Omni Air International
- Thread starter Dan208B
- Start date
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Thanks, yeah, going through it now. Looks to be a ~40% increase in base pay rates across the board, but there are some other work rule changes I'm sorting through right now that could lead to soft pay credit.
Looks like a typo. DC-10s are still around.
any scheduling improvements?
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
Yes, decent improvements there. Still going through the details, but it looks like the days of "every line is short-call reserve" are going to be over. Looking forward to being able to bid an actual line of flying, or long-call reserve. Maximum 18 days a month, but I have no idea what individual lines will look like. Depends on how the company and scheduling committee build them.
Also, seniority will be respected in terms of upgrade and aircraft transition, as is the industry standard.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
A friend of mine from Omni sent me a copy early today. Overall looks like a very good first contract for an ACMI carrier. My thoughts:
- Scope seems pretty well locked up, provided that Omni isn't already held by a holding company. Dasleben, do you know if there is a holding company already in place?
- Pay rates look really good for a carrier like Omni. For the large category (which I believe is most of the fleet), rates look to be only slightly less than AirTran narrow body rates in most years of longevity. A few years are actually more in the first year, although they fall behind in the following years pretty quickly. Still, very good rates for an ACMI carrier.
- Half pay for deadheads sucks, but maybe that's industry standard in the ACMI world. Not familiar enough to know.
- 3.33 hours guaranteed per day is a bit low, but without knowing your operation very well, I'm not sure if it's a significant issue.
- Per diem just flat out sucks. But with the pay rate table where it is, not a big deal.
- Health insurance is expensive, but not out of line.
- LTD and STD aren't good. But if you don't view this as your career airline, then that's not as big of an issue.
- Retirement plan is so-so. A 5% max employer contribution won't make you rich at retirement, but it's a good start if you're planning on moving on to another carrier for your career. Just make sure to contribute enough to get the max company contribution.
- Guaranteed business class travel would have been nice for deadheads in your kind of operation. A coach seat would suck for a flight from JFK to Mumbai.
- Sick leave is only about 2/3 of what it really should be, but not a huge deal for a first contract.
- Training protections seem pretty good.
- Vacation accrual doesn't look good on first blush, but when you read the rules on how it is applied, it seems pretty good. I'm betting that 12 days actually turns into more time off than I get with my 2 weeks in many cases. The ability to carry over to the next year is also nice.
- Consecutive days off requirements are good.
- Reserve call outs are industry standard.
- Minimum 10 hours rest is good. Don't know enough about augmented flying to comment on those rules.
- Max 18 days of work is pretty much industry standard.
- Grievance language is pretty standard.
- No real drug/alcohol protections. I'm surprised that the IBT couldn't at least get something more than the regs on this one.
- Other sections seem mostly standard.
Overall, not bad. You guys know better than me if there are any concessions in there, though, so maybe I'm not familiar with something you're giving up. If not, I'd imagine a healthy ratification vote. Congrats!
- Scope seems pretty well locked up, provided that Omni isn't already held by a holding company. Dasleben, do you know if there is a holding company already in place?
- Pay rates look really good for a carrier like Omni. For the large category (which I believe is most of the fleet), rates look to be only slightly less than AirTran narrow body rates in most years of longevity. A few years are actually more in the first year, although they fall behind in the following years pretty quickly. Still, very good rates for an ACMI carrier.
- Half pay for deadheads sucks, but maybe that's industry standard in the ACMI world. Not familiar enough to know.
- 3.33 hours guaranteed per day is a bit low, but without knowing your operation very well, I'm not sure if it's a significant issue.
- Per diem just flat out sucks. But with the pay rate table where it is, not a big deal.
- Health insurance is expensive, but not out of line.
- LTD and STD aren't good. But if you don't view this as your career airline, then that's not as big of an issue.
- Retirement plan is so-so. A 5% max employer contribution won't make you rich at retirement, but it's a good start if you're planning on moving on to another carrier for your career. Just make sure to contribute enough to get the max company contribution.
- Guaranteed business class travel would have been nice for deadheads in your kind of operation. A coach seat would suck for a flight from JFK to Mumbai.
- Sick leave is only about 2/3 of what it really should be, but not a huge deal for a first contract.
- Training protections seem pretty good.
- Vacation accrual doesn't look good on first blush, but when you read the rules on how it is applied, it seems pretty good. I'm betting that 12 days actually turns into more time off than I get with my 2 weeks in many cases. The ability to carry over to the next year is also nice.
- Consecutive days off requirements are good.
- Reserve call outs are industry standard.
- Minimum 10 hours rest is good. Don't know enough about augmented flying to comment on those rules.
- Max 18 days of work is pretty much industry standard.
- Grievance language is pretty standard.
- No real drug/alcohol protections. I'm surprised that the IBT couldn't at least get something more than the regs on this one.
- Other sections seem mostly standard.
Overall, not bad. You guys know better than me if there are any concessions in there, though, so maybe I'm not familiar with something you're giving up. If not, I'd imagine a healthy ratification vote. Congrats!
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
ATN, thanks for taking a look. Overall, I think this is an improvement on what we have; up to this point, we've been so below the industry average that it didn't take much to make significant gains. 
There's certainly language that I don't like (specifically, two clauses), as well as some loose wording that I wish would be cleared up. I'm not sure if these will be a problem when it comes to a ratification vote, but as expected there was a fair amount of "rabble rabble rabble!" at the hotel breakfast this morning. That said, nobody seemed ready to kick it back to the negotiating table.
So overall, I dunno! Should be an interesting month.
To your question regarding the holding company: I'm honestly not 100% sure how the company is structured. Since this is a private company, they have a number of subsidiaries and whatnot that aren't exactly clearly laid out. The company originally refused to negotiate scope, using the excuse of "Omni is a leasing company first, and an airline second." I was pleasantly surprised to see industry-standard scope in this contract, but without a clear understanding of how the company is laid out, who knows what they could sharp-shoot. Perhaps our negotiators had a better idea, but us rank-and-file are kept somewhat in the dark. I'm doing some research as we speak.
There's certainly language that I don't like (specifically, two clauses), as well as some loose wording that I wish would be cleared up. I'm not sure if these will be a problem when it comes to a ratification vote, but as expected there was a fair amount of "rabble rabble rabble!" at the hotel breakfast this morning. That said, nobody seemed ready to kick it back to the negotiating table.So overall, I dunno! Should be an interesting month.
To your question regarding the holding company: I'm honestly not 100% sure how the company is structured. Since this is a private company, they have a number of subsidiaries and whatnot that aren't exactly clearly laid out. The company originally refused to negotiate scope, using the excuse of "Omni is a leasing company first, and an airline second." I was pleasantly surprised to see industry-standard scope in this contract, but without a clear understanding of how the company is laid out, who knows what they could sharp-shoot. Perhaps our negotiators had a better idea, but us rank-and-file are kept somewhat in the dark. I'm doing some research as we speak.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
I hope you guys have official help from a group that has done this before. I'm sure your guys negotiated in good faith and to the best of their abilities, but IMHO, first offer on a first contract and the company is just sitting on its hands hoping you "fall for" whatever hook they have hidden in the bait.
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
We had the IBT and IBT lawyers at the table along with the members of the negotiating committee. The IBT isn't exactly ALPA, but they're not brand new to this either.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
The Omni pilots have been in negotiations for a few years. This is hardly a "first offer." This is the result of years of tough bargaining and probably thousands of proposals crossing the table. I'm no fan of the IBT, but it looks like they've put together a solid first deal. Passing up such a deal in blind hope of something better usually results in losing money in the end.
RightSeatGirl
KA'PLAH BITCHES!
Got an email back from the CP today, seems the 1000 PIC is a pretty firm min. I thought it was actually pretty nice to get a personalized email back from him. He basically wanted me to stay in touch but even though Im only 500 away 1000 PIC for me may as well be 10,000. Stuck in the right seat of a TP regional with no upgrade in sight, LOL...The legacies will probably be taking non-PIC time F/O's from the right seats of regionals long before I have OAI's mins...
I can only guess they are going to relax this min eventually....but to anyone applying I thought I'd share.
I can only guess they are going to relax this min eventually....but to anyone applying I thought I'd share.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
Probably. On re-reading the Scope section and having attended one of the road shows, it seems they've addressed the holding company issue:
Either way, if they want to find a way around Scope, they will...
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
That's pretty close, if not the same, language we had in the 2003 CBA at RAH. It was very strong.
jynxyjoe
Queso King
Look man, the only reason Pinnacle corp went to bat with the 3 companies was because of the Mesaba scope. They couldn't find any way around. Scope is attainable.
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
Glad to hear it. This scope section seems very good.
We should know the results of this thing on Sept. 21st. I hate that it's taking this long, but it's apparent that we need the road shows and conference calls; lots of unrealistic expectations floating around. I've been trying to point out that rejecting this thing over a section you don't like will probably lead to us being shelved by the NMB, and not the company quivering in their boots and handing over a World+ contract.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Polar742 said:
It's only strong if the holding company signs the agreement. If only the airline signs it, then the holding company isn't bound.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
Our agreement was between the airline (CHQ) and the pilots, but the scope held to the holding company.
Dan208B
Well-Known Member
Overall it does look like good improvement. The thing that scares me the most is the language regarding basing. I wish I could see how that would turn out before my interview... Home basing is a great thing. But if this is signed, the company can VERY much take advantage of how that works...
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
PM me your concern; I might be able to pass along some info from the road show. There were several concerns cleared up.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
That's only because you had LOA #5, which bound the parent corporation to your contract. That LOA was signed by the holding company, even though the CBA itself wasn't.