The Real story of pinnacle pilots

[buckwheat]

http://youtu.be/4JCi4zrsT1k

 

[SpaceShipEarth]

Wow...

 

[BUDDHA145]

Well I'm not a fan of the Fuhrer!! But he is 100% correct about ALPA!!! and for that case any union that is not in house!!! and yes I'm a horse member.... :/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jetflier]

What a mess! Are the Q400's biddable? Is the Q400 pay close to the RJ?

 

[silver02ex]

What a mess! Are the Q400's biddable? Is the Q400 pay close to the RJ?

I take about a $5/hr pay cut if I go to the Q. I can only bid Q FO, since I'm a PNCl FO. I get to see a guy at Colgan who was hired 3 year and almost 1,000 number below me upgrade to Q, and see a Mesaba guy who was hired a year after I did take a CA slot on a PNCL CRJ2 in DTW or JFK. This is what senior PNCL FO has to deal with. I'm not complaining but just stating some facts.

 

[RJLoser]

I wasn't aware XJ guys hired after some of our FO's are bidding ca. Quotas?

 

[bri5150]

I don't know silver's situation and I am trying to figure it out. Pinnacle wasn't fenced completely from the Q, right? Just the Saab. I know some Mesaba FO's that were in the jet FO group that got Q captain, so I am not sure sure why he wouldn't be able to do it if he has reasonable seniority. The DTW captain thing might be because he couldn't hold a vacancy, but someone junior to him was displaced. With 5500+tt he must have passed up on a captain position at some time. I've been at Mesaba since the beginning of '05 and only have 4250tt. Silver, is any of that correct?

 

[Salukipilot4590]

http://i52.tinypic.com/2d85njb.jpg

 

[WMUSIGPI]

I take about a $5/hr pay cut if I go to the Q. I can only bid Q FO, since I'm a PNCl FO. I get to see a guy at Colgan who was hired 3 year and almost 1,000 number below me upgrade to Q, and see a Mesaba guy who was hired a year after I did take a CA slot on a PNCL CRJ2 in DTW or JFK. This is what senior PNCL FO has to deal with. I'm not complaining but just stating some facts.

I suspect this FO easily could have bid CA in DTW or JFK also. Now if you are mad that this FO couldn't hold CA in MEM or MSP, well neither can any of the Mesaba FO's. Not holding Saab CA, you can thank your negotiators for that screwing. Same goes for your low fence numbers. Perhaps if they weren't effectively asking for a straight staple and considered the Saabs worthless PCL pilots wouldn't have been pushed around so much. For the record I don't agree with the award either, the numbering or the fencing.

 

[Flyer1015]

. Not holding Saab CA, you can thank your negotiators for that screwing. Same goes for your low fence numbers. Perhaps if they weren't effectively asking for a straight staple and considered the Saabs worthless PCL pilots wouldn't have been pushed around so much.

JH should be sued!

 

[jynxyjericho]

I love how the video says this is somehow "all the Mesaba committee fault". Mesaba did it's best to defend against a wildly unfair and bitter proposal by JH and the bucket of fail sauce he brought with him. JH is just upset the preemptive strike failed and Bloch saw through his crap.

 

[Flyer1015]

unfair and bitter proposal by JH and the bucket of fail sauce he brought with him. JH is just upset the preemptive strike failed and Bloch saw through his crap.

JH should be sued!

 

[silver02ex]

I don't know silver's situation and I am trying to figure it out. Pinnacle wasn't fenced completely from the Q, right? Just the Saab. I know some Mesaba FO's that were in the jet FO group that got Q captain, so I am not sure sure why he wouldn't be able to do it if he has reasonable seniority. The DTW captain thing might be because he couldn't hold a vacancy, but someone junior to him was displaced. With 5500+tt he must have passed up on a captain position at some time. I've been at Mesaba since the beginning of '05 and only have 4250tt. Silver, is any of that correct?

I can hold a DTW CA slot (probably the last 2-3 spot), since I was hired mid 2006. All I was trying to say was that there are Mesaba FO's that were hired in 2007 that are taking those spot and lines from me in DTW. Those 07 Mesaba CA were displaced out of the Saab, and took the DTW CA during 11-08 which I couldn't hold DTW CA even if I wanted to, but the 11-09 I could hold the last 2-3 spots.

 

[silver02ex]

I suspect this FO easily could have bid CA in DTW or JFK also. Now if you are mad that this FO couldn't hold CA in MEM or MSP, well neither can any of the Mesaba FO's. Not holding Saab CA, you can thank your negotiators for that screwing. Same goes for your low fence numbers. Perhaps if they weren't effectively asking for a straight staple and considered the Saabs worthless PCL pilots wouldn't have been pushed around so much. For the record I don't agree with the award either, the numbering or the fencing.

I'm not mad about anything, i'm just stating the fact what the senior Pinnacle FO like myself has to deal with. Unlike some pilots, what's done is done, and there's not a thing I can do about it, and just moved on.

 

[DoinTime]

I can hold a DTW CA slot (probably the last 2-3 spot), since I was hired mid 2006. All I was trying to say was that there are Mesaba FO's that were hired in 2007 that are taking those spot and lines from me in DTW. Those 07 Mesaba CA were displaced out of the Saab, and took the DTW CA during 11-08 which I couldn't hold DTW CA even if I wanted to, but the 11-09 I could hold the last 2-3 spots.

You do know that Date of Hire was not used in seniority integration, right?

 

[Flyer1015]

You do know that Date of Hire was not used in seniority integration, right?

Any chance of using DOH for integrating purposes was screwed the day the 9E committee submitted the initial seniority list that had the date of hire column as our sim date. I like how the 9E committee then claimed that we made it clear from day 1 that our class date was our DOH for integrating purposes, however, that is false. Once the Mesaba merger committee disputed it, there was the initial response from JH, and Mesaba's JM responded with their stance on our DOH issue. At that point, Bloch emailed saying, and I quote: "John, could you please clarify this."

That's within that email chain. The fact that Bloch even had to ask US to clarify the DOH position that late into the game clearly indicates to me that our group failed to represent our interests fairly. They never got the message across to the other committees, nor arbitrator Bloch, which is why Bloch asked our group for clarification well after the April 15 hearings were closed. In the following email, that is when the 9E committee took a low blow and stated that we have received additional information today about further turboprop reductions, but this committee will not be entering this information on record.

Lets face it, Bloch saw through the 9E committee's incompetency at handling the seniority list and at their low blow on the Saab reductions. Also, an outright staple proposal of Colgan was something that definitely didn't go well with Bloch, and he therefore fenced us off for the entire 5 years from Saabs. If you pretend they don't exist, then they will not exist for you.

 

[jynxyjericho]

Nice to see the information is getting out there.

 

[DoinTime]

Any chance of using DOH for integrating purposes was screwed the day the 9E committee submitted the initial seniority list that had the date of hire column as our sim date. I like how the 9E committee then claimed that we made it clear from day 1 that our class date was our DOH for integrating purposes, however, that is false. Once the Mesaba merger committee disputed it, there was the initial response from JH, and Mesaba's JM responded with their stance on our DOH issue. At that point, Bloch emailed saying, and I quote: "John, could you please clarify this."

That's within that email chain. The fact that Bloch even had to ask US to clarify the DOH position that late into the game clearly indicates to me that our group failed to represent our interests fairly. They never got the message across to the other committees, nor arbitrator Bloch, which is why Bloch asked our group for clarification well after the April 15 hearings were closed. In the following email, that is when the 9E committee took a low blow and stated that we have received additional information today about further turboprop reductions, but this committee will not be entering this information on record.

Lets face it, Bloch saw through the 9E committee's incompetency at handling the seniority list and at their low blow on the Saab reductions. Also, an outright staple proposal of Colgan was something that definitely didn't go well with Bloch, and he therefore fenced us off for the entire 5 years from Saabs. If you pretend they don't exist, then they will not exist for you.

The PCL committee did not propose DOH nor do they claim they ever had an intent to. You probably would have done better with DOH but that is not the case with the majority of the PCL list. Are you suggesting that "your way" was the right way? WTF are you talking about?

 

[Flyer1015]

The PCL committee did not propose DOH nor do they claim they ever had an intent to. You probably would have done better with DOH but that is not the case with the majority of the PCL list. Are you suggesting that "your way" was the right way? WTF are you talking about?

Of course I know the 9E committee didn't propose DOH nor did they have an intent to. Their primary interest was preserving the senior guys, and their "worse case scenario" was the CRJ-900 being a category by itself. In the end, that's exactly what happened.

My point was that the arbitrator could have used the Mesaba DOH proposal but any chance of doing that was crushed by the DOH issue/debacle. That's why even in his final award, he mentions that he has no idea how to resove the issue, and therefore does not. The cat/stat method took care of that by itself.

And make no mistake: it's not the DOH or stat/cat method that has screwed the 9E group. It's the ratios based on an extremely low staffing ratio/number, the one-way Colgan quota on the Q, and the fence on the Saab.

 

[DoinTime]

Of course I know the 9E committee didn't propose DOH nor did they have an intent to. Their primary interest was preserving the senior guys, and their "worse case scenario" was the CRJ-900 being a category by itself. In the end, that's exactly what happened.

My point was that the arbitrator could have used the Mesaba DOH proposal but any chance of doing that was crushed by the DOH issue/debacle. That's why even in his final award, he mentions that he has no idea how to resove the issue, and therefore does not. The cat/stat method took care of that by itself.

And make no mistake: it's not the DOH or stat/cat method that has screwed the 9E group. It's the ratios based on an extremely low staffing ratio/number, the one-way Colgan quota on the Q, and the fence on the Saab.

Pilot seniority hasn't been decided by DOH by an arbitrator for over two decades. If you really think Bloch was considering DOH, you are diluted. I'm sorry that the majority of PCL weren't sold out to appease you.