Pinnacle / Colgan Seniority List
03-07-2011 | 09:11 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 0
From: CL-65 captain
03-07-2011 | 09:12 AM
#42
:-)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
That's just it, Colgan never did any Pinnacle INC flying. The only flying Pinnacle INC does is Delta codeshare flying. Colgan does not operate, nor has ever operated as a Pinnacle flight under the Pinnacle/Delta ASA. If Pinnacle INC had branded flying Colgan could not operate any of those flights. If Pinnacle Corp had branded flying, both Colgan and Pinnacle Inc. can operate those flights. Your scope contract only exists between you and Pinnacle Inc.
03-07-2011 | 09:24 AM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
We are talking about codeshare flying for a mainline for the sake of your codeshare argument and scope. Stop making it a Inc/Corp issue for this argument. We all know about Inc Corp this is strictly codeshare argument
03-07-2011 | 09:33 AM
#44
:-)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
You do realize that if Colgan had an ASA with Delta it still wouldn't be a violation of the Pinnacle scope contract. Colgan is not nor has ever operated a flight for NWA or Delta on behalf of Pinnacle Inc, or Pinnacle Corp for the sake of violating the 9E pilots scope contract. Thus the acquisition of Colgan is not, nor was it ever a violation of the Pinnacle pilots CBA. If it was, a grievance would have been filed and a judge would have ordered Pinnacle corp or inc to stop it. This has never happened.
03-07-2011 | 09:39 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
You do realize that if Colgan had an ASA with Delta it still wouldn't be a violation of the Pinnacle scope contract. Colgan is not nor has ever operated a flight for NWA or Delta on behalf of Pinnacle Inc, or Pinnacle Corp for the sake of violating the 9E pilots scope contract. Thus the acquisition of Colgan is not, nor was it ever a violation of the Pinnacle pilots CBA. If it was, a grievance would have been filed and a judge would have ordered Pinnacle corp or inc to stop it. This has never happened.
03-07-2011 | 09:49 AM
#46
:-)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
ONLY pertains to Pinnacle, Colgan, and Mesaba. All of my posts are only about them, nobody else. This is not a disscussion of scope in general, my original post was in response to yours. You said that Colgan was purchased to get around the Pinnacle scope contract, this is FALSE.
03-07-2011 | 11:19 AM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
And why did XJ holdings purchase Big Sky? Every XJ guy I talked to at the time said it was to get around scope....then they got the parent letter restricting the size of Big Sky...
Last edited by IBPilot; 03-07-2011 at 11:49 AM.
03-07-2011 | 12:04 PM
#49
:-)
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Likes: 1
someone already did....I'm not the only one that read what you said that way.....
Say you guys cancel a flight due to lack of crews, and they use a colgan Q400 to cover that flight for Delta. That's a scope violation. If Delta however, creates a flight specifically for Colgan under some type of contract separate from pinnacle inc. it is not a scope violation. To my knowledge, such a contract has never existed and colgan has never operated for NW airlink or Delta so there couldn't possibly be a scope violation. The only flying pinnacle inc. does is for Delta, and previously NWA.
And why did XJ holdings purchase Big Sky? Every XJ guy I talked to at the time said it was to get around scope....then they got the parent letter restricting the size of Big Sky...
Say you guys cancel a flight due to lack of crews, and they use a colgan Q400 to cover that flight for Delta. That's a scope violation. If Delta however, creates a flight specifically for Colgan under some type of contract separate from pinnacle inc. it is not a scope violation. To my knowledge, such a contract has never existed and colgan has never operated for NW airlink or Delta so there couldn't possibly be a scope violation. The only flying pinnacle inc. does is for Delta, and previously NWA.
And why did XJ holdings purchase Big Sky? Every XJ guy I talked to at the time said it was to get around scope....then they got the parent letter restricting the size of Big Sky...
03-07-2011 | 12:34 PM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: Couch-Horizontal
Who cares. You guys are all a bunch of high school thugs. Mesabah, Mooney, IBPilot I am saying what a bunch of people are thinking.....SHUT UP! This thread is about SLI. Not which one of you knuckle heads knows more about scope. Nobody likes know-it-alls. None of this matters. SLI is going to be done and everybody is going to move on. 10 yrs from now nobody besides you is going to remember what happened here.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
