|
Originally Posted by gredenko
(Post 1111739)
Creating a safety culture that has led to having an accident-free operation for 68 years, for starters.
|
Originally Posted by AxialFlow
(Post 1112308)
That's only popular when it's somebody elses turn to do it. I'm voting "NO"
|
Originally Posted by AxialFlow
(Post 1112312)
You must be a first year FO, I take it. Feel free to ask any questions you may have...I'm sure your coworkers will be more than happy to answer them for you. Welcome aboard!
It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt . |
Originally Posted by Boomer
(Post 1112229)
Understand this - you could agree to a 50% pay cut to help the company, and if Pinnacle files Ch11 the next day your efforts will not be recognized by the judge.
Only concessions given during BK count as a good faith sacrifice toward the 1113c motion that Pinnacle will certainly file against the pilot group. |
Originally Posted by shimmydamp
(Post 1112354)
Kind of my point. Bankruptcy court isn't fair. So if there is a chance you can stay out of it, it's the best route to go with. Of course you'd have to actually prove that to me, hence the roadshows.
|
Originally Posted by shimmydamp
(Post 1112354)
Kind of my point. Bankruptcy court isn't fair. So if there is a chance you can stay out of it, it's the best route to go with. Of course you'd have to actually prove that to me, hence the roadshows.
Look - Pinnacle Corp has NO INTENTION of avoiding bankruptcy. They are just trying to get lower rates from us so that the rates they get out of bankruptcy are much, much lower. |
Originally Posted by TSioux55
(Post 1111721)
So tell me, what good has been done on behalf of the PILOTS with all that time????
it's so easy to forget. |
Originally Posted by TristarJS30
(Post 1112263)
Someone should mention this to the ALPA guys that sent out their "FAQ" last night where they say any givebacks now will be looked favorably upon by the bankruptcy judge.
http://www.nysb.uscourts.gov/opinion...64_opinion.pdf Page 4: Concerned with the escalating financial problems confronting both Delta and Comair in the post 9/11 era, Comair sought cost reductions in its employee costs from both unionized and non-union employees and officers in late 2004 and early 2005. Of relevance here, in February 2005 Comair and ALPA signed a letter of agreement (“LOA”) modifying the pilot collective bargaining agreement to provide pilot compensation reductions equating to approximately $8 million per year. The judge understands that pilots ponied up $8 million in concessions just prior to BK. Page 15: When Comair and ALPA negotiated the February 2005 pre-petition concession LOA Comair undertook to increase its fleet of aircraft as a condition of maintaining the cost concessions. Its inability to do so will result in the January 1 $8 million snapback. The Judge again points out that the pilot concessions right before BK save/cost Comair $8 million. He is clearly aware of the pilot concessions.Page 22: Today, as a result of the rejection of the January 2006 LOA, the pilots are the only Concessions prior to BK obviously don't count toward BK.employee constituency which has contributed no concession in wages, benefits or work rules toward Comair’s attempt to reorganize and emerge from bankruptcy. Page 27: Finally, the pilots are the only employee constituency which has made no concessionary contribution to Comair’s reorganization. Every other labor group, both union and non-union, has made substantial financial sacrifices to support the ongoing viability of the enterprise, except the pilots. Again, concessions prior to BK obviously don't count toward BK.Sorry guys, but giving Pinnacle concessions right before BK will not get you squat from the judge. |
Boomer,
Just to clarify, pg 15. "When Comair and ALPA negotiated the February 2005 pre-petition concession LOA Comair undertook to increase its fleet of aircraft as a condition of maintaining the cost concessions. Its inability to do so will result in the January 1 $8 million snapback." The judge here is referring to the fact that the pilot's concessions were contingent on Comair increasing it's fleet, which comair was unable to do. As a result, the pilot's wages snapped back to what they were initially. So as it stood, after Comair entered bankruptcy, the pilot's wages were due to revert to their pre-concession levels. This is what the judge meant by the fact that pilots were the only employee group who had not contributed wage concessions to the reorganization. As of the time of the judge's ruling, the pilots' wages were set at the level they were before concessions. If anything, this section of the ruling that you highlighted shows that bankruptcy judges closely examine which employee groups have made concessions and take that into account when imposing further concessions. M. |
Originally Posted by Boomer
(Post 1112406)
Page 27: Finally, the pilots are the only employee constituency which has made no concessionary contribution to Comair’s reorganization. Every other labor group, both union and non-union, has made substantial financial sacrifices to support the ongoing viability of the enterprise, except the pilots. Again, concessions prior to BK obviously don't count toward BK.Sorry guys, but giving Pinnacle concessions right before BK will not get you squat from the judge. So, I guess the judge recognized the HUGE sacrifices made by management!?! :rolleyes: |
5% is just a drop in the bucket. Why go after employees pay first? That should be LAST!!
Sean Menke may have been a good guy at Frontier, but now he's making big mistakes. How about going after Phil Trenary, Doug Shockey and Clive Seals contracts first - since they all get monthly payments and don't even work there, or even do consulting like they should be. Pinnacle just wastes money non stop, that's the problem. Leave the pilots industry standard wages alone. I have seen millions of dollars wasted upon unused sim time, when managers simply forgot about all the sim time purchased in other cities. And now seeing pilots going through worthless training, just to follow a few weeks later to go through training on different equipment. What a waste. The pilots could work for free, and If management doesn't streamline the operation, then it still looses money. This problem is totally the result of a mis-managed company from the top down. |
Originally Posted by mloub
(Post 1112436)
Boomer,
Just to clarify, pg 15. "When Comair and ALPA negotiated the February 2005 pre-petition concession LOA Comair undertook to increase its fleet of aircraft as a condition of maintaining the cost concessions. Its inability to do so will result in the January 1 $8 million snapback." The judge here is referring to the fact that the pilot's concessions were contingent on Comair increasing it's fleet, which comair was unable to do. As a result, the pilot's wages snapped back to what they were initially. No, they had not snapped back. The snapback was to happen on 01/01/2007. In 2006, the judge ruled for the company in dismissing the ALPA contract and also granted an injunction to prevent our snapback wages from going into effect. So as it stood, after Comair entered bankruptcy, the pilot's wages were due to revert to their pre-concession levels. True. When we entered BK Delta elected to divert our aircraft to other regionals and then used that as evidence that we were too expensive. Similar to a father testifying at his own child abuse trial: "Your honor, my kid is terrible. He always behaves badly. Look at all the bruises he has from me having to punish him!" This is what the judge meant by the fact that pilots were the only employee group who had not contributed wage concessions to the reorganization. As of the time of the judge's ruling, the pilots' wages were set at the level they were before concessions. Again incorrect. We never got the snapback. The company used the 1113c process to impose substantial pay cuts and workrule changes. The judge refused our snapback in one ruling and rejected our concessionary contract in a different ruling. He allowed the company to impose cuts that were much more severe than our 2005 concessions. If anything, this section of the ruling that you highlighted shows that bankruptcy judges closely examine which employee groups have made concessions and take that into account when imposing further concessions. And he did not consider our 2005 concessions as BK concessions because they were "pre-petition". I could quote several other pages where he goes into the "fairness and equity" of all employees taking cuts during BK. M. But thank you for taking time to read the ruling. |
Boomer,
Sorry you had to go through all that at Comair. It sounds like it was a raw deal. I certainly don't know as much about the comair situation as you do, and your insights are really helpful. Bankruptcy is a sh$t sandwich no matter how you slice it. As I understand it, right off the bat management can accept or reject any contract they had entered into pre-bankrupcty. (No surprise they usually target everyone else's contracts and not their own). Once they have rejected a contract, like a pilot group's contract, they then either reach a deal on a new contract (rare! if they coulda reached a deal they would have done it earlier) or take it to the judge in 1113c. The judge's role is to see if he can make all the pieces work by looking at projected revenues, the FA's pay, pilots pay, maintenance, management etc..etc...if there is no way in hell it would work, you get liquidation. In that sense, it is open to debate what the judge looks at when imposing concessions, but I think most people would tell you the judge looks at wages compared to industry averages, and concessions that labor groups have already given, and things along those lines. I guess the issue with Comair was the judge viewed concessions that were due to snap back as not much of a concession. If there is a solution to the mess by bringing in new labor contracts, then the judge imposes the labor contracts that he thinks spread the pain around fairly. Of course managements have a way of dodging the bullet here with post-petition bonuses and other shenanigans that they pay themselves for supposedly righting the ship. The judge can't do much about these post-petition bonuses that happen after the fact. This is an unfairness in the system that should be fixed, and really happens because shareholders are too comatose to know they are being robbed blind in these situations. The name of the game is to avoid BK, and that is what makes this situation so tough. Is Menke working in good faith? Is he trying to save the business, or is he just preparing for bankruptcy, regardless? That is the million dollar question. At Frontier, Menke was making some progress until their credit card processing company panicked and pulled the plug - forcing them into bankruptcy. Pinnacle seems to be a ways away from anyone doing that to them (the only entity that could is Delta, and they run litigation risk if they withhold payments), so Menke might have enough time here to right things. We'll see. M. |
Originally Posted by mloub
(Post 1112561)
Boomer,
Sorry you had to go through all that at Comair. It sounds like it was a raw deal. I certainly don't know as much about the comair situation as you do, and your insights are really helpful. Comair won three rulings against ALPA. One was the injunction that nullified the snapback clause due to kick in on 01/01/07 when Delta failed to meet the fleet guarantee they had promised for the 2005 concessions. The second was ruling for the company in their 1113c motion to reject the pilot contract and impose their own. The third was an injunction to prevent ALPA from striking when Comair imposed the 1113c contract, thus violating the status quo. (This one was technically a win for the company, since he postponed the case pending further review and we never actually had the opportunity to test the case law by striking). Bankruptcy is a sh$t sandwich no matter how you slice it. As I understand it, right off the bat management can accept or reject any contract they had entered into pre-bankrupcty. (No surprise they usually target everyone else's contracts and not their own). Management can not outright reject a contract, only the judge can do that for them. Prior to 1113c, Management can propose a new contract, and ALPA can accept it or counter-offer. Both sides must negotiate in good faith. When the company doesn't get what they want, they file the 1113c motion and the judge decides which proposal is more justified. I do not know of any case (in aviation, anyway) where the judge decided that a union's proposal offered a better chance than management's for the company to survive. Once they have rejected a contract, like a pilot group's contract, they then either reach a deal on a new contract (rare! if they coulda reached a deal they would have done it earlier) or take it to the judge in 1113c. The judge's role is to see if he can make all the pieces work by looking at projected revenues, the FA's pay, pilots pay, maintenance, management etc..etc...if there is no way in hell it would work, you get liquidation. In that sense, it is open to debate what the judge looks at when imposing concessions, but I think most people would tell you the judge looks at wages compared to industry averages, and concessions that labor groups have already given, and things along those lines. I guess the issue with Comair was the judge viewed concessions that were due to snap back as not much of a concession. Delta (Bastian, Glass, Anderson, Bornhorst) testified that Comair's costs were above average and not competitive. A group like Mesa would have a harder time proving that the pilot contract was a factor that led to BK. If there is a solution to the mess by bringing in new labor contracts, then the judge imposes the labor contracts that he thinks spread the pain around fairly. Exactly. This is where any good-faith paycuts outside of BK don't count for squat in 1113c, whether they are due to snap-back or not. The pilots need to hurt just like everyone else during BK. Here it is again: http://www.nysb.uscourts.gov/opinion...64_opinion.pdf |
Here is the Judge's ruling that prevented ALPA from self-help when the company imposed their 1113c contract:
http://www.nysb.uscourts.gov/opinion...24_opinion.pdf |
I have to correct myself, there is indeed a case where a judge sided with a union in an 1113 motion.
In looking at old Comair case files, I discovered that there were actually two 1113c motions against the FA's (Teamsters). In the first one (April 2006), the judge found that the company had not bargained in good faith and sent them back to negotiate further. http://www.nysb.uscourts.gov/opinion...67_opinion.pdf In the second (July 2006), the judge found that Comair had done a better job and threw out the FA contract. http://www.nysb.uscourts.gov/opinion...27_opinion.pdf |
Lawyered!!
|
Having Been through it twice I can say that I would as a pilot remember that Ican work for free and still not keep my airline out of BK.Management will find a way to do it any way and a pilot s pathetic five percent will only ultimately go to management bonuses... And then the judge will cut your pay some more any way. Just have guts and go for max pay till the last day and in the end you will be better off for it.
|
This is all good discussion but I'd be willing to bet my career at Comair (oh wait, never mind...that'll be gone soon) that the militant "full-pay-to-the-last-day" faction will gladly crusade on boards like this but those who buy into the company rhetoric and are afraid to take a stand keep their mouths shut until after said votes occur, at which point they will claim that no way in hay-all would they agree to concessions. This is what happened at Clownair. 51-49 in favor of concessions in bankruptcy and yet nobody I ever fly with ever seems to admit they voted yes. When we are down to 44 aircraft this summer, there will still be the "51ers" that can't replace $104/hr in a tough economy with nothing but a H.S. diploma and a 6,000 sq ft home in Northern Kentucky or Orlando or wherever.
I feel for the Pinnacle brethren. Just don't think what's happening to you is occurring in a vacuum. Listen to what Boomer is saying because I can corroborate all of it. |
Originally Posted by mumu
(Post 1113046)
This is all good discussion but I'd be willing to bet my career at Comair (oh wait, never mind...that'll be gone soon) that the militant "full-pay-to-the-last-day" faction will gladly crusade on boards like this but those who buy into the company rhetoric and are afraid to take a stand keep their mouths shut until after said votes occur, at which point they will claim that no way in hay-all would they agree to concessions. This is what happened at Clownair. 51-49 in favor of concessions in bankruptcy and yet nobody I ever fly with ever seems to admit they voted yes. When we are down to 44 aircraft this summer, there will still be the "51ers" that can't replace $104/hr in a tough economy with nothing but a H.S. diploma and a 6,000 sq ft home in Northern Kentucky or Orlando or wherever.
I feel for the Pinnacle brethren. Just don't think what's happening to you is occurring in a vacuum. Listen to what Boomer is saying because I can corroborate all of it. How about a new sticker: "I don't need a roadshow to vote NO..." |
Question, I'm still on probation, will I be able to vote on this? Or do i just get to sit back and watch the show?
-Matt |
probationary pilots can not vote
|
Originally Posted by whoareyou310
(Post 1113184)
probationary pilots can not vote
|
Originally Posted by whtever
(Post 1113051)
+1 Nice post! Completely agree... Maybe we should have a few Comair guys speak after the "roadshows" ;)
Or you could bring this to the road show and read it out loud during the Q&A: "This is from page 7 of Comair's 1113 decision. Section 1113 of the Bankruptcy Code provides as follows in the relevant subsections: (b) (1) Subsequent to filing a petition and prior to filing an application seeking rejection of a collective bargaining agreement, the debtor in possession or trustee, shall — (A) make a proposal to the authorized representative of the employees covered by such agreement, based on the most complete and reliable information available at the time of such proposal, which provides for those necessary modifications in the employees benefits and protections that are necessary to permit the reorganization of the debtor and assures that all creditors, the debtor and all of the affected parties are treated fairly and equitably... Now please tell us where it says our sacrifices will be honored by the court when Pinnacle files for bankruptcy? Because the "subsequent to filing a petition" part kinda says we still need to give back our fair share during BK, regardless of what we give back now." So throw something like that out there and watch the shifty ALPA lawyer they have standing off to the side kinda step forward, shrug his shoulders, and tell you "There's really no way to guarantee anything no matter what you do, and I can't tell you how to vote but you really should vote yes for the TA." |
So is us not getting paid ontime a part of their new strategery? Take money from peter to pay paul?
|
Originally Posted by Boomer
(Post 1112622)
Here is the Judge's ruling that prevented ALPA from self-help when the company imposed their 1113c contract:
http://www.nysb.uscourts.gov/opinion...24_opinion.pdf We as pilots are slaves to one company due to the seniority system and the RLA prevents our self help in search of a contract because you have to maintain the status quo and yet the company can declare bankruptcy, change the contract AND prevent a strike? How is that status quo? |
Originally Posted by Fly782
(Post 1116786)
So is us not getting paid ontime a part of their new strategery? Take money from peter to pay paul?
|
Originally Posted by higney85
(Post 1116932)
It's called "rainmaker". I got paid fwiw.
I think that memo should just be permanently posted on the company website. |
"It's called "rainmaker". I got paid fwiw. "
You are close to the heart of the matter ... you have influence! |
Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine
(Post 1116938)
I didn't get paid, but I am not too worried because there was a memo that said they are working hard to ensure this problem will never happen again. :roll eyes:
I think that memo should just be permanently posted on the company website. |
What a joke...this company is going down fast. If they can't get our payroll right what's next?
|
haha to all the responses....i bet its a colgan only problem of course ! any cjc pilots get paid yet?
|
Originally Posted by sinsilvia666
(Post 1117013)
haha to all the responses....i bet its a colgan only problem of course ! any cjc pilots get paid yet?
|
Originally Posted by FlyJSH
(Post 1117018)
Yes, on time.
|
I guess I should have said, "I was paid on time; however, since I only manage my own accounts, I cannot confirm anyone else received their funds in a timely manor."
|
You PNL guy's need to keep one thought in mind....
No Airline has ever been "Saved" by the Pilots taking paycuts...At best it just drags out the misery.. Keep Your Full pay to the Last Day..... |
I got paid on time as well.
|
Straight from the contract:
Example 2: A payday falls on Monday the 16th, a bank holiday. Paychecks shall be issued on Friday the 13th. Once again, I did not receive a direct deposit from Memphis. Why are some people not getting paid? I'm wondering if all the managers and execs got paid? Maybe I need to work harder. I guess all employees are equal, but some employees are more equal than others. |
I got paid and I am a fenced XJ guy. I thought they were supposed to put our sick time balance on our pay stubs.
|
They should pay us in cash if they can't do it right. One of these times they aren't going to pay us claiming they made an error and it is going to be the real deal. They won't have the money and we will never get paid.
I want to see a pilot group go to management and ask for a 5% raise outside of contract negotiations. Why can management pull this on us but it never works the other way? If this was a good company that ran a good operation (paid people on time, treated people with respect, did me a favor ONCE a year, kept track of my sick time and vacation properly and had a real retirement package) then I would consider this proposal. As it stands now this company can't get anything right and I am embarassed to have to put the name on my resume. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:27 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands