[QUOTE=ross9238;1391351]And the response to the original comment >> Nice attempt at causing more of a rift between our groups.<<

It appears that he hypersensitive to the truth.

 

Exactly the same.

 

That rumor is so ridiculous it doesn't even make sense. Why would they move our expensive 200s to replace PCLs cheap ones? Not to mention moving expenses, and the cost of expanding a base?

Only you would repeat an FI rumor.

 

But how would the ASA MEC get to vote on ratification on something that not even the XJT MEC got to vote on?

For starters, this was a MUCH MUCH better run operation before Skywest bought us. And if it wasn't Skywest buying us, it would have been someone else, with just as bad as an operation too probably.

Actually, if you read it again, it specifically says, "terms and conditions" and not "pay rates." And like in ANY arbitration, both parties agree ahead of time on protocol (scope and process).

And speaking of rumors, the one I heard is that the MECs have come to a tentative agreement on a dispute resolution on choosing the pbs vendor.

PS It may be $12/hr less but in total compensation, its probably pretty close. There was a discussion about this between post 101-116 on this flightinfo thread: LXJET 70+ seat rates out Flightinfo.com Hangar

 

But the XJT MEC did get a vote. They just chose not to vote and let an arbitrator make a decision for them. The real question is....What was imposed by the arbitrator and what was agreed to beforehand?

 

No, actually, there was no vote. Not choosing to agree to something you don't want to agree with is not the equivalent of voting. There is nothing wrong with not agreeing to terms and conditions that the company wants and therefore it is legitimate decision to go to arbitration.

The protocol agreement was decided before it went to arbitration. The contract language in section 26 specifically says "terms and conditions" so it wasn't just for pay rates. Those terms and conditions are part of what is agreed to ahead of time in the protocol agreement, the scope of negotiations/mediation/arbitration. If the company wanted dual qual, seniority based pay, smartpref, ponies, etc, its up to the XJT NC to try to negotiate a way to keep that out, or make it the best they can if the don't have the negotiating capital to prevent it, or not come to an agreement and send it to that arbitrator.

 

Don't let this guy fool you.

I'm a CRJ guy, and I have met plenty of stand up ERJ guys that want the exact same things as us.

 

How am I trying to fool anyone. Just trying to explain the process.

I would love to have a joint contract that includes the best of each. As for PBS, whichever the MECs decide (and however they decide it) would be fine with me as well at this point. I'm just not optimistic.

 

Yeah. Screw DTW. Move it to MSP

 

I would guess the assertion is that the XJT MEC didn't have full authority to enter into the arbitration without the consent of the ASA MEC.