[QUOTE
=Mesabah;958971]This will obviously go to arbitration. If I were any of the SLI negotiators, I wouldn't want my name on anything that had to do with this integration. Also, Delta is probably going to keep the Saabs flying so there was no longer the threat of furloughing additional pilots at XJ.
9E did not buy XJ, we were purchased as a wholly owned subsidy of PNCL holdings. PNCL decided to merge us together to take advantage of the "synergy's" associated with operating common fleet types; Big difference.[/QUOTE]
How does it feel to be owned again except by pinnacle this time. It takes your ego down a notch which you guys needed.
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
It has everything to do with it; a violation of scope would be if Colgan started operating flights under the pinnacle ASAs with either Delta or NWA. There has never been an incident where Colgan was using Q400s or Saabs on NWA or Delta coded flights.
Wrong. A violation of scope would be any flying performed by Pinnacle Inc (we will leave out the inc/corp semantics this time) with pilots NOT on the Pinnacle seniority list. So if Pinnacle Inc bought Colgan, without merging the lists, it would have been a violation of scope wether or not the flew DL codeshare, CO/UA, or Aeroflot....that definition was straight from our contract....
Wrong. A violation of scope would be any flying performed by Pinnacle Inc (we will leave out the inc/corp semantics this time) with pilots NOT on the Pinnacle seniority list. So if Pinnacle Inc bought Colgan, without merging the lists, it would have been a violation of scope wether or not the flew DL codeshare, CO/UA, or Aeroflot....that definition was straight from our contract....
^^^^ What IB said is correct. Codeshare means nothing with regards to scope violation. If XJ would have bought Air Missouri, who flew for United, and transferred assets to Air Missouri, it would have been in violation of Mesaba scope, even if Air Missouri didn't fly for Delta or NWA like Mesaba does. Scope cares nothing about WHO you fly for codewise, what matters is who purchased/started you with their assets.
Wrong. A violation of scope would be any flying performed by Pinnacle Inc (we will leave out the inc/corp semantics this time) with pilots NOT on the Pinnacle seniority list. So if Pinnacle Inc bought Colgan, without merging the lists, it would have been a violation of scope wether or not the flew DL codeshare, CO/UA, or Aeroflot....that definition was straight from our contract....
What were the results from the grievance that was filed?
^^^^ What IB said is correct. Codeshare means nothing with regards to scope violation. If XJ would have bought Air Missouri, who flew for United, and transferred assets to Air Missouri, it would have been in violation of Mesaba scope, even if Air Missouri didn't fly for Delta or NWA like Mesaba does. Scope cares nothing about WHO you fly for codewise, what matters is who purchased/started you with their assets.
Uhhhhhh, none of this matters now, luckily our MECs were able to work together long enough to get us one contract and we are going to have our lists merged one way or another.
We are all going to have fun drinking and laughing about this on overnights together.
What were the results from the grievance that was filed?
re read what he wrote. it says leave out the INC/CORP semantics for the sole purpose of showing you it is not the codeshare that determins violation, it is where you get your assets/who purchases you as I said in my previous post.
^^^^ What IB said is correct. Codeshare means nothing with regards to scope violation. If XJ would have bought Air Missouri, who flew for United, and transferred assets to Air Missouri, it would have been in violation of Mesaba scope, even if Air Missouri didn't fly for Delta or NWA like Mesaba does. Scope cares nothing about WHO you fly for codewise, what matters is who purchased/started you with their assets.
Colgan has never operated as a pinnacle flight in any capacity. PNCL holdings can buy any airline it wants and operate them separately from the other companies. Your scope contract prevents Colgan or any other airline from operating pinnacle airlines INC flights ONLY. In Mesaba's case in the past we had a scope contract with MAIR that prevented them from operating larger aircraft than 20 seats IIRC.
Uhhhhhh, none of this matters now, luckily our MECs were able to work together long enough to get us one contract and we are going to have our lists merged one way or another.
We are all going to have fun drinking and laughing about this on overnights together.
I agree it doesnt matter now, but we are correcting false codeshare vs scope info.... You are buying by the way...
Similar Threads
You are buying by the way...
Linear Mode
