Just to be clear.... ALPA Merger Policy has immense flexibility into allowing ALPA properties to do their own negotiations, especially when all properties involved are already ALPA. After the USair fiasco ALPA offers legal assistance but cannot and will not take sides. All 3 MEC's are working together, nothing is off the table, nothing is on the table, what you are hearing is speculation as to what the actual merger policy will result in. You may want to take the time to read it. Section 45 of the ALPA Admin manual accessible under the alpa crewroom site/members section. ALPA Merger Policy WILL apply, but the policy does not mandate a fixed way as "the answer". You have the livelihoods of 3000 pilots at 3 carriers with 2 contracts, one of which over 5 years past it's amendable date with the potential of a single list, multiple lists, and a carrier that is essentially being split. More questions than answers at this point. It's a 3 part problem that will take all 3 MEC's to work together to get an acceptable solution. Nobody said it would be a quick fix.

The reference is an internal Mesaba ALPA email of something called "Keeping Current". It came out friday morning. Anyway "Keeping Current" isn't one of our regular communications. It is started and stopped during troubled times such as negotiations and bankruptcies. We haven't had one for quite some time.

This "Keeping Current" had a number of points but did spend some time going through the items that made this current transaction different from the SAAB transfer in the past.

The only issue I have with this is.....well, it's helping them out. They can't cover it? Tough. Allowing them to move it over to a different cert with a pilot group with extra pilots that can cover it, IMO, is opening the door to all kinds of abuse. Good thing Colgan doesn't operate CRJs, I guess. With a contract 5 years in the making and us on ice, we shouldn't be giving the company an inch. You know they wouldn't if the tables were turned.

You know I agree with you but in this case I cannot confirm, nor deny, any feelings I may or may not have. Furthermore, I cannot say what I would like to say or do what I would like to do. Hence the reason I simply posted the facts and let everyone make their own views of the matter. I'm sure we will chat tomorrow.

In the end I think the mindset is the bottom line, unfortunately such decision is far above my pay grade..

Yeah, wasn't meant as a shot at you. We really should get days off together so we can hang at the Saucer and talk about this stuff. :)

Is their anything in the contract that would prevent this? I gave mine away years ago, but I don't think that there is. Nor do I see how preventing it gains anything for the pilot group.

The flying can't be done because you don't have enough pilots. That is a staffing decision, not a contractual one. How the company staffs is a "management's rights" issue. If they can't cover it with premium pay, what does making a plane sit and flight cancel gain the pilot group?

Nothing in the PWA requires the company to actually be good at running an airline.

The issue I have is that it opens the door to transfer airplanes over to another certificate at will. Can't staff it? Transfer it to Mesaba/Colgan. Then just don't hire at Pinnacle. Keep transferring airplanes, and eventually Pinnacle Inc has none. IMO, the only reason management hasn't played the "Mesa/Freedom" card is because, until now, the other airline didn't have pilots already trained to fly the airplane or an operating certificate with the airplane on it.

Even more of a reason we need one list and one contract.

No argument from me. My first thought when I saw the company's plan was one list and TWO contracts was "Whaaaat? How? You can't even keep up with ONE right now."