The continued screwing of the Midex Pilots

[Minimaniac]

How will the Delta pilots scope clause affect RAH's contract as a Delta Connection carrier in the light of the RAH aquisitions?

At this point, there is no effect. Delta contracts specifically with Chautauqua and Shuttle America. Midwest flying is done on the Republic certificate, and is legally a separate entity from the other two airlines that Delta contracts with. Delta always has the option to not renew those contracts, but neither is open for renewal for years to come.

To keep it simple, Delta does not contract with Republic Airways Holdings (RAH). Delta only contracts with actual regional airlines. Delta cannot terminate a contract with one airline based on what another airline does. Delta cannot terminate a contract based on what the holdings company does (aside from bankruptcy). Delta can only terminate contracts based on what that specific airlines does or fails to do.

 

[Minimaniac]

Republic 20 Year Scale Captains 50-119/hr. FO 23-37/hr.

Midex 16 Year Scale Captains 82-153/hr. FO 41-100/hr.

Frontier 14 Year Scale Captains 111-156/hr. FO 37-94/hr.

If there isn't growth, or a new contract, I would hate to be a Republic FO. $37/hr as the top of scale for twenty years of service, that is incredible to me.

When is the Rev. gonna sit down with you guys and write some liveable rates? How long have you been in negotiations? Are you in mediation yet? Has there been a strike vote? Have you done anything to try to move the process forward, or are you all just interested in building time so that one of the few remaining decent airlines will hire you? I ask because, if you have 5 or 10 year FO's flying 100 passenger jets around for $37/hr., I'm not sure there's going to be too many good flying jobs left.

This industry is not the same one that I joined 20 years ago, and I realize that it will probably never come back to what it once was, but the race to the bottom has got to stop.

Flame away.

In short, 2.5 years of work, still not to mediation yet.

The RAH CBA became amendable in October of 2007. Negotiations have been ongoing since May of 2007. ALL sections were proposed. We were to the point where either agreement or impasse was reached (a requirement before mediation can begin), with the exception of compensation. Traditionally, compensation is one of the last sections the union submits here. Our compensation proposal was presented right before Bedford announced his plans to acquire F9 and YX (and Lynx and control of Mokulele). In light of the drastic changes in fleet size, types, mission, and longevity of all pilots that will eventually be covered by the master seniority list, it was decided that our compensation proposal be removed from discussion BEFORE the company had a chance to make a counter offer. If we had allowed the company to counter our offer, and we then removed our proposal entirely, the company would have a decent case before the arbitrator saying that the union was not bargaining in good faith. As it stands now, our union is reworking our proposal (significantly, it seems) based on all available information about the company's potential business plans. Until our union submits compensation again, the negotiating process will not go forward. Once the proposal is submitted, it is almost guaranteed that an impasse will be reached, which will open the door for mediation to begin.

Please stop insinuating that we are just here to build time, and that getting a new contract is not a concern. It is very important to us. Most of us care about where we work, which is why we did not go to Mesa, Colgan, Commutair, Gulfstream, or which is why we left the above mentioned companies as quickly as we could.

The four year cap on FO pay is obviously a thorn in our sides, as is the idea that a single FO scale covers all turbojet types. But, at least understand WHY we have that scale, and why those of us who were not here to vote on such a thing agreed to work for that FO pay:
1) FO's do not have the ability to bid between types or certificates at RAH. When the contract was signed there was only one certificate. In general, most people thought it would be unfair to have FO's assigned to one type and be stuck making less than another FO based soley on which week they were hired, and what airplane the company needed to staff. So, a single pay rate seemed reasonable, given that the difference was between 37 seats and 70 seats at the time. An average 50 seat FO rate acted as a blended rate.
2) The four year scale was deemed of sufficient length because, with knowledge of the company's plans, no pilot would have to remain an FO for more than 4 years. If you wanted more money, you had to upgrade. Since 2003 (when this current CBA was signed), every FO had an opportunity to upgrade to higher pay before the end of their fourth year. This was valid through 2007, the designed life of the contract, and has been valid for an additional two years. Even today, no FO has reached the end of their fourth year without an opportunity to upgrade. That WILL change here very soon, but the point is that for 6 years, the 4 year pay span worked. The 4 year pay span will change to reflect the projected time span of FO's in the new CBA.
3) 100 seat jets were not considered likely for the 2003-2007 lifespan of the contract when it was signed. And, as our union suspected, no 100 seat aircraft arrived in that time. Only now, 2 years after our contract become amendable, have 100 seat aircraft shown up.

Our union was able to predict what content was relevant for our current contract quite well. The problem is that our contract has outlived its shelf life. We have no reason to expect that our union will not deliver a contract that covers all likely career paths at this company this time around.

You can judge us for our pay when the contract was current. You can judge us on the pay we negotiate for our new contract. But be reasonable, and don't judge us on what we get paid NOW with an "expired" contract.

 

[PCL_128]

An impasse is necessary for a release, not for mediation. I can't believe you guys haven't requested a mediator after 2.5 years.

 

[StaySeated]

I would argue there are plenty of city pairs out of DEN that the E-jets can easily replace the larger airbuses and be profitable. I would expect when the dust settles, you'll see the airbus doing mostly the long-haul stuff out of DEN.

You are going to see a significant number of Emb170/175/190 operating in and out of denver. As each Emb enters the fray, an airbus is going to be deployed to fly out of a different city.

 

[Popeye0537]

deleted

 

[Popeye0537]

An impasse is necessary for a release, not for mediation. I can't believe you guys haven't requested a mediator after 2.5 years.

And I cant believe that you let your management push you around like they do. Why don't you worry about Airtran's problems first nuckle head.

 

[airlinepilot]

What is the RAH unions spin on bringing in Midwest and F9 to their seniority list? What is their proposal for integration? In the past how have other list(s) been combined?

 

[BoilerUP]

In the past how have other list(s) been combined?

Can't speak for the current EXCO's proposal (I don't work there), but I think the Arbitrator in the 2005 RAH/Shuttle America integration took career expectations of S5 pilots into account.

If I'm wrong I'm sure I'll be corrected...but IIRC Shuttle Saab captains were pay protected and stapled as a group below pilots hired on some date in mid-2004, and all Shuttle FOs were integrated something like 7:1 with CHQ FOs after that, although pay protected at CHQ rates with their S5 longevity.

 

[likeitis]

In short, 2.5 years of work, still not to mediation yet.

The RAH CBA became amendable in October of 2007. Negotiations have been ongoing since May of 2007. ALL sections were proposed. We were to the point where either agreement or impasse was reached (a requirement before mediation can begin), with the exception of compensation. Traditionally, compensation is one of the last sections the union submits here. Our compensation proposal was presented right before Bedford announced his plans to acquire F9 and YX (and Lynx and control of Mokulele). In light of the drastic changes in fleet size, types, mission, and longevity of all pilots that will eventually be covered by the master seniority list, it was decided that our compensation proposal be removed from discussion BEFORE the company had a chance to make a counter offer. If we had allowed the company to counter our offer, and we then removed our proposal entirely, the company would have a decent case before the arbitrator saying that the union was not bargaining in good faith. As it stands now, our union is reworking our proposal (significantly, it seems) based on all available information about the company's potential business plans. Until our union submits compensation again, the negotiating process will not go forward. Once the proposal is submitted, it is almost guaranteed that an impasse will be reached, which will open the door for mediation to begin.

Please stop insinuating that we are just here to build time, and that getting a new contract is not a concern. It is very important to us. Most of us care about where we work, which is why we did not go to Mesa, Colgan, Commutair, Gulfstream, or which is why we left the above mentioned companies as quickly as we could.

The four year cap on FO pay is obviously a thorn in our sides, as is the idea that a single FO scale covers all turbojet types. But, at least understand WHY we have that scale, and why those of us who were not here to vote on such a thing agreed to work for that FO pay:
1) FO's do not have the ability to bid between types or certificates at RAH. When the contract was signed there was only one certificate. In general, most people thought it would be unfair to have FO's assigned to one type and be stuck making less than another FO based soley on which week they were hired, and what airplane the company needed to staff. So, a single pay rate seemed reasonable, given that the difference was between 37 seats and 70 seats at the time. An average 50 seat FO rate acted as a blended rate.
2) The four year scale was deemed of sufficient length because, with knowledge of the company's plans, no pilot would have to remain an FO for more than 4 years. If you wanted more money, you had to upgrade. Since 2003 (when this current CBA was signed), every FO had an opportunity to upgrade to higher pay before the end of their fourth year. This was valid through 2007, the designed life of the contract, and has been valid for an additional two years. Even today, no FO has reached the end of their fourth year without an opportunity to upgrade. That WILL change here very soon, but the point is that for 6 years, the 4 year pay span worked. The 4 year pay span will change to reflect the projected time span of FO's in the new CBA.
3) 100 seat jets were not considered likely for the 2003-2007 lifespan of the contract when it was signed. And, as our union suspected, no 100 seat aircraft arrived in that time. Only now, 2 years after our contract become amendable, have 100 seat aircraft shown up.

Our union was able to predict what content was relevant for our current contract quite well. The problem is that our contract has outlived its shelf life. We have no reason to expect that our union will not deliver a contract that covers all likely career paths at this company this time around.

You can judge us for our pay when the contract was current. You can judge us on the pay we negotiate for our new contract. But be reasonable, and don't judge us on what we get paid NOW with an "expired" contract.

2.5 years and no mediation? Grow a set already. You don't have to be at an impasse. You could file for mediation the day after your contract's amendable date.

 

[Minimaniac]

2.5 years and no mediation? Grow a set already. You don't have to be at an impasse. You could file for mediation the day after your contract's amendable date.

I misspoke, and you are correct that we don't have to reach an impasse before going to mediation. However, negotiations have progressed since they began, and a mediator has not been required to keep things moving. If there is no progress, then mediation is the correct choice. But if our union has been able to make gains that they feel are sufficient, then by all means they should continue to negotiate directly with the company. It is kind of foolish to go to mediator and say:

IBT- "We need help negotiating our contract"

Mediator- "What sections do you need help with?"

IBT- "We don't know yet"

Mediator- "Are you making some progress?"

IBT- "Maybe"

Mediator- "So what exactly do you need me for?"

IBT- "We don't know."

Mediator- "What are your goals with this contract?"

IBT- "Well, we wanted..."

Mediator- "Wanted? You don't want the same thing that you used to?"

IBT- "The company changed. It bought new airlines. It is getting new types and sizes of planes. We have no idea what our needs will be."

Mediator- "So how am I supposed to fix that?"

IBT- "You can't."

Mediator- "Exactly."