Folks have asked what I think. I'm in the 'no' camp. I've written extensively about 'why' in the Mesalouge. Most of my major points have been covered by some of the posts on this board. In short, I think the current situation is better than this new TA, and the only real gain for
all of the MAG pilots is line guarantee (everything else is pandering to a specific group, most often the junior FOs on the CRJ, the best group to pander to due to their size and the ease of deceit). I think PBS is a concession, as is crew check in, and most of this TA in general (though I don't know why Mesa should be taking concessions). I think MAG needs a 2:1 duty rig, liberal trip trading rules, and a min staffing rule as a bare minimum. None of these are in this TA - hence, there's no reason to even consider working under it. I don't want to cost the company $, I want them to have an incentive to improve the QOL. If some pilots want to work on all their days off and have no QOL but line their pockets, then so be it. But for those who don't want to work 90 hours a month with 11 days off, I don't think they should have to. I don't subscribe for a moment to rules that force you to work more as a pseudonym for higher pay, which is the 'pay increase' that is being sold @ the road shows.
The below thinking will be the downfall of MAG, IMO:
Originally Posted by
UNDGUY
For those of you who think this TA vote is definately going to be a no. I have had multiple captains ask me how I'm going to vote. They have all been something like: "so your going to vote no right." So of course what do I say, of course I'm going to vote no.
Pilots like this don't even speak honestly to their own crew - they are liars, and thus worse than useless. How can you have a open conversation about the TA when the other party won't even discuss the merits of it? As long as pilots like this permeate Mesa's ranks, it's an uphill battle. The MAG pilots are being undermined by lies and deceit from their own - the cancer within.
I've spoke with many people who have gone to the road shows and participated in the conference calls and actually are going to make an educated decision, most of the people who fall into that category are going to vote yes.
The inference here is that anyone who's not voting 'yes' is uneducated. Even if we accept this premise, how can the 'uneducated' no voters benefit from the 'educated' yes voters if the educated won't share their knowledge, but rather horde it behind a lie? If one is truly educated about an issue, they owe it to 'the uneducated masses' to share their knowledge, rather than hide it and 'dumb themselves down' to the masses level.
I'm hopeful that the MAG pilots will be able to purge the cancer from within and redouble their efforts to securing the real goals of this negotiation as I understand them: increases in QOL while maintaining an industry standard compensation scheme that doesn't lose CPI value over time.