AAG to Transfer Envoy ERJ-145s to TSA and Piedmont

CFIscare said:
That simply is not the case at Envoy, nor would it have been if they voted it in. You would have seen pilots capped out at the lower ceiling, making less than pilots before them.
Click to expand...

That's not the same thing. For it to be a B scale, the two scales have to exist simultaneously. So, at any point in the future, would there be pilots from the original scale getting paid original scale rates while there are also pilots hired under the new scale getting paid the new rates? My understanding is that that never would take place, because everyone on the original scale would have long since upgraded.

@Gonzo or @bLizZuE , is this information incorrect?
 
@ATN_Pilot
The only thing I've read here that's embarrassing, is you thinking Envoy pilots did this to themselves. We're all impressed you read a book about b-scales, and I think I speak for everyone when I say we're all thankful you weren't able to vote on Envoy's b-scale TA.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ATN_Pilot said:
That's not the same thing. For it to be a B scale, the two scales have to exist simultaneously. So, at any point in the future, would there be pilots from the original scale getting paid original scale rates while there are also pilots hired under the new scale getting paid the new rates? My understanding is that that never would take place, because everyone on the original scale would have long since upgraded.

@Gonzo or @bLizZuE , is this information incorrect?
Click to expand...

Ah, I see what you are asking now. For the captain side, that would absolutely be the case. You would have two scales simultaneously for quite awhile. It is also true for the FO side, although naturally it would exist for a shorter amount of time.
 
Wow, you don't even know what was proposed to us. You've got this much to say, and didn't even know what the company proposed.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
That's not the same thing. For it to be a B scale, the two scales have to exist simultaneously. So, at any point in the future, would there be pilots from the original scale getting paid original scale rates while there are also pilots hired under the new scale getting paid the new rates? My understanding is that that never would take place, because everyone on the original scale would have long since upgraded.

@Gonzo or @bLizZuE , is this information incorrect?
Click to expand...
Well, it wouldn't be quite as simple as that. Due to grandfathering, there would be some captains and FOs stuck at rates higher than the capped 4/12. However, once the FOs upgraded and the Captains flowed/retired/moved on, those grandfathered rates would have disappeared.

I agree however, that this would not be a B scale.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Ahh, look, the dismissive attitude that lead to lost jobs. How cute.
Click to expand...

We agree on these points, hate to see job losses and the attitude some decided to take had a negative effect.

Just thought it was funny some of the flimsy arguments you made, then defended by being the one who yelled the loudest, instead of reason.
 
CFIscare said:
That simply is not the case at Envoy, nor would it have been if they voted it in. You would have seen pilots capped out at the lower ceiling, making less than pilots before them.
Click to expand...

Really? Funny how that isn't the case at PSA it's working? They were presented the same deal. Difference is that MEC and NC knew who they were negotiating with as did their pilots who voted yes. Now AA is doing what they said and others have pay caps but upgrading at under a year. Last I heard PSA only had 12/35 CRJ900s delivered? That means anyone hired today will still never see second year FO pay let alone 5.....

Until the majors secure scope more so that's just the regional game. There's ZERO leverage and won't be for the foreseeable future.
 
meyers9163 said:
Really? Funny how that isn't the case at PSA it's working? They were presented the same deal. Difference is that MEC and NC knew who they were negotiating with as did their pilots who voted yes. Now AA is doing what they said and others have pay caps but upgrading at under a year. Last I heard PSA only had 12/35 CRJ900s delivered? That means anyone hired today will still never see second year FO pay let alone 5.....

Until the majors secure scope more so that's just the regional game. There's ZERO leverage and won't be for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...
You're not seriously comparing PSA and Envoy are you? Even if Envoy voted it in, Envoy would never have been even remotely close in the amount of movement PSA currently has.
 
J Cole said:
Well, it wouldn't be quite as simple as that. Due to grandfathering, there would be some captains and FOs stuck at rates higher than the capped 4/12. However, once the FOs upgraded and the Captains flowed/retired/moved on, those grandfathered rates would have disappeared.

I agree however, that this would not be a B scale.
Click to expand...

Would the original pilots continue to advance up the original pay scale, or would they be locked in at their existing rate?
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Would the original pilots continue to advance up the original pay scale, or would they be locked in at their existing rate?
Click to expand...
I went and found the original TA language to be sure. Here it is:

a. Except as provided in paragraph 1.c., below, Captain pay will be capped at 12 Years of Service on the Captain pay rate scales or the pilot's actual years of service on that date, whichever is greater; and

b. First officer pay will be capped at 4 Years of Service on the First officer pay rate scales or the pilot's actual years of service on that date, whichever is greater, provided the First Officer pay scale will remain at 8 years through 12/31/2015. Effective 1/1/2016, the pay scale will be reduced by 1 year each 12 months until the pay scale is finally capped at 4 years on 1/1/2019.

c. A Captain with 15 or more years of service when the first EMB- 175 jet aircraft is placed on the Company's operating certificate will continue to accrue longevity for purposes of pay until he reaches 18 years of service, subject to paragraph C.2., below.
 
I had to commute and missed out on a lot of the fun

But while I was gone it seemed like we were arguing the semantics of a B scale and not focusing on the fact that people are losing their jobs because a fraction of the pilot group elected to take a pay cut for the chance of upward mobility. I thought the regional scale was already doing that...crap pay now but later it can be good, now we lower the bar more until another pilot groups values themselves even less than PSA/PDT.

If you'll never see the 4 year FO pay, then why not cap it at 12 years? Hell, if you'll never sit in the right seat that long then no harm no foul, right? I know that the term negotiating capital was thrown around as well, but I'm not sure if that isn't just a way to ignore the fact that a union is supposedly negotiating what's best for the pilot groups whilst giving them a paycut, and telling them to be happy about it. Why can't the union stand up for its members and demand pay for what a person is worth?

Even if that doesn't work it sure as hell looks better than bending over one side of the table, and dining with the other side.

We could have another recession or some other tragedy that get's people stuck at 4th year pay indefinitely. So while you say I'm worrying about hypothetical and getting my ass kicked by reality, I'm looking at the past as an example and skeptical of the hypothetical future you believe.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Ahh, look, the dismissive attitude that lead to lost jobs. How cute.
Click to expand...

Just a taste of what many of us have to deal with at Envoy on a daily basis. I'll say it again: this pilot group is toxic.

I'll even take it a step further. This pilot group is completely delusional. As recently as today I am hearing Captains in the terminal talking about how this was just AA's plan all along and nothing would have changed with a yes vote...and so on. The Facebook pages are just as bad.
 
Ajax said:
We could have another recession or some other tragedy that get's people stuck at 4th year pay indefinitely.
Click to expand...
:sarcasm: Yes, we may be stagnant, we may be shrinking, our fleet may be given away piece by piece, but thank goodness that I won't be capped at 4th year pay for that hypothetical 9/11. If Envoy is still here, I know I'll be really happy about that extra $2.92/hr.

(Seriously, that is the difference between 4th year and 8th year FO pay.)
 
Last edited:
J Cole said:
:sarcasm: Yes, we may stagnant, we may be shrinking, our fleet may be given away piece by piece, but thank goodness that I won't be capped at 4th year pay for that hypothetical 9/11. If Envoy is still here, I know I'll be really happy about that extra $2.92/hr.

(Seriously, that is the difference between 4th year and 8th year FO pay.)
Click to expand...

Well said! It's unbelievable that FOs at these stagnant regionals are grasping onto $2.92 so strongly. $2.92 or career advancement?
 
DetPilot said:
@ATN_Pilot
The only thing I've read here that's embarrassing, is you thinking Envoy pilots did this to themselves. We're all impressed you read a book about b-scales, and I think I speak for everyone when I say we're all thankful you weren't able to vote on Envoy's b-scale TA.
Click to expand...
You guys voted no, did you not? Even after being told the planes would go elsewhere if you vote no? I don't see how anyone else could have caused the no vote multiple times... It's a crappy situation but you can't be mad at other people for losing the battle of calling someones bluff.
 
Last edited:
ClarkGriswold said:
You guys voted no, did you not? Even after being told the planes would go elsewhere if you vote no? I don't see how anyone else could have caused the no vote multiple times... It's a crappy situation but you can't be mad at other people for losing the battle of calling someones bluff.
Click to expand...

The NY CA rep and others have them all convinced this is all everyone else's fault. Take your pick: AA for not just putting the planes here anyway. Jerry Glass for being such a meanie. PSA for securing their own future. The list of excuses coming from that crowd is long and distinguished.
 
Skyvector said:
The NY CA rep and others have them all convinced this is all everyone else's fault. Take your pick: AA for not just putting the planes here anyway. Jerry Glass for being such a meanie. PSA for securing their own future. The list of excuses coming from that crowd is long and distinguished.
Click to expand...
Is that the moron over on the dumb site? Mason something?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top