Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : Why I'm Voting No


deltajuliet
06-24-2017, 01:47 PM
The pilot group’s call to arms of the last two years has sounded something like “Industry Standard!” While TA17 improves on the horrible, debatably worse-than-current-book tentative agreement from 2015, it still falls very, very short of our unanimous goal of Industry Standard, let alone raising the bar. Some might want a few extra dollars before punching out, but bluntly, that’s selfish. Others have resigned themselves to the idea that “this is the best we can get.” What are the five hazardous attitudes again?

I intended to put this out sooner, but life has been busy and I wanted to give every word of our negotiators’ work its full due. Now that I have, yes, there are some improvements, but many of those improvements fall short of standard, omit critical language, or allow management plenty of loophole flexibility. Other work rules are definitively worse than current book.

2-A-12 "Day" means a period of time from the hours of 0001 to 2400 based upon the local time of a pilot's domicile; provided, however, that a flight scheduled to terminate before 2400 but which is delayed and actually terminated at or before 0200 will not alter a pilot's scheduled day off.

This has hurt many pilots many times. You’re at min days off, you get delayed into the next day, and you even miss your commute home. Great. So you whip out your cell phone and call Crew Line Adjustments to get a different day off. “Sorry, look at 2-A-12, a day doesn’t mean a day.”

3-A-1-b CR900/E175 (<86,000 lbs.) Captain Pay Rates

Longevity DOS DOS+1 DOS+2 DOS+3
1 $63.00 $64.50 $66.00 $67.32
2 $65.00 $66.50 $69.00 $70.38
3 $67.00 $68.50 $71.00 $72.42
4 $69.00 $70.50 $73.00 $74.46
5 $71.00 $72.50 $75.00 $76.50
6 $73.00 $75.00 $77.00 $78.54
7 $75.00 $76.50 $79.00 $80.58
8 $77.00 $79.00 $81.00 $82.62
9 $79.00 $81.00 $84.00 $85.68
10 $81.75 $83.50 $86.00 $87.72
11 $84.12 $86.00 $89.00 $90.78
12 $86.66 $88.50 $92.00 $93.84
13 $89.26 $91.25 $94.00 $95.88
14 $91.96 $94.00 $96.00 $97.92
15 $94.43 $96.50 $98.00 $99.96
16 $96.46 $98.50 $101.00 $103.02
17 $98.53 $100.51 $103.00 $105.06
18 $100.65 $102.66 $105.50 $107.61
19 $102.82 $104.88 $108.50 $110.67
20 $105.08 $107.18 $111.00 $113.22

We’ll call these the de facto rates since they’re what most of the Captains will be receiving. These rates, like all rates, continue to leave our pilot group as the lowest paid 121 jet operators in the country. This is in no conceivable way industry standard. Some comparisons:

Year – 2 – 5 – 10 – 20

Mesa – 65 – 71 – 82 – 105
Envoy – 70 – 77 – 88 – 106
SkyWest – 70 – 78 – 91 – 119
Republic – 72 – 78 – 91 – 120
Compass – 69 – 76 – 89 – 111

3-A-1-d CR200/E145/E140/E135 Captain Pay Rates

Longevity DOS DOS+1 DOS+2 DOS+3
1 $55.93 $57.05 $57.90 $58.77
2 $57.67 $58.82 $59.71 $60.60
3 $59.41 $60.60 $61.51 $62.43
4 $61.20 $62.43 $63.36 $64.31
5 $63.01 $64.27 $65.23 $66.21
6 $64.84 $66.14 $67.13 $68.13
7 $66.61 $67.94 $68.96 $70.00
8 $68.75 $70.13 $71.18 $72.25
9 $70.86 $72.28 $73.37 $74.47
10 $73.04 $74.50 $75.62 $76.75
11 $75.15 $76.65 $77.80 $78.97
12 $77.45 $78.99 $80.18 $81.38
13 $79.74 $81.34 $82.56 $83.80
14 $82.20 $83.85 $85.11 $86.38
15 $83.85 $85.53 $86.81 $88.11
16 $85.53 $87.24 $88.54 $89.87
17 $87.24 $88.98 $90.32 $91.67
18 $88.98 $90.76 $92.12 $93.50
19 $90.76 $92.58 $93.96 $95.37
20 $92.58 $94.43 $95.84 $97.28

And God help us if we ever do more 50-seat flying.

Year – 2 – 5 – 10 – 20

Mesa – 58 – 63 – 73 – 93
TSA – 66 – 71 – 83 – 101
Envoy – 67 – 73 – 84 – 101
SkyWest – 65 – 72 – 84 – 110
Piedmont – 63 – 73 – 88 – 93
Air Whiskey – 69 – 76 – 89 – 109

In fact, our CRJ900/E175 rates are actually below the vast majority of 50-seat rates at other carriers. In what world is this considered industry standard, particularly when you consider our healthcare premiums, iPad purchases, and uniform expenses that lag behind everybody else?

3-A-1-e First Officer Pay Rates (<86,000 lbs.)

Longevity DOS DOS+1 DOS+2 DOS+3
1 $36.00 $36.00 $31.00 $31.31
2 $38.00 $38.00 $34.00 $34.34
3 $38.00 $38.00 $36.00 $36.36
4 $38.00 $38.00 $38.00 $38.38
5 $39.00 $39.00 $39.00 $39.39
6 $41.00 $41.00 $41.00 $41.41
7 $42.00 $42.00 $42.00 $42.42
8 $43.00 $43.00 $43.00 $43.43
9 $44.00 $44.00 $44.00 $44.44
10 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.45
11 $47.00 $47.00 $47.00 $47.47
12 $49.00 $49.00 $48.00 $48.48
13 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.50
14 $51.00 $51.00 $51.00 $51.51
15 $52.00 $52.00 $52.00 $52.52
16 $52.00 $52.00 $52.00 $52.52
17 $52.00 $52.00 $52.00 $52.52
18 $52.00 $52.00 $52.00 $52.52
19 $52.00 $52.00 $52.00 $52.52
20 $52.00 $52.00 $52.00 $52.52

Yes, $22.18 to $36 an hour is a big jump for first year pay and about the only part of the contract that really surprised me. It’s one facet that comes close to industry standard, but it’s one small part of a giant agreement, our first year FO’s will still be the lowest paid in the industry – 50-seat jet rates included – and we’re creating a B-scale to do it.

What is a B-scale?
BOB CRANDALL'S BOO-BOOS THE FIERY AMERICAN AIRLINES CHAIRMAN FACES LABOR STRIFE THAT COULD CREATE LONG-LASTING SCARS AT HIS COMPANY. HERE'S HOW HE WENT WRONG. - April 28, 1997 (http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1997/04/28/225523/index.htm)

“The war started back in 1983, when a growth imperative gripped major airlines as they raced to compete with low-fare startups. Crandall convinced the pilots that the airline couldn't buy planes to add routes unless new pilots could be hired at drastically reduced pay scales. It seemed like another brilliant Crandall win-win at the time. The pilots who were then at American got to keep their pay, and the new planes offered them opportunities to move more quickly from co-pilot to captain status. Meanwhile, with each new cut-rate pilot, Crandall lowered his average labor costs, all the better to finance the debt incurred in buying the new jets.

Several years later, however, this move came back to haunt him. The pilots hired at what came to be known as the ‘b-scales’ developed a sort of inferiority complex. ‘All of a sudden, there was a whole group of people working there who were extremely resentful of the fact that the person sitting next to them was making a lot more money for exactly the same job," says Larry Crawford, president of Avitas, an aviation consulting firm in Reston, Virginia. "They began to wonder what kind of scheme was coming at them next.’ …they still resented their status as second-class citizens.”

Like Frank Lorenzo’s wake of destruction or the proliferation of regional jets in the 90’s, American’s creation of the B-scale is one of the most infamous anti-pilot policies our profession has had to come back from. It hurt the career earnings of thousands and its ripple effects on the industry aren’t quantifiable.

Does any of that excerpt sound like JO or Mesa Airlines? It should. We’ve heard all the same rhetoric, and just like American Airlines, our pilot group has the power to stop it. Let’s make the right decision this time – future aviators will thank you.

THE PAY RATES IN THIS CONTRACT WOULD STILL QUANTIFIABLY LEAVE US AS THE LOWEST PAID JET OPERATORS IN THE COUNTRY. THIS ALONE WARRANTS A “NO” VOTE.

3-D When a pilot is advanced from one pay step to the next, which occurs on the anniversary of his date of hire, he shall be paid his new rate from the beginning of the pay period nearest that date.

Every single pilot hired after the 7th or after the 22nd of the month gets screwed out of half a month of a better pay rate every single year. This really needed to be fixed.

3-F Pilots flying on Company holidays shall receive 1.5 times the applicable rates set forth above. Company holidays are:
- New Year’s Day (Jan 1st)
- Labor Day
- Memorial Day
- Thanksgiving
- Independence Day (July 4th)
- Christmas (Dec. 25th)

We're missing Easter, and let’s be honest, Super Bowl Sunday (hey, Republic has it).

3-H-8 Long Layover Pay Credit
For a trip pairing that has a scheduled layover(s) longer than twentyeight (28) hours, two (2) hours of pay credit shall be added to the trip pairing credit for each such layover.

It's an improvement over current book, and while pay and hotels were in dire need of fixing, so too is scheduling. We do 3.5 hour sits to do 2 hours of flying some days, and on 30-hour overnights we're not compensated for a whole day away from home. This is a baby step in the right direction but a far cry from the Min Day language we actually need.

5-A-2-a Per Diem Amounts
DOS $1.60 plus $40/month iPad reimbursement allowance
DOS+1 $1.65 plus $40/month iPad reimbursement allowance
DOS+2 $1.70 plus $40/month iPad reimbursement allowance
DOS+3 $1.70 plus $40/month iPad reimbursement allowance

Per diem still falls below everyone else. Current rates at other non-WO shops are as follows:
Republic – $1.95 ($2.50 int’l)
ExpressJet – $1.85
SkyWest – $1.90

iPads are also provided by every other airline in the country. To sanction buying our own is to lower the bar, and the extra $40 essentially just brings the per diem rate to around $1.70 while you’re still paying for your own iPad.

5-B-11-a When the Company enters into any contract with a hotel to provide lodging to pilots for their overnights (including split duty), overnights for training and on temporary duty assignment, that hotel contract will preferably contain all or some of the following criteria:

One word negates and invalidates this entire section.

5-E-4-a Hotel suitability will be determined using a metric of “complaints per room night” using the API MyCrewCare website or similar successor software/website. The Company and the Association’s Hotel Committee will review all complaints and focus on the top five in the agreed upon ranking. On-site inspections will be arranged when needed or a replacement hotel will be sourced when both parties agree on such action.

“…a replacement hotel will be sourced when both parties agree on such action.” So the company can veto replacements in perpetuity. This section has no teeth and we’re not guaranteed anything better than we already have. Aside from Compensation and Scheduling, Hotels were in dire need of better language. It’s just not there. I still laugh when I think back to the company call where JO famously stated, “We’re within 1% of SkyWest’s hotel budget.” :rolleyes:

I’ll continue echoing a popular sentiment. “We don’t stay where nobody else stays.”

5-G-2 The Company will pay one-half (1/2) of the pilot's initial uniform cost for hat (if applicable), topcoat, jacket and two pair of trousers and one-half (1/2) of the cost for replacement of such items based upon reasonable wear.

Uniform needs to be paid for. Period. With annual stipends for upkeep.

6-A-1 When pilots are required by the Company to deadhead to or from any station, each pilot will receive 62.5% of hourly flight pay at the applicable rate according to the status of the individual pilot for the scheduled time (block-to-block) of such deadhead. For the purposes of this paragraph, deadhead time shall include surface or air transportation.

Too low, not industry standard.

7-C A week of vacation represents twenty-one (21) hours of flight pay.

Funny how a reserve calling in sick uses up 4 hours, yet vacation is only worth 3 hours a day. Our current contract is the same way and it only benefits the company.

7-G The Company shall make vacation available for all (52) weeks of the year but reserves the right to limit available vacation slots to meet the needs of the service.

More faulty language borrowed from the last contract; management can unilaterally decide to have one vacation slot over Christmas and a whole bunch in other undesirable parts of the year. No need to cancel vacation when 90% of pilots can only get it during low flying times.

7-M-2 Full (7 days) and partial weeks (4 to 6 days) are allowed.
7-M-2-a-(1) 6 days can only start on the 1st or 2nd day of the vacation period.
7-M-2-a-(2) 5 days can only start on the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd day of the vacation period.
7-M-2-a-(3) 4 days can only start on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th day of the vacation period.

This is extremely limiting and restrictive in what you can get awarded. Need 3 days off the end of a week to lead into the next, or for a wedding, or to move, or just because? You’re SOL.

11-I-1 Pilots with less than four (4) years longevity may be required to execute training agreements for their initial, upgrade or transition training. The Company will provide the pilot with a copy of the signed Training Agreement.

We cannot sanction training agreements. These are a slap in the face and no other regional does them. Instead of strong arming people to stay with financial coercion, Mesa should look at retention bonuses for every pilot like Endeavor and Air Wisconsin have. Or, you know, respectable pay rates.

12-B Days Off
12-B-1 The minimum monthly days off for Regular line holders will be eleven (11) days in a month.
12-B-2 The minimum monthly days off for Reserve line holders will be eleven (11) days in a month.

Scheduling needed a major overhaul, but we’re still at our perpetual 11 days off with nothing else to show for it.

13-C-11 Travel to training will be assigned by the company to all eligible pilots with an awarded training event. A pilot who is assigned travel will have the ability to cancel the travel for a training event no less than 5 days prior to the event. If a pilot fails to notify the Company that they do not need the provided travel the pilot will be responsible for any associated fees the Company incurs with all necessary documentation by the Company via payroll deduction.

The company can charge pilots if they don’t cancel travel? Seriously?

13-K-17 Reserve Buffers
13-K-17-a The “Reserve Buffers” for a given month will be based on pilot absences, seasonality, and any other operational needs. This number may be adjusted daily.
13-K-17-b These buffers will not be set in excess of the above defined operational requirements.
13-K-17-c The Company shall provide the Association Scheduling Committee with the monthly calculations to establish the buffers above.

“Operational needs.” The company can still do whatever they want with buffers, they just have to come up with an explanation for ALPA now. Shouldn’t be too hard. I guess we’ll never have enough pilots to drop anything again, anyway.

13-M-3 A reserve pilot placed on an “FDP-code” will be returned to reserve status and assignments will be made in accordance with Section 13-N of this Agreement.

Right now, FDP is not defined in our contract, and we’re better off that way. Because it isn’t defined, reserves are under no obligation to answer their phones when on it. Essentially, that means you’re released and you can go home. If the company really wanted to keep you on reserve following a flight, they could put you on Ready, but they don’t want to pay you. Seriously, ask your reps. To accept what the company has been trying to do for years is a major concession, and our pay rates need to go up significantly to even humor the idea.

13-N-12 Reserve Pilots, upon returning from a flight assignment, may be contacted by Crew Scheduling. At the time of such contact, Crew Scheduling will assign the pilot an additional assignment, which will include:
13-N-12-a A flight assignment. or;
13-N-12-b Ready reserve. or;
13-N-12-c Remain on FDP and available for assignment. or;
13-N-12-d Release from further duty.

Release from further duty will never, ever happen. Why would they ever release you when they can now officially put you on FDP and be flush with free reserves every day? This is a major concession.

13-N-15-d Reserve Assignments
13-N-15-d-(1) Pairings will be assigned according to the following criteria. When there are MULTIPLE pilots in a reserve bucket being considered, proceed to steps 2 and 3 to determine the most suitable reserve for the assignment.

13-N-15-d-(1)-(a) Step 1 - Reserve Buckets
- Long call reserves are utilized first in the same bucket, then to the next longer
bucket(s) (if they exist). Long Call will always be used prior to short call for trips
with a greater than 12 hour report time.
- Short call reserve in the same bucket, then to the next longer bucket(s).

13-N-15-d-(1)-(b) Step 2 - Duty and Rest Considerations
- Pilots with an RAP that begins closest to the report for duty time of the assignment.
- Pilots with an RAP that ends closest to the scheduled release from duty time.
- Any other FAR 117 cumulative or daily limitations that exceed predetermined
buffers.
13-N-15-d-(1)-(c) Once a pilot has been credited with 65 hours he will be bypassed until all other reserves in their category (bucket and position) hit 65 credit hours.

13-N-15-d-(1)-(d) Step 3 - Seniority will then be the final step used to determine the assignment.
- Call Me First (CMF): If multiple pilots are eligible for the assignment, it will be
assigned to the most senior Call Me First (CMF)
- Call Me Last (CML): If no CMF pilot is available, then to the most junior Call Me
Last (CML) in reverse seniority order.
13-N-15-d-(1)-(e) Pilots on ready reserve will be used at the discretion of the company to preserve operational integrity.

Just like TA15, Call Me First and Call Me Last are essentially gone. There goes seniority on reserve. The company can now bring everybody up to right below min guarantee then go to the next guy. Want to fly a lot? Nope. Want to fly as little as possible? Nope.

13-N-17-b-(1) The Company will offer Long Call Reserve (LCR).
Long Call Reserve lines will be equal to at least 17% of the total amount of Reserve man days in each domicile, equipment and seat per bid period. If the calculation results in a number that is not a whole number, the result will be rounded down to the nearest whole number.

Long Call Reserve sounds nice until you realize only 17% get it.

13-Q-1 When availability during a bid period is reduced due to Vacation, LOA, or other absences (Per Section 9), days off will be prorated subject to the following table:

In what world does having a week of vacation mean you just work more the rest of the month? 7 days vacation should equate to minimum 18 days off. We have the same problem now.

23-C-1-a Beginning January 1, 2018, and annually thereafter on January 1, a number equaling one percent (1%) of the total pilot group shall be able to bid from one aircraft type to another, rounded up to the next whole number.
23-C-1-a-(1) Only Captains will be allowed to transfer equipment.

1% is anemic, pathetic, and not industry standard.

23-H-1 No Equipment Commitments exist for First Officers, however, a First Officer shall only be allowed to bid into a higher paying position.

Again, not industry standard.

24-A Insurance

We get killed on this compared to every other carrier, and there are no discernable changes. Enjoy paying more than everybody else while still getting paid less than everybody else.

LOA 3 – Pilot Retention Bonus Programs

D. Effective upon Date of Signing the Company may develop pilot retention bonus programs that include:
1. All First Officers or;
2. All Captains or;
3. All Captains & First Officers

While this is distinct from JO’s unethical and unilateral new hire bonuses, these follow the same trends in allowing management to pay who they want when they want however much they want. Captains should expect to never see a dime. So much for unity, solidarity, and equity.

LOA 4 – Use of Retired Pilots to Operate Part 91 Aircraft Repositioning Flights

The “Steve Trigg Clause.” We killed Freedom because our scope was threatened, and now we’re giving it away? Every Mesa flight needs to be operated by a Mesa Airlines line pilot. Anything else is outsourcing. Beyond that, why would we openly welcome Age 67+?

And I'll just leave this here . . .


Seniority List

2016
June - 1298
Sept -1267
October - 1258
November - 1231
2017
January - 1218
February - 1202
March - 1186
April - 1190
May - 1188
June - 1167

Shrinking with new A/C deliveries starting.

For the first time in Mesa Air Group’s history, management needs a deal more than we do. Let’s capitalize. Let’s set the bar higher. Let’s stop being the butt of jokes by other pilots. Let’s bring this place up to Industry Standard and keep the profession’s positive momentum going.

I appreciate the work done by our negotiators, and I think they may be the people to finish the job. But this isn’t it. We’re not across the finish line yet. Let’s stand together, send it back together, and get this thing done together. Let’s do it right.


PegasusOne
06-24-2017, 02:47 PM
I signed a CJO with Mesa for the E175 before the TA was announced, but I have not yet started class.

This will be my first 121 job so please forgive me if my question comes off as ignorant.

I understand what a B scale is, but do you mind clarifying what the DOSwill be for future pilots considering Mesa to know what their first year hourly pay might be.

Thank you!

deltajuliet
06-24-2017, 03:26 PM
DOS means Date of Signing. If this TA passed, that would be this summer. The way it's written, anyone hired after two years from that date would start at lower pay. You would be unaffected.

That being said, I still strongly encourage you to explore other regionals. As I pointed out in the first post, you will still be starting at the bottom of regional pay even if this thing passes. If it doesn't, $22/hour. Why put yourself through it? And this needs to be said: I've flown with countless new hires who came based on things Marcin told them that weren't true and never came true. If you're coming for the same reason, research and consider this decision very carefully.


squawkoff
06-24-2017, 03:27 PM
Great analysis. I read the TA from cover to cover and thought I had pretty much understood it but your analysis brought so much more to light. I've been a no from the beginning but now I'm a strong no.

Reference the popular comment about hotels: can't remember where we were but we made it out to the hotel pickup area and a driver from a pretty nice hotel (can't remember the name) got out thinking we were his crew. Right behind us was a Skywest or Republic crew that got in the van. We were waiting for a Laquinta van. I hoped they would be long out of sight before the laquinta van pulled up. Nope. Here came the worn out van to pick us up. It was rather embarrassing. Felt like I was getting on the short bus when I was in school.

20sx
06-24-2017, 06:33 PM
Wow, nice job deltajuliet. Very thorough. We'll see if a pay increase that is still below average is enough to sway pilots to look past the inadequacy of this TA.

AZPilotMike
06-25-2017, 05:31 AM
Great write up and much appreciated. Even though it doesn't directly effect me, I feel like all the regionals are linked in terms of pilot benefits.

I hope this doesnt pass and you all get the contract you truly deserve.

calmwinds
06-25-2017, 06:12 AM
DOS means Date of Signing. If this TA passed, that would be this summer. The way it's written, anyone hired after two years from that date would start at lower pay. You would be unaffected.

That being said, I still strongly encourage you to explore other regionals. As I pointed out in the first post, you will still be starting at the bottom of regional pay even if this thing passes. If it doesn't, $22/hour. Why put yourself through it? And this needs to be said: I've flown with countless new hires who came based on things Marcin told them that weren't true and never came true. If you're coming for the same reason, research and consider this decision very carefully.

There are valid reasons for wanting to fly the Ejet for Mesa. First, a pilot might live in the Houston area. Second, a pilot may want to build Ejet time quickly to progress their career. Either of these are valid reasons to sign with Mesa on the Ejet. With either of these reasons, you may not care about the pay as much - except $36 is better than $22.

FlyyGuyy
06-25-2017, 06:36 AM
There are valid reasons for wanting to fly the Ejet for Mesa. First, a pilot might live in the Houston area. Second, a pilot may want to build Ejet time quickly to progress their career. Either of these are valid reasons to sign with Mesa on the Ejet. With either of these reasons, you may not care about the pay as much - except $36 is better than $22.

Probably the dumbest excuse I have ever heard for deliberately going to the lowest paid carrier out there. Skywest, compass, envoy and republic also fly the ejet. Second there is no quantifiable days saying that the ejet magically makes you get hired elsewhere faster.

calmwinds
06-25-2017, 06:50 AM
Probably the dumbest excuse I have ever heard for deliberately going to the lowest paid carrier out there. Skywest, compass, envoy and republic also fly the ejet. Second there is no quantifiable days saying that the ejet magically makes you get hired elsewhere faster.

Which of these fly an Ejet out of Houston? Zero. Zip. Nada. Go with SW on the Ejet to sit on reserve in Chicago and take 3 years to upgrade to sit on reserve again. Unless you go with SW on the Ejet for a west coast base, then you sit on reserve in Chicago for months, to transfer to the West coast, to sit on reserve for many more months, to wait years to upgrade.

Pretty rare to get the Ejet on Envoy unless you are in your 50's. Republic doesn't just give you the Ejet either.

While I agree there is nothing magical about the Ejet getting you hired on with a major, there are pilots that want to fly it. Most majors simply want the 121 time and a decent internal reference.

MountainWaves
06-25-2017, 07:02 AM
While I agree there is nothing magical about the Ejet getting you hired on with a major, there are pilots that want to fly it.

But...But, they're so SHINY!!

FlyyGuyy
06-25-2017, 07:07 AM
Which of these fly an Ejet out of Houston? Zero. Zip. Nada. Go with SW on the Ejet to sit on reserve in Chicago and take 3 years to upgrade to sit on reserve again. Unless you go with SW on the Ejet for a west coast base, then you sit on reserve in Chicago for months, to transfer to the West coast, to sit on reserve for many more months, to wait years to upgrade.

Pretty rare to get the Ejet on Envoy unless you are in your 50's. Republic doesn't just give you the Ejet either.

While I agree there is nothing magical about the Ejet getting you hired on with a major, there are pilots that want to fly it. Most majors simply want the 121 time and a decent internal reference.

Republic only has the ejet.... So...

ACEssXfer
06-25-2017, 07:22 AM
Is it a typo on the FO scale that the pay goes DOWN at DOS+2 for the first 3 years of the scale?

Sumtinwong
06-25-2017, 07:24 AM
Is it a typo on the FO scale that the pay goes DOWN at DOS+2 for the first 3 years of the scale?

No it is not. They want poverty wages back when they think the shortage is over.

calmwinds
06-25-2017, 07:24 AM
Republic only has the ejet.... So...

Yep, go with Republic if you like their bases, or their upgrade times. I never said anyone should vote for this - there are plenty of reasons not to. I just said there are reasons to fly for Mesa if you want the bases or the Ejet time. No one will get you Ejet time faster at the lowest quality of life.

ACEssXfer
06-25-2017, 07:27 AM
No it is not. They want poverty wages back when they think the shortage is over.

LOL.......

Purpleanga
06-25-2017, 08:33 AM
Yep, go with Republic if you like their bases, or their upgrade times. I never said anyone should vote for this - there are plenty of reasons not to. I just said there are reasons to fly for Mesa if you want the bases or the Ejet time. No one will get you Ejet time faster at the lowest quality of life.

I hope mesa pilots don't cry themselves to sleep at the comfort inn airport saying at least they fly a 175.

Navmode
06-25-2017, 09:00 AM
FAR 117 actually prevents them from putting you on airport reserve after a flying segment. However they can (legally per 117) keep you on duty if there is a possibility of more flying within your remaining FDP availability.

It would however be a big concession to allow them to immortalize the "FDP" placeholder without getting something for it.

There are valid reasons for wanting to fly the Ejet for Mesa. First, a pilot might live in the Houston area. Second, a pilot may want to build Ejet time quickly to progress their career. Either of these are valid reasons to sign with Mesa on the Ejet. With either of these reasons, you may not care about the pay as much - except $36 is better than $22.

The Houston people might love saying "EJET" for some reason, but an rj is an rj. Don't delude yourself into thinking that any legit carrier you dream of flying for cares if the engines are under the wing or whether or not it has auto brakes.

MagPBS
06-25-2017, 11:54 AM
FAR 117 actually prevents them from putting you on airport reserve after a flying segment. However they can (legally per 117) keep you on duty if there is a possibility of more flying within your remaining FDP availability.
s.

No it doesn't. (The ready comment)

AZPilotMike
06-25-2017, 12:17 PM
FAR 117 actually prevents them from putting you on airport reserve after a flying segment. However they can (legally per 117) keep you on duty if there is a possibility of more flying within your remaining FDP availability.

It would however be a big concession to allow them to immortalize the "FDP" placeholder without getting something for it.



The Houston people might love saying "EJET" for some reason, but an rj is an rj. Don't delude yourself into thinking that any legit carrier you dream of flying for cares if the engines are under the wing or whether or not it has auto brakes.
No auto brakes at Envoy...lol and its the 175 "Heavy".

calmwinds
06-25-2017, 03:57 PM
FAR 117 actually prevents them from putting you on airport reserve after a flying segment. However they can (legally per 117) keep you on duty if there is a possibility of more flying within your remaining FDP availability.

It would however be a big concession to allow them to immortalize the "FDP" placeholder without getting something for it.



The Houston people might love saying "EJET" for some reason, but an rj is an rj. Don't delude yourself into thinking that any legit carrier you dream of flying for cares if the engines are under the wing or whether or not it has auto brakes.

No major carrier cares what you fly when they hire you. It is hours in seat and who you know.

Most IAH Mesa pilots don't care about the EJet either, but it is UAL that cares about the EJet. If you live in a UAL base, you better want to fly the EJet. It doesn't matter if it is ORD, IAH, or SFO.

My bet is the EJet comes to IAD for Mesa. You want to live In a UAL base, you better fly the EJet.

StartCart
06-25-2017, 05:25 PM
Yep, go with Republic if you like their bases, or their upgrade times.

Yeah but then you might actually have to buy a suit, study some gouges, answer real questions in front of an interview panel, and prove you're a professional and competent pilot worthy of a position.

I guess answering the phone and accepting a class date after 15 minutes of discussion is good enough to be considered AVERAGE when compared to the rest of the industry.

No Land 3
06-25-2017, 05:54 PM
There are valid reasons for wanting to fly the Ejet for Mesa. First, a pilot might live in the Houston area. Second, a pilot may want to build Ejet time quickly to progress their career. Either of these are valid reasons to sign with Mesa on the Ejet. With either of these reasons, you may not care about the pay as much - except $36 is better than $22.

Flying an E-Jet does absolutely zero for your career, over a CRJ 7/9, and in fact, is a detriment to your piloting skills, at least in the eyes of where I work. Some places still respect stick and rudder. The CRJ is a pilots aircraft, I miss flying it. What I fly now is an amazing airplane, but also a huge detriment to ones stick and rudder skills. You can turn off the automation, and I do hand fly it, but I also only spend maybe 1/4 to 1/8 as much time actually flying. This is why a very strong emphasis of stick and rudder skills is placed on new people, to have that foundation before coming to where I work now.

Navmode
06-25-2017, 05:57 PM
No it doesn't. (The ready comment)

My mistake, I thought there was a line in one of the interpretations that included a line about post-flying duty to not include airport standby.

calmwinds
06-25-2017, 07:27 PM
Yeah but then you might actually have to buy a suit, study some gouges, answer real questions in front of an interview panel, and prove you're a professional and competent pilot worthy of a position.

I guess answering the phone and accepting a class date after 15 minutes of discussion is good enough to be considered AVERAGE when compared to the rest of the industry.

Touché. Why is a Republic guy on a Mesa forum?

calmwinds
06-25-2017, 07:41 PM
Flying an E-Jet does absolutely zero for your career, over a CRJ 7/9, and in fact, is a detriment to your piloting skills, at least in the eyes of where I work. Some places still respect stick and rudder. The CRJ is a pilots aircraft, I miss flying it. What I fly now is an amazing airplane, but also a huge detriment to ones stick and rudder skills. You can turn off the automation, and I do hand fly it, but I also only spend maybe 1/4 to 1/8 as much time actually flying. This is why a very strong emphasis of stick and rudder skills is placed on new people, to have that foundation before coming to where I work now.

I simply said that pilots want to fly the Ejet. That is simply a fact. And, flying a CRJ doesn't do anything more or less for your career than an Ejet. The majors don't care. Time is time.

Why is someone who isn't at Mesa on our forum about our contract?

No Land 3
06-25-2017, 11:41 PM
Why is someone who isn't at Mesa on our forum about our contract?

It seems like yesterday I was at Mesa. I'm not telling you how to vote, but the rest of the industry has a vested interest in what you guys do. It's very eye opening being on the outside now, having experienced an alternate reality. Many of my friends are still at Mesa, so I still care. Believe it or not, the real question everyone asks about you guys is not if you're going to vote yes or no, but rather, "why are you still there?"
Thats what the people on the outside talk about.
I'm not questioning that, I understand everyone has different life circumstances , and it's none of anyone else's business.
This is why people may find it too hard to not be on your forum.

calmwinds
06-26-2017, 03:42 AM
It seems like yesterday I was at Mesa. I'm not telling you how to vote, but the rest of the industry has a vested interest in what you guys do. It's very eye opening being on the outside now, having experienced an alternate reality. Many of my friends are still at Mesa, so I still care. Believe it or not, the real question everyone asks about you guys is not if you're going to vote yes or no, but rather, "why are you still there?"
Thats what the people on the outside talk about.
I'm not questioning that, I understand everyone has different life circumstances , and it's none of anyone else's business.
This is why people may find it too hard to not be on your forum.

Yeah, because these non-Mesa pilots pretend like they are a Mesa pilot on our forum, telling us how to vote. Y'all are as bad as the Russians.

I have no clue why you are here and not letting your friends still at Mesa speak for themselves. Just get off our forum and let us vote.

Bgood
06-26-2017, 05:50 AM
.



The Houston people might love saying "EJET" for some reason, but an rj is an rj. Don't delude yourself into thinking that any legit carrier you dream of flying for cares if the engines are under the wing or whether or not it has auto brakes.

Unless they have the desire to be a lifer at Mesa. In that case, they should want a better TA. :rolleyes:

Bgood
06-26-2017, 05:52 AM
No major carrier cares what you fly when they hire you. It is hours in seat and who you know.

Most IAH Mesa pilots don't care about the EJet either, but it is UAL that cares about the EJet. If you live in a UAL base, you better want to fly the EJet. It doesn't matter if it is ORD, IAH, or SFO.

My bet is the EJet comes to IAD for Mesa. You want to live In a UAL base, you better fly the EJet.

Out of curiosity, why so?

minimwage4
06-26-2017, 05:55 AM
Yeah, because these non-Mesa pilots pretend like they are a Mesa pilot on our forum, telling us how to vote. Y'all are as bad as the Russians.

I have no clue why you are here and not letting your friends still at Mesa speak for themselves. Just get off our forum and let us vote.

What is up with this stupid argument that we keep hearing to get off and let us vote? Unless it's JO with 6 profiles posting the same thing. We all have an interest in this, we are under the same Union. If you pass a crappy TA that means we will have to deal with it at our negotiations don't you see?

StartCart
06-26-2017, 06:09 AM
Yeah, because these non-Mesa pilots pretend like they are a Mesa pilot on our forum, telling us how to vote. Y'all are as bad as the Russians.

I have no clue why you are here and not letting your friends still at Mesa speak for themselves. Just get off our forum and let us vote.

It's not YOUR forum. It's an OPEN forum about Mesa...

Sumtinwong
06-26-2017, 06:31 AM
Yeah, because these non-Mesa pilots pretend like they are a Mesa pilot on our forum, telling us how to vote. Y'all are as bad as the Russians.

I have no clue why you are here and not letting your friends still at Mesa speak for themselves. Just get off our forum and let us vote.

There are numerous Mesa folks here voicing their opinions. Fair play even if they are not employees. Its a public forum and input is welcome from all.

YVslave
06-26-2017, 06:49 AM
No it doesn't. (The ready comment)
Yes, the ready, airport standby comment. But....

Leaving the airport with a call out???? Sound like being on short/long call reserve. Not the idea behind the FDP rule IMO. How can you have two two hour call outs. No word about that in the TA. In section 13 how is possible to have four options of what happens to you once you block in after a reserve trip?????? Three possible if you read the FDP definition. Fly more, on the schedule once block in, ready reserve (how is this paid when assigned like this, you gotta spell it out negotiators!!), or you go home. NO way does the definition mention say you go back on short/long call. You union people just don't get it. Stop backing what the 'company wants'. Listen to the pilot group union people. You are here for US, not them.

wt93205
06-26-2017, 06:51 AM
Yeah, because these non-Mesa pilots pretend like they are a Mesa pilot on our forum, telling us how to vote. Y'all are as bad as the Russians.

I have no clue why you are here and not letting your friends still at Mesa speak for themselves. Just get off our forum and let us vote.

Typical Democrat. Why debate when you can just tell them to go away?

Need I remind you Trump won because of all the silent people who were told to (in a nice way for the forum) be quiet. Democrats haven't learned a thing. You will need to debate to change minds.

Flightcap
06-26-2017, 07:02 AM
Non-Mesa guy here. So I will try to make it short to get out the door before the pitchforks and firebrands make it to my hind end.

IMHO: don't accept a contract that's sub-standard when your fight was to get on that was standard. Keep focused on the objective. This TA doesn't look like the objective.

Cheers. *door slam*

YVslave
06-26-2017, 07:02 AM
For the good of the industry, this TA must be voted down. This industry has no room for the selfish. You must consider your brother and sister pilots, here, and at other airlines. The bar must raise.

Sumtinwong
06-26-2017, 07:30 AM
Typical Democrat. Why debate when you can just tell them to go away?

Need I remind you Trump won because of all the silent people who were told to (in a nice way for the forum) be quiet. Democrats haven't learned a thing. You will need to debate to change minds.

Yuck. Bad choice of an example to make your argument bud.

CWHCFI
06-26-2017, 10:59 AM
Yeah, because these non-Mesa pilots pretend like they are a Mesa pilot on our forum, telling us how to vote. Y'all are as bad as the Russians.

I have no clue why you are here and not letting your friends still at Mesa speak for themselves. Just get off our forum and let us vote.

I am a Mesa pilot. I welcome the input from outside people. This not just about the contract at Mesa. This has an impact on the entire regional airline industry. If we vote in a substand contract it lowers the industry average and affects the negotiating process at other companies. This vote is not just about our own wallets.

Now do you have a clue??? By the way, I am not Russian.

wt93205
06-26-2017, 02:37 PM
Yuck. Bad choice of an example to make your argument bud.

How so? If you don't debate you won't change minds. I have yet to meet a democrat who wants to debate other then tell me I am wrong or like you, say it is a bad example. Again, how so. Explain in detail that would convince me it was a bad example. I sense another democrat and yes voter...

This contract is horrible compared to the other regionals. Hard to debate that. Yet guys like calmwinds just keep telling people who are not in agreement with them to go away, or call you names when you do speak up, because that is the easy way out.

Sumtinwong
06-26-2017, 02:41 PM
How so? If you don't debate you won't change minds. I have yet to meet a democrat who wants to debate.

Riiiiiggggghhhht...........

wt93205
06-26-2017, 02:47 PM
Riiiiiggggghhhht...........

Ha! Proved my point. All they do is mock you.

Sumtinwong
06-26-2017, 03:15 PM
Ha! Proved my point. All they do is mock you.

If you saw yourself from the outside, you would realize it's the other way around.

calmwinds
06-26-2017, 06:39 PM
Out of curiosity, why so?

Passengers love to fly in the EJet. It ranks better than the 737 and A319 for comfort. It was designed for 90+ passengers but it is scope limited to 76 passengers. This means extra leg room, 2 by 2 seating, full size overhead bins.

UAL listens to their customers and you will find the EJet used in all of their bases. West coast customers (Alaska and Delta and United) in particular prefer the EJet.

calmwinds
06-26-2017, 06:46 PM
There are numerous Mesa folks here voicing their opinions. Fair play even if they are not employees. Its a public forum and input is welcome from all.

I don't have an issue unless they "pretend" to be a Mesa pilot by stating things in a way that makes it appear they still work at Mesa.

hdale
06-26-2017, 07:10 PM
Another reason to vote no, go to the TSA thread and read about their PBS LOA that was ratified and the improvements that came with it.

wt93205
06-26-2017, 07:48 PM
If you saw yourself from the outside, you would realize it's the other way around.

Or you could debate instead of bash me...

I will apologize for attacking you after looking back at it. But my example is sound. I took your comments personal. You never explained why it was not. Only mocked me. You should take a look at yourself also. However, for your info I use to be democrat. Slowly went right. Why, because after attempting to debate I realized the left didn't have any substance behind there views. Then I realized when I moved more and more right that the discussions I would have with the left always became name calling and blaming it on you for not being informed on there accusations which they couldn't back up. So they were never really debates. You can't debate with someone who doesn't know why they believe what they believe.

Whole point with this TA is get informed and know why you are voting yes or no and be able to back it up. Just don't do it with name calling or telling them to (be quiet). That does not change minds. I want the Mesa people to realize WHY they should vote no. I use to be one and still care quite a bit. Hence my passion. Not simply telling them how to vote. Or by bashing them. That gets no where.

deltajuliet
06-26-2017, 08:53 PM
Another reason to vote no, go to the TSA thread and read about their PBS LOA that was ratified and the improvements that came with it.

Wow, 4.25 min day? Sign us up.

Bgood
06-27-2017, 04:36 AM
Passengers love to fly in the EJet. It ranks better than the 737 and A319 for comfort. It was designed for 90+ passengers but it is scope limited to 76 passengers. This means extra leg room, 2 by 2 seating, full size overhead bins.

UAL listens to their customers and you will find the EJet used in all of their bases. West coast customers (Alaska and Delta and United) in particular prefer the EJet.

Ok. I thought it was some kind of benefit or requirement to the pilots wen u said "they better want to fly it". Wouldn't mesa just put them in it if short staffed on it and heavy staffed on the crj?

Sumtinwong
06-27-2017, 08:32 AM
Or you could debate instead of bash me...

I will apologize for attacking you after looking back at it. But my example is sound. I took your comments personal. You never explained why it was not. Only mocked me. You should take a look at yourself also. However, for your info I use to be democrat. Slowly went right. Why, because after attempting to debate I realized the left didn't have any substance behind there views. Then I realized when I moved more and more right that the discussions I would have with the left always became name calling and blaming it on you for not being informed on there accusations which they couldn't back up. So they were never really debates. You can't debate with someone who doesn't know why they believe what they believe.

Whole point with this TA is get informed and know why you are voting yes or no and be able to back it up. Just don't do it with name calling or telling them to (be quiet). That does not change minds. I want the Mesa people to realize WHY they should vote no. I use to be one and still care quite a bit. Hence my passion. Not simply telling them how to vote. Or by bashing them. That gets no where.

Dude, you need to go back and read this thread again. At no point did I ever name bash you or whatever. I simply pointed out your unfounded and absurd point that you made about this being somehow related to an "liberal" mindset. You somehow tried to turn this conversation into a political one. If you want to have a political debate, i'd be happy to. But this isn't the forum for that.

If you think that somehow someone expecting an industry average TA is somehow a liberal mindset, well you need to get out of your conservative echo chamber and learn about economics. Its supply and demand. The pilots are able to demand what the industry is offering. That's Econ 101. JO lives in the principles of supply and demand. That's why he's lobbying in DC to try and get rid of the 1500 hr rule. Whether you agree with it or not, it is hurting the supply of pilots to the reigionals, in some way. The real problem JO has is not the 1500 hour rule, rather a pay problem. He is not offering an attractive contract or pay to bring people in. He would rather increase his supply of pilots so that he doesn't have to increase pay to attract talent.

He has mentioned on every conference call since I have been here that he doesn't need to increase pay as long as people are coming. Well guess what, people aren't coming and also people aren't staying. So what does he do when he's having trouble staffing? Well, he doesn't increase pay (other than bonuses) so he continues to bleed pilots from the ranks, he instead increases the scope of the type of pilot he's willing to hire. We are hiring people with terrible training records and those who are all the way up into their 60's. Totally fine to do that and I'm personally cool with that, just further educating you on how JO's approach to supply and demand works since you seem to think this is about socialist economics.

Further, I and others on here have been debating the merits of this TA since it was made public. So for you to somehow suggest that because we aren't debating you on your suggestion that this is somehow a politically charged debate, perhaps you should stop trying to sway it that direction and we might take you seriously.

wt93205
06-27-2017, 01:28 PM
Dude, you need to go back and read this thread again. At no point did I ever name bash you or whatever. I simply pointed out your unfounded and absurd point that you made about this being somehow related to an "liberal" mindset. You somehow tried to turn this conversation into a political one. If you want to have a political debate, i'd be happy to. But this isn't the forum for that.

If you think that somehow someone expecting an industry average TA is somehow a liberal mindset, well you need to get out of your conservative echo chamber and learn about economics. Its supply and demand. The pilots are able to demand what the industry is offering. That's Econ 101. JO lives in the principles of supply and demand. That's why he's lobbying in DC to try and get rid of the 1500 hr rule. Whether you agree with it or not, it is hurting the supply of pilots to the reigionals, in some way. The real problem JO has is not the 1500 hour rule, rather a pay problem. He is not offering an attractive contract or pay to bring people in. He would rather increase his supply of pilots so that he doesn't have to increase pay to attract talent.

He has mentioned on every conference call since I have been here that he doesn't need to increase pay as long as people are coming. Well guess what, people aren't coming and also people aren't staying. So what does he do when he's having trouble staffing? Well, he doesn't increase pay (other than bonuses) so he continues to bleed pilots from the ranks, he instead increases the scope of the type of pilot he's willing to hire. We are hiring people with terrible training records and those who are all the way up into their 60's. Totally fine to do that and I'm personally cool with that, just further educating you on how JO's approach to supply and demand works since you seem to think this is about socialist economics.

Further, I and others on here have been debating the merits of this TA since it was made public. So for you to somehow suggest that because we aren't debating you on your suggestion that this is somehow a politically charged debate, perhaps you should stop trying to sway it that direction and we might take you seriously.

My example is sound. You just don't get it or missed the point. As for bashing me, you even admit you think it was "absurd". That is bashing me. Why don't you tell me why. Enlighten me. Then that wouldn't be bashing me then. It would be debating. You are right though this is not a political forum.

That response was directly to calmwinds trying to tell people to go away that don't agree with them. That is a "liberal" mindset and I explained why I see it that way above.. He brought the Russian's into it and was making it political so I responded in a way he would get. Political. Why Trump won. Calmwinds claimed we were like the Russians. I am not Russian. I didn't vote based on what the Russians said. If he wants to change minds on the merits of this TA he needs to debate instead of telling people to go away.

Debating is explaining why someone is wrong. I have been doing that for awhile on here. Not just saying that is "absurd". That gets no where.

I never said someone wanting an industry average TA is a liberal. At all. Ever. In fact everything you are telling me about Econ 101 I have been preaching on here for years. So I am not sure where you were going with this. Now is the time to get a TA due to the economics. So I think we are saying the same things. You just didn't get my example. It is all good. Peace.

Jma313
06-27-2017, 01:40 PM
This is a fantastic post. I hope y'all at Mesa get the contract you want and more importantly deserve.

idlethrust
06-27-2017, 07:54 PM
Which of these fly an Ejet out of Houston? Zero. Zip. Nada. Go with SW on the Ejet to sit on reserve in Chicago and take 3 years to upgrade to sit on reserve again. Unless you go with SW on the Ejet for a west coast base, then you sit on reserve in Chicago for months, to transfer to the West coast, to sit on reserve for many more months, to wait years to upgrade.

Pretty rare to get the Ejet on Envoy unless you are in your 50's. Republic doesn't just give you the Ejet either.

While I agree there is nothing magical about the Ejet getting you hired on with a major, there are pilots that want to fly it. Most majors simply want the 121 time and a decent internal reference.
Last i read,republic ONLY flies the ejet now.So what do you mean they wont just give it to you?

calmwinds
06-28-2017, 04:04 AM
Last i read,republic ONLY flies the ejet now.So what do you mean they wont just give it to you? Yep. For Republic, the only reason to go to Mesa is IAH.

Another pilot
06-28-2017, 05:40 AM
But...But, they're so SHINY!!

They are disgusting inside never cleaned in the cockpit or windows or instruments seats are wearing out fast and seat belts shoulder straps mark your shoulders so your shirt is unusable more than a day. 2 lavs means twice the disgusting unsanitary filth tracked into the cockpit
The exteriors are never cleaned so you don't want to touch the plane to do a walk around.
SHINY NOT!

StartCart
06-28-2017, 06:54 AM
Yep. For Republic, the only reason to go to Mesa is IAH.

That, and NO interview.

flapoverspeed
06-28-2017, 11:29 AM
Did anyone else get a letter in the mail addressed 'To the Family of ' then the employee name? The letter my family received contained a TA fact sheet, which sounds like the tri-fold the union was handing out at the road shows.

Bgood
06-28-2017, 02:01 PM
Last i read,republic ONLY flies the ejet now.So what do you mean they wont just give it to you?

They might just put u around a desk and take calls till they feel ur ready for the ejet lol

Bgood
06-28-2017, 02:02 PM
That, and NO interview.

True flow to the regionals lol

Sumtinwong
06-28-2017, 04:59 PM
Did anyone else get a letter in the mail addressed 'To the Family of ' then the employee name? The letter my family received contained a TA fact sheet, which sounds like the tri-fold the union was handing out at the road shows.

My goodness! Its starting to sound like this union of ours is crossing the line. A friend of mine told me a certain union representative is walking around telling people that if they vote this contract down, Mesa will go out of business.

Talk about browbeating.

No Land 3
06-28-2017, 08:10 PM
My goodness! Its starting to sound like this union of ours is crossing the line. A friend of mine told me a certain union representative is walking around telling people that if they vote this contract down, Mesa will go out of business.

Talk about browbeating.

We've flown together, we know each other, I know you're intelligent, your ability to figure things out is highly developed. It is a very legitimate fear certain people have, that their employer may go out of business. These people have skeletons in their closet, and it could mean an end to their career. They are selfish, to be ignored, as their plight does not correlate to yours. Often times the problem children find their way into the union to get reprieve from those wanting to sin
You must have 1000 hours PIC by now. Send your app in.
No offense to any regional pilot, but you guys act like you have blinders on sometimes. Do not get wrapped up in the politics of a new TA. Either they compensate, and give you the QOL you desire, or you go to someone who will. Do not worry about walking away being senior at Mesa.

No Land 3
06-29-2017, 04:12 AM
Autocorrect strikes again...

20sx
06-29-2017, 04:44 AM
My goodness! Its starting to sound like this union of ours is crossing the line. A friend of mine told me a certain union representative is walking around telling people that if they vote this contract down, Mesa will go out of business.

Talk about browbeating.

Hard to tell which rep at this point. I hear DL in IAD is telling people he has it on good authority that JO will take care of Dulles pilots....pure BS. DL can't even finish MEC voting meetings, how on earth would he know anything of importance? More important, how can he knowingly lie to his own pilots?!!

Smutter
06-29-2017, 06:04 AM
If you saw yourself from the outside, you would realize it's the other way around.

I think we're all staring at you, while he keeps proving his point.

MAGNegotiations
06-29-2017, 12:03 PM
@deltajuliet,

Thanks for your post. A lot of pilots found it informative, but unfortunately some of your statements are false and/or misinformed. Here are our corrections:


The pilot group’s call to arms of the last two years has sounded something like “Industry Standard!” While TA17 improves on the horrible, debatably worse-than-current-book tentative agreement from 2015, it still falls very, very short of our unanimous goal of Industry Standard, let alone raising the bar. Some might want a few extra dollars before punching out, but bluntly, that’s selfish. Others have resigned themselves to the idea that “this is the best we can get.” What are the five hazardous attitudes again?

I intended to put this out sooner, but life has been busy and I wanted to give every word of our negotiators’ work its full due. Now that I have, yes, there are some improvements, but many of those improvements fall short of standard, omit critical language, or allow management plenty of loophole flexibility. Other work rules are definitively worse than current book.



This has hurt many pilots many times. You’re at min days off, you get delayed into the next day, and you even miss your commute home. Great. So you whip out your cell phone and call Crew Line Adjustments to get a different day off. “Sorry, look at 2-A-12, a day doesn’t mean a day.”

This is correct and allows for flights that are scheduled to end before midnight, but incur a delay causing that flight to return after midnight, to continue without hindering operations to receive an extra day off. This concept originates from an arbitrator’s decision (GS 2 in the current contract). It is worth noting that Golden days have the time frame at 0000 instead of 0200. This is why it is important to bid your Golden days.


We’ll call these the de facto rates since they’re what most of the Captains will be receiving. These rates, like all rates, continue to leave our pilot group as the lowest paid 121 jet operators in the country. This is in no conceivable way industry standard. Some comparisons:

Year – 2 – 5 – 10 – 20

Mesa – 65 – 71 – 82 – 105
Envoy – 70 – 77 – 88 – 106
SkyWest – 70 – 78 – 91 – 119
Republic – 72 – 78 – 91 – 120
Compass – 69 – 76 – 89 – 111



And God help us if we ever do more 50-seat flying.

Year – 2 – 5 – 10 – 20

Mesa – 58 – 63 – 73 – 93
TSA – 66 – 71 – 83 – 101
Envoy – 67 – 73 – 84 – 101
SkyWest – 65 – 72 – 84 – 110
Piedmont – 63 – 73 – 88 – 93
Air Whiskey – 69 – 76 – 89 – 109

In fact, our CRJ900/E175 rates are actually below the vast majority of 50-seat rates at other carriers. In what world is this considered industry standard, particularly when you consider our healthcare premiums, iPad purchases, and uniform expenses that lag behind everybody else?



Yes, $22.18 to $36 an hour is a big jump for first year pay and about the only part of the contract that really surprised me. It’s one facet that comes close to industry standard, but it’s one small part of a giant agreement, our first year FO’s will still be the lowest paid in the industry – 50-seat jet rates included – and we’re creating a B-scale to do it.

Pay rate comparison across the industry-
Industry Average FO is $32.99. CA is $67.19.
TA pay rates 1st year FO $36 interim rates that may be extended. CA rates start at $63 and finish at DOS+3 $67.32.
Your statement that: “FO’s will be lowest in the industry” is false. Based on contractual pay scales at other regionals, Mesa FO’s would be higher than their peers. This includes Envoy, PSA and Piedmont where the current 1st year pay is around $28. There are letters of agreement that increase this number, however their contract payrate is around $28 per hour., and those LOAs do terminate. Industry average 1st year FO pay is less than $33.


What is a B-scale?
BOB CRANDALL'S BOO-BOOS THE FIERY AMERICAN AIRLINES CHAIRMAN FACES LABOR STRIFE THAT COULD CREATE LONG-LASTING SCARS AT HIS COMPANY. HERE'S HOW HE WENT WRONG. - April 28, 1997 (http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1997/04/28/225523/index.htm)

“The war started back in 1983, when a growth imperative gripped major airlines as they raced to compete with low-fare startups. Crandall convinced the pilots that the airline couldn't buy planes to add routes unless new pilots could be hired at drastically reduced pay scales. It seemed like another brilliant Crandall win-win at the time. The pilots who were then at American got to keep their pay, and the new planes offered them opportunities to move more quickly from co-pilot to captain status. Meanwhile, with each new cut-rate pilot, Crandall lowered his average labor costs, all the better to finance the debt incurred in buying the new jets.

Several years later, however, this move came back to haunt him. The pilots hired at what came to be known as the ‘b-scales’ developed a sort of inferiority complex. ‘All of a sudden, there was a whole group of people working there who were extremely resentful of the fact that the person sitting next to them was making a lot more money for exactly the same job," says Larry Crawford, president of Avitas, an aviation consulting firm in Reston, Virginia. "They began to wonder what kind of scheme was coming at them next.’ …they still resented their status as second-class citizens.”

Like Frank Lorenzo’s wake of destruction or the proliferation of regional jets in the 90’s, American’s creation of the B-scale is one of the most infamous anti-pilot policies our profession has had to come back from. It hurt the career earnings of thousands and its ripple effects on the industry aren’t quantifiable.

Does any of that excerpt sound like JO or Mesa Airlines? It should. We’ve heard all the same rhetoric, and just like American Airlines, our pilot group has the power to stop it. Let’s make the right decision this time – future aviators will thank you.

THE PAY RATES IN THIS CONTRACT WOULD STILL QUANTIFIABLY LEAVE US AS THE LOWEST PAID JET OPERATORS IN THE COUNTRY. THIS ALONE WARRANTS A “NO” VOTE.

Is this a B scale?
No, the interim rates are our way of tying Mesa’s hands to the bonus structure that they are currently using to lure New Hire pilots.




Every single pilot hired after the 7th or after the 22nd of the month gets screwed out of half a month of a better pay rate every single year. This really needed to be fixed.

Pilots advancing to the next pay scale annually-
Your statement is not true, pilots get 12 months of a pay rate. You will always have 24 pay checks at your applicable rate.


We're missing Easter, and let’s be honest, Super Bowl Sunday (hey, Republic has it).

Holidays [missing Easter and super bowl Sunday]-
This is correct, but remember that Easter is not considered a federal holiday either. Mesa is currently 1 of 3 regionals that offers holiday pay.


It's an improvement over current book, and while pay and hotels were in dire need of fixing, so too is scheduling. We do 3.5 hour sits to do 2 hours of flying some days, and on 30-hour overnights we're not compensated for a whole day away from home. This is a baby step in the right direction but a far cry from the Min Day language we actually need.

Sits and long layovers are a factor of flights assigned to Mesa from our mainline partners. With Min. Day language of 4 hours per day, your schedules could suffer more than currently. When Mesa builds pairings, multiple parameters are available in the optimizer, including a minimum day. If selected and set at 4 hours per day, the optimizer tends to dilute the pairings across the entire month trying to get at least 4 hours on each day, at the expense of higher credit days. The results that we reviewed were overall worse than those produced today without the Min. day.


Per diem still falls below everyone else. Current rates at other non-WO shops are as follows:
Republic – $1.95 ($2.50 int’l)
ExpressJet – $1.85
SkyWest – $1.90

iPads are also provided by every other airline in the country. To sanction buying our own is to lower the bar, and the extra $40 essentially just brings the per diem rate to around $1.70 while you’re still paying for your own iPad.

Industry Average Per Diem is $1.70-$1.80. This TA provides $1.60 with $40 for iPads. Initial ALPA proposal was per diem $1.70 with increases and iPad of $15 per month.
An average line provides 280 per diem hours. With $15 removed from the initial $40 for the iPad, $25 divided by 280 hours equals $0.089 per hour. Approx. $0.09 to be added to per diem rates which gives us an adjusted per diem rate of $1.69.
Remember that if Mesa provided your iPad, they would have the ability to assign you flying, track your whereabouts , as well as restrict any apps from being downloaded and monitor your activity while using the company provided iPad.


One word negates and invalidates this entire section [Section 5 - hotel preferred items].

The Preferable part of hotel language in section 5-B-11-a is placed there purposefully. This single word does not negate this entire section. If we moved microwaves and refrigerators into the mandatory section, this would move us out of good existing hotels such as Sheratons and Marriotts and guarantee us a slot at the La Quintas.


“…a replacement hotel will be sourced when both parties agree on such action.” So the company can veto replacements in perpetuity. This section has no teeth and we’re not guaranteed anything better than we already have. Aside from Compensation and Scheduling, Hotels were in dire need of better language. It’s just not there. I still laugh when I think back to the company call where JO famously stated, “We’re within 1% of SkyWest’s hotel budget.” :rolleyes:

The current hotel language states a “suitable” accommodation will be provided to the pilots and nothing much more. We’ve stated multiple times before that this TA isn’t perfect. However, of the multiple improvements to our current CBA, hotel language has some of the greatest gains. If there is a problem with a hotel, this language provides a means of changing out problematic hotels, however this requires pilots to actively participate by filing hotel complains.


I’ll continue echoing a popular sentiment. “We don’t stay where nobody else stays.”

This is not true. Some examples of where Mesa stays and other airlines stay: Midland (MAF), Birmingham (BHM), National (DCA), Cincinnati (CVG), Detroit (DTW), Dulles (IAD), Toronto (YYZ), Tulsa (TUL), Indianapolis (IND), San Antonio (SAT), Austin (AUS)- to name a few.


Uniform needs to be paid for. Period. With annual stipends for upkeep.

This was sought by the Negotiating Committee, but again since pay was deemed more important by the pilot group, the money for uniforms was shifted into seeking better compensation.


Too low, not industry standard.

Our peers have a range of 50% to 100% deadhead pay in the air and some have ground deadhead language with the average specified at 50%. If you ground deadhead at Mesa, it is paid at applicable pay rate at 62.5%. Obviously, in our next negotiation, we will seek a higher deadhead rate, which will be easier to achieve if we are at 62.5% versus 50%.


Funny how a reserve calling in sick uses up 4 hours, yet vacation is only worth 3 hours a day. Our current contract is the same way and it only benefits the company.

Vacation was calculated for a standard 4-day with 21 hours as 5.25 hours each day. For simplicity, and since vacation is issued at 7 days, 21 divides evenly into 3 hours per day.


More faulty language borrowed from the last contract; management can unilaterally decide to have one vacation slot over Christmas and a whole bunch in other undesirable parts of the year. No need to cancel vacation when 90% of pilots can only get it during low flying times.

This is correct. Vacation may be restricted by the company based on needs of service. For example, with transportation demand high during the holidays, you cannot expect Mesa to shoot themselves in the foot by offering more vacation slots which do not allow them to cover anticipated flying schedules. However Mesa is required to issues enough vacation slots to cover every week of vacation owed to pilots in a given year.


This is extremely limiting and restrictive in what you can get awarded. Need 3 days off the end of a week to lead into the next, or for a wedding, or to move, or just because? You’re SOL.

This is a software issue. We also would have liked 3 days of partial vacation, but this wasn’t our call. It’s purely a limitation of the software.


We cannot sanction training agreements. These are a slap in the face and no other regional does them. Instead of strong arming people to stay with financial coercion, Mesa should look at retention bonuses for every pilot like Endeavor and Air Wisconsin have. Or, you know, respectable pay rates.

1-year training notes for equipment transfers is not ideal, but is a way to keep training costs lower to Mesa and in return allows slots to be offered to pilots.
Mesa is offering retention bonuses currently, and it is part of the New Hire Compensation plan. Captains are not leaving in the amounts as FOs with less than 3 years seniority at Mesa. LOA-3 addresses this and should put a cap on future retention bonus offered to select pilots by requiring Mesa to offer such bonuses to all pilots in a given status or the entire pilot group.


Scheduling needed a major overhaul, but we’re still at our perpetual 11 days off with nothing else to show for it.

Cost associated with this was too high and Mesa was only willing to implement for line holders anyways. Since the majority of line holders receive 12 or more days off currently, we refocused our sights on compensation.


The company can charge pilots if they don’t cancel travel? Seriously?

This is Correct. If a pilot requests a seat for training, UA or AA will block off seats to accommodate. A “no show” pilot then causes a problem with lost revenue for that seat. If you make a request for a seat and plans change, be sure to cancel your reserved seat. This is an issue from our code share partners and is no change from current practice.


“Operational needs.” The company can still do whatever they want with buffers, they just have to come up with an explanation for ALPA now. Shouldn’t be too hard. I guess we’ll never have enough pilots to drop anything again, anyway.

ALPA was trying to get a more refined definition of Reserve Buffers, but due to the complexity of calculations and numerous variables it proved nearly impossible. For example: Reserve Buffers are affected by local weather phenomena, Historic pilot sick calls, TDY or moving reserves from one Domicile to another with fewer reserves. This language was the only way to get started in defining Reserve Buffers. Since now they have to provide us with their method of calculation it will be easier for us to call them out when they don’t stick to it.


Right now, FDP is not defined in our contract, and we’re better off that way. Because it isn’t defined, reserves are under no obligation to answer their phones when on it. Essentially, that means you’re released and you can go home. If the company really wanted to keep you on reserve following a flight, they could put you on Ready, but they don’t want to pay you. Seriously, ask your reps. To accept what the company has been trying to do for years is a major concession, and our pay rates need to go up significantly to even humor the idea.

Our current contract was written before the new FAR 117. That is why the definition has to be defined. This is not a concession because if we do not define FDP then Mesa retains rights to do as they please by section 1-F. Therefore, defining this term is vital to protecting pilots.


Release from further duty will never, ever happen. Why would they ever release you when they can now officially put you on FDP and be flush with free reserves every day? This is a major concession.

If reserve pilots are on their last day prior to days off, and no flight assignments have been made by 5 hours prior to ending reserve shift the pilot is automatically released. (Reference 13-N-10) There will be NO asking to be released from the Company. If you get no assignment, you are automatically released.


Just like TA15, Call Me First and Call Me Last are essentially gone. There goes seniority on reserve. The company can now bring everybody up to right below min guarantee then go to the next guy. Want to fly a lot? Nope. Want to fly as little as possible? Nope.

Call me first/ Call me last is not dead. Your argument is false. Reference 13-N-15-d-(1)-(d). Reserves will be implemented different than current book, so comparing it to the current process is comparing apples and oranges. The only time seniority is not considered in reserve assignments is ready reserve, which is the same as current practice.


Long Call Reserve sounds nice until you realize only 17% get it.

If our math is right, 17% is greater than 0% which is current book that Mesa MAY offer long call if staffing permits. Now Mesa MUST offer long call. During the next round of negotiations this number should become larger.


In what world does having a week of vacation mean you just work more the rest of the month? 7 days vacation should equate to minimum 18 days off. We have the same problem now.

This was discussed in negotiations, but did not progress further due to short staffing system wide and removal of the pro rate table would increase the number of days off. Again, per pilot demand, our focus was mostly on compensation.


1% is anemic, pathetic, and not industry standard.

Once again, if our math is correct, 1% is higher than the current 0%. We know this TA isn’t perfect, but it’s better than the equipment lock that our senior captains currently experience.


Again, not industry standard.

Again, everything comes at a cost. With upgrades still coming, a 3-year seat lock does not make sense to implement for a FO when current upgrades are around 2.5 years and with the option to select the aircraft of their choice.


We get killed on this compared to every other carrier, and there are no discernable changes. Enjoy paying more than everybody else while still getting paid less than everybody else.

You’re right. We’re also disappointed that we couldn’t get improved insurance. But with 30% of the pilot group involvement and 8% enrolled in higher premium plans, we just couldn’t justify the cost. It would have been almost $55 million to improve health insurance, which is the same value of the wage increases. The lower cost insurance plan offered by Mesa is industry standard, since contribution from the pilot is approximately 30 – 50%. The higher plans require pilot contribution of roughly 85%, which is not industry standard. Since a smaller portion of pilots would receive improvements in benefits and 100% of the pilots would receive the benefit of a bigger paycheck, we decided to concentrate more on compensation.


While this is distinct from JO’s unethical and unilateral new hire bonuses, these follow the same trends in allowing management to pay who they want when they want however much they want. Captains should expect to never see a dime. So much for unity, solidarity, and equity.

We agree that new hire bonuses are discouraging to pilots on property, however due to the Railway Labor Act, there is very little we can do about New Hire Bonuses. This isn’t just our problem, it’s every regional airlines’ problem. Until a pilot finishes IOE, ALPA has no control over what the company can offer them. This LOA does not allow management to pay “whoever they want,” that is what management is currently doing with their bonus programs. This LOA states that if one pilot of a group is offered a retention bonus, ALL pilots of said group will be offer the SAME retention bonus.


The “Steve Trigg Clause.” We killed Freedom because our scope was threatened, and now we’re giving it away? Every Mesa flight needs to be operated by a Mesa Airlines line pilot. Anything else is outsourcing. Beyond that, why would we openly welcome Age 67+?

This does not threaten your flying schedules. Reference 1-B-2 states that a very specific and rare type of flying may be contracted out to meet the needs of service. As far as Mesa pilots flying Mesa aircraft, they are Mesa Pilots, just on retired status. The number of flights flown under this LOA is miniscule due to the extremely high cost (Mesa must keep these pilots trained and current), they must only fly with other retired pilots, and must be travelled to and from locations. Keep in mind that flying allowed is only what is NOT covered in our OPS SPECS. It’s not a scope violation. Negotiations are a give and take, and we got a lot of other benefits in the TA because of this. Also, Section 1-B-3 prevents the formation of alter egos such as Freedom in past Mesa Practices.


For the first time in Mesa Air Group’s history, management needs a deal more than we do. Let’s capitalize. Let’s set the bar higher. Let’s stop being the butt of jokes by other pilots. Let’s bring this place up to Industry Standard and keep the profession’s positive momentum going.

I appreciate the work done by our negotiators, and I think they may be the people to finish the job. But this isn’t it. We’re not across the finish line yet. Let’s stand together, send it back together, and get this thing done together. Let’s do it right.

In closing, Mesa Management has always needed us. After all, there is no airline without pilots. Although pilots talk about not needing this deal as much as our management, the pilot group has been very loud in asking about the pace of negotiations. You asked to be in line with our peers and the numbers show that this TA will bring us in line with our peers on many items. We’ll say it again, we know it’s not perfect, but it is a vast improvement from where we currently are and gives us a much stronger foundation from which to build in our next negotiation. We encourage all our pilots to ask us questions directly and not use speculation or she said/he said talk. If you do not know the answer, just ask. We’re here to give you the correct information.

Fraternally,

Your Negotiating Committee

OOMainline
06-29-2017, 01:09 PM
Finally some logic out there. I do not have any skin in the game, and this deltajuliet "pilot" seems to have been put in their place.

minimwage4
06-29-2017, 02:02 PM
MAGnegotiations, why don't you admit you're a management sympathizer who thinks Mesa pilots aren't worth it? Why would you be ok with a below average contract that will be last again in a year or two as other places that are already paid higher than you will go even higher? Just admit to everyone here that you think Mesa pilots are not worth it and they should know they work for a bottom feeder so at least you will have some dignity.

wt93205
06-29-2017, 03:00 PM
Finally some logic out there. I do not have any skin in the game, and this deltajuliet "pilot" seems to have been put in their place.

Ha! First post. Hello JO.

I stand 100 percent behind deltajuliet. He gets it.

wt93205
06-29-2017, 03:58 PM
I will wait for deltajuliet to respond and if need be help him rip MagNeg responses apart.

LAMAwannabe
06-29-2017, 04:40 PM
I will wait for deltajuliet to respond and if need be help him rip MagNeg responses apart.

Why wait. I'm on a long sit and could use some entertainment.

whyvee
06-29-2017, 05:33 PM
I will wait for deltajuliet to respond and if need be help him rip MagNeg responses apart.


Have you ever flown with one of those super-seniors whose entire identity is wrapped up in being bitter about Mesa? That was this guy.

MagNeg gave a logical and lengthy explanation. There's no reason they or any of the negotiators should be considered 'on managements side'.

wt93205
06-29-2017, 06:44 PM
Have you ever flown with one of those super-seniors whose entire identity is wrapped up in being bitter about Mesa? That was this guy.

MagNeg gave a logical and lengthy explanation. There's no reason they or any of the negotiators should be considered 'on managements side'.

Have you ever flown with a newbie FO who was ready to jump off a cliff if he was told too? That was this guy.

MagNeg gave an explanation. That is fair and appreciated. I watched the video and the biggest part that was a no no was when they said this is "GOOD FOR YOU" Why sell it. Just explain it. Don't tell guys like you "whyvee" how to vote because I know you types who are so new they still believe anything told to them by management and Alpa.

wt93205
06-29-2017, 08:05 PM
I will let deltajuliet respond to all those one by one questions since he can probably figure out all the editing stuff and besides he is doing a nice job debating. Good to know guys like him still care and fight for what they should be getting at Mesa.

I will get the debate started though. :)

First off I get this TA is not perfect and MagNeg does too. Good that he admits that. That does not mean you should vote yes. Voting no gives them leverage to get an even better TA. JO needs one and in this environment it won't be long...

Here is the main thing that I get from MagNeg's responses is that most of the answers are about we didn't get better health insurance, greater DH pay, industry average per diem (even 1.69/hr including ipad is not it), or the like because it all went to the "pay rates". So why is the pay not industry leading then? Sure FO's get a nice jump in pay only to let future FO's get a cut in a few years. Also don't give me that garbage that they can extend it. We are talking about JO. If it is not in hard writing it does not exist. So in a few years others will then be above these FO pay rates, have flow, better health insurance, per diem, DH pay, etc... Oh yeah and it still takes two years to get captain rates at 79 seat pay. What a joke. Mesa just had an additional 1.5 years under the old rates. It should be immediate or at least 6 months max before they match. JO just saved a lot of money the last 1.5 years since the last TA was voted down.

But wait, those FO's are going to vote yes because this is how JO designed it. He knows these FO's can't get hired at other regionals and yet this will get them to vote yes since they "think" they will be gone in a year or two...right...heard that before.

As for Captains those that will vote yes are the ones near retirement and don't have time anymore to wait. That should get you to 51 percent yes...per JO's negotiating strategy.

The 55mil you speak of about health care and only 30 percent roughly use it is why you need a huge increase in hourly pay rates well above industry standard to offset the lack of money JO is putting into it, since that is the way you are looking at it. I get it is far behind and you think it is not fixable but with that mindset it won't be. When I was at Mesa in 2015, my plan I use to have was 440/month. That same plan I bought in the marketplace was 175/month. You need to kick the FA's out of the plan the pilots are using and let them go to the marketplace. Pilots pass medicals. FA's do not. JO needs to kick in more money to health care or some serious increases to the pay rates.

If I was still at Mesa with these proposed pay rates I would laugh at the TA unless the health care was equal to Mesa's peers at descent coverage levels. So what I understand MagNeg to say here is forget healthcare and let Mesa end up with none, in time, at these sub standard pay rates. Heck no. If they don't offer a health care plan like the other regionals you better put a value on it and charge Mesa for it in the pay rates!

I get you polled the pilot group and they wanted more money in there pockets via pay rates, but it does no good if you don't offset the other things lacking.

As for PBS...go read TSA's new LOA. Yes it is an LOA but they start neg in a year. Go back to the table and get something like it locked in now.

Another big thing lacking is limits on Coverage awards. There should be limits because why let the company punish the pilot group for their screw up with staffing the airline properly. They should pay it out in JRA like the old days were. Now they just destroy your schedule at straight time. Then JRA the scraps left.

Min pay days at Mesa are a joke. You need a trip rig. Put your efforts toward that. It leaves Mesa with the flexibility they need but you will still get paid for your time away.

As for hotels they have improved a bunch except that one word (preferably) deltajuliet pointed out negates the whole thing. MagNeg you are wrong. If you don't believe me just wait.
What you should have each hotel requires xxx (6) out of xxx(10) listed below. That way you have flexibility with a Sheraton vs a Motel 6. You can still get that Sheraton without that one word "preferably" added in. That word means Mesa doesn't have to give you any that you listed. It is the same garbage as "suitable".

After every TA that was passed at Mesa a huge increase in grievances occur, which if you have been at Mesa long enough, you will know the company wins the majority and the few they lose you get a fraction of what you were owed. So the language better be bullet proof!

By far the biggest mistake MagNeg said that I want to harp on him for was that they will get more next time. Where have I heard this broken record? Mesa Alpa in previous TA's. Always next time. Grow some guts and fight for what you deserve now. This IS the time to get it and to make up for all those previous "next times". There will not be a better time to get a better TA then now! You have so much leverage you have no clue if that is what you think.

wt93205
06-29-2017, 08:57 PM
One more thing...Vacation. It should be a solid 7 days blocked out in PBS and valued at 3.5 hours/day just like TSA.

You would then have 18 days off. If you worked 12 days with those being 3, 4-day trips, the average credit would need to be 17 per trip. At 70 hours per diem per trip that would be a little over 4 hour per day credit. TSA has a 4.25 min day. So see how they solved the same issues Mesa has? Just duplicate them in this area. Trip rig would be better for commuters however. Min day they can start you early day one and finish you late day 4. Trip rig would be 70 hours per 4 day with the math above. Hence Trip rig is better IMO.

wt93205
06-29-2017, 08:59 PM
TRANS STATES PILOTS RATIFY PBS LOA
Last week, the pilots of Trans States Airlines officially ratified a Preferential Bidding System Letter of Agreement (PBS LOA). Seventy-seven percent of eligible pilots participated in the vote, with 92 percent voting in favor.
"I want to personally thank the entire MEC, the Negotiating Committee members, and the PBS working group [PWG] for their continued hard work in achieving this beneficial agreement," said MEC chairman Capt. Neil Butler. "Notably, I want to thank former TSA MEC Chairman Zach Barnes, Grievance Chairman Mark Zust, and PWG members Damon Robertson, Sean Stickney, and Tim Reed for their invaluable contributions to this process. Finally, I want to thank all of the professional pilots of Trans States Airlines for their hard work and dedication every day that made these results possible."
Improvements include: a 4.25 min day with no carve outs; a collaboration on all pairing constructions and PBS runs between the PWG and the company; junior assignments pay 175% and holiday pay is 150%; and a 3.5 vacation credit; among other gains.
Not only are the many contractual improvements and the establishment of PBS bidding beneficial to the pilot group, this PBS LOA will put TSA on solid ground when the MEC embarks on Section 6 contract negotiations early next year.

YVslave
06-29-2017, 09:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltajuliet https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/mesa-airlines/103895-why-im-voting-no.html#post2384645)
Right now, FDP is not defined in our contract, and we’re better off that way. Because it isn’t defined, reserves are under no obligation to answer their phones when on it. Essentially, that means you’re released and you can go home. If the company really wanted to keep you on reserve following a flight, they could put you on Ready, but they don’t want to pay you. Seriously, ask your reps. To accept what the company has been trying to do for years is a major concession, and our pay rates need to go up significantly to even humor the idea.

Our current contract was written before the new FAR 117. That is why the definition has to be defined. This is not a concession because if we do not define FDP then Mesa retains rights to do as they please by section 1-F. Therefore, defining this term is vital to protecting pilots.



Quote:
Originally Posted by deltajuliet https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/mesa-airlines/103895-why-im-voting-no.html#post2384645)
Release from further duty will never, ever happen. Why would they ever release you when they can now officially put you on FDP and be flush with free reserves every day? This is a major concession.

If reserve pilots are on their last day prior to days off, and no flight assignments have been made by 5 hours prior to ending reserve shift the pilot is automatically released. (Reference 13-N-10) There will be NO asking to be released from the Company. If you get no assignment, you are automatically released.



Show me a definition some where that FDP allows a pilot to be on short call reserve with a call out after the pilot blocks in and there is no intent of further flying for that pilot, but can sit around (on reserve) and be required to accept another flight assignment.

wt93205
06-29-2017, 09:15 PM
Show me a definition some where that FDP allows a pilot to be on short call reserve with a call out after the pilot blocks in and there is no intent of further flying for that pilot, but can sit around (on reserve) and be required to accept another flight assignment.

My airline has something like this. They have up to 1 hour after block in to assign you further flying or until you call them to get released. So I call as soon as I block in to get released before they find more. It does exist and is legal.

20sx
06-30-2017, 01:55 AM
Nice job wt.

But remember, this is an 85 million dollar contract.....except 22 million of that is for new-hire bonuses;)

YVslave
06-30-2017, 05:27 AM
My airline has something like this. They have up to 1 hour after block in to assign you further flying or until you call them to get released. So I call as soon as I block in to get released before they find more. It does exist and is legal.

Not what I am saying.

example.

Your airlines way, I think they way it works. On your last day, or last of flying on schedule with reserve on following day.

show time, 9:00 am at outstation, fly to base, block in, no flying on your schedule, approximately 11 hour of FDP remaining. You pick up your phone, hello scheduling, this is WT, calling to be released. No flying here, you are released. They may also say, have a nice weekend WT, or your reserve starts tomorrow at XX:XX WT.

The mesa new ta way, which is WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This could be with days remaining on reserve or your last day.

show time, 9:00 am at outstation, fly to base, block in, no flying on your schedule, approximately 11 hour of FDP remaining. You pick up your phone, hello scheduling, this is joe pilot, calling to be released. mesa scheduling, joe we are keeping you on FDP for 9 more hours, we are short crews. joe pilot, is there any flying to be done now? no mr joe pilot, something might come up. With no intent to fly mesa is now keeping joe on reserve ( tell me there is another name MagNeg ) with no flying to be had. Joe gets home, lives near the airport, does gardening and a trip to home depot. Three and half hours go by, ring ring, hello joe, its scheduling, just got a sick call from a pilot, we need you to get to the airport to do a short turn, you have a show time in two hours.?????WTF

Someone please reference how this is legal per FAR 117. There must be some examples and new interpretations by now. I have looked, but have found nothing. How this is in the TA is unbelievable to say the least. They are in-fact changing the FDP formula. It is RAP + FDP, this example does not show this, but mesa is IMO wanting to do this: FDP + RAP + FDP. MagNeg, anyone, please comment.

stbloc
06-30-2017, 05:39 AM
when does voting close and the results posted?

Xdashdriver
06-30-2017, 07:05 AM
Not what I am saying.

example.

Your airlines way, I think they way it works. On your last day, or last of flying on schedule with reserve on following day.

show time, 9:00 am at outstation, fly to base, block in, no flying on your schedule, approximately 11 hour of FDP remaining. You pick up your phone, hello scheduling, this is WT, calling to be released. No flying here, you are released. They may also say, have a nice weekend WT, or your reserve starts tomorrow at XX:XX WT.

The mesa new ta way, which is WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This could be with days remaining on reserve or your last day.

show time, 9:00 am at outstation, fly to base, block in, no flying on your schedule, approximately 11 hour of FDP remaining. You pick up your phone, hello scheduling, this is joe pilot, calling to be released. mesa scheduling, joe we are keeping you on FDP for 9 more hours, we are short crews. joe pilot, is there any flying to be done now? no mr joe pilot, something might come up. With no intent to fly mesa is now keeping joe on reserve ( tell me there is another name MagNeg ) with no flying to be had. Joe gets home, lives near the airport, does gardening and a trip to home depot. Three and half hours go by, ring ring, hello joe, its scheduling, just got a sick call from a pilot, we need you to get to the airport to do a short turn, you have a show time in two hours.?????WTF

Someone please reference how this is legal per FAR 117. There must be some examples and new interpretations by now. I have looked, but have found nothing. How this is in the TA is unbelievable to say the least. They are in-fact changing the FDP formula. It is RAP + FDP, this example does not show this, but mesa is IMO wanting to do this: FDP + RAP + FDP. MagNeg, anyone, please comment.

Yep, the FAA has answered various iterations of this question, all saying that a carrier can keep you on duty if they have some intent, no matter how vague, of having you fly some more up to Table B maximums, plus extension with PIC concurrence.

Here's one letter:
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2014/Wykoff%20&%20Mullen-ALPA%20-%20(2014)%20Legal%20Interpretation.pdf

CWHCFI
06-30-2017, 08:29 AM
when does voting close and the results posted?

Voting closes on July 12. I think at noon PHX time, but I am not sure about that part. Our last vote this results were released the same day voting closed.

MAGNegotiations
06-30-2017, 10:30 AM
show time, 9:00 am at outstation, fly to base, block in, no flying on your schedule, approximately 11 hour of FDP remaining. You pick up your phone, hello scheduling, this is joe pilot, calling to be released. mesa scheduling, joe we are keeping you on FDP for 9 more hours, we are short crews. joe pilot, is there any flying to be done now? no mr joe pilot, something might come up. With no intent to fly mesa is now keeping joe on reserve ( tell me there is another name MagNeg ) with no flying to be had. Joe gets home, lives near the airport, does gardening and a trip to home depot. Three and half hours go by, ring ring, hello joe, its scheduling, just got a sick call from a pilot, we need you to get to the airport to do a short turn, you have a show time in two hours.?????WTF

Someone please reference how this is legal per FAR 117. There must be some examples and new interpretations by now. I have looked, but have found nothing. How this is in the TA is unbelievable to say the least. They are in-fact changing the FDP formula. It is RAP + FDP, this example does not show this, but mesa is IMO wanting to do this: FDP + RAP + FDP. MagNeg, anyone, please comment.

With using your example; the answer received by other bloggers is the legal rules of 117 and current book since this term is currently undefined in our current contract. However since FDP is defined in this TA your example would be as follows:

"show time, 9:00 am at outstation, fly to base, block in, no flying on your schedule, approximately 11 hour of FDP remaining for 117 rules, with TA you would finish at 2 hours after block in or 1/2 remaining FDP whichever is less. You pick up your phone, hello scheduling, this is joe pilot, calling to be released. mesa scheduling, joe we are keeping you on FDP for 2 hours, we are short crews. joe pilot, is there any flying to be done now? no mr joe pilot, something might come up. with no flying to be had. Joe gets home, lives near the airport, does gardening and a trip to home depot. Three and half hours go by, ring ring, hello joe, its scheduling, just got a sick call from a pilot, we need you to get to the airport to do a short turn, you have a show time in two hours. I'm sorry but my FDP ended 2 hours after my last flight and am not able to accept this assignment. "

YVslave
06-30-2017, 10:46 AM
With using your example; the answer received by other bloggers is the legal rules of 117 and current book since this term is currently undefined in our current contract. However since FDP is defined in this TA your example would be as follows:

"show time, 9:00 am at outstation, fly to base, block in, no flying on your schedule, approximately 11 hour of FDP remaining for 117 rules, with TA you would finish at 2 hours after block in or 1/2 remaining FDP whichever is less. You pick up your phone, hello scheduling, this is joe pilot, calling to be released. mesa scheduling, joe we are keeping you on FDP for 2 hours, we are short crews. joe pilot, is there any flying to be done now? no mr joe pilot, something might come up. with no flying to be had. Joe gets home, lives near the airport, does gardening and a trip to home depot. Three and half hours go by, ring ring, hello joe, its scheduling, just got a sick call from a pilot, we need you to get to the airport to do a short turn, you have a show time in two hours. I'm sorry but my FDP ended 2 hours after my last flight and am not able to accept this assignment. "

Half way answered at best. Does FAR 117 allow this? Show me. You never commented on my point that anything after you block in with no flying on your schedule is short call reserve as I read the FAR definition. Do you have an answer for that? And with no language, as usual, what can the company do after no flying, no ready, no release after block in and option 4 you stay on FDP. are you getting paid? per diem? What ?? I bet nothing as this TA is written. FAIL.

YVslave
06-30-2017, 11:03 AM
Yep, the FAA has answered various iterations of this question, all saying that a carrier can keep you on duty if they have some intent, no matter how vague, of having you fly some more up to Table B maximums, plus extension with PIC concurrence.

Here's one letter:
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2014/Wykoff%20&%20Mullen-ALPA%20-%20(2014)%20Legal%20Interpretation.pdf

Again, vague imo. Not enough info. In this TA situation they have ready reserve and the vague part (option 4). How are you getting paid? The reason the company doesn't want to. Four options after you block in? seriously? I fault the lousy union neg. that let this slide. If you are going to be waiting to fly again (maybe, very little intent) on FDP, there needs to be compensation.

MAGNegotiations
06-30-2017, 11:21 AM
Your Question was answered, maybe a different approach is needed. I'll try to make it simple for you.

Half way answered at best. Does FAR 117 allow this? Show me. YES. You where already given a link from someone else. There have been many interpretations for FAR 117 and we recommend all crewmembers become familiar with them.

You never commented on my point that anything after you block in with no flying on your schedule is short call reserve as I read the FAR definition.
FDP is not short call reserve. (13-M-2-a)

what can the company do after no flying, no ready, no release after block in and option 4 you stay on FDP.
The company has a right to assign you those four choices- FAR117.


are you getting paid?
You are paid minimum guarantee while on reserve or flight credit whichever is greater. Daily credit for reserves is 4 hours (76 hours / 19 works days = 4 hours daily)

per diem?
NO.

MAGNegotiations
06-30-2017, 11:35 AM
As for hotels they have improved a bunch except that one word (preferably) deltajuliet pointed out negates the whole thing. MagNeg you are wrong. If you don't believe me just wait.
What you should have each hotel requires xxx (6) out of xxx(10) listed below. That way you have flexibility with a Sheraton vs a Motel 6. You can still get that Sheraton without that one word "preferably" added in. That word means Mesa doesn't have to give you any that you listed. It is the same garbage as "suitable".

Preferable is only one section, another section is mandatory items listed as Hotel Criteria. What you suggest is one possible route, but then you give Mesa the option to choose 6 out of 10 items that are must haves? Keep in mind that deadbolts are a part of must haves, are you suggesting that Mesa could opt out of rooms with locks? That is a grievance generator and is not a good route to take for the pilot group. There are 23 mandatory items and 8 preferred items. It is not possible to secure every item on a 31 item list in every city we serve, therefore compromises must be made for the good of the pilot group.

Xdashdriver
06-30-2017, 11:58 AM
Again, vague imo. Not enough info. In this TA situation they have ready reserve and the vague part (option 4). How are you getting paid? The reason the company doesn't want to. Four options after you block in? seriously? I fault the lousy union neg. that let this slide. If you are going to be waiting to fly again (maybe, very little intent) on FDP, there needs to be compensation.


You asked:

Someone please reference how this is legal per FAR 117. There must be some examples and new interpretations by now. I have looked, but have found nothing.

I referenced what you asked for. Nothing vague about it. Like I said, there are SEVERAL other iterations of the question that may provide the clarity you're looking for. I didn't link to them all, but I believe Wykoff and Mullen asked them and they are in 2015 IIRC.


How this is in the TA is unbelievable to say the least. They are in-fact changing the FDP formula. It is RAP + FDP, this example does not show this, but mesa is IMO wanting to do this: FDP + RAP + FDP. MagNeg, anyone, please comment.

I think you're getting confused with terminology. A RAP is NOT part of your FDP. Once the FDP clock has started and then stopped, you cannot go into another FDP or RAP until you have 10 hours of rest. What the FAA is saying in the interpretations is that the company can keep your FDP clock running after your last leg if there is some intention of you flying more, even if they aren't yet aware of it. "We may have some more flying for you later" is acceptable to the FAA for keeping your FDP clock running to the Table B max. It's not a RAP because it's inside of the FDP. It becomes one continuous FDP. Once the company determines it is no longer going to use you and/or the FDP clock runs to its Table B max, you're released to rest.

Now, companies/unions can call this FDP-clock-continuation period whatever they want for compensation/work rule purposes. They may even call it reserve, like you want, but it doesn't change the legal status of that time...it's still FDP time, not a RAP per 117.

Right now, Mesa can keep you on FDP right up until Table B max and then ask you to extend on top of that. There are no additional restrictions because it isn't addressed in the current contract.

In looking at your TA in 13.M.2 it looks like the company would be limited beyond what the FARs require as to how long you can kept in this FDP limbo world without additional assignment. That's why it's important to have this kind of time defined.

FAA definitions:

Short-call reserve means a period of time in which a flightcrew member is assigned to a reserve availability period.

Reserve availability period means a duty period during which a certificate holder requires a flightcrew member on short call reserve to be available to receive an assignment for a flight duty period.

The FAA defines short-call reserve as a pilot assigned to a RAP. If you've already been assigned into a flight duty period, then by definition you are no longer in a RAP and therefore are not on short-call reserve as the FAA defines it. The FAA would probably define any post-flight or in-between-flights-reserve as airport/standby reserve for regulatory purposes. The ready/airport/standby reserve term has other implications in the Mesa contract (namely extra pay), so they have to call it something else in the contract or else it would be confusing.

wt93205
06-30-2017, 12:09 PM
Preferable is only one section, another section is mandatory items listed as Hotel Criteria. What you suggest is one possible route, but then you give Mesa the option to choose 6 out of 10 items that are must haves? Keep in mind that deadbolts are a part of must haves, are you suggesting that Mesa could opt out of rooms with locks? That is a grievance generator and is not a good route to take for the pilot group. There are 23 mandatory items and 8 preferred items. It is not possible to secure every item on a 31 item list in every city we serve, therefore compromises must be made for the good of the pilot group.

I probably was not clear on this part...
Separate the mandatory from the additional (preferred) items. Have your "mandatory" list and then your list of additional items each hotel must have. The additional list would have things like your microwaves, fridge, pool, breakfast, fitness center, etc. Of that list they would need to have a min of 5-6 or whatever out of them. My point is the section with preferable means Mesa doesn't have to give you any. Make them give you SOME of the things like I mentioned but it still leaves them room to put you in a holiday inn with no breakfast.

MagPBS
06-30-2017, 12:13 PM
Half way answered at best. Does FAR 117 allow this? Show me. You never commented on my point that anything after you block in with no flying on your schedule is short call reserve as I read the FAR definition. Do you have an answer for that? And with no language, as usual, what can the company do after no flying, no ready, no release after block in and option 4 you stay on FDP. are you getting paid? per diem? What ?? I bet nothing as this TA is written. FAIL.

This is the better interpretation.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2014/Anderson-Teamsters357%20-%20(2014)%20Legal%20Interpretation.pdf

MAGNegotiations
06-30-2017, 12:14 PM
Then separate them. Have your "mandatory" list and then your list of additional items each hotel must have. That list would have things like your microwaves, fridge, pool, breakfast, fitness center, etc. Of that list they would need to have a min of 5-6 or whatever out of them. My point is the section with preferable means Mesa doesn't have to give you any. Make them give you some of the things like I mentioned but it still leaves them room to put you in a holiday inn with no breakfast.

Your statement is exactly what we did. Reference the following:
5-B-9
5-B-10
5-B-11
These sections should clarify things for you.

wt93205
06-30-2017, 12:30 PM
Your statement is exactly what we did. Reference the following:
5-B-9
5-B-10
5-B-11
These sections should clarify things for you.

You are missing the point. I know you have a mandatory section and it is 5-B-9 Hotel Criteria.

The problem we are talking about is specific to section 5-B-11 Preferable Provisions...

5-B-11-a When the Company enters into any contract with a hotel to
provide lodging to pilots for their overnights (including split
duty), overnights for training and on temporary duty
assignment, that hotel contract will preferably contain all or
some of the following criteria:

5-B-11-a-(1) A functioning safety lock box
5-B-11-a-(2) Fitness center
5-B-11-a-(3) Refrigerator available in each room.
5-B-11-a-(4) Microwave available in each room or in a crew lounge.
5-B-11-a-(5) Complimentary breakfast and/or “Grab-and-go” for
early morning departures.
5-B-11-a-(6) Crew discount on food and beverage if the hotel has a
dining facility.
5-B-11-a-(7) Complimentary local transportation to attractions
within a reasonable distance mutually agreed upon
with hotel.
5-B-11-a-(8) Ability to accumulate rewards points and or night stay
credits in specific hotel programs on all incidental
charges.
5-B-11-a-(9) Pet free hotel.

Again, that word means they don't have to give you a single one of these 9 items. I will repeat, change the wording so it reads

5-B-11-a When the Company enters into any contract with a hotel to
provide lodging to pilots for their overnights (including split
duty), overnights for training and on temporary duty
assignment, that hotel contract will contain all or
at a minimum of (5) of the following criteria:"

Or 4 or 6 or whatever you think would make the pilot group happy.

wt93205
06-30-2017, 12:36 PM
5-B-11-a-(9) Pet free hotel.

This should be in the Hotel Criteria section. Who wants pet fur on their cloths or to hear dogs barking.

As for 5-B-11-a
You could add more to this section like a pool, hot tub, etc so you have more options the company can choose from but still have to give you a set number.

You guys have done vast improvements to these sections but unfortunately one word can bring it all crashing down.

wt93205
06-30-2017, 12:45 PM
This is the only place the word Preferable works because the union would have to willingly waive it for a hotel they know is better.

5-B-12 The Company and the Association’s Hotel Committee may
mutually agree to waive any of the requirements set forth in
paragraphs 5-B-9 above and 5-B-11 above in order to secure a
preferable hotel property

Xdashdriver
06-30-2017, 01:10 PM
This is the better interpretation.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2014/Anderson-Teamsters357%20-%20(2014)%20Legal%20Interpretation.pdf

Aha...that's the one I was looking for originally. Thanks!

Inop2
06-30-2017, 02:31 PM
I would vote Go.....like.....go someplace else.

I'm of the opinion that unfortunately in the end JO will win. He won't sign anything that is industry standard or a win/win. It's not in his DNA and he plays by a different set of rules. You deserve better than anything he'll offer now and a possible future at Spirit Airlines. There are much, much better places to work that need you!

squawkoff
06-30-2017, 03:05 PM
I would vote Go.....like.....go someplace else.

I'm of the opinion that unfortunately in the end JO will win. He won't sign anything that is industry standard or a win/win. It's not in his DNA and he plays by a different set of rules. You deserve better than anything he'll offer now and a possible future at Spirit Airlines. There are much, much better places to work that need you!

You make it sound so easy. Just go someplace else like all we have to do is pick a place. Many of us have our apps out and many of us hear nothing. Should we just quit and hope someone calls us? It's easier to get a job when you have a job and that is really applicable when it comes to pilots even if you work for Mesa. You are stating the obvious and it has been stated over and over by many before.

No Land 3
06-30-2017, 08:04 PM
You make it sound so easy. Just go someplace else like all we have to do is pick a place. Many of us have our apps out and many of us hear nothing. Should we just quit and hope someone calls us? It's easier to get a job when you have a job and that is really applicable when it comes to pilots even if you work for Mesa. You are stating the obvious and it has been stated over and over by many before.

Theres a difference between having apps out, and a desire to go anywhere else. You had a response from Omni?, and you made a decision that it wasn't going to be a higher QOL for your situation. Fair enough.
I will suggest however that it is very hard at the regional level to actually know what's better. Regional pilots know a certain lifestyle that they grow comfortable with. When I was at Mesa, I swore I'd never do long haul. Now that I am doing it, I swear I'll never go back to domestic short haul. In fact, the thought of domestic overnights puts a bad taste in my mouth. I had to try it to have formed this opinion. I wanted Spirit, Frontier, Jet Blue, South West when I worked at Mesa. Now, that type of flying seems too close to regional flying, just something I want nothing to do with.
The good news is that any move will provide more for you than anything JO will ever offer.

bnkangle
06-30-2017, 08:32 PM
"We agree that new hire bonuses are discouraging to pilots on property, however due to the Railway Labor Act, there is very little we can do about New Hire Bonuses. This isn’t just our problem, it’s every regional airlines’ problem. Until a pilot finishes IOE, ALPA has no control over what the company can offer them. This LOA does not allow management to pay “whoever they want,” that is what management is currently doing with their bonus programs. This LOA states that if one pilot of a group is offered a retention bonus, ALL pilots of said group will be offer the SAME retention bonus."

This isn't clear to me. The new hire bonuses, specifically the 30k and 22.5k for ejet and crj respectively are indeed paid AFTER the completion of IOE. It says right on the company website and elsewhere.

Also, what you're saying is the LOA assuming the TA passes should effectively end all of the new hire bonuses. Certainly they're not going to pay every pilot on property the same bonuses they've been paying to the recent new hires, so they'll just do away with the bonuses altogether. Is that right?

Inop2
07-01-2017, 04:30 AM
You make it sound so easy. Just go someplace else like all we have to do is pick a place. Many of us have our apps out and many of us hear nothing. Should we just quit and hope someone calls us? It's easier to get a job when you have a job and that is really applicable when it comes to pilots even if you work for Mesa. You are stating the obvious and it has been stated over and over by many before.

You misunderstood my comment. Go to another regional with better pay, real medical insurance, etc.

20sx
07-01-2017, 04:44 AM
With using your example; the answer received by other bloggers is the legal rules of 117 and current book since this term is currently undefined in our current contract. However since FDP is defined in this TA your example would be as follows:

"show time, 9:00 am at outstation, fly to base, block in, no flying on your schedule, approximately 11 hour of FDP remaining for 117 rules, with TA you would finish at 2 hours after block in or 1/2 remaining FDP whichever is less. You pick up your phone, hello scheduling, this is joe pilot, calling to be released. mesa scheduling, joe we are keeping you on FDP for 2 hours, we are short crews. joe pilot, is there any flying to be done now? no mr joe pilot, something might come up. with no flying to be had. Joe gets home, lives near the airport, does gardening and a trip to home depot. Three and half hours go by, ring ring, hello joe, its scheduling, just got a sick call from a pilot, we need you to get to the airport to do a short turn, you have a show time in two hours. I'm sorry but my FDP ended 2 hours after my last flight and am not able to accept this assignment. "

Careful with your answer, he was referencing a pilot on reserve with this example. I think your answer is for a line holder with a canceled flight. Correct me if I'm wrong;)

Also, by 13-n-12-b, does this mean getting done a reserve assignment a pilot can be put on ready reserve? I didn't think we could mix assignments like that.

squawkoff
07-01-2017, 05:54 AM
You misunderstood my comment. Go to another regional with better pay, real medical insurance, etc.


Not that easy either. Flew with a CA that has been at Mesa for 10 years. He showed me his recent rejection letter from Envoy. He didn't interview. I wonder if Envoy is told not to hire other pilots that support their feed to AA?

I personally applied to Endevor. Haven't heard a peep.

squawkoff
07-01-2017, 06:11 AM
Theres a difference between having apps out, and a desire to go anywhere else. You had a response from Omni?, and you made a decision that it wasn't going to be a higher QOL for your situation. Fair enough.
I will suggest however that it is very hard at the regional level to actually know what's better. Regional pilots know a certain lifestyle that they grow comfortable with. When I was at Mesa, I swore I'd never do long haul. Now that I am doing it, I swear I'll never go back to domestic short haul. In fact, the thought of domestic overnights puts a bad taste in my mouth. I had to try it to have formed this opinion. I wanted Spirit, Frontier, Jet Blue, South West when I worked at Mesa. Now, that type of flying seems too close to regional flying, just something I want nothing to do with.
The good news is that any move will provide more for you than anything JO will ever offer.

For me, long haul wouldn't work unless it would be 7 on and then days off. I can't and don't want to be gone from family for two weeks, and some times four weeks at a time. QOL is more important to me than money. Don't get me wrong. I'd love to have the best of both and I'll gladly fight for it. The question I ask myself is how much is two years of seniority worth? I really don't want to start over at the bottom of another seniority list at another regional. Don't mind it with a vertical or even a diagonal move. No matter how you cut it, a regional is a regional. Some are just worse than others.

I'm guessing by your comment that not just having your app out but going to job fairs also. I agree with you if that's what you're getting at. I plan on doing that. I talked to one of our FOs the other day who has been to 5 job fairs trying to get to Spirit. He has yet to receive a call. He is senior to me.

I think we (MESA) are at a real turning point with this TA. If it passes JO will have to bid flying inline with other regionals. His days of a never ending supply of cheap pilots is over. He (JO) just needs to face that fact. By his emails to us and the payscales for FOs in this new TA says he hasn't faced that fact yet. If we don't pass it either he will come back to the table and try to get an expedited vote on improvements or we will stand his ground and possibly lose the additional planes for United. We will never get an industry leading TA. This is a man who prides himself on the title "Worst CEO in America."

WE SHALL SEE!

MagPBS
07-01-2017, 06:18 AM
Also, by 13-n-12-b, does this mean getting done a reserve assignment a pilot can be put on ready reserve? I didn't think we could mix assignments like that.

Legally, yes you can.

WisJudge
07-01-2017, 06:20 AM
For me, long haul wouldn't work unless it would be 7 on and then days off. I can't and don't want to be gone from family for two weeks, and some times four weeks at a time. QOL is more important to me than money. Don't get me wrong. I'd love to have the best of both and I'll gladly fight for it. The question I ask myself is how much is two years of seniority worth? I really don't want to start over at the bottom of another seniority list at another regional. Don't mind it with a vertical or even a diagonal move. No matter how you cut it, a regional is a regional. Some are just worse than others.

I'm guessing by your comment that not just having your app out but going to job fairs also. I agree with you if that's what you're getting at. I plan on doing that. I talked to one of our FOs the other day who has been to 5 job fairs trying to get to Spirit. He has yet to receive a call. He is senior to me.

I think we (MESA) are at a real turning point with this TA. If it passes JO will have to bid flying inline with other regionals. His days of a never ending supply of cheap pilots is over. He (JO) just needs to face that fact. By his emails to us and the payscales for FOs in this new TA says he hasn't faced that fact yet. If we don't pass it either he will come back to the table and try to get an expedited vote on improvements or we will stand his ground and possibly lose the additional planes for United. We will never get an industry leading TA. This is a man who prides himself on the title "Worst CEO in America."

WE SHALL SEE!

Is it a lateral move when everything is better?
Two year's seniority seems a minor reason to hold you back.
Do the benefits of that seniority outweigh the benefits of a move, lateral or otherwise?

I was picked up instantly, interviewed on the spot and got a class date 3 weeks later. All it took was face time at a job fair. I've hired close to 100 employees and subcontractors in my business career. The ones who got instant credibility were those who took the time and expense to come see me. Some from Asia to the US. People take notice when you promote yourself in a respectful manner and in person.

What I considered in making a move, lateral or otherwise:
Was QOL going to be better (commute, work rules, corp culture)?
Would the new company be a place I could spend a lengthy time at?
Would it be a better stepping stone to bigger and better?
Was the pay better, immediately or within a year or so?
Was there good reliable insurance available?
Was there a reasonable labor contract in place?
Was the reputation of the company respectable?

I'm 51, so my time is limited. Even with limited time in the industry I found it much more advantageous to make a lateral move than to stay.
I wrote down all the pros and cons of making a move and the results were an eye-opener. Where I was at showed much less opportunity.
Was I more or less likely to get hired from where I was? Less.
Was the QOL going to be better? Much better.
How was the insurance? Best in the industry.
How was the contract, pay, and reputation? Good, Good, Very Good.
It was time to leave.

Don't be stuck anywhere that holds you back or where you are unhappy. Don't make any decision out of fear. Boldly do what is best for you and your family. Maybe staying is your best career move, maybe not.

Good Luck!

No Land 3
07-01-2017, 06:21 AM
Not that easy either. Flew with a CA that has been at Mesa for 10 years. He showed me his recent rejection letter from Envoy. He didn't interview. I wonder if Envoy is told not to hire other pilots that support their feed to AA?

I personally applied to Endevor. Haven't heard a peep.

A friendly suggestion, put in for a CA slot, if you haven't already. I've seen a few examples of FO's who could of upgraded, but did not, that sends warning flags out. I don't care what anyone says, having 1000 121 TPIC on your resume opens doors, and is in your best interest. Your CA friend that was told no, there's probably more to the story. Personally, I think Air Wisconsin looks nice, if I had to go back to a regional.
ABX, ATI, K4, Southern, Atlas, allegiant, South West, are all hiring, but I agree, it's harder than people think. I was extremely lucky. Heck, in this industry, luck has everything to do with it.

Inop2
07-01-2017, 06:34 AM
Not that easy either. Flew with a CA that has been at Mesa for 10 years. He showed me his recent rejection letter from Envoy. He didn't interview. I wonder if Envoy is told not to hire other pilots that support their feed to AA?

I personally applied to Endevor. Haven't heard a peep.

I was at Mesa last year and chose to leave. If I can do it anyone can.. lol. I prepared for the interview at my current regional. Started class 2 weeks later. I was ready for their questions. If I was a 10 year Capt I wouldn't be looking at regionals. Just my opinion.

Purpleanga
07-01-2017, 06:53 AM
If the voices in your head are telling you to make a lateral move you should listen. That's your soul telling you it can't take flying at Mesa anymore, if you deny it because you have 2 year or 10 year seniorty, you're just going to be miserable in the long run. Good luck.

Purpleanga
07-01-2017, 07:03 AM
Not that easy either. Flew with a CA that has been at Mesa for 10 years. He showed me his recent rejection letter from Envoy. He didn't interview. I wonder if Envoy is told not to hire other pilots that support their feed to AA?

I personally applied to Endevor. Haven't heard a peep.

As far as envoy I think everyone gets that rejection letter I think because the computer doesn't like something but it's not HR. Just find someone to reccomend you, probably as easy as asking an envoy guy here to talk to hr. They'll interview you right away.

YVslave
07-03-2017, 07:00 AM
You asked:



I referenced what you asked for. Nothing vague about it. Like I said, there are SEVERAL other iterations of the question that may provide the clarity you're looking for. I didn't link to them all, but I believe Wykoff and Mullen asked them and they are in 2015 IIRC.




I think you're getting confused with terminology. A RAP is NOT part of your FDP. Once the FDP clock has started and then stopped, you cannot go into another FDP or RAP until you have 10 hours of rest. What the FAA is saying in the interpretations is that the company can keep your FDP clock running after your last leg if there is some intention of you flying more, even if they aren't yet aware of it. "We may have some more flying for you later" is acceptable to the FAA for keeping your FDP clock running to the Table B max. It's not a RAP because it's inside of the FDP. It becomes one continuous FDP. Once the company determines it is no longer going to use you and/or the FDP clock runs to its Table B max, you're released to rest.

Now, companies/unions can call this FDP-clock-continuation period whatever they want for compensation/work rule purposes. They may even call it reserve, like you want, but it doesn't change the legal status of that time...it's still FDP time, not a RAP per 117.

Right now, Mesa can keep you on FDP right up until Table B max and then ask you to extend on top of that. There are no additional restrictions because it isn't addressed in the current contract.

In looking at your TA in 13.M.2 it looks like the company would be limited beyond what the FARs require as to how long you can kept in this FDP limbo world without additional assignment. That's why it's important to have this kind of time defined.

FAA definitions:

Short-call reserve means a period of time in which a flightcrew member is assigned to a reserve availability period.

Reserve availability period means a duty period during which a certificate holder requires a flightcrew member on short call reserve to be available to receive an assignment for a flight duty period.

The FAA defines short-call reserve as a pilot assigned to a RAP. If you've already been assigned into a flight duty period, then by definition you are no longer in a RAP and therefore are not on short-call reserve as the FAA defines it. The FAA would probably define any post-flight or in-between-flights-reserve as airport/standby reserve for regulatory purposes. The ready/airport/standby reserve term has other implications in the Mesa contract (namely extra pay), so they have to call it something else in the contract or else it would be confusing.

I was using the RAP +FDP + RAP as an example. My main problem is the company holding on to you like short call reserve. Out of those four options, three make sense. flying , ready, go home. When you read the FDP definition, it mentions airport standby, not short call. When you read these interpretation they do not specifically address my issue, other than you are still good to the company for flying. I am sure everyone has reservations on this portion of the TA. The spirit of the 117 rule is not to go home to be called back. This is what could happen. I am sure the people writing this rule never intended this sort of usage, that's why the idea of airport standby is in the definition. And back to the MAGNEG guys. Because you are on call, on FDP, you are not getting paid, just like short call reserve. There will be no credit for FDP on rainmaker. And stop with the BS of I am getting paid. YEAH YEAH YEAH, my daily credit for my guaranty, this IMO is telling me I am on short call, not FDP. And to make it simple for you, flying = paid, ready = paid, go home = done , FDP ( to be called back with two hour call out, MAYBE) = NO PAY.

Fix this section, ADD a day off, no DOS BS (everything in full swing day one), health insurance like everyone else has, better language and definitions, and just maybe we will have a contract that will attract and maintain an adequate pilot staffing level. This POS is not that contract. If you guys believe this contract attracts and keeps pilots, show me. Lots of FO's voting no, you know why??? no health insurance. Its a big F ing deal. JO has made this mess, everything we do now that does not fix all the problems is a concession. You see this word repeatedly. You union guys, without actually saying it, threaten the pilot group by saying this is the contract or the doors close. If this is really the case, ask yourselves, maybe we sent this out prematurely.
end rant.

Systemized
07-04-2017, 04:55 AM
Right now, Mesa can keep you on FDP right up until Table B max and then ask you to extend on top of that. There are no additional restrictions because it isn't addressed in the current contract.


2-hour 117 extensions are not legal for "added flying." You can only use and accept a 2-hour extension if it's for scheduled flying. Scheduled flying would be the flying already on your schedule when your FDP started or the night before when you entered the rest prior to your known scheduled show time.

Since you can't be extended for additional flying, why on earth would you agree to sit around until you hit the limit on the FDP table? You need at least 1.5 hour buffer to work the shortest possible flight. Why not sit around until 1.5 hours for your max FDP and go home?

Your company or scheduling department may tell you, you can accept 2-hour extensions for additional flying, but remember, you are the one "accepting" the extension on record. If anything happens, you will be hung out to dry for accepting an illegal assignment. We all know, when accepting a 2-hour extension, you've had a long day and chances of "anything happening" increases.

Navmode
07-04-2017, 06:50 AM
Is it a lateral move when everything is better?
Two year's seniority seems a minor reason to hold you back.
Do the benefits of that seniority outweigh the benefits of a move, lateral or otherwise?

I was picked up instantly, interviewed on the spot and got a class date 3 weeks later. All it took was face time at a job fair. I've hired close to 100 employees and subcontractors in my business career. The ones who got instant credibility were those who took the time and expense to come see me. Some from Asia to the US. People take notice when you promote yourself in a respectful manner and in person.



And there are those that are wildly against spending time off to go to a job fair. Everyone's resume looks the same, how else are you going to differentiate yourself besides dressing up and proving you'll be tolerable to sit next to on a trip? The same goes for getting involved/volunteering. Everyone has a life/ a family or whatever, otherwise it wouldn't be called a sacrifice.

deltajuliet
07-04-2017, 03:26 PM
@deltajuliet,

Thanks for your post. A lot of pilots found it informative, but unfortunately some of your statements are false and/or misinformed. Here are our corrections:

Thank you for your post. A lot of management individuals found it helpful, but unfortunately some of your statements are misleading and/or disingenuous. Here are my corrections.

Pay rate comparison across the industry-
Industry Average FO is $32.99. CA is $67.19.
TA pay rates 1st year FO $36 interim rates that may be extended. CA rates start at $63 and finish at DOS+3 $67.32.
Your statement that: “FO’s will be lowest in the industry” is false. Based on contractual pay scales at other regionals, Mesa FO’s would be higher than their peers. This includes Envoy, PSA and Piedmont where the current 1st year pay is around $28. There are letters of agreement that increase this number, however their contract payrate is around $28 per hour., and those LOAs do terminate. Industry average 1st year FO pay is less than $33.

Where are you getting your numbers? Industry average FO is $32.99?

First year FO rates at 76-seat shops:

Compass – 36
Endeavor – 30
ExpressJet – 40
PSA – 39
SkyWest – 37
Envoy – 38
GoJet – 37
Horizon – 40
Republic – 40

Average – 37.44

This doesn’t take into account union-sanctioned retention or new-hire bonuses like the additional $20,000 every single Endeavor pilot gets annually or the $31,000 a 1500 hour CFI gets for going to Air Whiskey. Even if you include 50-seat operators it doesn’t change. To suggest the American wholly-owneds will suddenly be paying $28/hour is laughable. No reasonable negotiator would use that as a baseline for what constitutes standard.

Add to this the fact that DOS+2 regresses to $31.00 and the thing’s a non-starter. Believing that JO will simply decide to keep the rates higher is shortsighted and naïve. He can just pay $31 while shelling out more new hire bonuses and use them as renewed leverage for the following contract. Or, suppose there actually is a major economic downturn or terrorist attack that gives him reprieve from staffing problems. We’ve seen his craftiness year after year. If you give him an inch of ambiguous wording in a contract, he’ll take a mile through interpretation and arbitration. Imagine giving him clear and complete power in reducing pay rates.

As far as Captain rates are concerned, again, we’re not receiving any sort of retention bonus and will only reach the present industry standard at DOS+3, by which point we will continue to be below industry standard. And as you pointed out, here and now, we are $4.32 per hour below industry average. That is significant.

Is this a B scale?
No, the interim rates are our way of tying Mesa’s hands to the bonus structure that they are currently using to lure New Hire pilots.

It’s literally by its definition a B-scale, and that should disgust any professional aviator.

As far as new hire bonuses, honestly, it would be worth negotiating capital to stop them if the lawsuit doesn’t pan out. Barring that, we need industry standard pay (not $4.32 below it) to consider sanctioning them, probably with a me-too clause thrown in.

Pilots advancing to the next pay scale annually- Your statement is not true, pilots get 12 months of a pay rate. You will always have 24 pay checks at your applicable rate.

A pilot is hired January 9th. January 10th of the following year, he gets a 4-day. A reasonable person would say that trip should be paid at Year 2 pay, but per the current contract and new TA, that trip will still be paid at Year 1 pay since “he shall be paid his new rate from the beginning of the pay period nearest that date.”

Sits and long layovers are a factor of flights assigned to Mesa from our mainline partners. With Min. Day language of 4 hours per day, your schedules could suffer more than currently.
Did an airline union just say that Min Day language would be bad?

When Mesa builds pairings, multiple parameters are available in the optimizer, including a minimum day. If selected and set at 4 hours per day, the optimizer tends to dilute the pairings across the entire month trying to get at least 4 hours on each day, at the expense of higher credit days. The results that we reviewed were overall worse than those produced today without the Min. day.
We don’t have to fly 4 hours a day to get paid 4 hours a day. At Mesa’s staffing levels they couldn’t afford to give us 16 hour 4-days where we aren’t utilized efficiently. They need to maintain the high credit days to keep the operation on track too, so our schedules would likely remain unaffected. What would change is a day flying from TUS-PHX-ELP or GRK-DFW-MAF is now worth 4 hours. Barring that, Trip Rigs. There are a lot of ways to fight inefficiency.

Remember that if Mesa provided your iPad, they would have the ability to assign you flying, track your whereabouts , as well as restrict any apps from being downloaded and monitor your activity while using the company provided iPad.
I’m not looking to watch Netflix, surf the Internet, or play Angry Birds on an iPad. They can restrict whatever apps they want and track me from the airport to the hotel if it makes them happy, but we should not be paying for it. This should be as self-evident as paying for KCM.

The Preferable part of hotel language in section 5-B-11-a is placed there purposefully. This single word does not negate this entire section.
Sure it does.

If we moved microwaves and refrigerators into the mandatory section, this would move us out of good existing hotels such as Sheratons and Marriotts and guarantee us a slot at the La Quintas.
Nobody is saying microwaves and fridges should be mandatory. We understand that. The way it’s written, however, Mesa can disregard 5-B-11 Preferable Provisions at 100% of our hotels. There’s nothing that holds them to having any of those items anywhere. That leaves us with 5-B-9, which in theory could land us back at a Microtel or even a Motel 6 provided there’s a truck stop Denny’s nearby.

The current hotel language states a “suitable” accommodation will be provided to the pilots and nothing much more. We’ve stated multiple times before that this TA isn’t perfect. However, of the multiple improvements to our current CBA, hotel language has some of the greatest gains. If there is a problem with a hotel, this language provides a means of changing out problematic hotels, however this requires pilots to actively participate by filing hotel complains.
5-B-9 is the operative section and basically lays out the definition of 117 suitable accommodations while adding in basic safety features any first world structure should have (smoke detectors, safe elevators, etc.). 24-hour food availability exceeding a Whataburger is the only substantive addition, but again, a nearby Denny’s or Waffle House could satisfy the requirements.

5-E-4 gives us no power in changing hotels. It just lays out the process we’ve been using for a year or so. If a certain hotel generates enough egregious complaints, the company might choose to humor us with a hotel change if they’re feeling generous, but they don’t have to. Mesa can say, “Oh, API talked to the property manager about that bed bug infestation, they said they’d get right on it. Problem solved! Thanks for playing.”

This is not true. Some examples of where Mesa stays and other airlines stay: Midland (MAF), Birmingham (BHM), National (DCA), Cincinnati (CVG), Detroit (DTW), Dulles (IAD), Toronto (YYZ), Tulsa (TUL), Indianapolis (IND), San Antonio (SAT), Austin (AUS)- to name a few.

Obviously we have a few hotels that other airlines stay at, but the suggestion is a provision that says MAG pilots will not stay at any hotel not currently used by another 121 carrier. There may be exceptions if we’re the only airline serving a certain airport, but you get the idea.

This was sought by the Negotiating Committee, but again since pay was deemed more important by the pilot group, the money for uniforms was shifted into seeking better compensation.

Oh, you mean the survey that asked if we’d rather get above the poverty line or stop using bed bug infested hotels but not both? That survey?

Our peers have a range of 50% to 100% deadhead pay in the air and some have ground deadhead language with the average specified at 50%. If you ground deadhead at Mesa, it is paid at applicable pay rate at 62.5%. Obviously, in our next negotiation, we will seek a higher deadhead rate, which will be easier to achieve if we are at 62.5% versus 50%.
Yeah, we’ll get ‘em next time. Heck, Mesa pilots might see 75% deadhead pay by 2021. Exciting times.

This is a software issue. We also would have liked 3 days of partial vacation, but this wasn’t our call. It’s purely a limitation of the software.
Apparently adding us to Jetnet is a software issue too. For being 2017, there’s quite a few software issues preventing basic things from getting accomplished.

1-year training notes for equipment transfers is not ideal
Training notes are not acceptable in any way, shape, or form.

…but is a way to keep training costs lower to Mesa...
Every give we offer the company should equate to higher and higher pay rates for the pilots.

Mesa is offering retention bonuses currently, and it is part of the New Hire Compensation plan. Captains are not leaving in the amounts as FOs with less than 3 years seniority at Mesa. LOA-3 addresses this and should put a cap on future retention bonus offered to select pilots by requiring Mesa to offer such bonuses to all pilots in a given status or the entire pilot group.
It’s not equitable to pay only one status, and that LOA doesn’t do anything to cap sign-on bonuses.

Cost associated with this was too high and Mesa was only willing to implement for line holders anyways. Since the majority of line holders receive 12 or more days off currently, we refocused our sights on compensation.
Gosh, if they weren’t willing, I guess there’s nothing we can do. And that’s the second time you’ve acknowledged yielding a section to focus on Compensation instead only for it to still quantifiably lag behind every other regional airline.

ALPA was trying to get a more refined definition of Reserve Buffers, but due to the complexity of calculations and numerous variables it proved nearly impossible. For example: Reserve Buffers are affected by local weather phenomena, Historic pilot sick calls, TDY or moving reserves from one Domicile to another with fewer reserves. This language was the only way to get started in defining Reserve Buffers. Since now they have to provide us with their method of calculation it will be easier for us to call them out when they don’t stick to it.
And what happens when we call them out?

Our current contract was written before the new FAR 117. That is why the definition has to be defined. This is not a concession because if we do not define FDP then Mesa retains rights to do as they please by section 1-F. Therefore, defining this term is vital to protecting pilots.
That’s why we shouldn’t pass a TA that defines it and treats it like reserve, especially if we’re not monetarily compensated another dollar or two per hour to make it worthwhile.

Call me first/ Call me last is not dead. Your argument is false. Reference 13-N-15-d-(1)-(d). Reserves will be implemented different than current book, so comparing it to the current process is comparing apples and oranges. The only time seniority is not considered in reserve assignments is ready reserve, which is the same as current practice.
I literally quoted 13-N-15-d-(1)-(d) and bolded it. CMF/CML is the last assignment method and preceded by long call reserves with the closest reserve bucket category, then short call reserves with the closest reserve bucket category, then pilots with a RAP starting closest to the start of the assignment, then pilots with a RAP ending closest to the end of the assignment, then pilots who haven’t reached 65 hours for the month, and then finally Call Me First/Call Me Last. It’ll rarely if ever get to that. It’s like suggesting the NFL frequently uses the #12 tie breaking method of a coin toss to decide who’s going to the playoffs.

If our math is right, 17% is greater than 0% which is current book that Mesa MAY offer long call if staffing permits. Now Mesa MUST offer long call. During the next round of negotiations this number should become larger.
“We’ll get ‘em next time.”

This was discussed in negotiations, but did not progress further due to short staffing system wide and removal of the pro rate table would increase the number of days off.
That’s the point.

Again, per pilot demand, our focus was mostly on compensation.
Third time.

Once again, if our math is correct, 1% is higher than the current 0%. We know this TA isn’t perfect, but it’s better than the equipment lock that our senior captains currently experience.
Why are you pushing this TA so hard for statistically indiscernible improvements like 1%? You must have been here in 2015 – surely you remember how much disdain and division was created by the union cramming a sub par TA down the pilot group’s collective throat. I always thought, at the very least, that wouldn’t happen again. That the union would be smart enough not to “sell” any new TA, but simply let the pilots read it and decide.

You’re right. We’re also disappointed that we couldn’t get improved insurance. But with 30% of the pilot group involvement and 8% enrolled in higher premium plans, we just couldn’t justify the cost.
Pilot involvement is low precisely because the insurance is so bad! This was echoed ad nauseam after TA15.

Since a smaller portion of pilots would receive improvements in benefits and 100% of the pilots would receive the benefit of a bigger paycheck, we decided to concentrate more on compensation.
Fourth time.

We agree that new hire bonuses are discouraging to pilots on property, however due to the Railway Labor Act, there is very little we can do about New Hire Bonuses. This isn’t just our problem, it’s every regional airlines’ problem. Until a pilot finishes IOE, ALPA has no control over what the company can offer them. This LOA does not allow management to pay “whoever they want,” that is what management is currently doing with their bonus programs. This LOA states that if one pilot of a group is offered a retention bonus, ALL pilots of said group will be offer the SAME retention bonus.
Does that mean if a new hire gets a hypothetical $10,000 upon completion of IOE as part of a sign on bonus, suddenly all FO’s would have to get $10,000? Suppose then that JO simply gives the new hire all bonus money up front with a contract that says it must be paid back if they don’t finish training or leave. We’re still up the creek.

Other regional pilot groups have reconciled new hire bonuses upon receiving a satisfactory contract.

This does not threaten your flying schedules. Reference 1-B-2 states that a very specific and rare type of flying may be contracted out to meet the needs of service. As far as Mesa pilots flying Mesa aircraft, they are Mesa Pilots, just on retired status. The number of flights flown under this LOA is miniscule due to the extremely high cost (Mesa must keep these pilots trained and current), they must only fly with other retired pilots, and must be travelled to and from locations. Keep in mind that flying allowed is only what is NOT covered in our OPS SPECS. It’s not a scope violation. Negotiations are a give and take, and we got a lot of other benefits in the TA because of this. Also, Section 1-B-3 prevents the formation of alter egos such as Freedom in past Mesa Practices.
It’s the principle and the precedent. What did we get for it?

In closing, Mesa Management has always needed us. After all, there is no airline without pilots. Although pilots talk about not needing this deal as much as our management, the pilot group has been very loud in asking about the pace of negotiations. You asked to be in line with our peers and the numbers show that this TA will bring us in line with our peers on many items. We’ll say it again, we know it’s not perfect, but it is a vast improvement from where we currently are and gives us a much stronger foundation from which to build in our next negotiation. We encourage all our pilots to ask us questions directly and not use speculation or she said/he said talk. If you do not know the answer, just ask. We’re here to give you the correct information.

Fraternally,

Your Negotiating Committee

In closing, thank you for featuring my post on Facebook. I hope it reached a wider audience. Perhaps we should simplify this whole process and ask for Republic's contract with a Me-Too clause. Just a thought. Happy Independence Day.

3167

calmwinds
07-04-2017, 04:00 PM
$32.99 the industry FO! That was their starting point? Our negotiators can't even get their facts straight or are simply too lazy to do the necessary research.

It is pretty simple, there aren't that many regionals flying for AA or UA. Their FO pay is public. Just do a little research before you hit us with asinine statistics.

If that doesn't tell you we have incompetent negotiators, nothing will. This one post convinced me to Vote No.

Sure, Mesa may fold and if it is that poorly managed, it is probably time. The AA and UA flying isn't going away --- we will all land someplace.

Xdashdriver
07-04-2017, 08:40 PM
2-hour 117 extensions are not legal for "added flying." You can only use and accept a 2-hour extension if it's for scheduled flying. Scheduled flying would be the flying already on your schedule when your FDP started or the night before when you entered the rest prior to your known scheduled show time.

Since you can't be extended for additional flying, why on earth would you agree to sit around until you hit the limit on the FDP table? You need at least 1.5 hour buffer to work the shortest possible flight. Why not sit around until 1.5 hours for your max FDP and go home?

Your company or scheduling department may tell you, you can accept 2-hour extensions for additional flying, but remember, you are the one "accepting" the extension on record. If anything happens, you will be hung out to dry for accepting an illegal assignment. We all know, when accepting a 2-hour extension, you've had a long day and chances of "anything happening" increases.

Do you have a source that backs up the "no extensions for added flying" as being illegal?

Systemized
07-05-2017, 07:37 AM
Do you have a source that backs up the "no extensions for added flying" as being illegal?

It's black and white spelled out in 117. I can find the section if you want and post it but I'm certain 2-hour extensions for added flying is not legal. 2-two extensions are only legal for scheduled flying, flying that was on your schedule at your show time when your FDP began. In other words, once the FDP clock has started, you can't extend for added flying. You can only extend past your 117 table for delayed flights that were on your schedule at show time.

Xdashdriver
07-05-2017, 08:32 AM
It's black and white spelled out in 117. I can find the section if you want and post it but I'm certain 2-hour extensions for added flying is not legal. 2-two extensions are only legal for scheduled flying, flying that was on your schedule at your show time when your FDP began. In other words, once the FDP clock has started, you can't extend for added flying. You can only extend past your 117 table for delayed flights that were on your schedule at show time.

Please find the section and post it. 117.19 Flight Duty Period Extensions doesn't say anything of the sort, so I'm curious which section does.

Bgood
07-05-2017, 08:36 AM
[QUOTE=Systemized;2389762]It's black and white spelled out in 117. I can find the section if you want and post it but I'm certain 2-hour extensions for added flying is not legal. 2-two extensions are only legal for scheduled flying, flying that was on your schedule at your show time when your FDP began. In other words, once the FDP clock has started, you can't extend for added flying. You can only extend past your 117 table for delayed flights that were on your schedule......

Yes you cannot be extended just so they have u walk across to the next flight they just added to ur schedule. Example, U are operating a flight out of let's say Newark and u have 1hr of FDP left b4 u time out and suddenly ur airplane broke and takes 1.5 hrs to get it fix. That's wen scheduling will call to ASK you if u can take an extension for that UNFORSEEN circumstance. It is always up to u to accept it. If u feel ur getting too tired then NO, if u feel u can operate the flight safely then ok. Simple. That's what the UP TO 2 hr extension is for, unforseen circumstances.
U cant be sitting on reserve and they extend u for 2 more hrs to just sit there if that's wat the question was.

Here's a link
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/117.19

Bgood
07-05-2017, 08:51 AM
[QUOTE=Systemized;2389762]It's black and white spelled out in 117. I can find the section if you want and post it but I'm certain 2-hour extensions for added flying is not legal. 2-two extensions are only legal for scheduled flying, flying that was on your schedule at your show time when your FDP began. In other words, once the FDP clock has started, you can't extend for added flying. You can only extend past your 117 table for delayed flights that were on your schedule......

Yes you cannot be extended just so they have u walk across to the next flight they just added to ur schedule. Example, U are operating a flight out of let's say Newark and u have 1hr of FDP left b4 u time out and suddenly ur airplane broke and takes 1.5 hrs to get it fix. That's wen scheduling will call to ASK you if u can take an extension for that UNFORSEEN circumstance. It is always up to u to accept it. If u feel ur getting too tired then NO, if u feel u can operate the flight safely then ok. Simple. That's what the UP TO 2 hr extension is for, unforseen circumstances.
U cant be sitting on reserve and they extend u for 2 more hrs to just sit there if that's wat the question was.

Here's a link
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/117.19

And in addition to this, scheduling has to call u and ASK u to extend BEFORE u time out. Else u cant accept it if u wish to cuz u already timed out.

MAGNegotiations
07-05-2017, 09:57 AM
$32.99 the industry FO! That was their starting point? Our negotiators can't even get their facts straight or are simply too lazy to do the necessary research.

It is pretty simple, there aren't that many regionals flying for AA or UA. Their FO pay is public. Just do a little research before you hit us with asinine statistics.


32.99 is industry standard. Pay rates on Airline Pilot Central are not accurate to contracted pay rates with FOs. This information was derived from the ALPA contract archives. We didn't just make this number up. Research was done. Maybe do some more research rather than just using APC.

For example: the contract pay rates for Envoy is 25.84 (2015-2017) then 26.10 (2018). Envoy has an LOA that starts FO's at year 4 which is 39.78 (2015 - 2017).


ALPA is always looking for volunteers. I suggest you give it a try.

Bgood
07-05-2017, 11:00 AM
32.99 is industry standard. Pay rates on Airline Pilot Central are not accurate to contracted pay rates with FOs. This information was derived from the ALPA contract archives. We didn't just make this number up. Research was done. Maybe do some more research rather than just using APC.

For example: the contract pay rates for Envoy is 25.84 (2015-2017) then 26.10 (2018). Envoy has an LOA that starts FO's at year 4 which is 39.78 (2015 - 2017).


ALPA is always looking for volunteers. I suggest you give it a try.

Dash 8 37 seater....$36.54...C5......we always looking for ppl too :D :D :rolleyes:

Systemized
07-05-2017, 01:12 PM
[QUOTE=Bgood;2389788]

And in addition to this, scheduling has to call u and ASK u to extend BEFORE u time out. Else u cant accept it if u wish to cuz u already timed out.

It doesn't matter if they call you before you time out if they're asking you to work xyz additional leg. You can't do anything additional to what was on your schedule when your FDP started if it requires a 2-hour extension. If you're sitting reserve with one hour left on your FDP limit and scheduling calls you asking if you can do a DFW-SDF leg but need to accept an extension, you're being asked to do an illegal assignment. You shouldn't sit around tell the end of your FDP limit because once it's within 1.5 hours, it's almost impossible to legally work another flight.

Xdashdriver
07-05-2017, 01:52 PM
[QUOTE=Systemized;2389762]It's black and white spelled out in 117. I can find the section if you want and post it but I'm certain 2-hour extensions for added flying is not legal. 2-two extensions are only legal for scheduled flying, flying that was on your schedule at your show time when your FDP began. In other words, once the FDP clock has started, you can't extend for added flying. You can only extend past your 117 table for delayed flights that were on your schedule......

Yes you cannot be extended just so they have u walk across to the next flight they just added to ur schedule. Example, U are operating a flight out of let's say Newark and u have 1hr of FDP left b4 u time out and suddenly ur airplane broke and takes 1.5 hrs to get it fix. That's wen scheduling will call to ASK you if u can take an extension for that UNFORSEEN circumstance. It is always up to u to accept it. If u feel ur getting too tired then NO, if u feel u can operate the flight safely then ok. Simple. That's what the UP TO 2 hr extension is for, unforseen circumstances.
U cant be sitting on reserve and they extend u for 2 more hrs to just sit there if that's wat the question was.

Here's a link
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/117.19

No that's not the question. All extensions have to be due to unforeseen operational circumstances. I'm not suggesting otherwise.

Systemized is saying that even if there's an unforeseen operational circumstance, you can't be extended if you've had flying added to your schedule after your initial report time for that FDP.

For example, let's say you were scheduled to fly 2 legs and when you get back from the second leg, scheduling assigns you a third leg. That third leg was scheduled to get back before the end of your Table B max, but then an unforeseen operational circumstance delays that third leg so that now it will end after your Table B max.

Systemized says that because the third leg was added to your schedule after your show time for that FDP, you cannot accept an extension. I'm asking him where he is seeing that in 117.

Bgood
07-05-2017, 02:23 PM
[QUOTE=Bgood;2389792]

It doesn't matter if they call you before you time out if they're asking you to work xyz additional leg. You can't do anything additional to what was on your schedule when your FDP started if it requires a 2-hour extension. If you're sitting reserve with one hour left on your FDP limit and scheduling calls you asking if you can do a DFW-SDF leg but need to accept an extension, you're being asked to do an illegal assignment. You shouldn't sit around tell the end of your FDP limit because once it's within 1.5 hours, it's almost impossible to legally work another flight.

Im talking about if ur already on a scheduled flight and something happens, I was making an additional comment to the example I provided in my first post.

Bgood
07-05-2017, 02:28 PM
[QUOTE=Bgood;2389788]

No that's not the question. All extensions have to be due to unforeseen operational circumstances. I'm not suggesting otherwise.

Systemized is saying that even if there's an unforeseen operational circumstance, you can't be extended if you've had flying added to your schedule after your initial report time for that FDP.

For example, let's say you were scheduled to fly 2 legs and when you get back from the second leg, scheduling assigns you a third leg. That third leg was scheduled to get back before the end of your Table B max, but then an unforeseen operational circumstance delays that third leg so that now it will end after your Table B max.

Systemized says that because the third leg was added to your schedule after your show time for that FDP, you cannot accept an extension. I'm asking him where he is seeing that in 117.



You are correct there. In ur example the added flight wasn't gonna go over ur table B max initially. So u started loading up to takeoff and the plane breaks, now it will go over ur Table B max.....they can call and ASK if u can take an extension due to that unforeseen circumstance.

It doesnt matter if the flight was an added flight, the fact that it was to be completed within Table B limits but unforseen happens while ur operating it, warrants a legal ASK for extension.

calmwinds
07-05-2017, 02:30 PM
32.99 is industry standard. Pay rates on Airline Pilot Central are not accurate to contracted pay rates with FOs. This information was derived from the ALPA contract archives. We didn't just make this number up. Research was done. Maybe do some more research rather than just using APC.

For example: the contract pay rates for Envoy is 25.84 (2015-2017) then 26.10 (2018). Envoy has an LOA that starts FO's at year 4 which is 39.78 (2015 - 2017).


ALPA is always looking for volunteers. I suggest you give it a try.

If you go directly to the Envoy Air website, their hourly rate for First Year FOs is $38. They have a bonus on top of that bringing the total first year compensation to $60k. It is just sad!

MAGNegotiations
07-05-2017, 02:44 PM
If you go directly to the Envoy Air website, their hourly rate for First Year FOs is $38. They have a bonus on top of that bringing the total first year compensation to $60k. It is just sad!

That is because of an LOA called FO Flex pay that starts New Hire FOs pay at Year 3 (37.90) rather than year 1(25.84). This LOA expires 2018. If not renewed pay will decrease to previously stated rates.

Bgood
07-05-2017, 02:47 PM
If you go directly to the Envoy Air website, their hourly rate for First Year FOs is $38. They have a bonus on top of that bringing the total first year compensation to $60k. It is just sad!

And MagNeg shouldn't be knocking APC for their accuracy in pay...cuz if u check out each regionals website for first year FO pay and ask those FO that are on first year pay u pretty much get the same answer as wat APC is showing (+/- some cents becuz APC rounds up). CommutAir is paying $36.54 and what does APC say? Republic is actually paying $40 (I asked, I know ppl there) and what is APC showing? The same thing MagNeg mentioned abt LOA with Envoy...APC mentions that too....so how is it not accurate? Industry standard is not $32.99. If so then whats the reason for my pal at republic getting $40 per hr?

APC might lag by 1 to 2 months but they update their stuff

MAGNegotiations
07-05-2017, 02:47 PM
32.99 is industry standard. Pay rates on Airline Pilot Central are not accurate to contracted pay rates with FOs. This information was derived from the ALPA contract archives. We didn't just make this number up. Research was done. Maybe do some more research rather than just using APC.

For example: the contract pay rates for Envoy is 25.84 (2015-2017) then 26.10 (2018). Envoy has an LOA that starts FO's at year 4 which is 39.78 (2015 - 2017).


ALPA is always looking for volunteers. I suggest you give it a try.

[correction LOA starts New Hires at year 3 ($37.90), the pay rate for year 4 is correct.]

Bgood
07-05-2017, 03:01 PM
[correction LOA starts New Hires at year 3 ($37.90), the pay rate for year 4 is correct.]

Same thing ur saying is the same thing APC says:

http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/airlines/regional/envoy_air

Check it out.
It also says after 1 year of service FOs will go to year 4 pay. I will ask a friend of mine (that works at Envoy) to verify this....just to measure how accurate APC is.

And dont think im attacking you MagNeg, its just my allergies acting up.

MAGNegotiations
07-05-2017, 03:09 PM
Same thing ur saying is the same thing APC says:

Envoy Air | AirlinePilotCentral.com (http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/airlines/regional/envoy_air)

Check it out.
It also says after 1 year of service FOs will go to year 4 pay. I will ask a friend of mine (that works at Envoy) to verify this....just to measure how accurate APC is.

The problem with APC and you just saying that pay is $38 is because it is artificially inflated due to an LOA. Year 1 pay rates are $25.84 per Envoy contract. The Negotiating Committee has access to current contracts and LOAs at all ALPA carriers and have verified first year pay contract rates.

Bgood
07-05-2017, 03:11 PM
The problem with APC and you just saying that pay is $38 is because it is artificially inflated due to an LOA. Year 1 pay rates are $25.84 per Envoy contract. The Negotiating Committee has access to current contracts and LOAs at all ALPA carriers and have verified first year pay contract rates.

Ok. Does Republic and CommutAir has an LOA for why their pay is higher than ur quoted industry standards pay? The think is, at the end of the day Envoy won't rollback to $25 as much as its an LOA

Bgood
07-05-2017, 03:15 PM
The problem with APC and you just saying that pay is $38 is because it is artificially inflated due to an LOA. Year 1 pay rates are $25.84 per Envoy contract. The Negotiating Committee has access to current contracts and LOAs at all ALPA carriers and have verified first year pay contract rates.

And APC explained the same thing u explained so if they are inaccurate in saying that then so are you. APC didnt inflate it, you didnt either. APC just stated facts from whats happening at the company. My point is, u cant just throw a wrench in APC accuracy just to say mesa current TA is above industry standards of $32.99. No FO will see it that way and neither should u for determining a good TA.

MAGNegotiations
07-05-2017, 03:18 PM
And APC explained the same thing u explained. APC didnt inflate it. It just stated facts from whats happening at the company. My point is, u cant just throw a wrench in APC accuracy just to say mesa current TA is above industry standards of $32.99

There is no mention of contract 1st year pay rates 25.84.

Bgood
07-05-2017, 03:25 PM
There is no mention of contract 1st year pay rates 25.84.

And you didn't mention that after an FOs first year of service with Envoy they will get year 4 FO pay. Does that mean ur not accurate? No, u simply just didnt mention it. Doesn't mean ur not accurate in everything else u stated. And I'm still wondering abt all the other regionals that are above $32.99.

Ur just talking about 1.

LAMA
07-06-2017, 11:04 AM
To all the Mesa peeps that have a say in this vote. You should vote for you and your pilot group and not listen to all the keyboard commandos out there. If it is the best you think ( and the negotiators think) you can get then vote it in. If not, vote it down. worst thing that happens is you shut your doors and you now actually have priority hiring at all alpa Carriers. Something you obviously don't have now. Look at it as a Mesa Flow thru agreement. Personally i think AA and United did the math and came up with numbers that would be the break even for them. This is how much we will give for new contract, if it passes great, it's still cheaper than the alternative of letting mesa die a slow death and cancel flights for no crew to fly them. If it fails, United simply pull the 175's Mesa doesn't own and gives them to Skywest or Republic. Mesa Mainline becomes newly minted CRJ FO's ( 75% of them are too junior to hold CRJ captain) and staffing problem is fixed. Mesa AA planes are staffed and the CRJ 700's in IAD are now staffed as well. Good luck... Still say the best vote you can do is vote with your feet...Leave before the mushroom cloud gets too big...

CWHCFI
07-12-2017, 07:26 AM
Congratulations for passing the worst contract in the industry. We should all be so proud.

Tpinks
07-12-2017, 08:12 AM
Congratulations for passing the worst contract in the industry. We should all be so proud.

With an even higher rate of Yes votes than Skywest.