|
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 556667)
IIRC, he has said as much publicly. But replacing 40 900's might be tough...as much as everyone wants to cut capacity, mainline LOVES 900's (mainline capacity, regional cost structure). I think the delivery slots are all accounted for a ways out so in order to replace the MAG birds, DP would have to do a deal with another regional several years in advance to allow them to obtain delivery slots. Or airways could buy the 900's themselves now and farm them out later...not sure they have the credit rating for that though.
|
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 555880)
The reality was the MEC screwed up...they could have killed freedom without concessions (the lawsuit was already in progress). Hindsight is an interesting thing. I would not have been optimistic about the outcome of a court fight between a union and an employer that would definitely be heard at some point by a far-right judge appointed by Reagan or one of the Bushes. Other non-union alter egos have continued to exist to the present day. Freedom is now union. Compared the rest of the industry it is highly concessionary. The mag pilot group had OJ between a rock and a hard place...and that opportunity does not happen every year. He had a host of critical issues to address and was not in a good position for a protracted contract battle. But the 418 handed him a Hanuka present...he got an industry-leading contract (from management perspective) without a fight! Hanuka or Hanukkah? "Hanuka; a blessing of interisland jet airliners commonly performed on special occasions in Hawaii." I disagree with your analysis of the bargaining position of the MAG pilot group and of the new contract. Under the RLA, bargaining proceeds at a snail's pace and no union can speed this up. While Mesa was bargaining with the pilot group, the space between the "rock and the hard place" widened as the economy tanked. Airlines switched from hire to furlough and JO's staffing problems disappeared overnight. The Mesa MEC had to weigh gains for the pilots versus containing costs to preventing further furloughs. In a tough economy, the new contract is not at all "concessionary", it contains significant work rule improvements. The pilot group's collective self-respect and backbone are lacking. I left because I was afraid of exactly this happening...another cave-in. I actually wanted to stay and go on strike just to exact my share of pain from OJ. I thought a strike was guaranteed....glad I didn't stick around for that. I detect no shortage of backbone or self-respect among my fellow pilots. You have spoken about leaving because you feared another "cave-in", yet here you say that you left thinking a strike was "guaranteed". I do not want to split hairs but I am guessing you left for a variety of reasons. The options for making a lateral move to another regional airline are much more limited now. Maybe you guys will do better in two years, but until then you don't really have any bragging rights. I am not bragging, because the only role I played was concerned member. I am pleased with the result and I think our MEC and LEC officials have done good work in tough times. BTW, how is the implementation coming along on that new contract? Did OJ hold up his end of the bargain in a reasonable time frame? PBS is going to hurt real bad with OJ pulling the strings... Block or better and cancellation pay were effective pretty much right away. PBS comes online in April. Time will tell if it "hurts real bad" or not. I am not living in fear. I'm not bashing anyone, and I don't want a bunch of people unemployed...I wouldn't waste my time on that. I am sharing my experience and perspective in hopes of educating entry-level pilots and mesa FO's that there are much better alternatives (when hiring resumes). I would of course like to see OJ out of this industry...he should be running a telemarketing boiler-room, not an airline. Or maybe in an orange jumpsuit :) "Much better alternatives"? You spend a lot of time negatively describing a company you left sometime ago. Things are not perfect, but have improved. This is largely due to the hard work of the MAG pilots. Regional airline pilots are undercompensated across the board. I think the differences between regionals are not all that significant in the long run. I know two Express Jet furloughees that cannot say enough bad things about that company. I appreciate you for not wanting to see lots of people unemployed. |
Originally Posted by maxjet
(Post 555905)
Not only does the Dash Rock YOU ROCK! This is very well said. I too am sick of all of the Mesa bashing. Great post, 100% factual and on point!
Originally Posted by laserman2431
(Post 555910)
Rock ON!:)
|
Originally Posted by FL450
(Post 555348)
Can it get any lower:rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by BeenThere
(Post 556689)
Yes. Zero.
|
Originally Posted by ToiletDuck
(Post 556030)
Thing is that Mesa is a regional. There's not much a regional has that others would want. Anything they have could be quickly taken care of by other regionals.
|
Originally Posted by BeenThere
(Post 556697)
Update your resumes, and have a survival plan.
|
Originally Posted by kersplatt
(Post 556710)
Funny, that advice can be given to any pilot that is in bottom half of any seniority list at ANY airline. Even FedEx, Southwest, SkyWest pilots are a little nervous. You never know what can happen.
Exactly! I wouldn't want to be at the bottom of ANY airline seniority list right now. Where's the next hiring boom??? :eek: |
Originally Posted by iPilot
(Post 556669)
Does Mesa own these 900s? I was under the impression they were all owned by their respective mainline customers. That would mean they could be sent over to a different regional at the tip of the hat. They would bypass the usual BK auction and all that just go.
None of our mainline partners own any of our airplanes. You must be thinking of the 8 -900's we once operated for Delta, which WERE owned by Delta. Thus their ease in "giving" them to 3 or 4 carriers inside 6 months. |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 555880)
Um, no. Compared the rest of the industry it is highly concessionary. The mag pilot group had OJ between a rock and a hard place...and that opportunity does not happen every year. He had a host of critical issues to address and was not in a good position for a protracted contract battle. But the 418 handed him a Hanuka present...he got an industry-leading contract (from management perspective) without a fight!
We took a few baby steps towards the rest of industry, but with the exception of PBS, I wouldn't call it concessionary. The fact that it was baby steps towards industry standards is why I voted no. We needed a lot more than we got. Things we needed and didn't get: 1) Pay raise 2) Duty rigs 3) Trip rigs 4) Increased days off for line holders. We didn't take a pay cut, no decreased line value, no decrease in days off. PBS is the question mark, and we'll know how it is in about 4 months. |
You did take a paycut!
In buying power that is, with inflation at about 3-4% per year since the contract was up (2years) that would be 6-8% paycut that yall took! You must have been one of the 418, because everyone I ask is part of the 400. Additionally, are you getting block or better yet??? Ooopsy, finally, agreeing to this check in crap was probably the biggest concession yall took, pbs be damned if you get the right language it works fine. |
Originally Posted by powrful1
(Post 556992)
You did take a paycut!
In buying power that is, with inflation at about 3-4% per year since the contract was up (2years) that would be 6-8% paycut that yall took! You must have been one of the 418, because everyone I ask is part of the 400. Additionally, are you getting block or better yet??? Ooopsy, finally, agreeing to this check in crap was probably the biggest concession yall took, pbs be damned if you get the right language it works fine. I am one of the 400 and carry my vote receipt with me during all trips/commuting. Next time you see someone who claims they voted no, ask them to see this piece of paper. We have been getting paid block or better since December. I examine each paycheck, and the numbers add up to reflect what I have flown. No one is checking in yet. I see this as a enormous pain in the ass. |
Originally Posted by paxhauler85
(Post 556996)
You missed my point. We did not see a decrease in our pay rates.
I am one of the 400 and carry my vote receipt with me during all trips/commuting. Next time you see someone who claims they voted no, ask them to see this piece of paper. We have been getting paid block or better since December. I examine each paycheck, and the number add up to reflect what I have flown. No one is checking in yet. I see this as a enormous pain in the ass. Your buying power has decreased with the new contract. The 418 achieved nothing but a few months stay of execution. |
Originally Posted by powrful1
(Post 556992)
You did take a paycut!
In buying power that is, with inflation at about 3-4% per year since the contract was up (2years) that would be 6-8% paycut that yall took! You must have been one of the 418, because everyone I ask is part of the 400. Additionally, are you getting block or better yet??? Ooopsy, finally, agreeing to this check in crap was probably the biggest concession yall took, pbs be damned if you get the right language it works fine. |
News coming fast and changing fast! Just came out an hour ago. Looks like they reached another agreement with some of the bond holders.
Mesa Air Group Announces Completion of Transactions with Certain Holders of Senior Convertible Notes due 2023 and the Results of its Tender Offer for its Senior Convertible Notes due 2024 PHOENIX, Feb. 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Mesa Air Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: MESA) announced it completed transactions with certain of the holders of its Senior Convertible Notes due 2023 (the "2023 Notes") resulting in the exchange of $21,271,250 in aggregate face amount of the 2023 Notes for the following consideration: (i) $878,269 in cash, (ii) 8,430,458 shares of the Company's common stock, no par value (the "Common Stock"), and (iii) $983,937 in aggregate principal amount of the Company's new 8% senior unsecured notes due 2012 (the "2012 Notes"). The issuance of the Common Stock and 2012 Notes in the exchange is exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, pursuant to Section 3(a)(9) and Section 4(2) thereof. As of the date of this report, approximately $12,656,280 million (at today's value) in aggregate principal amount at maturity of the 2023 Notes remains outstanding. (Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/19990210/LAW065) Also on February 11, 2009, the Company announced the results of its tender offer to up to $120.3 million in aggregate face amount of its Senior Convertible Notes due 2024 (the "2024 Notes"). The tender offer expired at 11:59 p.m., New York City time, on February 10, 2009. Pursuant to the terms of the offer, $13,224,000 in aggregate face amount of 2024 Notes, or approximately 11% of the 2024 Notes, were validly tendered and not withdrawn. The Company accepted all of the tendered 2024 Notes, and in exchange therefor, issued 64,665,360 shares of Common Stock and paid a nominal amount of cash in lieu of fractional shares of Common Stock. The issuance of the Common Stock in the tender offer is exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, pursuant to Section 3(a)(9) and Section 4(2) thereof. The Company also announced its intent to immediately resume discussions with certain holders of its Senior Convertible Notes due 2024 (holding $104,030,000 million in aggregate face amount) to enter into agreements with such holders imminently on terms substantially equivalent to the previously announced rescinded agreements. No assurance can be given that the Company will be able enter into mutually acceptable agreements with such note holders. If such discussions prove unsuccessful, the Company intends to permit such holders to put their notes to the Company on the same economic terms as previously provided for under the terms of the Indenture governing such notes, including at the same pricing for the notes tendered on or before February 10, 2009. This press release contains various forward-looking statements that are based on management's beliefs, as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to management. Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable; it can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to have been correct. Such statements are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those anticipated, estimated, projected or expected. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:26 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands