flycrj200

are you looking for a job at Freedom

CaribPilot

O no my friend, I am happily employed at ASA. I would rather go back to flight instructing than go to Mesa, Id rather work retail than work for Mesa. Id rather go to he....ok you get my point buddy.

hdale

The following is a post from a Lama on a Mesa message board, it gives some interesting insight into the Start of Freedom and how we have the contract we currently have at Mesa!

"Perhaps you're right. However, the 'one carrier petition' was brought on behalf of the Mesa Air Group ALPA pilots, not the CC Air pilots, from what I recall. CC Air's pilots felt that they still got hosed by ALPA b/c they didn't get to keep longevity (amongst MANY other things). I don't know when Freedom's operating certificate came into effect, but I am certain that Freedom was operating flights when the ruling came out. It was complicated further by Mesa ALPA fighting against Freedom while US Airways ALPA was endorsing their furloughed pilots to go fly for Freedom (once the US Airways guys got to Freedom, only then did they realize there was more to the story). Don't know who dropped the ball there, but not one of ALPA's finest moments.

The ruling helped establish what makes a carrier as 'separate' - things like different entrances to corporate offices, different training departments, inability to access the other's offices, etc. Freedom shared essentially everything with Mesa, and that's how the judge ruled that Mesa and Freedom were one and the same. Once the ruling came out, Wexford Capital (TSA's holding company) went through the ruling and used it as the blueprint on how the create a carrier that was 'separate' based upon precedent (Mesa ALPA's ruling). That's how GoJet was created - offices in the same building, but different entrances to each office (unlike Freedom), different training departments (unlike Freedom), and TSA employees didn't have keys to GoJet offices (unlike Freedom), and vice versa. TSA ALPA sued, just as Mesa ALPA did, based on the same argument Mesa ALPA did. TSA ALPA decided to put their faith in the courts, and thus did not follow the advice of Mesa ALPA to secure the same scope language Mesa ALPA did in their CBA that captured Freedom (prior to the judge's ruling). The courts found that Wexford had followed the precedent of the Mesa ALPA ruling, and that GoJets is not the same entity as TSA b/c of the 'test' of what makes a carrier separate had been purposely followed by Wexford to start GoJets. Thus TSA lost, and GoJets hired as TSA furloughed. It is possible, however, that Mesa ALPA still did the right thing by getting the scope clause language that they did - would you put it past JO to integrate Freedom (b/c the judge told him to) and then start another airline, just like GoJets, one that complies with the 'test' that the courts established?

While a testament to each MEC operating independently, it is disappointing to me that a single association had at least 3 pilot groups (US Airways, Mesa/Air Midwest, and TSA) involved in this whole thing (and maybe 4, with CC Air), but couldn't coordinate the collective efforts better.

For those who study the situation, it's actually far from clear that the Mesa MEC failed, when you consider CC Air pilots were willing to do the flying (ALPA National squashed that, though they weren't going to do it in quite the same manner that the 'alter-ego' set-up of Freedom was) as well as Freedom Air pilots (which Mesa ALPA squashed). The Mesa MEC got all of the the pilots @ CC Air jobs and some seniority, captured the Freedom flying, and negotiated a raise for all equipment. When you consider the circumstances and the craftiness of the opponent, it makes many all the more bitter to see young FO's @ other carriers (most of whom weren't even flying professional at the time) look down their noses at the Mesa pilots. It is far from certain that the pilots of Skywest, ExpressJet, or whomever is the 'flavor of the day' today could have done better. You have to understand the situation - Mesa pilots were actually showing up to the gate to operate their flight, only to find a Freedom crew there at the gate, with a Freedom 900 parked there. The Freedom crews were then put in the position of informing the Mesa crews that the flight was now a Freedom flight (this certainly did not help relations stay professional b/t the two groups, and was a brilliant play by management to whip up animosity). The Mesa crews were, as you can imagine, not pay protected. As a Mesa pilot, you were literally watching your flying disappear right in front of your eyes - it was hard to see that your management was responsible for this deed, ultimately, not the Freedom pilot (not to let them off the hook here, but they were more accomplices than lead players, in reality).

Anyway, that's my history lesson for the day. It all happened about 5 years ago, so, I figure most pilots @ Mesa now weren't even on property when it happened, but they are ultimately the ones who have to deal with the fall-out from it all. My version of history is likely seen through my own rose colored glass, so please don't accept it as anything more than my opinion."

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" - George Santayana

hdale

The way I've heard it from the old timers at Mesa was that we got our scope along with the integration of the freedom A listers in our contract. It did come at the expense of QOL but if you've ever seen a copy of the contract it lists where every pilot came from. If they were freedom A its noted in the contract! Currently their are good people working to resolve these issues as we are in negotiations on a new contract. But with the state of the industry and our company it is slow going!

Blueskies21

Freedom A listers were the pilots who helped start Freedom as an alter ego to intercourse mesa. Freedom B listers are the guys from mesa who fly for freedom now but were originally and have always been part of mesa's original seniority list or joined the list after freedom was reintigrated.