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!

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
Register   Log in
As for the comment that any XJ pilot has said anything about staple-that is Total Bull. I do plenty of ready reserve and keep an ear to crew room talk and rumors (one in the same). Not one XJ person has said anything about this. I have heard DOH talked about by most of the senior people, but most everyone else just says some sort of "however fair can be worked out" is what they want. Heck even the DOH is not anti Pinnacle pilots as it would help more of them than Mesaba people. Most of the talk is fear of the squeaky wheel getting the attention as per the Pinnacle pete types out there. I now more fear the US Air scenario where they lawyer up when they do not get their staple. All I know is I have heard some bad things coming from the 9E MEC and how they are mistrusted by their own pilot group. I know most of our union pilots and trust them 100% when they tell me of what happened happened concerning emails.....

Lets stop fighting about this-its out of our hands. Hybrid....as in Delta/NWA is what is referenced
 
xjhawk said:
As for the comment that any XJ pilot has said anything about staple-that is Total Bull. I do plenty of ready reserve and keep an ear to crew room talk and rumors (one in the same). Not one XJ person has said anything about this. I have heard DOH talked about by most of the senior people, but most everyone else just says some sort of "however fair can be worked out" is what they want. Heck even the DOH is not anti Pinnacle pilots as it would help more of them than Mesaba people. Most of the talk is fear of the squeaky wheel getting the attention as per the Pinnacle pete types out there. I now more fear the US Air scenario where they lawyer up when they do not get their staple. All I know is I have heard some bad things coming from the 9E MEC and how they are mistrusted by their own pilot group. I know most of our union pilots and trust them 100% when they tell me of what happened happened concerning emails.....

Lets stop fighting about this-its out of our hands. Hybrid....as in Delta/NWA is what is referenced
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
xjhawk said:
Hybrid....as in Delta/NWA is what is referenced
Click to expand...

DAL/NWA was not a hybrid. It was a ratioed (read "relative seniority") status and category scheme. Date of hire was not considered at all. Status and Category is by far the most predominate way arbitrators settle seniority lists.


DAL MEC said:
After weeks of mediation and arbitration, the Panel produced a Ratioed Status and Category solution that resulted in an ISL Award. Update #02 will cover the construction of the ISL in more detail. A brief description of a Ratioed Status and Category list requires a discussion of:

• Aircraft Groupings and

• Staffing Ratios.

To create the Aircraft Groupings, a variety of factors can be used: technical specifications (range, payload, seats, etc.), similar missions, or some other construct. After analyzing several different groupings, the Panel ultimately focused on a 4-grouping list:

1. Widebody Captains (757 and above),

2. Narrowbody Captains,

3. Widebody First Officers, and

4. Narrowbody First Officers.

The next step in a Ratioed Status and Category list construction process is to establish proper Staffing Ratios. This ratio determines the number of pilots required to operate the aircraft and can be based on a calculation for each airframe or on the total number of block hours flown and the required staffing. There is a lengthy discussion in the Post-Hearing Statement on pages 22-54 that outlines the various discussions and analyses, but the essence of this discussion is covered in the excerpt below from page 23 of our Post-Hearing Statement:

First, the appropriate fleet and staffing ratio assumptions used for list-
building purposes should be based on the known information as of the
snapshot date, or a date nearby. In this case, the parties’ agree on this
principle, but not on the proper snapshot date, as explained below.

Second, the appropriate staffing ratios for crediting jobs in each status and
category are those based on each carrier’s current, pre-merger staffing
practices.

During the mediated sessions, the Panel sought a means to address the attrition differences between the two pilot groups. A concept referred to as “pull-out and plug-in” was developed to address this issue. Under this treatment, a sampling of former NWA pilots who are the closest to reaching the mandatory retirement age are identified and then pulled from their pre-merger list and placed off to the side while the ISL is constructed based on appropriate ratios. The extraction of these pilots allows all of the pilots below them on their pre-merger seniority list to move up in the initial list construction. The pilots who were pulled out are then plugged back into the list one position senior to the pilot who was junior to them on their respective pre-merger list.

As is typical in these proceedings, the arbitrators have little technical support to assist them in constructing seniority lists. At the conclusion of the hearings on November 17th, the Panel requested technical assistance from the two Merger Committees to assist the Panel in constructing a fair and equitable list. In this final phase, during which both committees only provided technical assistance, dozens of lists with various groupings, staffing assumptions, construction methods and pull-outs/plug-ins were produced for the Panel.

After months of work, the Delta MEC Merger Committee believes that the SLI Process Agreement provided for a fair process and that, by definition, produced an end product that is fair and equitable. The Award that was issued by the Panel on Monday, e-mailed to you and posted on the Delta MEC website is a Ratioed Status and Category list using the four aircraft groupings mentioned above. The Panel elected to utilize the “pull-out/plug-in” treatment using the 274 oldest former NWA pilots during the construction of the list. The Panel also followed a long established practice referred to as “constructive notice” which places any pilots who were hired after the date of the merger announcement on the bottom of the list in date-of-hire order. Delta had two classes of pilots hired after April 14, 2008 and Northwest did not have any classes hired after the merger was announced. We will discuss the constructive notice issue as well as the pull-out/plug-in attrition treatment in greater detail in Update #02. Also, a number of Conditions & Restrictions are a part of the Award, and we will cover these in detail in Update #03.
Click to expand...
 
However, there is still fear and anticipation that this could go the wrong way.
I, however am slightly optimistic that the right decision will be made.
Click to expand...
How do define "wrong way"?????? And how do you define a "right decision" regarding this matter at hand?
 
Flyer1015 said:
How do define "wrong way"?????? And how do you define a "right decision" regarding this matter at hand?
Click to expand...

Wrong way....Pinnacle Pete's way. Right way....some form of a fair relative seniority for all pilot groups involved.
 
I have always heard (which sounds right) the only fair outcome is that everyone feels equally shafted. We all had expectations and thoughts about where we would be in our own companies. This merger changed everything. I could become very senior or be back on reserve with the SLI. I have no idea. The nice thing is that we have and we will see more attrition. This would have been a lot tougher 2-3 years ago.
 
Here is some background on Pinnacle Pete:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/co-court-of-appeals/1419143.html

And for sheer amusement:

Legal Battle Over Fraternal Twins with Two Different Fathers

"The Twins with Two Fathers’ by Lori K. Baker, Ladies Home Journal Feb., 1996. Lauren and Megan Taylor, fraternal twins with different fathers, face separation. Lauren’s father, Peter Tonnessen, is seeking to gain custody of her. The girls mother, Brenda, claims Peter raped her the night after she had sex with her fiancé, dean."

Yeah, I can see that happening. A thoroughly disgusting human being, wrapped in the sanctimony of his own twisted religious views.
 
Inconceivable said:
Here is some background on Pinnacle Pete:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/co-court-of-appeals/1419143.html

And for sheer amusement:

Legal Battle Over Fraternal Twins with Two Different Fathers

"The Twins with Two Fathers’ by Lori K. Baker, Ladies Home Journal Feb., 1996. Lauren and Megan Taylor, fraternal twins with different fathers, face separation. Lauren’s father, Peter Tonnessen, is seeking to gain custody of her. The girls mother, Brenda, claims Peter raped her the night after she had sex with her fiancé, dean."

Yeah, I can see that happening. A thoroughly disgusting human being, wrapped in the sanctimony of his own twisted religious views.
Click to expand...
I have a feeling the mods won't like this too much....I guess it's public info.
 
Inconceivable said:
Here is some background on Pinnacle Pete:

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/co-court-of-appeals/1419143.html

And for sheer amusement:

Legal Battle Over Fraternal Twins with Two Different Fathers

"The Twins with Two Fathers’ by Lori K. Baker, Ladies Home Journal Feb., 1996. Lauren and Megan Taylor, fraternal twins with different fathers, face separation. Lauren’s father, Peter Tonnessen, is seeking to gain custody of her. The girls mother, Brenda, claims Peter raped her the night after she had sex with her fiancé, dean."

Yeah, I can see that happening. A thoroughly disgusting human being, wrapped in the sanctimony of his own twisted religious views.
Click to expand...

Geeeeeezz, Pete may be a little different, but if you were to meet him face to face or fly with him you would see that he is a pretty good guy!! I for one wouldn't be posting such information about a fellow pilot on a message board that is filled with witch hunters...Give the guy a break, he just turned 60 and will not be in the industry much longer anyway!!

I find your post very offensive!!!
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top