PNCL pilots are our brothers! Unity?

Doug Taylor said:
You do realize that such is part of our cultural war.

One side came from a world of scripts, flows and dictating every switch change, position and etc. The other side came from a world of "Ok, here's the goal, here's a box of tools, go"

So "they" think we're unsafe cowboys, "we" think they're automatons! :)

Oh just wait! :) Pour up a colortini and enjoy the show my friends.
Click to expand...

Like I said...
jynxyjoe said:
Already begun.
Click to expand...
 
Just found this one in my inbox (yeah, I really should check that ALPA e-mail address more often)

May 11, 2011

Over the weekend the Merger committee was advised of conversations between the MEC Chairman of Pinnacle and Mesaba indicating a possible interest in continued merger negotiations. After completing our training events, the Pinnacle Merger Committee emailed all parties to see if both parties desired to continue negotiations. This followed Mr. Bloch’s desire for all parties to negotiate an acceptable integration.

This morning all 3 committee chairman participated in a conference call. All 3 mutually agreed that further negotiations would not elicit a negotiated agreement.
During the conference call, the Pinnacle Merger Committee Chairman emphasized the importance of moving forward and to integrate the strengths of our pilot groups so we can capture our synergies.

This afternoon we learned of the Colgan Merger Committee’s release of final positions to its pilot groups. This release countered the arbitrator’s final remarks during the hearing on March 31, 2011 wherein Mr. Bloch stated: “ Well, I have always believed that negotiating in full sunlight doesn’t necessarily help the process.”

The Pinnacle Merger Committee acknowledges a Status and Category proposal as its final submission. Status and Category has shown historical precedent and under the circumstances of the three properties, we believed this was a valid method. We understand that integration proposals can be emotional; however, we believe our proposal resulted from careful factual analysis without regard to emotional considerations.

We must move forward and bring our pilots together. The Arbitrator’s award will most likely be published after May 15th. Anything that now divides our groups is counter-productive. All committees provided positions in the interest of their respective properties. Arbitrated decisions may not meet the needs of all pilots.
While your committee is back to the line, we are available to answer your direct questions. We will provide you with direct answers.

Thank you for your support and consideration during this historical merger.

Fraternally,

The Pinnacle Merger Committee


Okay, so was it okay with Bloch or was it kind of a "Eh, do it if you want, but I don't think it's a good idea" from Bloch? Also, wasn't the Delta/NWA a mix of ratio and status/category? Seems to me that a mix of the Colgan/9E proposal would net almost the same results and Delta/NWA, and I thought that went pretty well.....
 
jynxyjoe said:
You were fairly adamant about there not being a staple proposed by the Pinnacle SLI team. In light of new evidence to the contrary do you still maintain your position?
Click to expand...


Yup. The "buckets" do not bring a staple into anything. It's about equipment and secured flying with status and category. I dont want "forum wars" personally because I'm along for the ride like everyone else at this point, but "staple" is not listed anywhere, although I can see it from your viewpoint. Our senior pilots would feel the same "staple" mindset if put DOH behind the senior XJ guys.
 
kellwolf said:
Okay, so the Colgan merger committee thought that all the Pinnacle pilots and some XJ guys in the top two "buckets" would be too much of a windfall. I agree. HOWEVER, the counter proposal they put forth is almost as much of a windfall for Colgan. Based on a "ratio" merger method, you'd have a mid-2010 hire from Colgan potentially a good deal senior to 2008 and 2009 hires at 9E and XJ. It's almost a case of the pot calling the kettle black to me.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges. The pncl proposal would have our #1 guy (over 20 years on property) at 1904. losing 20 spots vs 1903 spots is not even in the same galaxy. With the pncl proposal a CJC 99 hire would go junior to a PNCL 08 hire. not just losing a little, losing everything. This is a big "screw you" from the PNCL Merger Committee and likely much of the MEC. Message loud and clear.

I can't even begin to believe anyone actually considers a staple in the same universe as any DOH or Relative seniority scenario.

Again, won't affect the actual integration at all, but will affect who is considered for leadership roles in the combined union.
 
kellwolf said:
.....Based on a "ratio" merger method, you'd have a mid-2010 hire from Colgan potentially a good deal senior to 2008 and 2009 hires at 9E and XJ. It's almost a case of the pot calling the kettle black to me...

...Do we need to bring up how we were "stabbed in the back" by the Colgan and Mesaba groups over the whole picketting thing? NOW we want unity....got it...
Click to expand...

I thought this was worth repeating.
 
kellwolf said:
Just found this one in my inbox (yeah, I really should check that ALPA e-mail address more often)

May 11, 2011

Over the weekend the Merger committee was advised of conversations between the MEC Chairman of Pinnacle and Mesaba indicating a possible interest in continued merger negotiations. After completing our training events, the Pinnacle Merger Committee emailed all parties to see if both parties desired to continue negotiations. This followed Mr. Bloch’s desire for all parties to negotiate an acceptable integration.

This morning all 3 committee chairman participated in a conference call. All 3 mutually agreed that further negotiations would not elicit a negotiated agreement.
During the conference call, the Pinnacle Merger Committee Chairman emphasized the importance of moving forward and to integrate the strengths of our pilot groups so we can capture our synergies.

This afternoon we learned of the Colgan Merger Committee’s release of final positions to its pilot groups. This release countered the arbitrator’s final remarks during the hearing on March 31, 2011 wherein Mr. Bloch stated: “ Well, I have always believed that negotiating in full sunlight doesn’t necessarily help the process.”

The Pinnacle Merger Committee acknowledges a Status and Category proposal as its final submission. Status and Category has shown historical precedent and under the circumstances of the three properties, we believed this was a valid method. We understand that integration proposals can be emotional; however, we believe our proposal resulted from careful factual analysis without regard to emotional considerations.

We must move forward and bring our pilots together. The Arbitrator’s award will most likely be published after May 15th. Anything that now divides our groups is counter-productive. All committees provided positions in the interest of their respective properties. Arbitrated decisions may not meet the needs of all pilots.
While your committee is back to the line, we are available to answer your direct questions. We will provide you with direct answers.

Thank you for your support and consideration during this historical merger.

Fraternally,

The Pinnacle Merger Committee


Okay, so was it okay with Bloch or was it kind of a "Eh, do it if you want, but I don't think it's a good idea" from Bloch? Also, wasn't the Delta/NWA a mix of ratio and status/category? Seems to me that a mix of the Colgan/9E proposal would net almost the same results and Delta/NWA, and I thought that went pretty well.....
Click to expand...

Sounds like they put some nice dressing on the Crap sandwhich they were trying to shove down our throats. Status and Category sounds like fanciful language for staple and justify. Complete joke.

I'm am now going to leave this forum before I start making enemy's and focus on this killer day outside. I'll save my comments for Christmas morning!
 
PNCL: :soapbox:

Mesaba: :guns:

CJC: :wtf?:

The rest of us: :pop:

Been to the show once, got the next show prepackaged and waiting for the third (hope it never comes)
 
Doug Taylor said:
Well, some rumors say AS, other rumors say Virgin Atlantic. AND A STAPLE GUN, YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR ENDZ OF THE BOAT!!!! YAAAAAAAAR!

(kidding, of course)
Click to expand...

If they don't rock a double breasted coat: 103:1 ratio. If they don't rock a tie: 2002:1 ratio. Starting at DOH of 2007.

Sounds fair.
 
kellwolf said:
Do we need to bring up how we were "stabbed in the back" by the Colgan and Mesaba groups over the whole picketting thing? NOW we want unity....got it.
Click to expand...

Kell... most of the time I enjoy reading what you have to say because 99.9% of the time you take a step back to look at how you address things and ponder for a minute before typing. That being said during the negotiation process I could not and would not support any picketing by any of the three pilot groups because I see it as being detrimental to the negotiating process. In my opinion I think it should have been all three groups picketing in our respective domiciles at the same time or no one pickets at all. My understanding is that when the 9E MEC wanted to picket CJC and XJ MEC's told them that they could not support the action but would do nothing to stop them. If I am wrong then so be it... but it seems very odd to want to picket during negotiations especially when the other 2/3's of the future pilot group do not support it... you call it being stabbed in the back... I call it respecting the 9E pilot group enough to allow them to do something (potentially harmful) that could affect the rest of the pilots negotiating and not do anything to stop it.
I am a very plain man... my mannerisms, my speech patterns, and my approach on life. I have no hidden agendas, no secret plans, and no ambition to bid over to the RJ's. I will give you the shirt off my back and the last pinch of my snuff but don't tell me that I "stabbed you in the back."
 
That being said during the negotiation process I could not and would not support any picketing by any of the three pilot groups because I see it as being detrimental to the negotiating process.
Click to expand...

See, I disagree. We'd already been in negotiations for 5+ years with the same guys at the table from the company. It was deja vu, and we could easily seeing it turn into a stall tactic. Can you really blame us for switching into "Great, here we go again" mode? CJC and XJ said it would "hurt" negotiations, but we don't know if it helped. We do know the company pleaded with us NOT to do it because Delta hates bad press. We said "Fine....negotiate fairly and we'll cancel it." There was no movement in negotiations, we picketed, things didn't grind to a halt. XJ and CJC seemed like they were trying to convince everyone if we all picketed, the company would pull out of negotiations while saying "They NEED this contract." Well, it's either one or the other, not both. If they NEEDED the negotiations, they wouldn't pull out. I was under the impression that the CJC guys were on board, until XJ's MEC started talking them into not supporting us. Then they turned into the kid on the playground being influenced by the older kids. Did the picketing help? Who knows? Did it hurt? Obviously not. For the record, once the company DID start making strides our direction at the table, we canceled the remaining picketing events.

As for the "crap sandwich" spin the 9E merger committee is supposedly putting on this, I still think Delta/NWA was a category/class merger. No one is calling that a "staple job" because of their similar equipment. I haven't seen the 9E merger committee proposal. Neither has anyone else on this board. It just says "a few Mesaba pilots" in the first two buckets. How many is a "few?" Bet they're all -900 guys, too.....which would fit with a category/class merger. I'd bet the XJ Saab pilots are pretty close to the Colgan Saab pilots. Once again, I don't know. I haven't seen the proposal.

My main beef is a pilot group calling for unity when their own merger committee really had no aim other than "We tried, but the other two guys are being mean" in sending out this memo. What good does it do other than attempt to make them look better in the eyes of their own pilot group by pointing a finger at the other two groups? If they had waited until AFTER the award to send this out, we wouldn't even be HAVING this discussion. IMO, it's hypocritical to call for "unity" with this. Are we gonna start arguing over Mesaba's Saab rates again, too?
 
kellwolf said:
See, I disagree. We'd already been in negotiations for 5+ years with the same guys at the table from the company. It was deja vu, and we could easily seeing it turn into a stall tactic. Can you really blame us for switching into "Great, here we go again" mode? CJC and XJ said it would "hurt" negotiations, but we don't know if it helped. We do know the company pleaded with us NOT to do it because Delta hates bad press. We said "Fine....negotiate fairly and we'll cancel it." There was no movement in negotiations, we picketed, things didn't grind to a halt. XJ and CJC seemed like they were trying to convince everyone if we all picketed, the company would pull out of negotiations while saying "They NEED this contract." Well, it's either one or the other, not both. If they NEEDED the negotiations, they wouldn't pull out. I was under the impression that the CJC guys were on board, until XJ's MEC started talking them into not supporting us. Then they turned into the kid on the playground being influenced by the older kids. Did the picketing help? Who knows? Did it hurt? Obviously not. For the record, once the company DID start making strides our direction at the table, we canceled the remaining picketing events.

As for the "crap sandwich" spin the 9E merger committee is supposedly putting on this, I still think Delta/NWA was a category/class merger. No one is calling that a "staple job" because of their similar equipment. I haven't seen the 9E merger committee proposal. Neither has anyone else on this board. It just says "a few Mesaba pilots" in the first two buckets. How many is a "few?" Bet they're all -900 guys, too.....which would fit with a category/class merger. I'd bet the XJ Saab pilots are pretty close to the Colgan Saab pilots. Once again, I don't know. I haven't seen the proposal.

My main beef is a pilot group calling for unity when their own merger committee really had no aim other than "We tried, but the other two guys are being mean" in sending out this memo. What good does it do other than attempt to make them look better in the eyes of their own pilot group by pointing a finger at the other two groups? If they had waited until AFTER the award to send this out, we wouldn't even be HAVING this discussion. IMO, it's hypocritical to call for "unity" with this. Are we gonna start arguing over Mesaba's Saab rates again, too?
Click to expand...

Then we disagree.... fair enough. I have zero problems with the Mesaba Saab rates... I understand the reasoning behind it and accept it. I think we would be having this discussion if the information had come out after the award except that I don't think people would be nearly as open to hearing arguments from the other side... I truly believe that in some way, shape, or form it would have divided us without recourse. If any of y'all 9E'ers get stuck in IAH... give me a shout... the beer and BBQ is on me.
 
I'm still LOLing. Ya'll thought I was the crazy one? The reality, aka truth, hit home hard! But as mentioned already, it's all a moot point until Bloch issues the official, final binding SLI award.


kell,

My main beef is a pilot group calling for unity when their own merger committee really had no aim other than "We tried, but the other two guys are being mean" in sending out this memo. What good does it do other than attempt to make them look better in the eyes of their own pilot group by pointing a finger at the other two groups? If they had waited until AFTER the award to send this out, we wouldn't even be HAVING this discussion. IMO, it's hypocritical to call for "unity" with this. Are we gonna start arguing over Mesaba's Saab rates again, too?
Click to expand...

EXCELLENT POST.
 
On a lighter note...Do you think I should read this
spiral-web.jpg

or should I just do to ATP RJ transition course? Im so excited I cant sleep!







EDIT: This is all in good fun. Lest we forget that none of us have any control over how this will shake out.
 
USMC-SSGT said:
On a lighter note...Do you think I should read this
spiral-web.jpg

or should I just do to ATP RJ transition course? Im so excited I cant sleep!
Click to expand...

According to some on here, you may as well go get single engine current while you wait out the furlough.

I don't understand why people can't wrap their head around that no one should gain out of this.
 
Many people seem quite concerned about the chance of a '10 hire being placed so far ahead of an '08 hire, for example. I seemingly recall reading that anyone hired after the Mesaba purchase date, mid 2010, would be DOH. Did I dream this? If this is correct, it seems that a relative merger would still put the pre-purchase '10 hires, the few '09 hires and potentially some '08 hires near the bottom of the list. So I guess I am curious as to why so many feel that it is unfair. I really don't want to get involved in the "my way is better than yours" campaign, I am simply looking for clarification.

Thanks
-Jay
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top