Mesaba (ALPA) vs. Colgan (NONALPA)

[Seggy]

Total Aircraft: 50
Total Pilots: 601
Total Domiciles: 3
Hiring Minimums: 600/50
Notes:

• Goldman Sachs purchased ALPA claim for $.97-$1.00 on the dollar
• Furloughed pilots who resigned will not receive any creditor claim payouts
• Hiring over 400 pilots in 2007
• Recalled all furloughed pilots
• Dollar amounts announced for creditor claim payout
• Payout ranges from $20,000-$30,000 for each active pilot and each pilot who returns from furlough will get approx. $10K-$14K depending on how many return
• First CRJ900 to go to MSP
• To receive 36 new CRJ900 aircraft, first delivery in May
• MAIR holdings has agreed to sell Mesaba to Northwest
• New pilot labor contract amendable Dec 2010 or Jun 2012; dependent on growth
• Calls for 5% pay cut with snap-back provision
• Pilots get sharing of any future profits in cash

Total Aircraft: 53
Total Pilots: 365
Total Domiciles: 27
Hiring Minimums: 500/80
Notes:

• ALPA sent Authorization for Representation Election cards to Colgan pilots in March
• Colgan Air will start an independent pilot committee to negotiate with management
• Signed contract to acquire 15 Bombardier Q400 turboprops with options for additional 20
• To operate 15 Dash 8 Q400s (74 seats) for Continental out of EWR
• Dash 8s will be delivered between Dec 2007 and Jun 2008
• Colgan purchased by Pinnacle Holdings in January for $20 million
• Not a merger; will continue to operate separately from Pinnacle Airlines
• Pilots based in HPN (White Plains) receive an extra $300/mo for cost of living consideration
• B1900 upgrades running 9-12 months, Saab upgrades 18-24 months
• Operates for US Airways Express, Continental Connection, and United Express

Look how many planes Mesaba has compared to Colgan and the pilot roster. It's no secret we work hard for our money over at Colgan!

 

[GaTechKid]

An important observation: Colgan has 3 more aircraft than Mesaba, but 236 fewer pilots.

 

[sopdan]

Something to note, though, is that those 600 pilots aren't all currently in the 50 Saabs. ~90 furloughees (included in the 600) started to come back last week training for the Saabs, and the senior guys will start training for the -900 soon (if some haven't already started). Still doesn't make up for the disparity in numbers, though.

It's no secret that Mesaba is gonna be fat on Saab FOs for a little while.

 

[AmazingPilot]

Colgan has approximately 53 aircraft, typical manning numbers are about 4 flight crews per aircraft.
i.e;

(53 aircraft times) x (4 flight crews) = 212 Flight Crews

Flight Crews consist of two crewmembers,

(212 flight crews) x (2 i.e; captain and first officer) = 424

Colgan's pilot roster should equal approximately 424 pilots,

Colgan's pilot roster equals 365

424 - 365 = 59 pilots short of target roster

Colgan is short only about 60 pilots, not 236.
Working at a company that is overstaffed is an undesirable quality since it the hours worked will be less and the reserve time will be more.
Keeping in mind that "getting the time" and moving on is the majority goal of the pilot population.

I don't think Colgan Pilots work any harder than Mesaba Pilots, last I checked we were all restricted to the same amount of duty hour requirements of 30 in 7, 100 in a month, and 1,000 in a year.

 

[kellwolf]

Working at a company that is overstaffed is an undesirable quality since it the hours worked will be less and the reserve time will be more.
Keeping in mind that "getting the time" and moving on is the majority goal of the pilot population.

Working at an understaffed airline isn't very desirable, either. Although, the getting time part sure is easy, it's the getting time with the family part that's tough.....

 

[AmazingPilot]

Working at an understaffed airline isn't very desirable, either. Although, the getting time part sure is easy, it's the getting time with the family part that's tough.....

Agree my point may be my own personal opinion.
The way I look at it though, I hate sitting reserve at a regional while I scrape by financially.

A union will bring on changes, so will be good and some will be bad.
I personally don't believe a union will be the holy grail of solutions to fix all problems.
Still haven't decided if I am for or against it yet, would like to see some intelligent arguments coming from either side though.

 

[kellwolf]

Agree my point may be my own personal opinion.
The way I look at it though, I hate sitting reserve at a regional while I scrape by financially.

I agree with ya there, and I've been there done that last year. However, you don't want so few pilots you're using your reserves to cover open time. Then, your line holders wind up getting extended or JMd to cover sick calls, MX delays, ferry flights, etc. That's what's been going on here until now. Now, since all the line holders are at 90-95 hours block a month already, if someone calls in sick, there are good odds that flight is just gonna get CXld. Not good if your ASA with the airline partner has stiff fines for X amount of cancelled flights, which our's does.

A union will bring on changes, so will be good and some will be bad.
I personally don't believe a union will be the holy grail of solutions to fix all problems.
Still haven't decided if I am for or against it yet, would like to see some intelligent arguments coming from either side though.

Agree here as well. However, there IS no holy grail that will solve all the problems. If there are pro-union guys thinking ALPA is gonna swoop in and fix everything, they need to be educated a bit more to avoid a serious disappointment in the near future. ALPA is, like someone else said, "career insurance." I know without ALPA on property here, we'd probably be down to 8 or 9 day minimum days off, potentially on reserve for a few hours after finishing a trip even if you're a line holder (this was something the company wanted in the new contract!), same pay on 70-90 seaters as there is for the 50 seaters, and no hotel room on a 5+ hour sit. Pref bid would be happening as well. The memo we got from management said "there will be issues, and we expect the program to not work correctly at first, but be patient." Huh? They KNOW the program doesn't work right and they wanted to start it anyway to covering staffing issues. ALPA fought it off, and we've managed to maintain some part of our QOL. The big issues is there is an agreement about certain items that must be met for pref bid to be implemented, and the company hasn't met those. They were gonna press forward anyway to see if we'd just cave on the issue.

I've worked for an independent union before (not in aviation), and it was more or less run by a few high ups that threw us under the bus for kick backs from management. There was no voting from the general union populace since the charter gave all negotiating and ratifying power to the union heads. Basically, it was a puppet union. The advantages to ALPA is the decades of experience on tap there along with an extensive financial backing. We've got top lawyers from ALPA scrutinizing the purchase of Colgan and how to best go about grieving it, since it's a scope violation of our current contract. There's no WAY we'd be able to afford those lawyers if we were an independent union.

Another feature of ALPA you get for essentially free is the insurance. I've got life insurance, disability insuarnce and loss of license insurance through ALPA, and I don't pay an extra cent for that.

Ultimately, the union is only gonna be as good as the people that work in it at the local level. However, at least every pilot will get a chance to say "yes" or "no" come contract time. I'm sure the Brasilia guys over at Skywest would have loved to have had a voice when the CRJ guys got raises, but they were left out in the cold.

 

[Velocipede]

A union will bring on changes, so will be good and some will be bad.
I personally don't believe a union will be the holy grail of solutions to fix all problems.
Still haven't decided if I am for or against it yet, would like to see some intelligent arguments coming from either side though.

The biggest plus about working for a union company is the benefits the Union brings to the individual pilot. When aeromedical or legal problems crop up, ALPA is the best investment a few dues dollars provides.

Additionally, flying under a contract ensures that the "rules" of the game don't change at the whim of the managers.

 

[AmazingPilot]

Velocipede, Kellworlf

You both bring up excellent points and I can definetly see the positives from your standpoints. I feel the biggest resistence among the pilot population at Colgan is the way that the it is being handled or "mis handled" by the organizing commitee.
A list was made consisting of all the pilots who were for the union, and most of those pilots weren't ever contacted. I shold know I was one of them.
Secondly all of there selling points are absurd, protection against sexual harrasment??? What moron came up with that.
The committee consists of pilots who have been here the least amount of time at the bottom 20% of seniority among the pilot roster.
I don't feel that this commitee is adequately representing the cares and concerns of the pilot group. Personally the majority of the pilots here ,along with myself, question the ability of a represented union that seems out of touch with the pilots. Our fear is that one of these quote, unquote morons who feel sexual harassment is a major issue becomes our MEC.

 

[Airdale]

As long as it doesn't jeopardize our Q400 flying. Rumor has it that PCL wants the Q flying. Their pilot group out numbers ours by more then double. I'm just staying out of all of this, I'm in no position to think about anything but V1 cuts, flows and callouts.

 

[kellwolf]

Secondly all of there selling points are absurd, protection against sexual harrasment??? What moron came up with that.

Maybe the two FOs over here that were accused by crazy FAs of rape on an overnight? I'd personally like a little more protection other than "her word against mine." Seems moronic until it happens to you or someone you know, then you thank your lucky stars the protection was in place.

The committee consists of pilots who have been here the least amount of time at the bottom 20% of seniority among the pilot roster.
I don't feel that this commitee is adequately representing the cares and concerns of the pilot group. Personally the majority of the pilots here ,along with myself, question the ability of a represented union that seems out of touch with the pilots. Our fear is that one of these quote, unquote morons who feel sexual harassment is a major issue becomes our MEC.

Other than taking your issues to this board, what are you doing to make your concerns known? If there's an issue or you feel they aren't properly representing your interests, they won't know unless you tell them. I'm sure Seggy's keeping track, but he's just one guy. If you don't tell the people that are trying to get this going what you want and it gets passed, then you really don't have room to complain in the future. It's kinda like the guys over here saying "No, no! I want more days off!" when they told the negotiatiors years ago they wanted more money instead. The negotiators and the union in general go on what the pilot group tell them, not what they can read from the pilot groups' minds.

 

[kellwolf]

As long as it doesn't jeopardize our Q400 flying. Rumor has it that PCL wants the Q flying. Their pilot group out numbers ours by more then double. I'm just staying out of all of this, I'm in no position to think about anything but V1 cuts, flows and callouts.

Okay, it's time for PCL rumor control. This has to do with our scope clause.

What our contract says (and has said since 1999) is that any flying done by Pinnacle AIrlines or "A COMPANY IN CONTROL OF PINNACLE AIRLINES (ie Pinnacle Airlines Holdings)" is to be done by pilots on the Pinnacle Airlines seniority list. Technically (and the ALPA lawyers agree with this), ALL of Colgan's flying violates this scope clause. Do we want to "steal" your flying? Not at all. Most of the guys here don't want to move from where they are. What we want is everyone on one seniority list. There are a minority of the guys and gals over here that are saying "I got mine, staple 'em to the bottom!" but they are few and far between. The majority (including the union leadership here) want a merged seniority list with fence protections to keep guys from Pinnacle and Colgan from booting each other out of their slots. A merged list kills two birds with one stone: the Colgan guys get the union protection they're gonna need with this management team and our scope clause at Pinnacle is still being honored. The fences keep the quick upgrades flowing on BOTH sides without interrupting movement, transfers, etc at either place.

So, we don't want the Q400 flying. We just want our scope clause to be honored while getting you guys the representation you're gonna need. Odds are if you go to one of the ALPA events put on by the organizing committee at Colgan, there's gonna be a few Pinnacle guys there helping out.

 

[Kristie]

A list was made consisting of all the pilots who were for the union, and most of those pilots weren't ever contacted. I shold know I was one of them.

I'm confused, your all for ALPA coming onsite? I had the presumption that you were more inclined to go with the Colgan Pilot Group which doesn't want ALPA onsite.

Other than taking your issues to this board, what are you doing to make your concerns known? If there's an issue or you feel they aren't properly representing your interests, they won't know unless you tell them. I'm sure Seggy's keeping track, but he's just one guy. If you don't tell the people that are trying to get this going what you want and it gets passed, then you really don't have room to complain in the future. It's kinda like the guys over here saying "No, no! I want more days off!" when they told the negotiatiors years ago they wanted more money instead. The negotiators and the union in general go on what the pilot group tell them, not what they can read from the pilot groups' minds.

:yeahthat: you already told seggy that you no longer want to talk about the ALPA union with him, so what is your plan to alleviate your issues? or are you just complaining with no solution?

 

[AmazingPilot]

Okay, it's time for PCL rumor control. This has to do with our scope clause.

What our contract says (and has said since 1999) is that any flying done by Pinnacle AIrlines or "A COMPANY IN CONTROL OF PINNACLE AIRLINES (ie Pinnacle Airlines Holdings)" is to be done by pilots on the Pinnacle Airlines seniority list. Technically (and the ALPA lawyers agree with this), ALL of Colgan's flying violates this scope clause. Do we want to "steal" your flying? Not at all. Most of the guys here don't want to move from where they are. What we want is everyone on one seniority list. There are a minority of the guys and gals over here that are saying "I got mine, staple 'em to the bottom!" but they are few and far between. The majority (including the union leadership here) want a merged seniority list with fence protections to keep guys from Pinnacle and Colgan from booting each other out of their slots. A merged list kills two birds with one stone: the Colgan guys get the union protection they're gonna need with this management team and our scope clause at Pinnacle is still being honored. The fences keep the quick upgrades flowing on BOTH sides without interrupting movement, transfers, etc at either place.

So, we don't want the Q400 flying. We just want our scope clause to be honored while getting you guys the representation you're gonna need. Odds are if you go to one of the ALPA events put on by the organizing committee at Colgan, there's gonna be a few Pinnacle guys there helping out.

So are you saying that even with a merged seniority list pinnacle and colgan will still remain as seperate companies moreorless, with little on no physical change to the pilot domiciles/schedules?
What I mean by this is that most pilots will stay at they parent companies and their will be little transition from one company to another?
I think a big fear from me personally that I risk being downgraded to an FO only to sit right seat to a more senior pinnacle FO who upgraded because it was faster to move to the saab. I think most people here feel that we built this company up, if it is in violation of pinnacle's scope clause then we would prefer pinnacle just took the Q400, most pilot's here are indifferent in that manner. This is my opinion if the situation lies the way it does, but a position of being downgraded is highly undesirable.

 

[kellwolf]

So are you saying that even with a merged seniority list pinnacle and colgan will still remain as seperate companies moreorless, with little on no physical change to the pilot domiciles/schedules?
What I mean by this is that most pilots will stay at they parent companies and their will be little transition from one company to another?
I think a big fear from me personally that I risk being downgraded to an FO only to sit right seat to a more senior pinnacle FO who upgraded because it was faster to move to the saab. I think most people here feel that we built this company up, if it is in violation of pinnacle's scope clause then we would prefer pinnacle just took the Q400, most pilot's here are indifferent in that manner. This is my opinion if the situation lies the way it does, but a position of being downgraded is highly undesirable.

For a look on how it would work, look at Republic/CHQ/Shuttle America, minus the stapling of Shuttle America. Or Mesa/Freedom. The fences that would be hammered out in the agreement would keep a senior PCL guy from taking your Saab CA spot or pushing you out of domicile. There are CAs at Colgan that would be senior to some PCL CAs and FOs as well. No one wants to lose movement at either place or get pushed out of their domicile.

I agree that you guys are the ones that built that company, and you didn't ask to be bought, just like we didn't ask for management to buy you. It's a crappy situation for both groups. Essentially, management has been wanting to start a non-union carrier under Pinnacle Holdings in order to whipsaw us Mesa/Freedom/TSA/GoJets style. Our current scope clause doesn't let them, though. Somehow, I guess they think since they bought an existing company it's different. I don't see how.

 

[Cruise]

Ok, here's a little tidbit of information........the Colgan domicle in ABE is going to be changing in the next few weeks. We just found out through the Colgan grapevine that we are losing one of the two Saabs in base. We will no longer be running US Airways out of ABE (claims of lack of profit). This much is fact.

Now, rumot has it that this is the start of many changes to come here at Colgan. This is just the first move away from outstation basing and moving to the "hub" system of crew domicles. The Colgan family is no longer "running the show" as they'd have us believe. Not much more than a puppet government at this point and it's only going to continue slide. Sure, the Colgan's are to remain in their original capacity for at least one year. However, a takeover of this kind is always easier to sell to the little worker bees if changes come slowly and we are lead to believe things are going to remain the same.........it's more or less kool-aid to keep the bees producing honey.

Unfortunately, the Colgan's are pushing to keep ALPA off-property to supposedly maintain the open-door policy that's currently in place. Threats have been made by Mr. Colgan himself in a memo distrubted to all the pilots stating if ALPA is voted in things will change and there will no longer be a "friendship" between management and the employees. From what I've heard, and I have no proof whatsoever, people have been canned for bringing opposing views to the company during this open-door policy. Newsflash! An open-door policy only works unless there are no repurcusions regarding information that is presented.....and I just don't think that is actually in place here. I for one (and I know many others feel the same way) would never openly bring any complaints to the chief pilot or any management type for fear of reprisals. Not a very effective policy as it stands.

All this being said, I've enjoyed my time at Colgan! I think it was and still is (for now) a great place to work. Only time will tell how things change.....it could continue to be a great place or it could become a living hell. But reading everything Kellwolf has to say about the way PCL management treats it's pilot group, it seems obvious to me we need the protection a union will provide.

 

[TebPilot]

So, we don't want the Q400 flying. We just want our scope clause to be honored while getting you guys the representation you're gonna need. Odds are if you go to one of the ALPA events put on by the organizing committee at Colgan, there's gonna be a few Pinnacle guys there helping out.

If your scope includes all flying, how will having your scope protected be at all benefical for Colgan pilots. It would seem that Pinnacle would have access to all the Saabs and Q400s while the Colgan pilots would just get to pick up the scraps. Do Pinnacle CRJ FOs really want to upgrade to the Saab? Is the Q400 flying really that desirable even at (roughly) the same payscale as a CRJ captain? Are Pinnacle pilots willing to move to the northeast to fly a turboprop? I don't see how defending your scope does anything for Pinnacle pilots.

 

[Seggy]

A few things. First AmazingPilot, you say you were never contacted by the Organizing Committee? That could be the case as we do have some people missing in our master list. Go to www.alpa.org/colgan and fill out your information. I PROMISE you then you will be contacted. Also if you look at my other posts, I offered to contact you, including giving you my phone number to call. I still haven't received any calls.

Secondly, EVERYONE calm down at the scope clauses, seniority list issues and everything else related to that.

Our biggest concern is to have a collective bargaining voice for the Colgan Pilot group. To obtain that we need to get a union on property. Once that is obtained THEN we move forward and talk about these issues.

I promise you this. With ALPA on property at Colgan, the COLGAN PILOTS will be protected and will have a say on how our pilot roster is fenced from the Pinnacle Pilot roster. ALPA would lose credibility if they unionized a pilot group, then forcibly staple us to the bottom of the list.

If the Colgan Pilots for some reason do turn down ALPA, we have NO protection from ANY issues.

Things ARE changing at Colgan. We NEED to make sure we have protection from these changes.

 

[kellwolf]

If your scope includes all flying, how will having your scope protected be at all benefical for Colgan pilots. It would seem that Pinnacle would have access to all the Saabs and Q400s while the Colgan pilots would just get to pick up the scraps. Do Pinnacle CRJ FOs really want to upgrade to the Saab? Is the Q400 flying really that desirable even at (roughly) the same payscale as a CRJ captain? Are Pinnacle pilots willing to move to the northeast to fly a turboprop? I don't see how defending your scope does anything for Pinnacle pilots.

What does it do for us? It keeps management from slowly opening the "we're gonna put everything but NWA flying at a non-union carrier" door. That's what they wanted to do, so we'd be pretty much cut off at the knees with growth. Probably eventually shrink like hell since I'm sure NWA would move a lot of the 50 seat flying to larger aircraft. Losing that flying, we would get no replacement from any other regional partners that might pick up along the way. The plan was for those contracts to go to the "non-union" carrier management was trying to form. Our scope clause wouldn't let them form a non-union carrier, and we weren't budging. Their solution was to buy one, which I still don't see how that magically nullifies our scope clause.

As for PCL FOs moving to Saabs, etc, re-read what I said. That's what the "fence protections" would be for. When NWA bought Republic back in the day, they had the same kinda protections. I think some of those fences may STILL be in effect.

 

[AmazingPilot]

A few things. First AmazingPilot, you say you were never contacted by the Organizing Committee? That could be the case as we do have some people missing in our master list. Go to www.alpa.org/colgan and fill out your information. I PROMISE you then you will be contacted. Also if you look at my other posts, I offered to contact you, including giving you my phone number to call. I still haven't received any calls.

Secondly, EVERYONE calm down at the scope clauses, seniority list issues and everything else related to that.

Our biggest concern is to have a collective bargaining voice for the Colgan Pilot group. To obtain that we need to get a union on property. Once that is obtained THEN we move forward and talk about these issues.

I promise you this. With ALPA on property at Colgan, the COLGAN PILOTS will be protected and will have a say on how our pilot roster is fenced from the Pinnacle Pilot roster. ALPA would lose credibility if they unionized a pilot group, then forcibly staple us to the bottom of the list.

If the Colgan Pilots for some reason do turn down ALPA, we have NO protection from ANY issues.

Things ARE changing at Colgan. We NEED to make sure we have protection from these changes.

So then how will defend your original post in this thread of claiming Colgan Pilots work harder than Pinnacle Pilots???
I thought I broke down the staffing issues for you, so I would like to see what you have in response to that?
You keep posting that we need a union at Colgan, things are changing, and that the pilot group committee is useless, but you never seem to defend your points, only reiterate them.
I don't need to call you, since you chose this forum to discuss this issues this is where I will respond, on this website with the rest of my Colgan and Pinnacle peers. There is nothing you can say to me that you can't say to the rest of them.