J4J Question - Chip

N628AU

Veteran
Aug 22, 2002
909
106
www.usaviation.com
Chip,
A friend of mine and I had a discussion yesterday about Jets for Jobs, and specifically how it applies at Freedom Air. ALPA seems to continue to be dead set against Freedom, and although they have agreed to J4J (ir the company has, depending on who you ask), ALPA is telling furloughed US pilots not to accept a job there.
If this is true, how does it work? If Pilot Smith is #1 in seniority amongst those furloughed, and a J4J opening comes up and it is with Freedom, lets say he passes on it. Is he still #1, or is he/she bypassed from J4J completely now. Basically, can the furloughed pilots kind of wait to pick and choose their opportunites?
Thanks.
 

ex-u pilot

Newbie
Dec 29, 2002
12
0
I work for Freedom Airlines. We voted (the pilot membership) for J4J at U. Over 20% of our seniority list is made up of furloughed U pilots, and the way it looks, this number will continue to grow. The union's position on this is absurd. Freedom could go ALPA if they wanted to. It is just right now, we aren't feeling much love from the U MEC or the ALPA National brotherhood of overpaid mahogany desk drivers.

The way I understand J4J's is this.

You are entitled to a job based on your seniority on the APL(furloughed pilot list). When they call you, you are allowed to pass on any J4J carrier. If you do, you are shut out of that carrier. (You can go and get a job at that carrier on your own, just not J4J) If you accept a position at a J4J carrier, you are removed from the APL and you may only accept employment at Mid-Atlantic (when they start up) or recall to mainline. You cannot skip from J4J carrier to another.

Hope this helps.
 
C

chipmunn

Guest
N628AU:

Ex-U-Pilots's J4J description is accurate.

In regard to Freedom, the issue is ALPA International views Freedom Air as a Mesa Air Group "alter ego" airline, where the parent company is in negotiations with the Mesa pilot group.

US Airways ALPA is working closely with Mesa MEC Chairman Andy Hughes. If Mesa Air Group CEO Jonathan Ornstein recognizes ALPA, merges Freedom into Mesa, than the Mesa MEC and US Airways MEC will authorize J4J.

This is a significant issue because the Mesa Air Group 50 RJ addition to the US Airways Express network, which includes 70-seat CRJs, is dependent upon satisfactory resolution to this issue.

Chip
 

ClueByFour

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
3,566
37
www.usaviation.com
[BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 1/11/2003 10:58:31 PM chipmunn wrote: [BR][BR]US Airways ALPA is working closely with Mesa MEC Chairman Andy Hughes. If Mesa Air Group CEO Jonathan Ornstein recognizes ALPA, merges Freedom into Mesa, than the Mesa MEC and US Airways MEC will authorize J4J.[BR]----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]One gets better odds in Vegas.[BR][BR]I may be slow, but something tells me that Ornstein is not about to recognize or encourage ALPA at the carrier he started to end-run scope and other fun ALPA effects. [BR][BR]Maybe all the CCair guys can grab all the Freedom jobs, and [STRONG]then[/STRONG] go ALPA with no seats left to lose to J4J/ALPA. The irony would be stunning.
 

ex-u pilot

Newbie
Dec 29, 2002
12
0
Chip - you are correct about the ALPA national stance and the U MEC stance. However, we could go ALPA at Freedom, but will NOT if it means being merged in with MESA. An aside to this, even if we did and the single carrier petition is awarded, MESA and Freedom can and most likely will be operated separately.

The MESA pilot group has had 3 opportunities to bid over to Freedom with their seniority and longevity for pay purposes. If Freedom goes ALPA and has MESA's contract, it will be a backwards step for us at Freedom. We make more $$$ per hour than a Midway or Mid-Atlantic pilot will make. We have a commuter policy. We have a pretty good deal going and we have growth and the delivery positions for 30+ aircraft by the end of 2003. The U MEC is missing a HUGE opportunity for its furloughed members by making demands on another pilot group to satisfy the demands of the MESA MEC and the mahogany desk drivers at ALPA National.

Don't think for a minute that there aren't games being played here. Woerth hates Ornstein. It is hatred that will consume ALPA and further weaken its position. ALPA helped create this mess and now is trying to threaten and intimidate its way out of it.

Remember this. Freedom will grow with or without U pilots in the seats. They have hired over 25 of us and the number is expected to grow. They need the experience of the U pilots and the longer the U MEC waits, the less chance its furloughed members will find a home away from home until recall. Every day that goes by will see seats at Freedom go to other carriers at DAL, UAL, AMR, and everyone else who is furloughing.

Another tidbit. How long will it be before the MESA MEC authorizes a strike for better whatever? How happy are you going to be giving up more of your hard earned paycheck to pay another strike assessment so your ALPA brothers can make more money and take more of your routes and cities? How long do you thing the MESA MEC would authorize strike benefits for a striking U group? Only long enough for their first group of B-737 pilots to complete training? Look what is going on with the CCAir pilots. The MESA brothers took the planes and the flying and didn't hire one of their CCAir brothers.

ALPA needs to get it together, and FAST.
 

michael707767

Senior
Aug 21, 2002
332
0
Chip, I have a question regarding J4Js and RJs. Given the pay cuts that you have accepted previously, why would you not negotiate to have the bigger RJs flown at the mainline, instead of allowing them to go to the regionals under J4Js. With the pay cuts in place, there can't be the big a gap between what a U pilot would make flying a 70 or 90 seat RJ, and what a Mesa pilot would make(just for example). And I know the rest of us would like those jets (and jobs) to be at the mainline.
 

Cisco

Member
Jan 1, 2003
44
0
www.usaviation.com
Ex U Pilot is right on the money. Though the railway labor act would prohobit Freedom from organizing until two years after start-up unless management also solicits representation, JO has offered to facilitate our wishes should they be to organize.

There are several reasons why Freedom is not organized. First, there really is no reason or motivation as our pilot board is very affective. Second, we have only been threatened and challenged by ALPA for working here, so why would we want to join up? How can someone call a Freedom pilot a scab when there are no picket lines to cross nor struck work to fly? Does ALPA even care if people cross picket lines? If so, how did the CO scabs (people who actually did cross picket lines) get back into the union? How about FedEex? I think there are a lot of people out there who need to break open the dictionary and find out what a scab really is! It can be found in the dictionary somewhere between hypocrite and zealot!

The U MEC under the terms of duty of fair representation are bound to first and foremost protect their own pilots. To put the interests of another pilot group ahead of their own are some twisted ethics. However if in fact the U MEC mission is to protect the unized masses, I hear the Chataque pilots are in need of help as they are going to lose aircraft and routes to a new "alter ego" start-up called Republic Airlines which is being started to cir***vent a "NO" vote at that airline for J4J....

Fact is, Freedom Airlines was created by the USAir pilots and their working agreement. Now the same pilot group needs more than anything to save their own company with an influx of revenue which only a LARGE number of SJ's will provide. Why not go with an offer from an airline which they created and who has already offered to meet and exceed the requirements of LOA #83 and J4J?

Answer: D.W. does not like J.O. ALPA doesn't like the idea of ANY regional carrier operating 70 and especially 90 seat aircraft. CCair would be flying RJ's today under better work rules for more money preparing to hire U pilots for the J4J program had there not have been a 90 seat rate of pay in their contract.

Knowlege is power, and there are many who have neither....
 

DakotaHC8

Member
Aug 20, 2002
64
0
What a bunch of hoo-ha from both sides:

Current Freedom pilots do not want ALPA because they have staked out a sweet little deal for themselves, passing up more senior Mesa pilots to fly in the larger 70 and 90 seaters (if they came over from Mesa). And as for the furloughed Airways pilots that Freedom brought on, they get in on the ground floor (and left seat) instead of starting all over at the bottom of someone's list. Both types of pilots think "Why mess with a good thing by bringing in ALPA" because what they have gained was only possible by going around other ALPA pilots in the first place...


On the other hand the real reason the Airways pilots are mad about Freedom, is because when they arrive at Freedom, they will be junior to everyone that is already there... Thus they will be junior to the furloughed airways pilots that were already hired by Freedom.

Sure, half the positions will go to fuloughed airways pilots in senority order, but those positions will be junior to anyone already there. Thus the more senior Airways pilots will be pulling reserve and bidding behind other furloughed Airways pilots far junior to them (back at US Airways).

This is why you are seeing such threatening language towards US Airways furloughees that might want to sign on at Freedom before the more senior US Airways pilots get there first. Airways ALPA does not have a real problem with Freedom being non ALPA, they just want top make sure that the senior positions at Freedom are filled in senority order by themselves, not junior airways fuloughees... Waving the ALPA banner is just for show. Trust me, they have no problem with starting up alter-egos or allowing one ALPA pilot group to take advantage of another.

So lets all stop pretending, stop the spin doctoring, and just call things like they really are. All of this debate is about self-interest, nothing else
 

ex-u pilot

Newbie
Dec 29, 2002
12
0
Dakota - your post is full of monkey spunk.

The U MEC hates Freedom because ALPA national hates Freedom. They claim Ornstein is the devil incarnate and that Freedom exists to get around the MESA pilots contract.

The U MEC is duty bound to the pilots of U. Not the MESA pilots or the CHQ pilots or any other pilots, PERIOD. Yet they have allowed the elimination of hundreds of pilot jobs over the years to lower paying union pilots at other carriers without even a hint of doing anything about it. Now Freedom was formed to get aroung the U pilots SCOPE clause. Now there is an opportunity to help those pilots find employment and the MEC is too busy issuing threats of blacklisting and forfeiture of web board access. I am crushed! They don't give a rats rear end about seniority among furloughed pilots.

We have a good thing at Freedom. It is a pilot board that is not clouded by politics and the mahogany desk driver syndrome that blurs the judgement of those we entrust to deliver the promise of fair and equal representation.

 

DakotaHC8

Member
Aug 20, 2002
64
0
oh please...

Give it a break with the "labor relations utopia" talk ex-u, you are just making yourself sound foolish. A pilot board and working agreement sounds "neat-o", but it does not mean a thing. Unless you have an actual collective bargining agreement under the RLA, your agreement is not a legal do***ent ----> which menas that nice guy management tactics today can change to whatever management wants the next.

Need an example...? Lets say Mesa airlines does strike and Freedom management tells you to fly struck work. You must scab, or you will be fired. Or how about another one, say Airways ALPA agrees to Freedom, but only if all APL pilots are placed above current Freedom pilots. Once again, you have no right to disagree.

Sure, Mesa management will tell you they'd "never" do such things, but the truth is that if they have to, they will. So get off your high horse and stop making Freedom sound like the solution to every pilot's problems.

Just because the company offers free kool-aid does not mean you have to drink it.
 

gogogadget

Advanced
Aug 21, 2002
140
0
The real problem at Mesa and Freedom is called "UNION BUSTING" and you are either part of it like the rest of the major airline CEO's or you are not. You "Cross the Line" or you dont. Regardless of what a few content happy to be working pilots feel now that they got over. Mesa's own CEO said "Pilots are to expensive " Now isnt that the pot calling the kettle black? Pretty soon you will be working for free when there isnt a union at Freedom and your own CEO decides you make too much money because you are no longer subsidized (sp) by your Major airline bank. Ask ACA how they feel now that UAL want to stop paying them their $60 mil.

There isnt a problem with start-up's. There is a problem when a company starts a company within a company and entices you with bigger and better promises to lure you to the other side at the EXPENSE of the original employees. IT IS CALLED UNION BUSTING!!!!!!!!

plain and simple and I hope you get it fixed or worked out or what ever you call it. I fly with people all the time that say the union isnt S^(& but they sure do reap the benefits fought for by it regardless of wether they are in it or not. It is only convient when it benefits YOU!!! You dont have to go to ALPA, there are teamsters and others or you can form your own. Heck if Freedom was a stand alone by itself created to fly only in Mexico and hired "only from outside" It would be a totally different story!

Excuse me for ranting but trying to rationalize why you aren't what everyone knows you are is beyond me! LOOK IN THE MIRROR and take the blinders off!
 
C

chipmunn

Guest
Michael:

Michael asked: Chip, I have a question regarding J4Js and RJs. Given the pay cuts that you have accepted previously, why would you not negotiate to have the bigger RJs flown at the mainline, instead of allowing them to go to the regionals under J4Js. With the pay cuts in place, there can't be the big a gap between what a U pilot would make flying a 70 or 90 seat RJ, and what a Mesa pilot would make(just for example). And I know the rest of us would like those jets (and jobs) to be at the mainline.

Chip answers: Management had signficant leverage over ALPA and the MEC and its Advisors believed the liquidation threat was valid. ALPA wanted the 70-seaters to be flown only at MDA, but agreed to permit the CRJ-700 to be flown at other carriers; however, the higher paying EMB-170/175 will be only flown at MDA (the new mainline division).

Chip
 

Cisco

Member
Jan 1, 2003
44
0
www.usaviation.com
I don't know what news you got in the Dakota's, but U management did about anything to the pilots which they desired as well inspite of the collective agreement. Anything U mgmnt didn't do to screw the pilots, the fearless association leadership completed.... There are 1800 pilots on the street who if they had a voice at all would tell you just how much good that collective bargaining agreement has done. I think when it comes right down to it, any agreement is written in toilett paper unless you own the company.
 

michael707767

Senior
Aug 21, 2002
332
0
[blockquote]
----------------
Chip answers: Management had signficant leverage over ALPA and the MEC and its Advisors believed the liquidation threat was valid. ALPA wanted the 70-seaters to be flown only at MDA, but agreed to permit the CRJ-700 to be flown at other carriers; however, the higher paying EMB-170/175 will be only flown at MDA (the new mainline division).

Chip

----------------
[/blockquote]

Chip,
what is the seating capacity of the EMB-170/175, and how many of them do you think U will acquire?
Michael
 

Latest posts