Not that it matters but Eagle was hiring and I know of at least one person that declined the interview to go to Pinnacle in order to stay in his old base and keep seniority/accrue longevity.

I'm not too good to accept Pinnacle first year pay. I probably would have still taken the job if that was the case, knowing it was temporary (unless I had to resign XJ seniority then I wouldn't have). But the company and the union were able to do a nice thing for us by honoring our experience at Mesaba, what's wrong with that?

 

There seems to be a general lack of knowledge about the whole MOU thing. Maybe the Pinnacle group was just told you will be flying with XJ guys who were furloughed and then everyone has all this fear and aggression because they don't understand the situation? Fear of the unknown? Lots of false rumors about everything too that doesn't help the situation. I really think if you guys had more information about what the deal was and how it works then you wouldn't be so mad and angry at us.

 

Nothing is wrong with that and I fully supported it. But you didn't have the tone like the post I was referring to that inferred he was too good for 1st year Pinnacle pay. You sound actually happy to have a job here under the circumstances and I welcome that attitude.

 

I can't think of any 9e pilot that is mad or angry at any XJ furloughee. I did a few sim events with many of you and was happy to see you here as a furlough vs some off the street zero 121 experience guy. What did make us mad was that the company did not give us any longevity bennies for our adjusted hire date (class vs checkride) because they claimed it would cost too much but had no problem letting the XJ furloughs keep their longevity bennies (or even the lack of longevity bennies between us and a 9l/XJ guy of the same general hire date on the combined SLI)....so we were/are mad at the company not the furloughs...although I agree with the other post about the tone of the 1st year pinnacle pay being beneath someone...but every group has their bad apples, 9e, XJ and 9L

 

asa, xjt,............................

 

Good point and nice reading your post. I agree that they should have adjusted your pay to the hire date. I think the reason they did it for us - it was like a welcoming "gift" to show some good faith. But yea, I would be mad at them too.

 

I don't ever want to see you using "pinnacle management" and "good faith" in the same sentence again, young grasshopper....

 

Well, unemployment was always an option! I think the numbers speak for themselves.

I understand the LOA back in '90s. It's irrelevant now, but I stand corrected that it is happened in the past history, and it wasn't a first to offer previous seniority or longevity credit. And thank you for answering the 60 day question.

 

I know about the snapshot, duh! But my understanding is that has changed because of Bloch asking for updated lists from all three. The lists submitted on Monday would have the most up to date information on it as of May 23, 2011. All pilots on Pinnacle's list would have been on that list, including the furloughee XJ pilots currently flying at Pinnacle. Bloch didn't say to give him an updated seniority list that "stops" at the July 1 2010 snapshot. There is potential for confusion in this situation.

 

This has nothing to do with hatred for them. And I do have sympathies for any furloughed pilot. Being forcefully unemployed is something that we all hope to avoid, but it can come at anytime in this industry. I'm against the MOU's longevity credit on the principal of the matter. Once Pinnacle started hiring in Summer 2010, we received XJ furloughs as newhires, but with longevity credit, while newhire off-the-street pilots did not get any credit. Many Pinnacle newhires from 2010 were furloughed from other airlines too. How are they any different? Some of them had been in the industry a lot longer than a 2008 furloughee, but once they started at Pinnacle, they got no favoritism, no break, no credit.

In a seniority based system, things need to be fair with everyone on the same level playing field. I could have been furloughed from XYZ airlines in 2009 and then hired at Pinnacle in summer of 2010, but I won't be getting 2nd year pay. The point of seniority and longevity is defeated by having a MOU such as this. I didn't get any breaks as a newhire pilot. Current Pinnacle employees that work as a non-pilot, and then 'transfer' to a pilot position (basically assigned a class date) got NO credit for being at Pinnacle in their prior position. Sure, you could have been a scheduler for 2 years at Pinnacle. For example, I could have 2 years at Pinnacle (my Pinnacle longevity) and then get a class date. The only thing a pilot kept in this case was the prior employee number. But guess what? I start at the bottom of pilot list, with first year pay, and zero longevity as a Pinnacle piot. Isn't that a little unfair? You're gonna give longevity credit to a furloughed XJ pilot, who has zero time at Pinnacle, and yet, you won't give any longevity time to Pinnacle pilot transferee, who came in from another department. I mean, technically, he's been at Pinnacle. Isn't that Pinnacle longevity? The answer is 'no' because your longevity and seniority at Pinnacle depends on when you started class date at Pinnacle. And for us to issue a MOU that allows this longevity credit to a SELECT few (the XJ furloughees) and ignores all others is a little unfair. I say current Pinnacle pilots who served at Pinnacle in another job capacity should start a revolt and demand back-pay and longevity credit as well! It's about being fair and level in a seniority+longevity-based system. That is my point.

So the above is one argument I have against it. Here's another: we have been told that Pinnacle can't afford to adjust my longevity from my sim date to my class date (the now official DOH) because it would cost them "too much." Really? Getting my payraise two months sooner would cost "too much?" Yet, they had no problem offering longevity credit to incoming Mesaba furloughee pilots? Again, nothing against you furloughees. I say welcome aboard. But the MOU was a company and PCL ALPA decision. Our union should have used leverage and tried to get us our longevity credit before they went out and fought for Mesaba furloughee longevity credit as newhires. Do you see my point?