Mesaba's dispute?
05-26-2011 | 07:01 PM
#151
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
From: Up Front
Assuming, for the sake of argument, that we are supposed to use our sim date as our DOH. I have yet to hear one person explain how that is workable in the SLI process since you had junior people finishing their checkride first and thus being 'hired' ahead of people senior to them. ALPA merger policy clearly states that people cannot jump ahead of people senior to them in the completed SLI award. You would have a complete reordering of the 9E seniority list under this scenario. The only logical way to get around this is to create an adjustment that puts all people on even footing within each newhire class. The most logical way to do this is to use the start of class, which is an industry standard practice and as supported by the JCBA and subsequent LOA. The list that Pinnacle submitted at the start of negotiations had these adjusted dates. Mesaba and Colgan has almost half a year to contest this adjustment and yet only choose to do this at the very past second. Yes pinnacle Corp may have botched a few people here or there because they were given no time to prepare the list, and I am all for correcting those errors. But you cannot argue that we have to use our original sim DOH is inane and completely unworkable.
The "not senior to anyone you are junior to" applies to which list?
The list 9E is using, which may not be valid, or a new reordered list that is valid.
05-26-2011 | 07:07 PM
#152
Roll’n Thunder
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,150
Likes: 562
From: Pilot
Using our start of class date as our DOH complies with ALPA merger policy. Obviously we were starting operational training. From the very start of class we had employee numbers and were in the pinnacle HR system. And if, for arguments sake, there was any ambiguity in ALPA merger policy, it can never trump US employment law. On day one we had to fill out the I-9 employment verification form. US law states that this form must be filled out by the employee 'at the actual time of employment.' Employers are required to complete their part of the I-9 form within three days of the employee starting work. All this paper work was done right from the start so the government considered us employees. You can't argue that we were contractors until we passed our checkride because the I-9 form is not required for contractors.
05-26-2011 | 07:12 PM
#153
Roll’n Thunder
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,150
Likes: 562
From: Pilot
Seniority at pinnacle was determined by age within each newhire class, just like every other place. This was in our CBA. Our seniority list is valid because people are ordered by their seniority, not by their DOH (checkride date) which varies widely within classes. DOH and seniority have no correlation for anyone hired at pinnacle before the JCBA. If there is no correlation then you cannot use the DOH information to try to determine seniority.
05-26-2011 | 07:19 PM
#154
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
From: Up Front
Seniority at pinnacle was determined by age within each newhire class, just like every other place. This was in our CBA. Our seniority list is valid because people are ordered by their seniority, not by their DOH (checkride date) which varies widely within classes. DOH and seniority have no correlation for anyone hired at pinnacle before the JCBA. If there is no correlation then you cannot use the DOH information to try to determine seniority.
Try to think about it from a real legal standpoint not what you believe.
"Were you on 9E's payroll as a pilot when you started training?"
Who can definitively answer that question?
05-26-2011 | 07:21 PM
#155
Roll’n Thunder
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,150
Likes: 562
From: Pilot
For people who aren't getting this, here is an example:
Pilot A and B, both in the same newhire class of 1/1/01. Pilot A is older than pilot B and thus per the CBA pilot A has the higher seniority. As training commences, due to scheduling, being sick, acts of God, or whatever, pilot B finishes his checkride 1 week ahead of pilot A. On the pinnacle list, pilot B's DOH would be ahead of pilot A, but pilot A would still be senior no matter how much longer it took him to finish his checkride after pilot B. The seniority list of Pilot A being ahead of Pilot B is legitimate and valid because DOH had no role in determining seniority.
It's convoluted and stupid, but that's the way pinnacle did it. Now years later you cannot take an element that is completely unrelated to seniority at pinnacle airlines (DOH) and use it to manufacture seniority. If you want to use DOH you have to factor out the randomness of all of our DOH's, and again the most sensible way to do this is to make our DOH the same as the start of class, which is what our seniority was based on all along anyways.
Pilot A and B, both in the same newhire class of 1/1/01. Pilot A is older than pilot B and thus per the CBA pilot A has the higher seniority. As training commences, due to scheduling, being sick, acts of God, or whatever, pilot B finishes his checkride 1 week ahead of pilot A. On the pinnacle list, pilot B's DOH would be ahead of pilot A, but pilot A would still be senior no matter how much longer it took him to finish his checkride after pilot B. The seniority list of Pilot A being ahead of Pilot B is legitimate and valid because DOH had no role in determining seniority.
It's convoluted and stupid, but that's the way pinnacle did it. Now years later you cannot take an element that is completely unrelated to seniority at pinnacle airlines (DOH) and use it to manufacture seniority. If you want to use DOH you have to factor out the randomness of all of our DOH's, and again the most sensible way to do this is to make our DOH the same as the start of class, which is what our seniority was based on all along anyways.
05-26-2011 | 07:22 PM
#156
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
From: PIC Challenger 605
I'd like to ask the same question about every pilot at Mesaba and Colgan. Obviously, anyone hired within the last few years was paid for training, but have both companies always done that? I find it hard to believe that Colgan was paying people for training 15 years ago
05-26-2011 | 07:24 PM
#157
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
From: Up Front
I'd like to ask the same question about every pilot at Mesaba and Colgan. Obviously, anyone hired within the last few years was paid for training, but have both companies always done that? I find it hard to believe that Colgan was paying people for training 15 years ago
05-26-2011 | 07:27 PM
#158
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
For employment verification purposes, I always put my class start date and not my "date of hire" as I had actually been on property for 2 months.
The DOH for the seniority list needs to be class start date to make it standard. Mesaba throwing a hissy fit over it wreaks of a seniority grab.
05-26-2011 | 07:29 PM
#160
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
From: Up Front
You were in the system, could bid on positions, and everything was on file... but didn't have an ID yet.
For employment verification purposes, I always put my class start date and not my "date of hire" as I had actually been on property for 2 months.
The DOH for the seniority list needs to be class start date to make it standard. Mesaba throwing a hissy fit over it wreaks of a seniority grab.
For employment verification purposes, I always put my class start date and not my "date of hire" as I had actually been on property for 2 months.
The DOH for the seniority list needs to be class start date to make it standard. Mesaba throwing a hissy fit over it wreaks of a seniority grab.
I'm getting tired.
But were you considered on the payroll as a pilot yet?
Just trying to figure out their angle.
Last edited by Bartok; 05-26-2011 at 07:41 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Major
15
10-20-2007 02:01 PM
