View Poll Results: I will vote... (XJ/9E/9L pilots only, please)
For the TA
95
66.43%
Against the TA
35
24.48%
I will not vote
4
2.80%
Undecided
9
6.29%
Voters: 143. You may not vote on this poll
December 9E/XJ/9L TA Poll
12-21-2010 | 01:15 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Absolute no vote here. It was a terrible idea to pay the Q at 50 seat rates back when that was being passed around as what was going to happen and to actually go several dollars an hour less is embarrassing. Every pilot should vote no to a 74 seat airplane getting 40 seat pay.
12-21-2010 | 05:52 AM
#13
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
From: Furlough/Gun Driver
Using your logic, the industry has given concessions for the past decade so we must continue to give concessions.
GMAFB
12-21-2010 | 06:01 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Pay should be based on revenue generated. If a 70 carries more revenue than a 50 seater then the pay should be greater on the 70 seat aircraft. Regardless of the type of propulsion system.
Using your logic, the industry has given concessions for the past decade so we must continue to give concessions.
GMAFB
Using your logic, the industry has given concessions for the past decade so we must continue to give concessions.
GMAFB
12-21-2010 | 06:13 AM
#15
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
From: Furlough/Gun Driver
Five years is a long time to wait for appropriate rates, add to that another three or more years of negotiations. If your group is unwilling to make 70 seat rates comparable to other 70 seat rates regardless of t-prop or jet then the next group to negotiate any 70 seat rate will have that much harder of a time.
Managements perspective will be "hey our 70 seat jet rates are more than brand X's 70 seat (turbo prop) rates so you are paid too much for us to be competitive. We would love to give you a raise but we need concessions to keep our current flying."
Congratulations on your improved contract.
It will be a shame when a B scale is accepted at a regional.
Last edited by dosbo; 12-21-2010 at 06:14 AM. Reason: gr
12-21-2010 | 06:33 AM
#17
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 229
Likes: 2
From: B737 FO
Here's a reality check for all the those screaming to vote no.
This TA gives Pinnacle and Colgan a huge pay raise and QOL increase, regardless of whether the Q gets paid less than the 50 seat jets or the Saab A and B scales. Mesaba guys aren't getting much but it's still an improvement.
If we vote this down, Pinnacle Corp will still find a way to do what they want and we will be stuck in negotiations as seperate companies and lists for many years to come while our pilots aren't making enough to live.
This TA gives Pinnacle and Colgan a huge pay raise and QOL increase, regardless of whether the Q gets paid less than the 50 seat jets or the Saab A and B scales. Mesaba guys aren't getting much but it's still an improvement.
If we vote this down, Pinnacle Corp will still find a way to do what they want and we will be stuck in negotiations as seperate companies and lists for many years to come while our pilots aren't making enough to live.
12-21-2010 | 06:51 AM
#18
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
From: Furlough/Gun Driver
How have we come to value our skills and training so little?
12-21-2010 | 07:02 AM
#19
Doing One Pilot's Job
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,889
Likes: 127
12-21-2010 | 07:43 AM
#20
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Pay should be based on revenue generated. If a 70 carries more revenue than a 50 seater then the pay should be greater on the 70 seat aircraft. Regardless of the type of propulsion system.
Using your logic, the industry has given concessions for the past decade so we must continue to give concessions.
GMAFB
Using your logic, the industry has given concessions for the past decade so we must continue to give concessions.
GMAFB
You automatically assume more seats equals more revenue. I'm sure the road show will explain the rates.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
