RAH 100 seat pay
 

While I realize this post will surely bring on a lot of flaming, I thought maybe a handful of you would be interested...

Today is the day that the IBT finally gets the issue of 190 pay heard by an arbitrator. The exact issue, for those who do not know, is that most (not all) of the current RAH 190's have 100 seats physically installed. The RAH CBA covers compensation for all aircraft types up to 99 seats. Over 99 seats, the CBA has a defined method and timetable for negotiating new pay rates. The company refused to negotiate new pay, and has removed the seatbelt from one seat, claiming that the 100th seat was deactivated, and therefore there is no reason to create a new pay scale.

Things is the pilots' favor:

Certain factors are in our favor, and may lead to a overall positive outcome. One is that the 100th seat is depicted in all of our manuals. That is company acknowledgment of the 100th seat. Likewise, deactivation implies installation of the 100th seat. Also, that 100th seat is included in weight and balance calculations. But most importantly, the company has set a precedent that favors us. Our 135/140 pilots are paid less per hour than our 145 pilots. However, our 135/140 pilots receive the 145 (50 seat) payrate anytime they fly a 145. If a 135 pilot flies a 145 with one or more seats MEL'd, the 135 pilot has always received the 145 pay rate. The company has a history of paying us based on seats installed, not seats that are active for a flight.

Things working against us:

Our CBA says that a new payscale must be established for the 100+seat aircraft. Our union wants that to mean that both captains and F/O's are entitled to a new payrate. However, our CBA also states that all jet f/o's are paid according to the well known lousy f/o scale currently in place. It is very likely, in my opinion, that the company will avoid having to pay F/Os more for the 190, but that captains will get some improved pay out of the case.


I know, and frankly so does everyone else on this board, how you feel about RAH pay. You can go ahead and post how little faith you have in the IBT or whatever, but at least you know now that the legal processes have not been overlooked or ignored, and that the IBT has been working on this issue since it became an issue. Nothing happens quick in the legal system, and extra time was spent getting our case heard by an arbitrator who is more likely to look favorably upon our side of the story.

Disclaimer: I am not a part of the union other than a general member, and I do not know how exactly the IBT intends to present our case.

Good luck. Most contract improvements are done incrementally. Every time one airline is able to raise the bar it makes it easier for the next one. In this case, obtaining improved FO pay would set a new standard in regional pilot contracts.

The logic of for low FO pay was that upgrades were fast enough it didn't really matter. Also, regional airlines had traditionally been "stepping stone" airlines. This resulted in very weak union participation since most members had their eye on building time and bailing for a major airline instead of spending their time working on building a better regional airline pilot contract. As more and more regional pilots are finding out, their "stepping stone" airline is quickly becoming a "final step" airline. Now they are in the position of having to correct 30 years of poor contracts in order to be properly compensated for their position. The next four years of regional pilot contract negotiations should show significant changes if I am correct.

A little something on the topic.

ATW Daily News

The article has been posted elsewhere on this forum, and Swelbar has more to say on his blog.

Swelblog / Swelbar on Airlines - Articles - Mainline Pilot Scope: Will Regional Carriers Be Permitted to Fly 90+ SeatAircraft?

Pardon my ignorance...what's the background history on Republic acquiring the E190s? Does this not violate any kind of scope, or is this somehow tied into Frontier? I'm so confused...

Thanks in advance.

This topic has little to do with 'scope' because these 100 seat planes are flown for Republic/Frontier/MidWest. Essentially their own airline. They could buy 747's and still be outside the area of scope.

If these 100 seat planes were flow with United colors then we would have an issue.

I just hope you guys get a fair rate for these things or we are all screwed.

were you part of the negotiating EXCO in 2003 when the contract was ratified? No?..... that's what I thought. Don't claim to know what happened or the "why"s of what was negotiated.

True, RAH is operating the 190's as Midwest which they own, but how long till they do show up in United colors? A regional is flying a 100 seat aircraft, it will spread. Scope.

Pay is only part of the much larger issue looming for this industry.

Current UAL ALPA scope prevents any "small jets" with more than 70 seats, with the exception of Air Wisconsin operating more seats under the "AWAC quota".

FWIW, I know a few VERY senior UAL 777 captains (whose many feel are most likely to sell narrowbody scope) that are adamant about protecting what little scope they have left.

Sizzlechest is right. Do not pretend to know the logic behind negotiating poverty wages for half of the pilot group.

It's not that simple. Some airline's (ex DAL) have scope which specifies that a regional subcontractor who flies for them may not operate airplanes larger than X for anyone or any reason, including other majors or as a branded airline.

The usual loophole around this is to keep them on separate operating certs.

? Not too sure about this one. Depends on who you ask. There are some on the MEC who say that this is not the case, and some who say it is. Looks like an arbitration is in order here.

Goodness.. I was simply saying this issue of 100 seat pay for Midwest/Frontier has nothing to do with scope because they're on a different certificate.

I don't see this 100 seat regional feed spreading to UA,AA,DA or any other large carrier because it would be like slitting your own throat (a topic which has been beaten to death).

WHEN SkyWest,XJet and the rest buy 100 seat planes to "codeshare" (which is different than regional feed) for UA or AA, etc.. this Republic deal will be the benchmark for those pilots wages.

Feel free to offer a better reason.

Brian Bedford

Wow, they didnt even have the decency to physically remove the 100th seat. Pathetic. I am guessing BB knows he will lose this one in arbitration. Im also guessing things will drag on and on years in arbitration until that 100th seatbelt gets put back, so it will make $$ for BB until then.

other things going against you are plenty of industry arbitrations, mostly by FA's, and industry common practices of removing from service a few seats to get under FAA limits and then need fewer fight attendants...

IE - taking a few seats out of service to get a 155 seat jet to only 149 seats and then needing one less FA... althoigh they typically remove the seat, not just MEL it.... how do you have a permanent MEL? do they fix it, then put it back out oif service on some type of schedule?

http://i42.tinypic.com/1zl6c61.jpg
Do you think they removed seats?

The CRJ seatbelts are not deferrable, but the passenger seat is. The seat is repair category C, which means the MEL is only valid for 10 days after the deferral is made. I guess Embraer / Chautauqua have a different set of rules, or maybe their POI doesn't care.

Of all the things to jump on someone for, I thought this issue is pretty cut and dry. Is there another reason/rationalization for the FO "commuter" pay progression (or lack thereof)?

HA!! Too funny

I just read that Jazz is going to start flying 757s... for once Republic is not leading the pack in the demise of mainline pay... although I'm sure some at Republic are drooling...

On the whole seat issue, You can't just take the seat out and call it good. If the Plane was designed from the factory to have a hundred seats, then the pay has to be a hundred seats, the only way I can see it being different is if a first class is available. The First class would make it impossible to implicate a hundred seats. Therefore the pay would have to based upon the maximum amount of seats that could be installed. So if they took out that one seat, there would have to be something in its place (ie closet.)

Basically, management's case rests entirely on the fact that the 100th seat was never "held out" for sale to the public. It is installed, it is depicted in our manuals, and the fact that maintenance has deactivated the seat implies that it is was seat in the first place. What this case will boil down to is the definition of a seat in the RAH CBA. Yes, our payscales are foolishly tied to seat count. However, no one ever took the time to explicitly define whether pay was based on seats installed, seats available for service, or seats available for sale. I guess no one ever really though that the word "seat" needed to be explained. Every contract has ambiguities, but making the word seat a gray area is something no one expected.

Its stuff like this that really raises my blood pressure. How can anyone say the RAH guys were stupid for not defining how their pay scales were determined. As said above, nobody would have imagined the number of seats would have to be defined in a CBA but look where we are. In the end those planes will be flying for months if not years before this all gets sorted out, undoubtedly in management's favor.

I hate lawyers.

I can say they are stupid. I said it in 2003 while the vote was going on. You never base pay on something that can be altered. Pay should be based on specific aircraft or max certified ramp weight. Want to know something else I told the EXCO back in 2003. FO pay rates were a joke and the quick upgrades won't last forever.

Is there any provision for retro pay if the judge decides that the 100th seat does in fact exist?

I mean technically RAH pilots would be doing months of work that they aren't getting paid for.

Fair enough, I'm just sick of airlines being able to get away with murder by finding rediculous loop holes in the contract. My disdain for them is only second to the lawyers we hire to write these contracts that end up getting ripped apart anyway.

You have to look at the Type Certificate Data Sheet. It will list the amount of seats that can be installed. Typically, it lists a range of seats so you can add or subtract as many as you want and its still legal. If you look at the TCDS for Challengers you will see that certain models like the 605 can have up to 19 seats but typically you see around 9-10 (including a devan) installed.

Truer words have never been said. What I don't understand is why pilot groups can't hire competent lawyers to review their contract proposals...this is too often a recurring theme, and not just at regionals.

I can't recall..do alpa/teamsters national hire a professional law firm for contracts, or do they have some good-old-boy in-house counsel who's too drunk to hold a real job somewhere else?

Many times they have in house attorney's but most hire additional outside counsel.
3 problems.
1. Need to hire professional negotiators, not pilots. Pilots are too much of control freaks to think that there are other people who can do a better job at anything than themselves.
2. Pilots are too cheap to pay for representation on par with what management uses against us.
3. Most pilots aren't bright enough to look past pay rates and see that the compensation chapter is probably the least important chapter in most contracts.

Many, if not most, airlines utilize the services of Ford & Harrison when negotiating with their labor groups. And F&H has one hell of a reputation in management circles for their success in "dealing" with labor issues.

Pilots sitting across the table from F&H specialists is like the Taliban engaging in a firefight with Recon Marines - it ain't gonna be pretty for one side.

It costs money, big money, to bring in representation like this...

The seat is not MEL deferred. It is deactivated.

I don't get why pilot groups don't pony up the cash and hire real, qualified, trained, negotiators. Say $5M, and take it straight out of the new deal thats being negotiated. A professional negotiator could probably regain that and more.

Pilots are pilots, they fly planes. Leave the negotiating to people who know what they're doing.

it will do no good, he/she will be easily influenced with hand outs, just like everyone else! "it's the precious"