Airline Pilot Central Forums - Mesa / Mokulele terminate code share

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)

- - Mesa / Mokulele terminate code share (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/38432-mesa-mokulele-terminate-code-share.html)

By the way, below is our scope language which is pretty clear:

Quote:

CBA Section 1.B. Scope
1. Except as provided in section 1.B.2 all present and future flying of any form performed in and for the service of the company shall be performed by pilots on the Mesa Air Group Pilot System Seniority List in accordance with the terms and conditions of this agreement. The phase "present and future flying of any form performed in and for the service of the company" includes without limitation all such flying 1) on the company's aircraft (whether leased or owned), or 2) under the company's control, including wet leases and contracting for carriers for other carriers or entities (government, military or commercial)

2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1.B1., above, the company may assign or contract out revenue flying for a period of sixty (60) days during the term of this agreement if a) such conduct is necessary to accomplish the needs of the service of the company, and b) the company does not have sufficient aircraft and pilots to perform the revenue flying assigned or contracted out, and c) no pilot on the Mesa Air Group Pilots System Seniority List is furloughed, or remains on furlough, while the company contracts out revenue flying.

The first sentence is pretty clear. There is no mention of any routes or city pairings in our scope clause. This flying is being performed for Mesa Air Group, Mesa Air Group receives income from this flying. It should be performed by pilots on the MAG seniority list. Even the Caravan flying. We have pay rates for caravans (0-19seat turboprop).

Agreed. I think the precedent was set when 'go! Express' was allowed to fly for more than 60 days though.

This kind of thinking is just like DALPA's in the early 90's - 'a couple small aircraft, big deal'. Commair (and the RJ) got their 'nose under the tent', and now the same thing is happening @ the regionals, ironically.

Quote:

Agreed. I think the precedent was set when 'go! Express' was allowed to fly for more than 60 days though.

Per one of the previous MAG MEC hotlines there is a grievance pending (Scope) for go! express operated by Mokulele, so maybe not.

I hope so. Typical RLA stuff: The company violates the contract, and it takes years to resolve. By the time its resolved, Mesa could be insolvent, and Mokulele (now owned by RAH, I believe) could be the #2 inter-island carrier in Hawaii.

Meantime, AirTran's got a pilot terminated b/c he wore his uniform to drop his family off @ a circus sponsored by NPA on his way to work.

The company gets to sink the union's boat. The union can't fire back, but is left to negotiate for the pieces of the wreckage years later. Gotta' love the system.:rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sniper (Post 587070)

Airtran pilot was suspended, not terminated I believe. In any case, you're absolutely right. It doesn't help that the company always has an "out" away from the RLA process, which the union never has -- which is bankruptcy.

Always noticed that for any contract improvement that the full slow process of the RLA is used? Years and years sometimes of operating under the old contract, but any time contract concessions are called for they happen in weeks or months?

Quote:

Originally Posted by travelnate (Post 586505)

The Caravan ops have been running quite well, when a select few pilots aren't blowing tires, and maintenance gets the support to keep'em all flying. The loads on the Caravans are between 60 - 80% on the average. Honolulu-Molokai is going to be at 10 flights a day this summer, so they're doing something right, and Kona - Maui should be around 8 or 9.

Care to explain yourself further? Maybe you could have touched on the fact that it was never the pilot's fault infact it was a faulty tube stem on each flat tire. Mokulele was not the only 208 operator that recently had this problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpiraMirabilis (Post 587075)

Always noticed that for any contract improvement that the full slow process of the RLA is used? Years and years sometimes of operating under the old contract, but any time contract concessions are called for they happen in weeks or months?

Bingo. Then once the company gets a quick concession from the group they are now bound to it until they draw out the long neg. process of the RLA. It's damned if you do and damned if you don't.

I hope it is a scope violation....but I don't think so, since it is a CODE SHARE agreement. In other words..it is Island air flights not go flights...get it.

The go express stuff is a scope violation.....cant call your self go express and claim code share.

Quote:

Originally Posted by XPEHBAM (Post 587229)

There are a lot of factors, and that being one of them. 1 pilot alone blew 3 within a 2 week period.... which could have been a mix of bad landings + bad tires. The last blown tire was a fairly new tire with not even 50 landings on it.