Mesa Air Group Pilot Website
09-26-2009 | 11:20 AM
#31
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,167
Likes: 803
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
We have golden days (they are REAL golden days, unlike the ones at mesa)...why didn't she use one?
09-26-2009 | 12:00 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
From: LAMA/P180/747
Mesa Pilot's;
Long before the acceptance of this contract it was made clear by some that PBS is only as good as the contract language that protects it. We are now feeling what it is like to live without strong contract language. Management's ability to use PBS as an "optimization tool" remains unchecked and believe me when I tell you that they aren't yet finished looking for "loop-holes".
This is exactly what many tried to warn about prior to the acceptance of this contract. We were all forewarned that this is exactly what would happen and I am amused at the shock and anger I witness as proponents of this contract discover that they have less control over their schedules than ever before. Perhaps they won't be so quick to accept a TA next time around?
With adequate staffing levels PBS is an excellent quality of life enhancer but adequate staffing was not protected in this contract. After only a couple of months of semi-quality schedules the company began the furlough process and introduced "unstacking". "Unstacking" is a euphemism for Junior Assignment. What sort of schedule "massaging" techniques does the company plan once PBS is permantently locked in? Trust me when I say that "unstacking" is only a "peek behind the curtain".
With no contract language protection the company simply ignores the pilot's bid and builds lines to cover the vast open time. I don't remember anyone mentioning "unstacking" during the road shows but some of us knew it would be a short period of time before a way was found to circumvent the intent of the contract. The company is now immensely happy with the benefit of having uninterrupted use of a schedule optimizer.
Unfortunately our current MEC and Negotiation Committee seem content. The only communications we hear from our MEC is either apologetic for the company, or self-congratulatory over a poorly written contract. Instead of providing excuses for the company I expect them to do what they were elected to do and provide and protect a strong labor contract.
This contract included a provision to vote it out by December if we weren't happy with it. By voting out PBS we would have to suffer a year of the former contract with concessions. Beginning December 2010 we would have to re-negotiate the few gains made on this current contract. I propose a strong message be sent to our MEC and our Management that we don't want PBS without a letter of agreement providing adequate staffing and PBS protection language against tactics such as "unstacking".
I for one am willing to risk losing the small gains made on this contract for adequate staffing language. If the company really wants to keep PBS (believe me, they do!) then they will agree to a LOA concerning "unstacking" and staffing. .
Prepare to learn that the MEC will not allow a pilot vote on the matter of the dis-continuation of PBS. Please get involved and contact the MEC and make it clear that you want an LOA concerning staffing and PBS language or you are willing to throw out this "furlough-optimization" contract and start fresh in December 2010.
Stay Strong "The 400"!
winglet
Long before the acceptance of this contract it was made clear by some that PBS is only as good as the contract language that protects it. We are now feeling what it is like to live without strong contract language. Management's ability to use PBS as an "optimization tool" remains unchecked and believe me when I tell you that they aren't yet finished looking for "loop-holes".
This is exactly what many tried to warn about prior to the acceptance of this contract. We were all forewarned that this is exactly what would happen and I am amused at the shock and anger I witness as proponents of this contract discover that they have less control over their schedules than ever before. Perhaps they won't be so quick to accept a TA next time around?
With adequate staffing levels PBS is an excellent quality of life enhancer but adequate staffing was not protected in this contract. After only a couple of months of semi-quality schedules the company began the furlough process and introduced "unstacking". "Unstacking" is a euphemism for Junior Assignment. What sort of schedule "massaging" techniques does the company plan once PBS is permantently locked in? Trust me when I say that "unstacking" is only a "peek behind the curtain".
With no contract language protection the company simply ignores the pilot's bid and builds lines to cover the vast open time. I don't remember anyone mentioning "unstacking" during the road shows but some of us knew it would be a short period of time before a way was found to circumvent the intent of the contract. The company is now immensely happy with the benefit of having uninterrupted use of a schedule optimizer.
Unfortunately our current MEC and Negotiation Committee seem content. The only communications we hear from our MEC is either apologetic for the company, or self-congratulatory over a poorly written contract. Instead of providing excuses for the company I expect them to do what they were elected to do and provide and protect a strong labor contract.
This contract included a provision to vote it out by December if we weren't happy with it. By voting out PBS we would have to suffer a year of the former contract with concessions. Beginning December 2010 we would have to re-negotiate the few gains made on this current contract. I propose a strong message be sent to our MEC and our Management that we don't want PBS without a letter of agreement providing adequate staffing and PBS protection language against tactics such as "unstacking".
I for one am willing to risk losing the small gains made on this contract for adequate staffing language. If the company really wants to keep PBS (believe me, they do!) then they will agree to a LOA concerning "unstacking" and staffing. .
Prepare to learn that the MEC will not allow a pilot vote on the matter of the dis-continuation of PBS. Please get involved and contact the MEC and make it clear that you want an LOA concerning staffing and PBS language or you are willing to throw out this "furlough-optimization" contract and start fresh in December 2010.
Stay Strong "The 400"!
winglet
Blue skies and tailwinds-
09-26-2009 | 08:28 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
From: DHC-8 CA Furloughed
I guess she's not into golden showers. I never bid golden days myself. Never was JAed either.
09-27-2009 | 09:04 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
From: CRJ
Mesa Pilot's;
Long before the acceptance of this contract it was made clear by some that PBS is only as good as the contract language that protects it. We are now feeling what it is like to live without strong contract language. Management's ability to use PBS as an "optimization tool" remains unchecked and believe me when I tell you that they aren't yet finished looking for "loop-holes".
This is exactly what many tried to warn about prior to the acceptance of this contract. We were all forewarned that this is exactly what would happen and I am amused at the shock and anger I witness as proponents of this contract discover that they have less control over their schedules than ever before. Perhaps they won't be so quick to accept a TA next time around?
With adequate staffing levels PBS is an excellent quality of life enhancer but adequate staffing was not protected in this contract. After only a couple of months of semi-quality schedules the company began the furlough process and introduced "unstacking". "Unstacking" is a euphemism for Junior Assignment. What sort of schedule "massaging" techniques does the company plan once PBS is permantently locked in? Trust me when I say that "unstacking" is only a "peek behind the curtain".
With no contract language protection the company simply ignores the pilot's bid and builds lines to cover the vast open time. I don't remember anyone mentioning "unstacking" during the road shows but some of us knew it would be a short period of time before a way was found to circumvent the intent of the contract. The company is now immensely happy with the benefit of having uninterrupted use of a schedule optimizer.
Unfortunately our current MEC and Negotiation Committee seem content. The only communications we hear from our MEC is either apologetic for the company, or self-congratulatory over a poorly written contract. Instead of providing excuses for the company I expect them to do what they were elected to do and provide and protect a strong labor contract.
This contract included a provision to vote it out by December if we weren't happy with it. By voting out PBS we would have to suffer a year of the former contract with concessions. Beginning December 2010 we would have to re-negotiate the few gains made on this current contract. I propose a strong message be sent to our MEC and our Management that we don't want PBS without a letter of agreement providing adequate staffing and PBS protection language against tactics such as "unstacking".
I for one am willing to risk losing the small gains made on this contract for adequate staffing language. If the company really wants to keep PBS (believe me, they do!) then they will agree to a LOA concerning "unstacking" and staffing. .
Prepare to learn that the MEC will not allow a pilot vote on the matter of the dis-continuation of PBS. Please get involved and contact the MEC and make it clear that you want an LOA concerning staffing and PBS language or you are willing to throw out this "furlough-optimization" contract and start fresh in December 2010.
Stay Strong "The 400"!
winglet
Long before the acceptance of this contract it was made clear by some that PBS is only as good as the contract language that protects it. We are now feeling what it is like to live without strong contract language. Management's ability to use PBS as an "optimization tool" remains unchecked and believe me when I tell you that they aren't yet finished looking for "loop-holes".
This is exactly what many tried to warn about prior to the acceptance of this contract. We were all forewarned that this is exactly what would happen and I am amused at the shock and anger I witness as proponents of this contract discover that they have less control over their schedules than ever before. Perhaps they won't be so quick to accept a TA next time around?
With adequate staffing levels PBS is an excellent quality of life enhancer but adequate staffing was not protected in this contract. After only a couple of months of semi-quality schedules the company began the furlough process and introduced "unstacking". "Unstacking" is a euphemism for Junior Assignment. What sort of schedule "massaging" techniques does the company plan once PBS is permantently locked in? Trust me when I say that "unstacking" is only a "peek behind the curtain".
With no contract language protection the company simply ignores the pilot's bid and builds lines to cover the vast open time. I don't remember anyone mentioning "unstacking" during the road shows but some of us knew it would be a short period of time before a way was found to circumvent the intent of the contract. The company is now immensely happy with the benefit of having uninterrupted use of a schedule optimizer.
Unfortunately our current MEC and Negotiation Committee seem content. The only communications we hear from our MEC is either apologetic for the company, or self-congratulatory over a poorly written contract. Instead of providing excuses for the company I expect them to do what they were elected to do and provide and protect a strong labor contract.
This contract included a provision to vote it out by December if we weren't happy with it. By voting out PBS we would have to suffer a year of the former contract with concessions. Beginning December 2010 we would have to re-negotiate the few gains made on this current contract. I propose a strong message be sent to our MEC and our Management that we don't want PBS without a letter of agreement providing adequate staffing and PBS protection language against tactics such as "unstacking".
I for one am willing to risk losing the small gains made on this contract for adequate staffing language. If the company really wants to keep PBS (believe me, they do!) then they will agree to a LOA concerning "unstacking" and staffing. .
Prepare to learn that the MEC will not allow a pilot vote on the matter of the dis-continuation of PBS. Please get involved and contact the MEC and make it clear that you want an LOA concerning staffing and PBS language or you are willing to throw out this "furlough-optimization" contract and start fresh in December 2010.
Stay Strong "The 400"!
winglet
Well put man! I have had it with PBS and we all need to voice our opinion to the MEC... I've heard lots of stories that they want to keep PBS no matter what which really bothers me.. put the damn thing to a vote.. I'm willing to sacrifice what little gains(if you can even call it that), to hopefully save some jobs... it's no coincidence that the furloughs kicked in with the implementation of PBS and it's amazing how this company can just do whatever the hell it wants now..
09-27-2009 | 09:19 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Well put man! I have had it with PBS and we all need to voice our opinion to the MEC... I've heard lots of stories that they want to keep PBS no matter what which really bothers me.. put the damn thing to a vote.. I'm willing to sacrifice what little gains(if you can even call it that), to hopefully save some jobs... it's no coincidence that the furloughs kicked in with the implementation of PBS and it's amazing how this company can just do whatever the hell it wants now..
The MEC wants to keep PBS, even though most of the pilots want it gone. The MEC has said they will vote to keep PBS because it's in the pilots best interest. It's complete horse dooky, and I think the entire MEC should be recalled (with the exception of 2 people, EL and CE). Everyone else is in it for themselves, and could care less about the little people.
I'm so sick of this MEC apologizing and making excuses for the company. The company WALKS ALL OVER US!!!! And they think we have gains by what we got with this POS contract? I'm embarrased.
I voted no, but I can't believe I almost voted yes. They had a pretty convincing show they were putting on. Thank goodness there were some smart people on here to help decipher the madness and propaganda.
We need new blood in the union. IF MAG pilots keep ALPA, which I could care less about at this point and time, we need new leaders. We need leaders that aren't going out to dinner with JO, Lotz and company, and we need people who will really fight for us... not give in for us.
09-28-2009 | 01:38 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
From: EMB145
Well put man! I have had it with PBS and we all need to voice our opinion to the MEC... I've heard lots of stories that they want to keep PBS no matter what which really bothers me.. put the damn thing to a vote.. I'm willing to sacrifice what little gains(if you can even call it that), to hopefully save some jobs... it's no coincidence that the furloughs kicked in with the implementation of PBS and it's amazing how this company can just do whatever the hell it wants now..
" The MEC will be discussing PBS at length at the upcoming MEC meeting in CVG. The meeting is September 29th and 30th. Any pilot in good standing is welcome to attend. There is an agenda item to be heard which calls for the Association to withdraw from PBS. If at the MEC meeting the elected reps decide to cancel PBS that decision will be put to the pilot group for ratification as it constitutes a major work rule change. At that point the pilot group has the option to accept or reject the MEC’s resolution. "
of course they choose CVG were we are still staffed correctly and PBS is actually working like it had the language it needed.
09-28-2009 | 07:08 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Exactly, because Cinci is overstaffed with pilots and everyone gets what they want. They should have done it in Chicago... but they know better than that. They do their best to hide from all the po'd pilots.
I'm on a trip right now, otherwise I'd go. I'm so mad about the way things are right now, and ALPA isn't doing ANYTHING about it... well, not like they ever did. It's time for a change.
09-28-2009 | 12:23 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
pad J.O.'s pocket, while you make jack? what's wrong with that?
LOL. in reality, many people are quite comfortable there.
embarrassing thing is, you shouldn't have to be there 19 years and work max credit to pull 6 figures. but boy are some people happy about that block-or-better.
you could make more in your 1st year flying a CRJ in China.
LOL. in reality, many people are quite comfortable there.
embarrassing thing is, you shouldn't have to be there 19 years and work max credit to pull 6 figures. but boy are some people happy about that block-or-better.
you could make more in your 1st year flying a CRJ in China.
09-28-2009 | 01:45 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
From: CRJ
Write your REP and tell them what you want. Tell others to do the same.
" The MEC will be discussing PBS at length at the upcoming MEC meeting in CVG. The meeting is September 29th and 30th. Any pilot in good standing is welcome to attend. There is an agenda item to be heard which calls for the Association to withdraw from PBS. If at the MEC meeting the elected reps decide to cancel PBS that decision will be put to the pilot group for ratification as it constitutes a major work rule change. At that point the pilot group has the option to accept or reject the MEC’s resolution. "
of course they choose CVG were we are still staffed correctly and PBS is actually working like it had the language it needed.
" The MEC will be discussing PBS at length at the upcoming MEC meeting in CVG. The meeting is September 29th and 30th. Any pilot in good standing is welcome to attend. There is an agenda item to be heard which calls for the Association to withdraw from PBS. If at the MEC meeting the elected reps decide to cancel PBS that decision will be put to the pilot group for ratification as it constitutes a major work rule change. At that point the pilot group has the option to accept or reject the MEC’s resolution. "
of course they choose CVG were we are still staffed correctly and PBS is actually working like it had the language it needed.
I did write them and told them my thoughts... they wrote back and made it seem like I didn't know what I was talking about. But I definitely voiced my opinion, and I know a lot of other guys did as well... this whole thing is a joke, and if the MEC doesn't at least give the pilots a vote on this, then I say there needs to be one hell of a stink raised and people voted out because that will prove they're not listening to, nor care about their members.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
