View Single Post
Old 12-23-2010 | 03:24 AM
  #103  
CAPIP1998
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
From: In the doghouse
Default

Originally Posted by FlyJSH
And that reality is there are some gains. Absolutely there are some gains, specifically (depending on the final language) scope.


But there are some loses.

A 74 pax TP (which according to the higher-ups at Colgan are the future) is below 50 pax JET rates. Depending on who one talks to, 50 pax jets days are numbered. So management may be looking at giving the 50 pax jets the moon knowing the 74 pax TP will replace them.

Saabs have taken a hit (except for the current Mesaba CAs). The standard pay rate (the rate every non Mesaba CA gets) is BELOW Mesaba pay rates. So Saab pilots (including the Mesaba FOs who upgrade) will be working BELOW current Mesaba rates. If the TA for Saabs was a continuation of Mesaba's rates (even including a signing bonus for current Mesaba Pilots), I would have been on board. But lowering the rate for the vast majority of 30ish seat TP pilots is a sell out.

Honestly, I don't know how I will vote. There is a lot of good in the TA, but there are several areas I am concerned about.



(again, I appreciate the work our negotiators have done and do NOT want my complaints to be a reflection on you guys)
Since you double posted your complaints, I will double post my response.

The "74 pax TP" pay is INITIALLY lower than the 50 seat RJ and will be on parity by 2014. Also, the "new" pinnacle has a contract for all their -200 flying well beyond the amendable date of this contract so I don't think its fair to say that their days are numbered.

Like everybody else, I agree that the lower Captain scale on the SF3 leaves a bitter taste, but that needs to be taken in the context of the entire deal. The lower FO rates are simply a product of splitting the "blended" rate at Mesaba.

Please don't make up your mind on how to vote based on a "preliminary" summary and some APC chatter. Talk to your reps and P2P members, go to the roadshows, and certainly READ the language when it comes out. THEN make an informed decision. If you want to vote "no" at that point I fully support you.

(See, this is why we keep ONE thread going and not several)
Reply