Originally Posted by ScottyDo

Way too humid in Houston for me man, and I'm a Dallas guy born and raised haha. Is IAH pretty junior at UAL?

Originally Posted by BeatNavy

The senior guys I've spoken with who are no voters know enough to know the contract isn't what they are willing to vote in. They aren't automatic no voters with no idea what's in it as is described here. The main reasons they are voting no are no duty rig and an almost negligible captain pay raise. We don't need to wait until it is officially distributed to know those two facts. No matter what else could be in there isn't enough to get (most) of the captains I've talked to about it to vote yes.

I personally think it's premature to make up my mind, as some of the things in the contract will benefit me and my personal situation and I don't plan on working here much longer, even if the entire industry goes into stagnation (I will leave aviation before I work at Mesa more than 3 years).

That said, a 4-5 year contract in this climate is foolish for pilots to vote in, and I'm shocked our negotiating committee agreed to that.

Originally Posted by 20sx

Ironic that the captains don't like it, as they get most of the gains. Elimination of the 50 seat rate and the ejets and 900's at the large seat rate only benefit the captains. While I'm happy for that, what do the fo's get....hardly any raise. I like some of the other goodies in the TA, but not enough to vote yes. Unless there is something to make it fair to both seats.

Originally Posted by NovemberBravo

Air Wisconsin just passed a TA which is without a doubt probably better than ours. I think that may force more pilots to vote no. Bad timing for management and our MEC.

Originally Posted by BeatNavy

The 76 seat pay (ie 700 pay despite being a 900/e175) vs the 79 seat pay is a joke as it is, and I welcome facebiter's bashing of our airline for having that. The fact that captains currently get paid around 15% less for 3 fewer seats flying the exact same plane (or a bigger one in the case of the e175) is criminal. From what I hear, all the captains will get in this new TA is removal of the pay rate based on 79 seats, and not much (if any) more than current 79 seat pay. That would be cool circa 2009, but not in 2015. In fact, that's kind of a slap in the face to those who have been here through the horrible times and put up with mesa's shenanigans through the years.

The company's paying for KCM (didn't our union dues pay for that at some point anyway?), removal of 50 seat pay altogether, and 900/175 pay rates based on aircraft type/size regardless of seat numbers should be an absolute given, not a bargaining point or something we should even have to negotiate for. Our raise in pay rates should be over and above that, by a decent amount, to the tune of "industry standard." Same with medical.

Just because the TA contract is better than our current bankruptcy outdated contract doesn't mean we should settle for it.

Originally Posted by CWHCFI

I see random posts by people saying they are going to vote no. Also, I hear pilots in base saying the same thing. What gets me is that we do not know what is in this contract and people are saying no to something they know nothing about. This is like Nancy Peloci saying that congress had to vote on the health care bill so that we could find out what is in it, but in reverse. Now we have pilots saying we have to vote no on this contract and I do not care what is in it.

I will admit, I have been with Mesa for just over two years. This will be my first contract vote. I have never worked somewhere that had a union before. I hear good and bad about Mesa from many people. But here is what I have discovered in my short tenure at this company. The crews are great to work with (except for a couple of people who will remain nameless.) I enjoy coming to work each day because I know I am going to have a good time.

The company has been there for me in an extremely difficult time in my life. In January of 2015 my daughter died of cancer. I was off work for two months while I sat by her side in Houston for the last weeks of her life and then for the funeral and grieving.

During this time members of management went out of their way to help me. J.O. himself got involved to make sure my wife and I had positive space tickets from LAS to OMA for the funeral. I could not have asked for anything more from any company during such a tragic time in my life.

I only know of a couple of details that are in this new contract. I have not made a decision one way or the other. Why? Because I do not know what is in it. I say we need to find out what is in the contract before we make up our minds on how to vote.

Originally Posted by BeatNavy

The 76 seat pay (ie 700 pay despite being a 900/e175) vs the 79 seat pay is a joke as it is, and I welcome facebiter's bashing of our airline for having that. The fact that captains currently get paid around 15% less for 3 fewer seats flying the exact same plane (or a bigger one in the case of the e175) is criminal. From what I hear, all the captains will get in this new TA is removal of the pay rate based on 79 seats, and not much (if any) more than current 79 seat pay. That would be cool circa 2009, but not in 2015. In fact, that's kind of a slap in the face to those who have been here through the horrible times and put up with mesa's shenanigans through the years.

The company's paying for KCM (didn't our union dues pay for that at some point anyway?), removal of 50 seat pay altogether, and 900/175 pay rates based on aircraft type/size regardless of seat numbers should be an absolute given, not a bargaining point or something we should even have to negotiate for. Our raise in pay rates should be over and above that, by a decent amount, to the tune of "industry standard." Same with medical.

Just because the TA contract is better than our current bankruptcy outdated contract doesn't mean we should settle for it.