Mda Flow-through

[TBONEJ4J]

back to the original ideal, what has crystal city or the mainline mec said about filling vacant positions with WO pilots when no more apl's will show up?

Thank you, my thoughts exactly.

So, anybody, what has crystal city or the mainline mec said about filling vacant PILOT positions with WO pilots when no more apl's will show up?

The Dash 8's are going away quickly, MDA is the only avenue for the current PDT/ALG PILOTS to continue flying in the US Air Group. After the APL, they are entitled to those positions. h34r:

 

[foreright]

I believe that MDA will not be spun off. My thoughts are that down the road MDA will be a true part of the mainline fleet. Thats if the company does not fold or merge. You will have a fleet of buses and big jungle jets 170/190.

 

[BoeingBoy]

FWIW, it seems that all the focus of mainline MEC is on scope relief - allowing RJ's and 170's, or divisions (PSA, ALG/PDT, MAA) to be sold off if necessary. I'm not sure flow-thru is even on the radar, unfortunately.

Jim

 

[TBONEJ4J]

FWIW, it seems that all the focus of mainline MEC is on scope relief - allowing RJ's and 170's, or divisions (PSA, ALG/PDT, MAA) to be sold off if necessary. I'm not sure flow-thru is even on the radar, unfortunately.

The thing is, the flow-through was already agreed to in the restructuring agreement, specifically Attachment B.

The language states that MDA vacancies will be filled in the following manner, APL Pilots, then CEL Pilots, then New-Hires.

Any position left over after the APL must go to a CEL Pilot. But to date, no information has been provided to CEL Pilots about these positions, other than the surfacing of a proposal to govern flow-through to MDA that provides for New-Hires before any CEL Pilot is offered a position.

Company cost savings and MDA politics would favor New-Hires over CEL Pilots, so it makes sense that there would be an attempt to change the order of filling vacancies at MDA. However, that would be the ultimate and truly final slap in the face to the PDT/ALG component of the CEL, and cannot be allowed to happen! h34r:

 

[av8or]

If mda hired off the street would that techincally be a violation of the loa and hence the cba?
perhaps it would be sufficient enough excuse for some kind of work action....which would be spectacular, watch this airline come to its knees when none of it's wo express flights fly one day

 

[BoeingBoy]

From what I understand of the proposed scope relief - 2nd & 3rd hand so take it with a grain of salt - there is provision to sell off W/O and/or MAA to NON-affiliated entities without carrying J4J with it.

Additionally, I don't think (another grain of salt) that are terribly close to running out of APL pilots for MAA yet - seems like they're still dealing with 88 or 89 hire date. Remember that MAA seniority is determined by mainline seniority for the APL folks, so all the pilots accepting F/O slots will be captains as more airplanes are delivered (assuming it isn't sold). Until it nears the point that APL pilots will be looking at the right seat of the 170 for an extended period will the F/O pay scale start making a real difference.

As I said, the focus of the mainline MEC is on scope relief - and the friction that led USA320Pilot to start the thread to recall certain MEC members is entirely over the "returns" for that scope relief, not the relief itself. That's why I said the focus was not on flow thru - the whole J4J program is somewhat up in the air depending on what might get sold to who.

From my view, the whole thing has turned into a sorry mess for all pilots concerned - including the folks at the W/O. Also, my view is and has been that we should have attempted to work out a flow thru, or preferably a single list, when the RJ's appeared on the horizon.

Jim

 

[ktflyhome]

So, what is up with this???We are starting MAA, training F/A/s and Pilots on the new Embraeur 170's and the Company is already talking about selling it???
Am I understanding this correctly? :huh:

 

[BoeingBoy]

kt,

It goes along with the talk of asset sales over the last couple of months or so.

As I understand the scope language, it allows the company to sell RJ's (including 170's) or divisions (W/O or MAA) to either an affiliate or non-affiliate carrier. If it's to a non-affiliate, the J4J doesn't apply. Crews (or at least pilots) on anything sold would go with the planes.

The problem I have with the language as I understand it (and I haven't seen the actual language, only read an "intrepretation") is this....

MAA is sold to Republic (non-affiliated). Any pilots at MAA at the time go with the planes, but no J4J. The following week, US & Republic sign an agreement for Republic to becoma an affiliated carrier using MAA's 170's. MAA is gone, J4J on the 170 is gone, but the planes still feed US.

I'm not saying that is what will happen, only that it is what could happen. Another gift from the ALPA MEC.

Jim

 

[ktflyhome]

Jim: What is J4J??

kt

 

[BoeingBoy]

kt,

That's the Jets for Jobs program - increased allowance for RJ's as long as part of the jobs (all for MAA) go to furloughed pilots.

To others,

When I mentioned earlier that flow-thru from W/O to MAA wasn't on the radar, I meant that the MEC is apparently focusing only on additional scope relief at this time - not that the flow-thru was being changed (other than what side effects a sale would have). Sorry if my poor choice of words sounded like I meant something different.

Jim