Why I'm Voting No
06-29-2017, 06:44 PM
#71
Hold my beer, watch this.
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Position: Airbus Pilot
Posts: 246
Originally Posted by whyvee
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'.
MagNeg gave a logical and lengthy explanation. There's no reason they or any of the negotiators should be considered 'on managements side'.
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.
Last edited by wt93205; 06-29-2017 at 06:55 PM.
06-29-2017, 08:05 PM
#72
Hold my beer, watch this.
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Position: Airbus Pilot
Posts: 246
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.
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.
Last edited by wt93205; 06-29-2017 at 08:42 PM.
06-29-2017, 08:57 PM
#73
Hold my beer, watch this.
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Position: Airbus Pilot
Posts: 246
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.
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.
Last edited by wt93205; 06-29-2017 at 09:11 PM.
06-29-2017, 08:59 PM
#74
Hold my beer, watch this.
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Position: Airbus Pilot
Posts: 246
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.
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.
06-29-2017, 09:05 PM
#75
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Posts: 88
HEY MagNeg
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltajuliet
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
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.
Originally Posted by deltajuliet
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
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.
06-29-2017, 09:15 PM
#76
Hold my beer, watch this.
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Position: Airbus Pilot
Posts: 246
Originally Posted by YVslave
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.
06-30-2017, 05:27 AM
#78
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Posts: 88
Originally Posted by wt93205
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.
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.
06-30-2017, 07:05 AM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by YVslave
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.
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.
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
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
