Mesa 3.0
06-19-2017, 07:21 PM
#4491
2 days off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: Embraer Systems Analyst
Posts: 1,853
Some food for thought:
I don't recall the exact year, but it was in the early 2000's when Mesa's union negotiated a contract with the company. At the time, I was with another regional, so we were obviously curious to what JO agreed to. When the details of the agreement were released, I remember most of us being surprised that he would agree to a contract that - compared to the old one - was a step forward for Mesa's pilots.
Over the first year or two of the agreement, it became apparent that he had no intention of living up to his agreement. While he obviously had to pay the posted pay rates, he apparently instructed his administration staff to NOT abide by the language of the contract in many cases. Pilots complained to the union, were told the usual b.s. ("fly it and grieve it"), and the grievances began to add up quickly. Finally JO went to the union (I think it was AH, but not sure) and offered to pay half of the dollar amount of the existing grievances to the union leadership - to be disbursed back the affected pilots at the union's discretion.
Union leadership apparently told the membership about JO's proposed offer, and the pilots were (rightfully) angry about it. I was living in PHX at the time, and I distinctly remember watching the local news and seeing a good-sized group of Mesa pilots - in uniform - picketing at the annual shareholder's meeting. There was a big story in the local PHX paper about it, too.
I don't recall what the outcome was - as I mentioned, I didn't work here then. Some of you who did might remember this - and feel free to correct me, since my memory is a little fuzzy on this. One thing I DO remember well about this is that JO attempted this because he entered into the contract in bad faith. That much was obvious, given the disproportionate number of pilot grievances after the contract was signed.
It's probably best to have a plan for this happening again.
Here's to hoping this ridiculous offer gets rejected by the pilots.
I don't recall the exact year, but it was in the early 2000's when Mesa's union negotiated a contract with the company. At the time, I was with another regional, so we were obviously curious to what JO agreed to. When the details of the agreement were released, I remember most of us being surprised that he would agree to a contract that - compared to the old one - was a step forward for Mesa's pilots.
Over the first year or two of the agreement, it became apparent that he had no intention of living up to his agreement. While he obviously had to pay the posted pay rates, he apparently instructed his administration staff to NOT abide by the language of the contract in many cases. Pilots complained to the union, were told the usual b.s. ("fly it and grieve it"), and the grievances began to add up quickly. Finally JO went to the union (I think it was AH, but not sure) and offered to pay half of the dollar amount of the existing grievances to the union leadership - to be disbursed back the affected pilots at the union's discretion.
Union leadership apparently told the membership about JO's proposed offer, and the pilots were (rightfully) angry about it. I was living in PHX at the time, and I distinctly remember watching the local news and seeing a good-sized group of Mesa pilots - in uniform - picketing at the annual shareholder's meeting. There was a big story in the local PHX paper about it, too.
I don't recall what the outcome was - as I mentioned, I didn't work here then. Some of you who did might remember this - and feel free to correct me, since my memory is a little fuzzy on this. One thing I DO remember well about this is that JO attempted this because he entered into the contract in bad faith. That much was obvious, given the disproportionate number of pilot grievances after the contract was signed.
It's probably best to have a plan for this happening again.
Here's to hoping this ridiculous offer gets rejected by the pilots.
Mesa pilots have to think about the big picture. I'm sure most think they'll be gone soon anyways and I'm sure nobody went into Mesa thinking it would be a destination airline but think about what could happen. Another 911, an economic meltdown, a war. You mess up the psych test at United.. The gravy train can stop instantly in this business and you won't see it coming until it's too late. You have to make Mesa a place where you can have a decent life if you're stuck there.
06-19-2017, 07:34 PM
#4492
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 2,623
Some food for thought:
I don't recall the exact year, but it was in the early 2000's when Mesa's union negotiated a contract with the company. At the time, I was with another regional, so we were obviously curious to what JO agreed to. When the details of the agreement were released, I remember most of us being surprised that he would agree to a contract that - compared to the old one - was a step forward for Mesa's pilots.
Over the first year or two of the agreement, it became apparent that he had no intention of living up to his agreement. While he obviously had to pay the posted pay rates, he apparently instructed his administration staff to NOT abide by the language of the contract in many cases. Pilots complained to the union, were told the usual b.s. ("fly it and grieve it"), and the grievances began to add up quickly. Finally JO went to the union (I think it was AH, but not sure) and offered to pay half of the dollar amount of the existing grievances to the union leadership - to be disbursed back the affected pilots at the union's discretion.
Union leadership apparently told the membership about JO's proposed offer, and the pilots were (rightfully) angry about it. I was living in PHX at the time, and I distinctly remember watching the local news and seeing a good-sized group of Mesa pilots - in uniform - picketing at the annual shareholder's meeting. There was a big story in the local PHX paper about it, too.
I don't recall what the outcome was - as I mentioned, I didn't work here then. Some of you who did might remember this - and feel free to correct me, since my memory is a little fuzzy on this. One thing I DO remember well about this is that JO attempted this because he entered into the contract in bad faith. That much was obvious, given the disproportionate number of pilot grievances after the contract was signed.
It's probably best to have a plan for this happening again.
Here's to hoping this ridiculous offer gets rejected by the pilots.
I don't recall the exact year, but it was in the early 2000's when Mesa's union negotiated a contract with the company. At the time, I was with another regional, so we were obviously curious to what JO agreed to. When the details of the agreement were released, I remember most of us being surprised that he would agree to a contract that - compared to the old one - was a step forward for Mesa's pilots.
Over the first year or two of the agreement, it became apparent that he had no intention of living up to his agreement. While he obviously had to pay the posted pay rates, he apparently instructed his administration staff to NOT abide by the language of the contract in many cases. Pilots complained to the union, were told the usual b.s. ("fly it and grieve it"), and the grievances began to add up quickly. Finally JO went to the union (I think it was AH, but not sure) and offered to pay half of the dollar amount of the existing grievances to the union leadership - to be disbursed back the affected pilots at the union's discretion.
Union leadership apparently told the membership about JO's proposed offer, and the pilots were (rightfully) angry about it. I was living in PHX at the time, and I distinctly remember watching the local news and seeing a good-sized group of Mesa pilots - in uniform - picketing at the annual shareholder's meeting. There was a big story in the local PHX paper about it, too.
I don't recall what the outcome was - as I mentioned, I didn't work here then. Some of you who did might remember this - and feel free to correct me, since my memory is a little fuzzy on this. One thing I DO remember well about this is that JO attempted this because he entered into the contract in bad faith. That much was obvious, given the disproportionate number of pilot grievances after the contract was signed.
It's probably best to have a plan for this happening again.
Here's to hoping this ridiculous offer gets rejected by the pilots.
06-19-2017, 11:35 PM
#4493
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Posts: 698
Times have changed from back when when pilots were actually paying for jobs. Even JO knows he will have to pay now.
Mesa pilots have to think about the big picture. I'm sure most think they'll be gone soon anyways and I'm sure nobody went into Mesa thinking it would be a destination airline but think about what could happen. Another 911, an economic meltdown, a war. You mess up the psych test at United.. The gravy train can stop instantly in this business and you won't see it coming until it's too late. You have to make Mesa a place where you can have a decent life if you're stuck there.
Mesa pilots have to think about the big picture. I'm sure most think they'll be gone soon anyways and I'm sure nobody went into Mesa thinking it would be a destination airline but think about what could happen. Another 911, an economic meltdown, a war. You mess up the psych test at United.. The gravy train can stop instantly in this business and you won't see it coming until it's too late. You have to make Mesa a place where you can have a decent life if you're stuck there.
06-20-2017, 06:07 AM
#4494
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 107
It's not possible if they don't give Mesa pilots a GOOD contract and that's my point! If Mesa wants the work they will have to pay scale to attract new pilots and keep the old. Supply and demand! If I was a new hire I would hand Mesa $20,000-30,000 bonus back and head over to Air Wisconsin! 😎
06-20-2017, 05:41 PM
#4495
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 79
After 32 years with AA and watching Eagle vote in a 17 year contract because none of them thought they would be their in two years. Well guess what the hiring cycle came to a emergency stop! And now guess who started *****ing about their contract. They did not care about year 3 until they had to work under it. And that's my point. 😎
06-21-2017, 01:34 AM
#4496
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: outside
Posts: 718
After reading most of this, it appears that JO could merely being setting Mesa up for a sale, to either Skywest or another, even AA as a whole owned and then brand it theirs and take advantage of a system they have already created.
If JO is speculating on a No vote then shares decrease and a sale is possible, even a yes vote will just be less profit and still could be a sale. He needs the group to settle first either way.
I would anticipate a No vote and position for acquisition by a stronger player.
just an observation...
If JO is speculating on a No vote then shares decrease and a sale is possible, even a yes vote will just be less profit and still could be a sale. He needs the group to settle first either way.
I would anticipate a No vote and position for acquisition by a stronger player.
just an observation...
06-21-2017, 04:06 AM
#4497
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2014
Position: 75 FO
Posts: 76
After reading most of this, it appears that JO could merely being setting Mesa up for a sale, to either Skywest or another, even AA as a whole owned and then brand it theirs and take advantage of a system they have already created.
If JO is speculating on a No vote then shares decrease and a sale is possible, even a yes vote will just be less profit and still could be a sale. He needs the group to settle first either way.
I would anticipate a No vote and position for acquisition by a stronger player.
just an observation...
If JO is speculating on a No vote then shares decrease and a sale is possible, even a yes vote will just be less profit and still could be a sale. He needs the group to settle first either way.
I would anticipate a No vote and position for acquisition by a stronger player.
just an observation...
The Mesa pilot group needs to ask themselves if JO can actually afford an industry contract?
The numbers say he can't.
06-21-2017, 05:10 AM
#4498
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,530
No he doesn't, and what numbers are you talking about? JO has the cheapest labor in the business. They're making tons of money through AA and UA and fly 70+ seat brand new planes for them. Skywest would have bought them long ago. And a AA WO that flys like 50 Ejets for United?? The only positioning JO is doing is to keep the costs low. If you've read or watched any of his interviews, he says many times that he considers he's doing a favor to employees by giving them a job at Mesa.
06-21-2017, 06:15 AM
#4499
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2016
Posts: 145
After reading most of this, it appears that JO could merely being setting Mesa up for a sale, to either Skywest or another, even AA as a whole owned and then brand it theirs and take advantage of a system they have already created.
If JO is speculating on a No vote then shares decrease and a sale is possible, even a yes vote will just be less profit and still could be a sale. He needs the group to settle first either way.
I would anticipate a No vote and position for acquisition by a stronger player.
just an observation...
If JO is speculating on a No vote then shares decrease and a sale is possible, even a yes vote will just be less profit and still could be a sale. He needs the group to settle first either way.
I would anticipate a No vote and position for acquisition by a stronger player.
just an observation...
The non-wholly owned sector is ripe for consolidation. This sector of the industry simply cannot compete with the financial backing of the wholly owned. If they reduce competition however, then they have more bargaining power since mainline still needs the capacity of the airframes out there in the non-wholly owned sector.
In the long run, a merger or buyout of Mesa would be better for this sector and the people within. Better benefits and pay would most likely result. On the other hand, it might be Mesa who is trying to buy another regional, though I don't know who.
People who work here shouldn't worry about it. With the pilot shortage and the movement in the industry, any effect on seniority list or upgrade times might be negligible, might.
06-21-2017, 06:22 AM
#4500
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2016
Posts: 145
Any of the union sponsored events do not change the variables of the contract and how they lag behind the industry in almost every single section of the TA. You cannot change that fact. I cannot see how these events can be used for anything more than as a way to explain why the concessionary stances were taken.
After watching that cringe worthy video just put out by the union last night, I now know that this is going to be a sales pitch (like last time) in getting us to accept the narrative that "this is the best we can get."
The TA simply does not fall in line with what our pilot group can demand right now. If they cant get us pay, then get us healthcare. If you cant get us healthcare, then get us pay. If we cant get healthcare or pay, then in the least we should be able to get uniforms, better language, luggage, etc.
Everyone should listen to what the union has to say. But regardless, it wont change the fact that we are being asked to accept a concessionary contract that not only hurts the industry, but our pilot group as a whole.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
