DashRocks,
Here are my responses to you:
Originally Posted by
TheDashRocks
It seems to me that under the TA, our hourly rates are comparable to other carriers and we would also have block or better.
Okay lets look at the facts.
The following is taken from the following link and may not be current but is close enough to make my point.
Airline Pilot Pay Rates
For 50 seat jets FO:
Year 1 2 3 4 5
Air Wiscon 25.00 36.00 37.00 38.00 39.00
Eagle 24.34 32.89 35.71 37.48 38.43
ASA 23.00 34.72 37.08 38.24 39.41
Comair 22.00 34.00 35.00 37.00 38.00
Compass 23.00 34.00 36.00 37.00 38.00
Express 22.59 33.62 35.72 38.09 39.23
Pinnacle 20.73 24.39 30.09 33.28 34.31
Republic 22.95 30.88 35.52 36.62
Sky West 22.00 34.89 35.97 36.71 37.84
Trans Stat 22.29 25.46 32.33 33.46 34.57
Mesa now 21.72 29.10 32.46 33.85 34.86
Mesa 2010 22.18 29.71 33.14 34.56 35.59
Please tell me how FO pay is industry standard. Your Dash pay really is well below industry standard. Also remember we don't have any pay raises tied to inflation. Many of the carriers above have block or better and have CPI pay raises included.
For 50 seat jets captain:
Year 3 4 5 6 7
Air Wiscon 62.00 64.00 66.00 68.00 70.00
Eagle 65.00 66.93 68.94 71.03 72.44
ASA 61.80 63.73 65.68 67.72 69.81
Comair 59.00 61.00 63.00 65.00 67.00
Compass 65.00 67.00 69.00 71.00 73.00
Express 63.58 65.75 67.73 69.76 71.15
Pinnacle 58.51 60.31 62.14 63.96 65.52
Republic 63.04 65.00 66.99 69.07 71.21
Sky West 59.54 61.40 63.29 65.25 67.27
Trans Stat 58.57 60.33 62.08 63.84 65.81
Mesa now 57.68 59.42 61.17 62.95 64.67
Mesa 2010 57.68 59.42 61.17 62.95 64.67
Again tell me how our captain pay is industry standard?
I was going to look at 700 and 900 pay but it got too complicated but I still make my point with the data I have.
Think how below industry standard we will be in 5 years time with no CPI link. We need the CPI link NOW to set a precidence for all future negotiations.
Originally Posted by
TheDashRocks
I think the TA will put pilots in the driver's seat in junior available situations. The TA contains penalty clauses if JA's are not reduced by at least 30%.
I'm sorry I must have missed the language in the TA that contains the penalty clauses if JA's are not reduced by at least 30%. Can you direct me to that page in the contract?
What I did read was the following:
Page 51 para F
1. The company may reassign a pilot during the trip pairing footprint.
a. Can only be done when there are no ready reserves available or if the flight to which the pilot is to be reassigned is in danger of failing to depart within the applicable code share parner's contractual performance parameters, such as D+0 or A+14
b. If an improper reassignment occurs, the pilot will be paid premium pay for the ressignment (200%)
Then per the TA letter of clarification:
A flight that is delayed and returns beyond the scheduled duty off time at the end of a trip will not be considered to have operated outside the originally scheduled 'footprint' and will not be subject to Premium Pay
I don't see how this puts us in the driver seat with regards to JA.
It is only an improper reasignment IF there are no ready reserves OR the flight is going to be late. This puts the company in the driving seat. They define the number of ready reserves so could easily manipulate this number to avoid paying premium pay AND we would have to prove there was no ready reserves. How do we prove that? Secondly the only reason they junior assign a pilot is if a flight is going to be late. This language means the company will never pay premium pay ever again.
I still don't know how this compares to the Harris Award because all the pertinant links on the ALPA page regarding the Harris Award seem to be broken. Can anybody explain to me what the details of the Harris Award because I'd hate for this contract to over shadow the Harris Award.
Originally Posted by
TheDashRocks
But, is it realistic to expect a percentage pay raise across the board when pilots are on furlough? What should the MEC's priority be, winning a raise for pilots lucky enough to still be on the job, or trying to get everyone back to work?
ALPA should be working for both. I'd be very surprised if PBS does not put more pilots on the street. I seems to me this displacement award has been delayed because the company are wanting to see if PBS gets introduced or not. I'll bet if PBS gets introduced the displacement will be greater than if we stay with the current contract. I have no data to back that up, just a gut feel.
Originally Posted by
TheDashRocks
My understanding is that drops and swaps will be easier because the process will be more automated than it is today. I have not yet been able to get a swap/drop approved in my Mesa career.
Actually swaps and drops will not be any different under the new TA. Just because they are automated the same rules with respect to 'sufficient reserve' coverage still apply. If your Flica denials are anything like mine every one of them is due to 'insufficient reserve coverage'. How can this be with pilots on furlough? It is this way because the company has control of reserve coverage. Yes it will be more dynamic becuase the reserve coverage should change instantaneously BUT the company can make the number of reserves that triggers 'the insufficient reserve coverage' any number they like. We need language in the TA to control the level of reserves.
Like I've said in other posts it is very rare that I can straight drop a pairing that isn't commutable and swap it directly for a commutable pairing. I usuall have to massage parts of both pairings to my liking. Under the new contract I will only be able to do this after SAP and ONLY IF there is open time available. Who decides if the open time will be available. The company and we have no language controlling how long the open time should be available for swaps.
Dash I understand that you can't vote but I'm sure you voice your opinion about the contract to your colleagues and captains as I do. I just hope you fully understand the implications of what you say and have researched and understood the language correctly.
I really believe we can do better than this contract and not have to wait 2 years, actually more likely 4-6 years, for it.
My NO vote is already cast.