L-16B
Well-Known Member
:rotfl:Jezus, I love it when you Colgan guys talk about a DOH being a screw-job for ya'll. Really?! Your most junior Captain upgrade is down to a 2010 DOH. Imagine the horror if a Colgan FO has to wait more than 12 months for an upgrade. You're crazy if you think it is legit for a 2-year Colgan guy to jump up to the equivalent of a 5 year XJ/PNCL guy. Your new CAs have seen just one winter, one summer and are already sitting left seat making "command" decisions. Meanwhile, 4-6+ year FOs at both XJ and 9E have not upgraded due to no fault of their own. I'll say it again: DOH credits you for TIME spent at YOUR airline in THIS industry. YOUR 18 MONTHS at Colgan do NOT deserve for you to get 4 to 5 YEARS equivalent at XJ or 9E.
The underlying tone of the start of this thread was that Pinnacle merger committee wants Colgan screwed and that there is no unity. That is NOT the case. The PNCL method was the *same* one (category/class) that has been used in recent arbitrator cases. When Pinnacle proposed that category/class method, they did so without any emotion. Breaking it down by equipment and position with no regard to airline. Mesaba proposing a straight-up DOH method is kinda silly, since no arbitration case has ever gone to 100% DOH for the past decade. Similarly, Colgan, IMO, proposed the biggest crap by straight-up relative integration, ensuring their low-time-spent-in-industry got years and years ahead of XJ and 9E. *At least* the Pinnacle method was realistic, from an arbitration award standpoint. Instead of pointing fingers and crying at Pinnacle, Colgan should look into past historical binding arbitration awards for senority, and look at category/class and how it applied.
No offense, but your clueless. There are NO 2010 Captains. There are NO 2009 Captains. It took me 3 years to get upgrade. Come back with some solid facts, thanks.