvals. After all, the Colgan FAA office already has approved, and is fully involved with, Colgan’s Saab and Q400 operations. The Mesaba FAA has no familiarity with the Q400. So by moving Mesaba’s Saabs to Colgan’s certificate, there is no learning curve required or additional fleet approvals needed by the Colgan FAA.
Another benefit to this change is flexibility. Because FAA approvals won’t exist to force schedule requirements, we’ll be able to move the turboprop aircraft between Mesaba and Colgan independently from the jets transitioning from Mesaba to Pinnacle. We can manage the rate of turboprop aircraft and personnel movement solely based on operational needs. From a timing perspective, we will wind down the Mesaba operation as Delta winds down its Saab operations (which we expect to be completed in the first quarter of 2012). At that point, we will move the seven US Airways Saabs over to Colgan, retire the Mesaba operating certificate (pending the completion of our jet aircraft fence transition) and assign Mesaba’s name to the Colgan operating certificate.
On the jet side, the Mesaba jets will still transfer to the Pinnacle operating certificate. The steps and timing are always subject to change as we continue getting feedback from the FAA. The main driving factor in the details and timing of our jet aircraft will be the staffing models. We have to make sure we’ve got the right numbers of crews, instructors and oversight personnel to ensure a smooth, safe transition.
It’s important to point out that we still believe there’s a good future for Saab flying. In fact, one of our 2011 goals is to develop a long-term fleet plan for the Saab, and the seven Mesaba Saabs currently flying for US Airways are a good example of this. Today’s high fuel costs reinforce the need for an economical aircraft like the Saab, and we’re working diligently to find other mainline partners that could benefit from our expertise with this aircraft.
Please note this decision does not change any of the end-state management selections that have been made.
I can’t say there won’t be more changes as we progress through this transition, but I can say that I’m extremely excited about our future. Thank you for all you’re doing to make our airline the best in our industry. We’ll continue to keep you posted as plans progress.
Doug
Thanx Kmox. If there was anyone to believe it is u.
Sux, but what's in a name. Nobody I tell knows who we are anyway. Now I can scare the crap out of them.
FOever. Seeeeeyyaaaa!!!!
kmox29
I'm open! I'm open!
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2005
- Posts
- 527
Roger that.
Posted somewhere else...
This is from an email the Colgan Merger Committee sent out to all Colgan pilots:
The Mesaba Airlines merger committee presented to Mr. Bloch an integration method of “Date of Hire.” Under the Mesaba final proposal, the new seniority list will be created in seniority order from the most senior pilot of the three groups becoming the new #1 to the most junior of the three groups who would be placed at the bottom. “Date of Hire” integration is a very straight forward integration methodology. However, in the opinion of your Merger Committee, it is better suited when integrating similar pilot groups. Colgan Air is a younger pilot group and we saw very few similarities between Colgan and Mesaba or Pinnacle that would suggest that a “Date of Hire” methodology would best suit the pilots of all three airlines.
The Pinnacle Airlines merger committee presented to Mr. Bloch an integration method of “Status and Category ratio integration.” Under the Pinnacle final proposal, the new seniority list will be created by placing each pilot into 1 of 6 possible groups; group 1 being at the top of the list and group 6 at the bottom of the list. The Pinnacle Merger Committee included all of their pilots within the first 2 groups along with a select number of Mesaba pilots; the first Colgan pilot does not show up until group 3. By delaying the placement of a Colgan pilot until group 3 it would create a list that unjustly underestimates the equities brought by the Colgan Air pilots to this merger. This methodology would place the now #1 Colgan pilot at #1904 on the new list. Your Merger Committee would never approve of a methodology that places our most senior pilot junior to Pinnacle’s most junior pilot.
The Colgan Air merger committee presented to Mr. Bloch an integration method of “Ratio integration.” Under the Colgan Air final proposal, the new seniority list will be created by constructing 33 individual blocks. Each block will be comprised by listing pilots from each airline in a ratio consistent with the number of pilots to be integrated from each pilot group. This method would guarantee that every one of the active pilots to be integrated will remain within 3% of their current, pre-merger, relative seniority position. We felt this methodology would help minimize any disruption in the quality of life of all 2807 pilots to be integrated. Every pilot would maintain the same bidding power after the merger since every pilot will have the same percentage of pilots senior and junior to them. Our intention was to present a realistic integration methodology that would ultimately be accepted by all of the pilots that will soon make up the “new” Pinnacle Airlines. We did not want to propose an outlandish methodology in the hope of having the arbitrator grant a portion of our final position. One of our goals was to have Pinnacle and Mesaba view the Colgan pilot group as an honest and straightforward group.
This is from an email the Colgan Merger Committee sent out to all Colgan pilots:
The Mesaba Airlines merger committee presented to Mr. Bloch an integration method of “Date of Hire.” Under the Mesaba final proposal, the new seniority list will be created in seniority order from the most senior pilot of the three groups becoming the new #1 to the most junior of the three groups who would be placed at the bottom. “Date of Hire” integration is a very straight forward integration methodology. However, in the opinion of your Merger Committee, it is better suited when integrating similar pilot groups. Colgan Air is a younger pilot group and we saw very few similarities between Colgan and Mesaba or Pinnacle that would suggest that a “Date of Hire” methodology would best suit the pilots of all three airlines.
The Pinnacle Airlines merger committee presented to Mr. Bloch an integration method of “Status and Category ratio integration.” Under the Pinnacle final proposal, the new seniority list will be created by placing each pilot into 1 of 6 possible groups; group 1 being at the top of the list and group 6 at the bottom of the list. The Pinnacle Merger Committee included all of their pilots within the first 2 groups along with a select number of Mesaba pilots; the first Colgan pilot does not show up until group 3. By delaying the placement of a Colgan pilot until group 3 it would create a list that unjustly underestimates the equities brought by the Colgan Air pilots to this merger. This methodology would place the now #1 Colgan pilot at #1904 on the new list. Your Merger Committee would never approve of a methodology that places our most senior pilot junior to Pinnacle’s most junior pilot.
The Colgan Air merger committee presented to Mr. Bloch an integration method of “Ratio integration.” Under the Colgan Air final proposal, the new seniority list will be created by constructing 33 individual blocks. Each block will be comprised by listing pilots from each airline in a ratio consistent with the number of pilots to be integrated from each pilot group. This method would guarantee that every one of the active pilots to be integrated will remain within 3% of their current, pre-merger, relative seniority position. We felt this methodology would help minimize any disruption in the quality of life of all 2807 pilots to be integrated. Every pilot would maintain the same bidding power after the merger since every pilot will have the same percentage of pilots senior and junior to them. Our intention was to present a realistic integration methodology that would ultimately be accepted by all of the pilots that will soon make up the “new” Pinnacle Airlines. We did not want to propose an outlandish methodology in the hope of having the arbitrator grant a portion of our final position. One of our goals was to have Pinnacle and Mesaba view the Colgan pilot group as an honest and straightforward group.
Fred Rogers
Neighbor
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2006
- Posts
- 570
That could very well be true. I didn't get on the MEC until around '04, so I'm not sure what happened in '02. I can say without a doubt, though, that no request was made during bankruptcy.
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
