Mesa issues warn notice to pilots
09-30-2020 | 06:13 PM
#1492
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 969
Likes: 17
09-30-2020 | 06:18 PM
#1493
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 500
Likes: 5
It’s a bad look for the union when 40%, the amount of people here 2018 and after, are in a position where they could have had their pay going down.
Now, very few of us planned on being on the FO pay scale past year two, and here we are.
09-30-2020 | 06:43 PM
#1495
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 500
Likes: 5
My point is that the company gave the higher pay when the union had negotiated for a pay decrease. It’s not a good way to gain the good graces of 30% of the pilot group.
09-30-2020 | 07:34 PM
#1496
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Only because the company decided that. I signed DOS+2 so I was scheduled for a reduction in pay. The company decided not to.
My point is that the company gave the higher pay when the union had negotiated for a pay decrease. It’s not a good way to gain the good graces of 30% of the pilot group.
My point is that the company gave the higher pay when the union had negotiated for a pay decrease. It’s not a good way to gain the good graces of 30% of the pilot group.
No one on property will have their pay scale slide backward. That only applies to where new hire pay starts.
09-30-2020 | 07:47 PM
#1497
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 500
Likes: 5
Don't think for a second the union wanted that pay decrease. That comes from the company, who was told by American they had to match the American regional carriers pay.
No one on property will have their pay scale slide backward. That only applies to where new hire pay starts.
No one on property will have their pay scale slide backward. That only applies to where new hire pay starts.
Also, you’re saying that American says they’ll pay us, for simplicity’s sake, $100 to fly our plane and oh by the way you can only pay your guys $x. That makes no sense. As long as the company agrees to the $100 what do they give a crap if the company is paying $y.
Also, it looks like the union did want the decrease. They voted for it.
09-30-2020 | 08:46 PM
#1498
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Maybe it’s starting to sink in. UA seems good. But with newly agreed scope all of our planes are going to 70 seats. In addition their block hours will be reduced to 40 pct or less of 2019 levels. UAX block hours can’t exceed UA BLOCK. UA flying will decrease. Combined with the AA DECREASE in November and maybe you see the darkness. The thing is we have a ton of idle crj pilots and not so much on the ejet side. Now at some point we will have to displace. When that happens you may find yourself a jr ca or Sr fo. It’s the whole airline that matters.
I'm not worried one bit.
Where do you stand?
09-30-2020 | 09:39 PM
#1499
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
We are flying E170-200 which are E175, regardless of seats.
Even the new Ejets that XpressJet were flying are E175 with 70 seats, same thing.
Nothing to grieve.
09-30-2020 | 10:02 PM
#1500
In a land of unicorns
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 103
From: Whale FO
Don't think for a second the union wanted that pay decrease. That comes from the company, who was told by American they had to match the American regional carriers pay.
No one on property will have their pay scale slide backward. That only applies to where new hire pay starts.
No one on property will have their pay scale slide backward. That only applies to where new hire pay starts.
Another great APC rumor.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
