Unneeded pain and cost for Pinnacle Corp. Airlines

[sinkrate]

Um, no for 2 years Mesaba 900's were staffed by displacements off the Saab. There were no vacancies. I was stuck on the Saab with 11 days off while people several HUNDRED numbers junior to me were getting more days off and more pay. All because I was too senior to get displaced. Pilots of similar seniority were making 35K more per year. So the old book cost me $70,000.

Current book honors seniority. Thats the way it should be. Thats the way it works in the majority of airline world. People get bumped deal with it!!!

On this subject Mesaba's old book was a travesty. No one that is familiar with it will deny that. However, the language in the new book that was intended to correct it is just as big a screw up. It did remedy the problem of the old book but it completely hosed the junior end of the list - uneccessarily. PCL's old language worked very well for displacements - for both the entire pilot group and the Company. The subject definetly needs to be revisited - and soon before the next round of displacements.

The requirement to force secondary displacements serves no useful purpose for anyone that I can see. Why do we double the misery of the junior pilots? Just to lord seniority over them?

The requirement to post and award vacancies prior to awarding the displacement does let the senior guys that were trapped on the Saab go where they want. However - they give up displacement benefits by not assuming a junior pilots displacment rights. Then again - those benefits aren't anywhere near as good as they were in PCL's old agreement. For that reason the requirement is a six of one half dozen of the other bag for the pilot group. The screw up was Mesaba's old Agreement. The remedy in the new Agreement isn't a very good one.

Once all the 'trapped' SF3 pilots are off that AC this language should be revisited too.

 

[Flyprdu]

What's interesting is that this comes into direct conflict with a displaced pilot's reinstatement rights.

So if all vacancies have to be filled by seniority order, regardless of whoever is occupying the current position, and a displaced captain has 90 days of super seniority to reclaim his/her seat.... then what happens?

Does the contract explode?

 

[bri5150]

The requirement to force secondary displacements serves no useful purpose for anyone that I can see. Why do we double the misery of the junior pilots? Just to lord seniority over them?

Under normal circumstances, it keeps the company from adding to one base by just shrinking and displacing out of another on a regular basis. It forces the company to create vacancies in which senior people can bid on. Like I said before. It's a great provision to protect us, but it would save the company a lot of money if we can make a deal to bypass this provision because we are not in the situation it is meant to protect us from. Much like a multi-class bid. By not allowing them in our last contract, it was meant to make training extremely expensive so they wouldn't seasonally furlough. When planes are going away, it is a good reason to have a MCB, and the company credited us half the savings of doing one during the shamruptcy.

 

[sinkrate]

Under normal circumstances, it keeps the company from adding to one base by just shrinking and displacing out of another on a regular basis. It forces the company to create vacancies in which senior people can bid on. Like I said before. It's a great provision to protect us, but it would save the company a lot of money if we can make a deal to bypass this provision because we are not in the situation it is meant to protect us from. Much like a multi-class bid. By not allowing them in our last contract, it was meant to make training extremely expensive so they wouldn't seasonally furlough. When planes are going away, it is a good reason to have a MCB, and the company credited us half the savings of doing one during the shamruptcy.

You are confusing two separate issues. Secondary displacements don't protect senior pilots. Posting vacancies does, but forcing the company to double the number of displaced pilots doesn't. In 'normal times' enough FO's will bid CA vacancies and the company can staff domiciles with vacancies alone. These provisions appear to be intended to enable senior pilots to bid what they can hold when the airline is downsizing.

 

[sinkrate]

What's interesting is that this comes into direct conflict with a displaced pilot's reinstatement rights.

So if all vacancies have to be filled by seniority order, regardless of whoever is occupying the current position, and a displaced captain has 90 days of super seniority to reclaim his/her seat.... then what happens?

Does the contract explode?

I don't know about that but some heads might.

 

[bri5150]

You are confusing two separate issues. Secondary displacements don't protect senior pilots. Posting vacancies does, but forcing the company to double the number of displaced pilots doesn't. In 'normal times' enough FO's will bid CA vacancies and the company can staff domiciles with vacancies alone. These provisions appear to be intended to enable senior pilots to bid what they can hold when the airline is downsizing.

I am saying it protects the senior when the airline is doing minor realignments. I am going to oversimplify it. Let's say there are 11 captains in MEM and 9 in MSP. If the company wants 10 pilots in MSP and could live with 10 in MEM, then they could just put out a displacement and the junior pilot from MEM would get MSP instead of the senior one that may want it. If the contract says they can't just "absorb" the extra one in MSP, then the company needs to create a vacancy so the senior guy can bid over there. Maybe it's a moot point if the senior guy can take the displacement in the junior guys stead, but you see my point at least. Honestly, I am making this up on my own. I haven't talked with anyone that has the real reason that provision is in there, but that's what I came up with.

 

[Inconceivable]

I think a lot of people are starting to realize this could easily be the beginning of the FINAL downfall of Pinnacle Corp. The ultra slim profit margin we have can not cover this massive amount of retraining, month after month, lack of productivity/downtime, on top of new high pay and work rules. Something will snap. Probably soon.

...and you are seeing the reason that Phil and his CFO were shown the door by the board. Not for buying Mesaba and not for the vanity real estate project...but for FAILING to manage the merger. The debacle with the FAA certificates was the largest aspect, to be fair. Pilot costs were probably the second failed synergy.

From the beginning Team Phildo had the attitude "When it is bigger, everything will work out." They gave away too much in the pilot contract for the current economy and did not parse these details. This company has some very significant revenue problems facing it over the next three years.

 

[CptMurf]

The PCL128 Council is bringing forth a Resolution to reverse this language.

Glad you mentioned that! Just spoke to my reps to keep the current language, and I will advise others to do the same. As others have mentioned it does more good than bad, giving protections from base swells. Especially in a shrinking environment, which by the way 9E has never experienced since Express I. An LOA could give exception to help in the current situation, without losing the contractual language. In fact we could gain something by giving the temporary LOA.

 

[bri5150]

Glad you mentioned that! Just spoke to my reps to keep the current language, and I will advise others to do the same. As others have mentioned it does more good than bad, giving protections from base swells. Especially in a shrinking environment, which by the way 9E has never experienced since Express I. An LOA could give exception to help in the current situation, without losing the contractual language. In fact we could gain something by giving the temporary LOA.

Absolutely. Again, CptMurf makes the most sense on the board. An LOA is the way to go. There is no reason make a permanent change, but I strongly feel we should give something in the current situation. This place needs some kind of light at the end of the tunnel. I think this would "break the ice" with the new CEO about working together, and it wouldn't hurt us permanently.

 

[WMUSIGPI]

You are confusing two separate issues. Secondary displacements don't protect senior pilots. Posting vacancies does, but forcing the company to double the number of displaced pilots doesn't. In 'normal times' enough FO's will bid CA vacancies and the company can staff domiciles with vacancies alone. These provisions appear to be intended to enable senior pilots to bid what they can hold when the airline is downsizing.

In a way you are right. There was a VERY LOUD SIGNIFICANT b!tching by the relatively more senior Saab captains stuck on a dying fleet. Mind you ALL of these captains had numerous chances to bid to either jet and CHOSE to stay on the Saab until the tides turned. By then it was too late and they were trapped til the end, and they wanted off because of the now dying schedules and lower pay/productivity. Basically now they wanted their cake and well a bownie with it oh and how bout some ice cream all to eat at once.... This provision was thier appeasment. It allowed the most senior ones to "voluntarily" jump off the sinking ship early and basically still go where they wanted. (there are some still waiting for base closure to go to the 900 by displacement rather than vacancy, Just wait to see the DTW base closure to see what I mean). This was a pure hail to the senior, screw the junior provision....