DEETS:

2010-12-20_PCL-MSA-CJC_JCBA_Tenative_Agreement_Summary__FINAL_.pdf

 

After reviewing it and comparing it with the only CBA I worked under (ARW 2003), a few thoughts from a "disinterested" third party:

1. Jet CA rates look decent, but Jet FO payrates are less than 60% CA rates...why?
2. Split Saab payrates. I understand why this is, but its still quite divisive IMO.
3. Q400 rates less than CRJ-200? Really? This seems short-sighted to me.
4. No trip/duty rigs?
5. Only 75% DH pay?
6. Commuter policy sucks - disciplined for more than 2 uses?
7. Only 11 days off?
8. Health insurance is less expensive & a better option than what's offered at my current employer

I worked for Pinnacle my vote would be HELL YES, if Mesaba it'd probably be an shrugging YES, and if I worked for Colgan I'd probably hold my nose on the payrate issue and vote YES because the "good" outweighs the "bad". That said, I'd be willing to bet over the life of this agreement many CR2s go away and many more Q400s are added...potentially leading to a loss of income for crewmembers while operating a more efficient, higher-margin aircraft for the company.

All that said, its your sandbox...but your negotiators had a VERY difficult job given the condition of each airline's contract & pilot group and this, to me, looks like a viable (if nowhere close to "industry leading") joint contract solution.

 

The Q400 rates are stepped so that they do equal -200 rates by year 5. They are better than horizon by year 3.

Trip/duty will be a nonfactor after the government steps in.

The commuter policy was not explained very well at all in this summary, everyone needs to bring this up at the roadshow to get the full picture. The way it was explained to me was after 2 you sit with the panel, 2 management 2 ALPA, and they look at your specific situation, if you follow their recommendation you can't get in trouble.

 

Trip and duty RIGS, not trip and duty TIMES.

 

You're right, I don't know what I was thinking, up too late I think.

 

I think the feeling was that neither side could begin to discuss Trip/Duty rigs since everything is changing with the FAA duty times. I do know they have the right to revisit the CBA once it is passed to address new duty rules down the road.

 

A duty rig will effectively kill highspeeds as we know them because of the higher cost. That means more regular lines will have those really short RR overnights or the really long crew staging overnights throughout the month. While I think that most good contracts have duty rigs, I would sacrifice them first because of the effect it will have on the operation and our schedules.

 

^^^^exactly rigs aren't right for every airline or every operation at every airport. Depends on the schedule Daddy Delta gives us.

 

For those at 9E or XJ -

Regarding extensions and the 3 hour limit, would most extensions automatically be JA's because of the stage lengths the jet operates on? Or does the 200 do some trips that you could be conceivably extended but not JA'd?

 

you cane be extended with out JA. We have some 20 min flights with 25 min turns in the 200. I my 3 years at Mesaba i have been extended once because another FO was going to time out in his last leg so they switched us.