Pinnacle has reached a TA!!!

I think you'll find that the next bargaining cycle is much different, assuming that Obama is elected to a second term. The Bush NMB is what held things up for you guys so long. It's also why so many of your TA's sections are somewhat lacking, since they were TA'd during the last NMB.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I think you'll find that the next bargaining cycle is much different, assuming that Obama is elected to a second term. The Bush NMB is what held things up for you guys so long. It's also why so many of your TA's sections are somewhat lacking, since they were TA'd during the last NMB.
Click to expand...

Talking to one of the negotiating team, he didn't have a lot of nice things to say about THIS NMB after last Tuesday......
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I think you'll find that the next bargaining cycle is much different, assuming that Obama is elected to a second term. The Bush NMB is what held things up for you guys so long. It's also why so many of your TA's sections are somewhat lacking, since they were TA'd during the last NMB.
Click to expand...

The hi-lighted portion is a big assumption. Without turning this into a political discussion though, what impact does the Presidents popularity play into the process of negotions? What I mean is, Obama selects a more labor-friendly NMB...but say his poll numbers dip badly, and by 2012 it looks as if he is Jimmy Carter. Does this put a sense of urgency into the process of negotiations to get them done while the friendly regime is in place prior to a Republican regime? Just asking from a macro point of view if ALPA (or other labor unions) look at these issues and if they have a material effect on the negotion process. With the length of time that these negotiations fan out, is it concievable that management would at some point say "Obama is toast...let's drag our feet and wait till the Republican is in" or vice-versa on the union side?

Follow-up - who in your view appointed the most labor-friendly NMB? Who was the most labor friendly President?
 
WacoFan said:
The hi-lighted portion is a big assumption. Without turning this into a political discussion though, what impact does the Presidents popularity play into the process of negotions? What I mean is, Obama selects a more labor-friendly NMB...but say his poll numbers dip badly, and by 2012 it looks as if he is Jimmy Carter. Does this put a sense of urgency into the process of negotiations to get them done while the friendly regime is in place prior to a Republican regime? Just asking from a macro point of view if ALPA (or other labor unions) look at these issues and if they have a material effect on the negotion process. With the length of time that these negotiations fan out, is it concievable that management would at some point say "Obama is toast...let's drag our feet and wait till the Republican is in" or vice-versa on the union side?
Click to expand...

It's very much a consideration in negotiations. You could definitely notice managements starting to move swiftly after Obama won last year, because they wanted to get as much stuff TA'd as possible before the new NMB came into town. The reverse is also true. If Obama is on his way out in a few years, then you'll see labor trying to finish things up as favorably as possible prior to a Republican entering office. The President is key to this RLA bargaining process.

Follow-up - who in your view appointed the most labor-friendly NMB? Who was the most labor friendly President?
Click to expand...

Difficult to say. Although Clinton was not always the most labor-friendly overall (NAFTA, for example), his NMB was pretty good, and mediation averaged only about two years. Several groups were also released into self help under his NMB.

Carter's NMB was likely the best in recent history. The arbitrators that were selected by his NMB are almost all gone now, but the couple that remain are some of the most prized by labor.
 
Remember, when you vote for a President you are voting more for the administration he will appoint than the president himself, at least in my opinion. The president rarely himself makes decisions that directly impact you, regardless of your station or industry except in the most general ways.
 
If this union sanctioned nepotism towards the senior guys continue (i.e. giving a minuscule signing bonus to the FO's who have been stuck making $26k a year and giving a big bonus to people who are making the most), I think it's safe to say <redacted> won't be the last guy to be recalled. There is a huge amount of animosity and boiling anger the FO's and junior CA's are feeling towards the union right now, this is going to make it twice as bad.
 
Could you possibly explain what the issue is with the signing bonus allocation? Maybe I'm just not understanding what's going on, but why wouldn't you expect a Captain to receive a higher signing bonus than an FO, since the signing bonus is theoretically linked to "retro pay?" The Captain makes a higher rate of pay, so a similar percentage increase in his pay rate would equate to a higher signing bonus amount. What am I missing?
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Could you possibly explain what the issue is with the signing bonus allocation? Maybe I'm just not understanding what's going on, but why wouldn't you expect a Captain to receive a higher signing bonus than an FO, since the signing bonus is theoretically linked to "retro pay?" The Captain makes a higher rate of pay, so a similar percentage increase in his pay rate would equate to a higher signing bonus amount. What am I missing?
Click to expand...

I don't know what I'm expecting. I actually felt more at ease with the conference call today as to the union's activities. I know now that I shouldn't expect anything from anyone.... just go to work and suck it up. "BOHICA".... my new favorite.

That which you quoted, which I posted above, is the sentiment from junior first officers (and captains) at this company..... who aren't very happy with the union.

We've got a dual qual LOA:
All current 900 guys will get 900 rates for all work; 200 guys put in the 900 will remain at 200 pay.

Bonus split into 2 payments, one of which is paid at the beginning of next April.

Scope is apparently pretty good.... if Delta starts trading us out of 200s for Qs, it's immediate integration with the Colgan group - pending Colgan MEC approval.

Not much was put forth in the conference call.... mostly questions about pay and signing bonus.

No COLA; we're getting a minimum of 1%/year increase but no greater than industry average.
 
The signing bonus "issue" is it will be a percentage of w-2 wages from th amendable period- where CA's had a wage that was close to average befor amendable, the FO's have been far below the average the entire time. The pilot group refused FO raises a couple years ago as a sign of solidarity and there in lies an issue. The company only keeps 3 years of w-2's for tax requirements so the wages would come extrapolated from the ALPA dues which is AFTER tax and would result in a lower number for any pilot who contributed to the 401k. Ironically 401k participation at the top of the list is minimal.

There are many upset with this and there IS another resolution that is being proposed at the next MEC meeting for a different formula. The chart should be somewhat linear to reflect seniority/longevity but right now the line would be a straight line up once it hits the captains. Everyone will not be happy, but leaving half the group with nothing and the top half with b checks will not work. I have already witnessed some heated arguments between CA's and FO's over the money.
 
Before the Colgan issue lifts off the launch pad.... There are protections created within the scope language and parent letter involving colgan, a good bit of it even involves Colgan's MEC involvement. 9e and 9l are in this together and on the same team, BOTH interests are protected. I could see this becoming a bloodbath for no reason.... Cencal- breathe, until you have all the details and see the language I would just take it all in and not start spitting on everyone. Not that I endorse the contract- just saying get the facts in front, read the whole thing, and make YOUR decision.
 
higney85 said:
Before the Colgan issue lifts off the launch pad.... There are protections created within the scope language and parent letter involving colgan, a good bit of it even involves Colgan's MEC involvement. 9e and 9l are in this together and on the same team, BOTH interests are protected. I could see this becoming a bloodbath for no reason.... Cencal- breathe, until you have all the details and see the language I would just take it all in and not start spitting on everyone. Not that I endorse the contract- just saying get the facts in front, read the whole thing, and make YOUR decision.
Click to expand...

Sounds good.
 
Yep go to about an hour and a half into the conf call.... during the Q&A it seems that the "pay protection" is only for current 900 pilots.:eek:

I can only imagine the reason that it was agreed to that way because.... the 900 rates are not moving (if they are, it's backwards). Our 200 rates are going to be VERY close to the 900 rates, within cents, as far as I can tell, especially for the first 2 or 3 years on the scale. So really, getting paid the 200 rate for the 900 is not that "bad" of a deal. It's all negotiations, guys.... you give and take some.


And don't worry Higney.... I'm breathing :) like I said, I feel better than I did before the conference call. Just puttin the stuff out here for our Pinnacle guys and Colgan guys.
 
You will AlWAYS get a -900 rate in the seat of a -900. The vacancy discussion is for a pay status. If you hold a -900 pay status everything you do is at -900 rates (fly,sick,vac,training, etc). If you do NOT hold a -900 vacancy spot you may still get qualified in both but will only make -900 rates in the seat. This entire dual qual is not an immediate thing, and the crew compliment of 3:1 would be arbitrated and could mean another 16 -900's before a single vacancy for -900 status worst case (not realistic). I have not seen the final language but there is also teirs to this -200/900 issue and at a certain number the pay arena gets revisited all together (50% fleet makeup is what I have been told). I had am MEC person explain this and I am sure their are far more details- waiting to see the language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top