Notices
Mesa Airlines Regional Airline

Mesa

Old 07-05-2015 | 04:54 PM
  #9181  
airflight999's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Default

Today marks the end of an era. Casper is no more!

Apparently it failed some sort of stress test and will not be returned to service.
Old 07-05-2015 | 05:23 PM
  #9182  
ScottyDo's Avatar
Chief Engineer
 
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 815
Likes: 0
From: CRJ FO
Default

Originally Posted by airflight999
Today marks the end of an era. Casper is no more!

Apparently it failed some sort of stress test and will not be returned to service.
Old 07-05-2015 | 06:10 PM
  #9183  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,082
Likes: 0
From: ERJ CA
Default

Originally Posted by airflight999
Today marks the end of an era. Casper is no more!

Apparently it failed some sort of stress test and will not be returned to service.

Casper? Is that N407SW?
Old 07-05-2015 | 06:12 PM
  #9184  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,082
Likes: 0
From: ERJ CA
Default

Regarding Envoy ground services, Mesa just hired one of Envoy's gate people to track all the delays they cause us.
Old 07-05-2015 | 06:32 PM
  #9185  
ScottyDo's Avatar
Chief Engineer
 
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 815
Likes: 0
From: CRJ FO
Default

Originally Posted by Blackwing
Regarding Envoy ground services, Mesa just hired one of Envoy's gate people to track all the delays they cause us.
That's pretty interesting. I don't think we will learn much more than we already know though.
Old 07-05-2015 | 07:06 PM
  #9186  
deltajuliet's Avatar
Living the Dream
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by PilotCrusader
Why not. You're below average in every other category as well:
Pay(lowest?)
Contract(family health plan $900/mo?)
Travel Privileges
Hiring(phone call interviews)

Oh I could go on. Stay classy Mesa!
Facebiter, is that you?

Originally Posted by RB211
Reading the Air Whisky thread, looks like we are getting AA benefits that are equivelant to our current Airways benefits, starting Sept. 1st.
A lot of people were dreading this and claiming we'd lose our benefits completely. Not a very realistic scenario, especially when half the employees wouldn't be able to get to work and all our flights would cancel. It'll be cool when there's more than a smiley face to let us know the loads.

Originally Posted by airflight999
Today marks the end of an era. Casper is no more!

Apparently it failed some sort of stress test and will not be returned to service.
Good riddance. Satan will enjoy it in hell. One guy said he heard the earlier arbitration about 50-seat Captain pay was contingent upon us actually having a 200, though I've heard that's not the case more frequently. To get to the bottom of it I dug into the contract, but I can't actually find any mention of training/vacation/deadheading/etc. being paid at 50-seat rates. Could someone direct me to the correct section or paragraph?

But in the course of looking through it, I found this little bit:
A pilot will not be required to pay for the use of any equipment required for training or equipment used in scheduled operations, e.g., WAC charts, Jeppesen manuals, flashlights, fuel strainers or Company manuals, unless lost or damaged due to pilot negligence. WAC charts, Jeppesen manuals are issued to First Officers at Company discretion.
So how does that work with paying for EFB's? I know it was optional earlier, but isn't it mandatory for all newhires now?
Old 07-05-2015 | 08:11 PM
  #9187  
airflight999's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by deltajuliet
Good riddance. Satan will enjoy it in hell. One guy said he heard the earlier arbitration about 50-seat Captain pay was contingent upon us actually having a 200, though I've heard that's not the case more frequently. To get to the bottom of it I dug into the contract, but I can't actually find any mention of training/vacation/deadheading/etc. being paid at 50-seat rates. Could someone direct me to the correct section or paragraph?
I'm not sure about that part in the contract, but in the most recent conference call with the MEC, the reps said it doesn't matter whether or not we have the 200 in regards to captain pay.

Supposedly the language in the contract says that captains get a "base pay" (which is what a captain would be paid flying the 200), for training events, deadheads, reserve, etc. It doesn't specifically mention anything about having a 200 on property means that captains will get paid that amount. So even though 407 is out to pasture, captains will still be getting paid the crap "base pay" if they're doing anything but flying the 76/79 seaters.
Old 07-05-2015 | 09:29 PM
  #9188  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 977
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by airflight999
I'm not sure about that part in the contract, but in the most recent conference call with the MEC, the reps said it doesn't matter whether or not we have the 200 in regards to captain pay.

Supposedly the language in the contract says that captains get a "base pay" (which is what a captain would be paid flying the 200), for training events, deadheads, reserve, etc. It doesn't specifically mention anything about having a 200 on property means that captains will get paid that amount. So even though 407 is out to pasture, captains will still be getting paid the crap "base pay" if they're doing anything but flying the 76/79 seaters.
Exactly. A "common sense" interpretation of our contract, conducted by an average human being on planet Earth, would very likely presume that a pilot based in Houston--who is only qualified to fly a 76-seater--would be paid guarantee, vacation, sick time, etc. on 76-seat payrates. Because, well, we only fly 76-seaters and are not qualified to fly anything else currently on property but 76-seat Embraers.

However, lawyers and arbitrators do not read contracts from the perspective of ordinary humans like us, and while something such as this seems readily obvious to an average Joe, they've decided that "base pay" means "the lowest paying jet equipment category that has ever been operated by Mesa since the CBA was signed."

Because it is not explicitly stated to the contrary, the arbitrator determined that equipment-specific payrates are only effective in an operational sense--i.e. those are the rates you get when actually flying that specific aircraft.

Language (or lack thereof) can be twisted to mean many things no one ever considered. Our current contract is one of the most bare-bones documents I have ever seen, because, well, it was signed with the "bankruptcy gun" to everyone's head.

I hope I don't tick off any CRJ Captains by saying this, but any junior IAH Captain who likes the EJet (and/or lives in IAH) should feel lucky that arbitrator decision went the way it did--if base pay were variant-specific, the CRJ Captains would've had a very, very strong argument to bid over to EJet CA. Lots of us would be nowhere close to IAH Captain at the moment if it had gone the other way, IMHO.
Old 07-06-2015 | 12:44 AM
  #9189  
deltajuliet's Avatar
Living the Dream
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by flapshalfspeed
However, lawyers and arbitrators do not read contracts from the perspective of ordinary humans like us, and while something such as this seems readily obvious to an average Joe, they've decided that "base pay" means "the lowest paying jet equipment category that has ever been operated by Mesa since the CBA was signed."

Because it is not explicitly stated to the contrary, the arbitrator determined that equipment-specific payrates are only effective in an operational sense
--i.e. those are the rates you get when actually flying that specific aircraft.
Interesting. So it isn't ever explicitly spelled out in the contract. Blows my mind. Either Mesa has the world's greatest lawyers or ALPA has the worst.
Old 07-06-2015 | 06:24 AM
  #9190  
Line Holder
10 Years
 
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Default

The way it was explained to me by one of the MEC officers is that the TA was annotated with the term "base pay" when it was signed and ratified but that term never made it into the final product that was printed after ratification. It was on the basis that the parties signed the TA that the arbitrator found that "base pay" was what everyone had agreed to.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
nwa757
Regional
31
07-31-2018 04:58 PM
AirbornPegasus
Regional
14
04-08-2009 07:17 PM
Spanky189
Regional
10
05-16-2008 09:38 AM
familyguy
Regional
49
04-11-2008 12:03 AM
LOW FUEL
Regional
104
08-17-2007 04:41 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices