New Mesa Thread
08-15-2015, 09:37 AM
#531
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,666
Originally Posted by 121again
I wanted to like this TA, I really did. But I think we left money on the table and the so called quality of life improvements are marginal at best. And there are enough questionable items to there where I might just be content to keep the status quo. Did anyone catch the new fleet transfer language giving the top 1% displacement rights? No Bueno.
08-15-2015, 09:45 AM
#532
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: men without hats
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by Xdashdriver
I was surprised to the see the displacement rights part in there. I figured it would only be when there were vacancies.
08-15-2015, 10:03 AM
#533
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 977
Originally Posted by wt932051
I agree totally. After looking at this I see so many vague things this thing is going to be a grievance nightmare! You would think these guys negotiating would have learned we needed specific language, not just more air filled language. How about something like..after 4 or more reports of bed bugs in any rolling 6 month period, the company will find a new hotel to put crews up permanently. Not, we will be notified and discuss the situation garbage...
I love how after coming back from a flight, the contract states they could reassign you to ready reserve. Per the FAR and the latest interpretations they cannot assign you RR. Only more flying, or regular reserve. Errors already. Unless something has been redefined recently.
I don't like this reserve system balancing either. I don't see how that benefits anyone. If you are junior you need hours to consolidate anyway. As you get senior, you get better trips ahead of time if you are CMF and that helps with commuting. If you are home based you can bid CML and sit at home. So reserve balancing would be worse for everyone I think. I don't see how it would benefit Mesa either.
I love how after coming back from a flight, the contract states they could reassign you to ready reserve. Per the FAR and the latest interpretations they cannot assign you RR. Only more flying, or regular reserve. Errors already. Unless something has been redefined recently.
I don't like this reserve system balancing either. I don't see how that benefits anyone. If you are junior you need hours to consolidate anyway. As you get senior, you get better trips ahead of time if you are CMF and that helps with commuting. If you are home based you can bid CML and sit at home. So reserve balancing would be worse for everyone I think. I don't see how it would benefit Mesa either.
I honestly prefer the current work rules to these new ones, as crazy as that might sound.
08-15-2015, 10:08 AM
#534
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 977
Originally Posted by 121again
Agreed. I don't see anything that compels the company to actually use it since they can just claim staffing and it goes away. And all they had to do was add a sentence or two that they can't convert you to SCR more than X numbers of days per month but as it's written it's unlimited. As to how it would actually work I'm envisioning a lot of 2 AM wake up calls for a 2 PM report time and randomly commuting in to do SCR in the middle of your RSV days.
Zero language on how buffers are set = all the sections on swaps/drops/LCR/dropping RSV days rendered copmletely irrelevant.
08-15-2015, 10:15 AM
#535
Covfefe
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
Originally Posted by Xdashdriver
The union has said in reference to these two issues:
They did attempt to negotiate on the buffers and the company would not budge.
They did attempt to negotiate on the buffers and the company would not budge.
The lack of transparency with buffers, the randomness with which buffers are changed, and the fact that the company won't budge on providing any insight other than saying there is an algorithm should be a huge red flag to every Mesa pilot. Even if the pay was substantially better this still might be an automatic no vote from me.
The way I read it, because the buffers are at the whim of the company, all the "dramatically improved scheduling language" is basically null and void at the company's whim. Similar to that bogus 5% pay raise at the company's discretion at the end of this 5 year contract that will never happen.
Did we really have ALPA lawyers/ALPA national review this? After reading most of the contract "improvements" I feel like a team of professional negotiators/lawyers/contract writers/exploiters who work for Mesa just steamrolled a bunch of well-intentioned pilots who don't specialize in this kind of negotiation stuff.
Also, the fact that every email and conference call has been coded with rhetoric like "there is no pot of gold" "harsh reality of razor thin margins" "there is no more money" and other gems I keep seeing/hearing, indicates to me that 1) the union knows this contract sucks 2) the company keeps feeding them that koolaid.
Well guess what...I don't run this airline. That isn't my job. We subsidize JO's multi millions he takes home (even with razor thin margins) with our poverty wages. My job is to fly the airplane and work to get compensated fairly for it. His job is to make money for the company and try to keep costs (labor included) down. He has at his disposal a team of professionals to keep labor costs down and exploit loopholes to screw us. We have ALPA, who is supposed to match them. Clearly management has the upper hand, deeper coffers from which to pay lawyers/negotiators, and they steamrolled us.
I believe there is no magic pot of gold at Mesa. But there sure as hell is at daddy mainline. And the whole FFD tangent that leads to is for another discussion.
I hear this talk about oh we can't do this or that because of RLA/NMB/good faith etc etc. Our union should have stood strong at "industry standard" and transparency with reserve buffers, among many other things that stink with this TA, and they should never have approved this to go to the pilot group. Asking for industry standard and preventing loophole exploitation is still acting in good faith. We need to stop pandering to JO and start fighting for the pilot group to get back all the lost wages from the last decade-plus of abuse and lagging the rest of the regional industry. Not asking for too much am I?
08-15-2015, 10:27 AM
#536
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Position: E175 Captain
Posts: 49
Only one third of the pilot group uses the company insurance? Now there is a reason to not bring it to the table. NOT. If that statistic is true someone should have thought that the reason why is nobody could afford it. Go back to the table and talk insurance. The company would not budge on buffers? Of course there needs to be buffers, but put a formula in place that everyone understands.
Oh and do not get me started on the term "suitable accommodations." This is an area that we have discussed every time we stay at ELP, ABQ, SDF and others. Suitable by whose standards?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Oh and do not get me started on the term "suitable accommodations." This is an area that we have discussed every time we stay at ELP, ABQ, SDF and others. Suitable by whose standards?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
08-15-2015, 11:17 AM
#537
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 737
Originally Posted by Pullout
We're already getting more Ejets (3-4 for sure this year) so I hope the new hires that are able to vote don't help solidify a crappy contract with the selfish thought that it will guarantee us more planes so they can 'upgrade, do their time and move on.' Ask thousands of regional Captains out there how that's worked out thus far.
If we as a pilot group vote in this bottom feeding contract, it will stick with every Mesa pilot throughout our career. When we sit across the interview board of a legacy, will you be able to justify how you voted? Think GoJet 1.0. Or the original Freedom. (No, it's not as bad as alter ego airlines, but we are being asked to take a subpar contract in a time when demand is starting to outpace supply) We will be stuck with the stigma of keeping the industry at crappy levels for at least the next five years out of pure selfishness.
Here is one more thing that should have been discussed by now. The company has shown ALPA their costs. Great. Our profits are razor thin just like other regionals. Understood. What also needs to be understood is that Skywest has near the same margin, but is able to pay their pilots around $10/hour greater (at my specific type/seat/year). They can do this because their leadership actually has someone that can negotiate a contract with legacies that can make a small profit while also supporting decent wages for their pilots. We do not have leadership that can do that. Any schmuck could have gone to AA or UA and said, "If you give us more flying we will do the flying cheaper than anyone else.....because we refuse to pay our people a decent wage."
Do you think our upper management wasn't counting on maintaining status quo crappy treatment of our pilot group into 2020 when they made all those great 'long term' flying contracts? Why didn't they make those contracts a little more profitable so they could actually give us a raise....or even just keep us equal with inflation.
Lets ditch the Stockholm syndrome. Lets vote this down, show management we're done being treated this poorly. This TA is an insult. Even more important, lets show the board they have an inept leader at the helm that can only negotiate business if the employees stay complacent to poor treatment. [Insert Twisted Sister - We're Not Gonna Take It]
If we as a pilot group vote in this bottom feeding contract, it will stick with every Mesa pilot throughout our career. When we sit across the interview board of a legacy, will you be able to justify how you voted? Think GoJet 1.0. Or the original Freedom. (No, it's not as bad as alter ego airlines, but we are being asked to take a subpar contract in a time when demand is starting to outpace supply) We will be stuck with the stigma of keeping the industry at crappy levels for at least the next five years out of pure selfishness.
Here is one more thing that should have been discussed by now. The company has shown ALPA their costs. Great. Our profits are razor thin just like other regionals. Understood. What also needs to be understood is that Skywest has near the same margin, but is able to pay their pilots around $10/hour greater (at my specific type/seat/year). They can do this because their leadership actually has someone that can negotiate a contract with legacies that can make a small profit while also supporting decent wages for their pilots. We do not have leadership that can do that. Any schmuck could have gone to AA or UA and said, "If you give us more flying we will do the flying cheaper than anyone else.....because we refuse to pay our people a decent wage."
Do you think our upper management wasn't counting on maintaining status quo crappy treatment of our pilot group into 2020 when they made all those great 'long term' flying contracts? Why didn't they make those contracts a little more profitable so they could actually give us a raise....or even just keep us equal with inflation.
Lets ditch the Stockholm syndrome. Lets vote this down, show management we're done being treated this poorly. This TA is an insult. Even more important, lets show the board they have an inept leader at the helm that can only negotiate business if the employees stay complacent to poor treatment. [Insert Twisted Sister - We're Not Gonna Take It]
08-15-2015, 11:22 AM
#538
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,666
Nope, we are only staffed for the 30.
08-15-2015, 11:22 AM
#539
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Position: 175 Left
Posts: 1,539
Originally Posted by 20sx
If e-jets were for sure, wouldn't we be having e-jet upgrades? Or are we already staffed for more?
NXXXRP
08-15-2015, 11:47 AM
#540
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,666
Are you suggesting we are getting some of RP's 50 175s?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
