sigep_nm

It becomes amendable 180 days prior to the expiration date, move back six months and that is june 1st.

xjcaptain

You must be using government style math. If an employee is making less money than is current book..it's a pay cut. Not only a 1 time cut, but a cut that will be there for every year after this point. I know everybody would like to make more, but that is solved by effective contract negotiations, not by taking it from a fellow pilot. Apparently people of have lost sight of the fact that an employer pays salaries, not other employees.

jayray2

I have to admit, I do not have a dog in this fight. Being as Mesaba will be a 600 pilot airline in the future my career at Mesaba will be over after this summer and the changes that this LOA will bring will not effect me. If I do get to vote on this I will wait until the Union presents their position before I make up my mind as should everyone else.

Regarding your opinion about effective contract negotiations, could you define that please? Was it effective contract negotiations that brought about FO wages at Mesaba that are second to the bottom only above Mesa? Was it effective contract negotiations that bring about the largest gap between FO pay and CA pay in the industry? Wages at Mesa and Mesaba only exacerbate the race to the bottom. How do you think our industry leading bottom feeding FO wages help Pinnacle (our fellow pilots) in their fight? As I stated above, if I do get a vote in this before I am let go, I will consider what the Union has to say. However, your attitude comes off as being very combative and non productive. Are you even willing to consider the case the Union will present in the roadshows?

sigep_nm

So you are saying that FO wages (combined scale) didnt subsidize the arrival of the Avro's, which resulted in a pay increase only to Captains? There was a pretty big difference between RJ85 captain pay and Saab captain pay. Where will the emphasis be placed in effective negotiations? Will it be placed for higher wages on the FO scale or the captain scale? I know the answer to this all ready, just rhetorical. I think the best quote I have heard is "why do you care how much an FO makes, you will only be one for a little bit longer". That was three years ago, with about four years to go. Not saying I am for or against this, because I havent decided, I am just saying make the decision that is best for you because the next guy is going to make the decision that is best for him. And no I did not use government math

cptmurf

At the time the contract was signed the averaged FO pay (because of the blended rate) was a little over 60% of the CA pay for the aircraft types that were on the property. The slide in CA-FO pay percentages is due to the BLENDED RATE not poor negotiations. His point is that it takes more negotiation capital to regain a negotiated item than it does to maintain that same item. IE. It would be better going into negotiations stating we want the FO pay at 60% of the CA pay, if we retain the higher CA pay, han to balance the pay now, out of the CAs coffers, only to try to push up both payrates in the upcoming negotiations.

I've said it on the "other" website, and I'll say it here. The absoulute first thing that has to happen to fix the FO pay issue, is get rid of the Blended Rate. If you want to complain to anyone that even had a hand in that fine piece of negotiations than you better look north of 150 on the seniority list, because the rest of us weren't here yet.

For the record I am willing to forgo some of my raise to resolve this, but I want to fix the problem so that it does arise again.

cptmurf

Actually it didn't. I believe that the current FOs took a pay raise at the time the blended rate went into effect. Also the large gap that you mention is due to the breakdown of fleet types. Remember the Metro and Dash were still on the property at the time of that contract. The union at that time broke the turboprop fleet up by seats the way that they are now. When the Avros came on that was an ammendment to that contract for the payscales, which were set to the Avro seating 69. The 02-04 contract established the 50 seat jet rate, which is identical to the 70 turboprop rate. The BK extended the 69 seat rate to 76, due to the forsight of the 900/175s. I think I got all that right, ask MN, he would have the exact timeline.

I actually think it is a good idea for all to try to learn how, when or why all of our contract items were negotiated. I think it will give you a better understanding of how we got in this perdicament, and how we can negotiate out of it successfully.

cptmurf

Guess we forgot about TransStates, PSA, Lynx, Great Lakes, GoJet, Commutair, Colgan, and Republic there somehow. (per APC) Didn't we?

With that being said I am interested in getting the rates brought up. Because after 5 years of reserve, 2 downgrades and being a 7 year FO (not by choice) myself, I can appreciate the position you are in.

Lowering our CA pay will not help Pinnacle or any other airlines negotiations. Period.

sigep_nm

I agree with you on the north of 150, the 401k shows that very clearly. I also tend to think the 60% rate is a pipe dream, but at the worst case, if the raises are foregone, it will at least bring the FO rate into the upper 40's. From your post I tend to think you are in the 220-380ish range, so it lends validity to the fact that you have been through the dumps before. thanks for the post.

jayray

I was mainly referring to the DCI carriers because that is what the Union email referred to but no I did not forget about the other carriers. This whole idea came out of the DCI meeting. If you are going to bring these other carriers into the discussion, then you have to start looking at the CA pay at those carriers. Where do the 76 seater rates compare with XJ?

I do not agree with this notion that the hard fought CA wages were won in negotaitions and once given away will never be won back. It is one piece of pie split between two pilots. The piece of pie is not getting smaller, it is getting cut different. In future negotiations pilots will have to negotiate for a bigger pie but the starting point is still the same, X amount of dollars between two pilots. Once again for the record, if I get to vote on this I will wait to make a decision until after the Union has presented the pros and cons of this proposal.

Avroman

I agree the best answer would be getting rid of the blended FO rate (though soon that will be irrelevant as we will likely be all CRJs) As for comparing all the pay rates, check your email as the union already sent out a comparison for us to many other companies...( and the FO pay IS abysimal for the jet rate though very good for the soon to be extinct props)
At this point though I'd rather get rid of PBS than the Blended FO rate (unfortunatley I highly doubt either will ever go away now)... If we get a second fleet type that replaces the Saab then I'd change that position.