Mesaba's dispute?
05-26-2011 | 03:58 AM
#111
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
From: Up Front
He seemed pretty definitive about "27 minutes after email being sent".
And the only information BIGRIG gave was the mid-June comment.
I smell spin-control.
05-26-2011 | 04:01 AM
#112
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
From: Up Front
It FLOORS me that XJ would try and dispute something like this, when it was clearly addressed in the LOA #2 Transtion agreement V. They are doing nothing more than trying to intentionally screw us 9E guys out of 2 months of seniority. "Unity" ....... what a joke! This is extremely pathetic behavior to dispute something like this, just to gain a 2 month advantage over every Pinnacle pilot. I won't being forgetting this anytime soon.
We don't even know the details of the dispute yet.
05-26-2011 | 04:33 AM
#113
On Reserve
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
it seems to me that when some people start ranting about $amounts, cost savings and whatever, they are simply forgetting about cancelled flights and lost earnings due to lack of crews!! try to figure out all the numbers out for that!!
05-26-2011 | 04:51 AM
#114
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
udpate: Funny how after I rant we get an email, but its worthless, technical difficulties, thats all we get?
Last edited by MunkyButtr; 05-26-2011 at 05:05 AM. Reason: addition
05-26-2011 | 05:52 AM
#115
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 0
From: CL-65 captain
Shyguy did you even read my post? I didn't say all would get an extra week of VAC. I said some would get an extra week one year earlier. Now I would like to see your calculations for every pilot here for their additional pay and 401k match for 1300 pilots with that extra 2-3 month longevity over the next 4-5 years.....since that is probably on average how much longer they will be at 9e....
ShyGuy isn't a guy who is shy, that would be Shy Guy. ShyGuy is a character in the Super Mario Brothers game for SNES.
Anyway,
Only a day or two additional. Per our last contract, from 12-59 months completed service, 2 weeks, 60 months and above, 3 weeks, etc.
There was no "in between." Now, we get a pro-rated amount of vacation day.
For example, assume one will have 52 months of completed service by the end of this year. Under the old contract, you'd just get 2 weeks.
But with the new contract, "more than 4 years service" accrues at a certain rate 1.75 and "more than one year" accrues at 1.16
So a guy with 52 months of service by the end of 2011:
His math..........
months 49, 50, 51, and 52. 4 months at "more than 4 years service."
4 x1.75 = 7
And for months 48 and below, it accrues at only 1.16 So the remaining 8 months were accrued at a rate of "more than one year"
8 x 1.16 = 9.28
7 + 9.28 = 16.28
Rounded to 16.
This pilot gets 2 weeks and 2 days (VAT) of vacation. Note how it prorates.
My argument is that adjusting the longevity by two months only nets you, at best, one or two days additional for vacation time. Not a full week. It could become a full week if you are around a Feb-March date of hire. But if that is the case, you'd be getting 2 weeks and 5 days vacation prorated before, and now, you'd get 3 weeks (just two days additional).
Do you see the difference?
Anyway,
Only a day or two additional. Per our last contract, from 12-59 months completed service, 2 weeks, 60 months and above, 3 weeks, etc.
There was no "in between." Now, we get a pro-rated amount of vacation day.
For example, assume one will have 52 months of completed service by the end of this year. Under the old contract, you'd just get 2 weeks.
But with the new contract, "more than 4 years service" accrues at a certain rate 1.75 and "more than one year" accrues at 1.16
So a guy with 52 months of service by the end of 2011:
His math..........
months 49, 50, 51, and 52. 4 months at "more than 4 years service."
4 x1.75 = 7
And for months 48 and below, it accrues at only 1.16 So the remaining 8 months were accrued at a rate of "more than one year"
8 x 1.16 = 9.28
7 + 9.28 = 16.28
Rounded to 16.
This pilot gets 2 weeks and 2 days (VAT) of vacation. Note how it prorates.
My argument is that adjusting the longevity by two months only nets you, at best, one or two days additional for vacation time. Not a full week. It could become a full week if you are around a Feb-March date of hire. But if that is the case, you'd be getting 2 weeks and 5 days vacation prorated before, and now, you'd get 3 weeks (just two days additional).
Do you see the difference?
Last edited by mooney; 05-26-2011 at 06:03 AM.
05-26-2011 | 06:20 AM
#116
Banned
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
From: Making them puke from the left
What does this even mean?? Are you suggesting that you are going to act more unprofessional than you are now towards your new coworkers? Does it mean that you are going to hold a grudge because things didn't go your way? I am just trying to understand. Do you speak for your entire pilot group?
05-26-2011 | 06:29 AM
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,356
Likes: 0
From: CRJ
What does this even mean?? Are you suggesting that you are going to act more unprofessional than you are now towards your new coworkers? Does it mean that you are going to hold a grudge because things didn't go your way? I am just trying to understand. Do you speak for your entire pilot group?
05-26-2011 | 06:52 AM
#118
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
From: CA
wow...so, just for my sake. Here's what I understand so far in summery:
9E submitted 2 different seniority lists to Bloch. One from the old contractual format and the other from the new JCBA format. Old way, seniority begins at a successful checkride. The new format gives the same start date for seniority accrual as XJ which in some cases could change seniority by half a year in some cases at 9E. XJ cries foul. Bloch considering what to do.
As far as updates from 9E MEC....I've recieved 3 emails in 3 days; not sure why some others haven't. Also, the 9E ALPA site has been updated daily for a while on this issue. I'm satisfied with our communication.
For the furloughees, we helped them. GOOD! We aren't enemies here. We should be happy we were in a position to do so. As far as SLI, 9e should in the same spirit use the same formula as XJ for determining seniority. We are in the same boat and should be rowing together. It helps no one to work against one another. Keep the XJ guys on with longevity. We may not have to, but it's the right thing to do especially w/regards to the JCBA. Same seniority start formula for everyone. Again, right thing to do. Let's move this process along. I may be wrong, someone correct me if so. I do appreciate the caution and calculated action. One week/month isn't that long to be patient fellas and ladies. In the words of the immortal R. King "can't we all just get along". Let's hug
9E submitted 2 different seniority lists to Bloch. One from the old contractual format and the other from the new JCBA format. Old way, seniority begins at a successful checkride. The new format gives the same start date for seniority accrual as XJ which in some cases could change seniority by half a year in some cases at 9E. XJ cries foul. Bloch considering what to do.
As far as updates from 9E MEC....I've recieved 3 emails in 3 days; not sure why some others haven't. Also, the 9E ALPA site has been updated daily for a while on this issue. I'm satisfied with our communication.
For the furloughees, we helped them. GOOD! We aren't enemies here. We should be happy we were in a position to do so. As far as SLI, 9e should in the same spirit use the same formula as XJ for determining seniority. We are in the same boat and should be rowing together. It helps no one to work against one another. Keep the XJ guys on with longevity. We may not have to, but it's the right thing to do especially w/regards to the JCBA. Same seniority start formula for everyone. Again, right thing to do. Let's move this process along. I may be wrong, someone correct me if so. I do appreciate the caution and calculated action. One week/month isn't that long to be patient fellas and ladies. In the words of the immortal R. King "can't we all just get along". Let's hug
Last edited by HIREME; 05-26-2011 at 07:14 AM.
05-26-2011 | 07:44 AM
#119
Banned
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
From: Making them puke from the left
wow...so, just for my sake. Here's what I understand so far in summery:
9E submitted 2 different seniority lists to Bloch. One from the old contractual format and the other from the new JCBA format. Old way, seniority begins at a successful checkride. The new format gives the same start date for seniority accrual as XJ which in some cases could change seniority by half a year in some cases at 9E. XJ cries foul. Bloch considering what to do.
As far as updates from 9E MEC....I've recieved 3 emails in 3 days; not sure why some others haven't. Also, the 9E ALPA site has been updated daily for a while on this issue. I'm satisfied with our communication.
For the furloughees, we helped them. GOOD! We aren't enemies here. We should be happy we were in a position to do so. As far as SLI, 9e should in the same spirit use the same formula as XJ for determining seniority. We are in the same boat and should be rowing together. It helps no one to work against one another. Keep the XJ guys on with longevity. We may not have to, but it's the right thing to do especially w/regards to the JCBA. Same seniority start formula for everyone. Again, right thing to do. Let's move this process along. I may be wrong, someone correct me if so. I do appreciate the caution and calculated action. One week/month isn't that long to be patient fellas and ladies. In the words of the immortal R. King "can't we all just get along". Let's hug
9E submitted 2 different seniority lists to Bloch. One from the old contractual format and the other from the new JCBA format. Old way, seniority begins at a successful checkride. The new format gives the same start date for seniority accrual as XJ which in some cases could change seniority by half a year in some cases at 9E. XJ cries foul. Bloch considering what to do.
As far as updates from 9E MEC....I've recieved 3 emails in 3 days; not sure why some others haven't. Also, the 9E ALPA site has been updated daily for a while on this issue. I'm satisfied with our communication.
For the furloughees, we helped them. GOOD! We aren't enemies here. We should be happy we were in a position to do so. As far as SLI, 9e should in the same spirit use the same formula as XJ for determining seniority. We are in the same boat and should be rowing together. It helps no one to work against one another. Keep the XJ guys on with longevity. We may not have to, but it's the right thing to do especially w/regards to the JCBA. Same seniority start formula for everyone. Again, right thing to do. Let's move this process along. I may be wrong, someone correct me if so. I do appreciate the caution and calculated action. One week/month isn't that long to be patient fellas and ladies. In the words of the immortal R. King "can't we all just get along". Let's hug
If it was just the moving of DOH to start of class I don't have an issue, however, the change of seniority date of over 100 by 8 months is fraud. Those of you on the current 9E list that didn't get this bump should be ****ed at your own representation not at the rest of us. In fact, you should thank our reps for saving you from yourselves.
05-26-2011 | 07:54 AM
#120
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
From: CA
If it was just the moving of DOH to start of class I don't have an issue, however, the change of seniority date of over 100 by 8 months is fraud. Those of you on the current 9E list that didn't get this bump should be ****ed at your own representation not at the rest of us. In fact, you should thank our reps for saving you from yourselves.
I may be naive, but I don't believe our guys would be foolish enough to think they could try that and not get caught. I don't believe for a moment they cherry picked 100 guys and changed their seniority date by 8 months thinking no one would be the wiser. Think about the accusation. Just not very logical that someone would attempt that.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Major
15
10-20-2007 02:01 PM
