Pinnacle Airlines pilots reject new collective bargaining agreement

by B.N. Sullivan

Pinnacle Airlines pilots have rejected a new collective bargaining agreement with management. The leadership of the pilots' union, the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), approved the tentative contract agreement in August and sent it to the membership for ratification. But, according to ALPA, "Pinnacle pilots concluded that the job security enhancements, work rule improvements, pay increases, and signing bonus just weren’t substantial enough to warrant a yes vote."

The pilots' contract became amendable on May 1, 2005, and contract negotiations began in February of 2005. Negotiations between Pinnacle's pilots and management have been mediated by the National Mediation Board since September of 2006.

“Pinnacle pilots believe there are sections of the tentative agreement that should be modified to better reflect their current needs,” said Capt. Scott Erickson, chairman of the Pinnacle arm of ALPA. “We look forward to working with the company to address these problem areas to achieve a successful ratification.”

The pilots are the only employee group at Pinnacle that has not had a raise in more than five years.

Pinnacle Airlines pilots to vote next month on new collective bargaining agreement

by B .N. Sullivan

The leaders of the pilots' union at Pinnacle Airlines have approved a tentative contract agreement reached recently between the union negotiating team and the airline's management. The union announced today that the tentative agreement will now be sent out to the membership for ratification.

The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), which represents Pinnacle Airlines' 1282 pilots, says that the new agreement provides for pay increases, work rule improvements, job protection provisions and a significant signing bonus. The tentative agreement will be distributed to all Pinnacle pilots during the next few days and a series of road shows to address pilots’ questions and concerns will be scheduled to begin in the near future. A vote will be conducted in September.

In a statement to the press, Captain Scott Erickson, chairman of the Pinnacle unit of ALPA, said, “After more than four and a half years of grueling contract negotiations, our negotiating committee obtained a deal we can confidently send to the pilots for their vote. I believe there is something in this agreement that benefits every Pinnacle pilot and I’m confident our pilots will feel the same way.”

The path to the new tentative agreement has been long and often contentious. The pilots’ contract became amendable May 1, 2005, and contract negotiations began in February 2005. Pinnacle pilots and management entered mediated negotiations with the National Mediation Board in late September 2006.

The pilots are the only Pinnacle Airlines employee group that has not had a raise in more than five years.

NTSB: Pinnacle Airlines pilots' poor decisions, fatigue caused 2007 accident

The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has issued its synopsis report on the investigation of an accident in which a regional jet operated by Pinnacle Airlines overran the end of a runway in Michigan last year. The NTSB determined that the probable cause of the accident was the pilots' poor decision-making, and that the poor decision-making "likely reflected the effects of fatigue."

Quoting from the Executive Summary of the NTSB Accident Report:

On April 12, 2007, about 0043 eastern daylight time, a Bombardier/Canadair Regional Jet (CRJ) CL600-2B19, N8905F, operated as Pinnacle Airlines flight 4712, ran off the departure end of runway 28 after landing at Cherry Capital Airport (TVC), Traverse City, Michigan. There were no injuries among the 49 passengers (including 3 lap-held infants) and 3 crewmembers, and the aircraft was substantially damaged. Weather was reported as snowing. The airplane was being operated under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 and had departed from Minneapolis-St. Paul International (Wold-Chamberlain) Airport, Minneapolis, Minnesota, about 2153 central daylight time. Instrument meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident flight, which operated on an instrument flight rules flight plan.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the pilots’ decision to land at TVC without performing a required landing distance assessment based on runway contamination initially reported by TVC ground operations personnel and continuing reports of deteriorating weather and runway conditions throughout the approach. This poor decision-making likely reflected the effects of fatigue produced by a long, demanding duty day, and, for the captain, the duties associated with check airman functions.

Contributing to the accident were 1) the Federal Aviation Administration pilot flight and duty time regulations that permitted the pilots’ long, demanding duty day and 2) the TVC operations supervisor’s use of ambiguous and unspecific radio phraseology in providing runway braking information.

The safety issues discussed in this report include the pilots’ actions and decision‑making during the approach, landing, and landing roll; pilot fatigue and line check airman duty time regulations; weather and field condition information and ground operations personnel communications; and criteria for runway closures in snow and ice conditions. [NTSB/AAR-0802]

As a result of the investigation of this accident, the NTSB made recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration in the following areas: the pilots' actions and decision-making during the approach, landing, and landing roll; landing distance assessment training; weather and field condition information and ground operations personnel communications; criteria for runway closures in snow and ice conditions; and alcohol testing.

Editor's Note: Before anyone jumps to any conclusions about the 'alcohol testing' item among the NTSB's recommendations, please note that it arose because the investigation showed that, while both pilots tested negative for illicit drugs, they were not tested for alcohol after the accident. This was an omission on the part of the airline. The text of the NTSB report clearly states, "Although there is no reason to believe their performance was affected by alcohol, the failure of the airline to perform required postaccident alcohol tests prevents a definitive statement on the issue."

Here is the link to the full text of the Synopsis Report: NTSB/AAR-08/02. The full report will be available on the NTSB website in several weeks.

Arbitrator says Pinnacle Airlines violated pilots' contractual rights

Score one for the pilots' side, in the continuing saga of acrimonious negotiations between the management of Pinnacle Airlines and its pilots' union. Yesterday, an arbitrator ruled that the pilots’ contractual rights were violated when management refused to meet and discuss labor protection issues with them, following the acquisition of Colgan Air in early 2007.

The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), the union representing Pinnacle pilots, issued a news release announcing the arbitration ruling, saying:

The arbitrator ruled that Pinnacle’s “consistent failure to distinguish between the two corporate entities provides persuasive evidence that Pinnacle Airlines Corp. and Pinnacle Airlines, Inc. were alter egos functioning as a single employer at the time of the acquisition of Colgan by PNCL,” and concluded, “… because PNCL and PAI were alter egos functioning as a single employer when PNCL acquired Colgan …” the company violated the labor protection section of the collective bargaining agreement with the pilots.

The chairman of Pinnacle unit of ALPA, Capt. Scott Erickson, called it "a major victory for us."

“We are very pleased with the arbitrator’s recognition that Pinnacle violated our contract when they refused to negotiate with us after buying Colgan Air,” Erickson said. “We hope this ruling puts an end to managements’ continued quest to deny us our contractual rights, prompting it to negotiate a contract that adequately compensates us for our dedication and sacrifice to this airline.”

For more than three years, Pinnacle pilots and management have been in contract negotiations, which have often been characterized as "contentious." They are currently working under a contract that became amendable in May of 2005. A mediator assigned by the National Mediation Board has been involved in the negotiating process since fall 2006.

Pinnacle vs. pilots: The latest chapter

Pilots at Pinnacle Airlines have not had a pay raise since 2004. They have been in contract negotiations with the airline's management since January 2005, with no satisfactory progress. This past Monday the pilots formally requested binding arbitration by the National Mediation Board (NMB). The following day, the airline filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the Air Line Pilots Association International (ALPA), the union representing the 12,000 pilots, citing bad-faith bargaining in contract talks.

In his January 7, 2008 letter to the NMB, ALPA President Capt. John Prater says that the airline's "best and last" offer submitted to the pilots in December of 2005 proposes pay rates and work rules that "fall well below industry average." Also at issue is the lack of a so-called successor clause in the company bylaws that would address job security protection.

Chairman of the Pinnacle MEC of ALPA, Capt. Scott Erickson, referring to Pinnacle's acquisition of non-union Colgan Airlines last year, said, "Essentially, it comes down to this: They took money out of the coffers of our airline, floated it up to Pinnacle Corp., the holding company, and bought another airline." The pilots fear that Colgan pilots eventually will be flying Pinnacle routes.

In its lawsuit, Pinnacle Airlines accuses the pilots of bad faith bargaining. In a news release issued by Pinnacle on January 8, Clive Seal, Vice President and General Manager of Pinnacle Airlines Inc. said, "We regret having to file this lawsuit, but the union left us with no choice. On more than one occasion, we agreed to terms that the union said would result in an agreement, and then they moved the goalposts and made additional demands. We need them to come to the table and deal fairly in a genuine effort to get a fair contract for our Pilots and their families. I believe we would have an agreement already if our Pilots had been told the truth about our offer and been allowed by the union to vote on the company proposal as we requested."

Philip H. Trenary, President and CEO of Pinnacle Airline, echoed Seal's sentiment, saying, "We want a new contract for our Pilots. We want to be at the table and bring these negotiations to a close. We have bargained in good faith and have repeatedly responded positively to requests from the union. We have been more than fair. All of us built this company together under the premise that we are a team, and we think it's unfair that our pilots are the only employee group that has not had a raise since 2005. Now, it's time for the union to be fair by putting union politics aside and doing what's in the best interest of our Pilots."

But ALPA called these statements by Pinnacle management "the height of cynicism." ALPA's Capt. Prater said in a news release:

"I’m astounded that Pinnacle management has the gall to accuse ALPA of bad-faith bargaining when management, not ALPA, has been dragging out negotiations for the last 18 months. It’s the height of cynicism.

"I sent a letter to the National Mediation Board just yesterday requesting that it issue a proffer of arbitration to the airline and the union. I do not believe the suit’s timing is a coincidence.

"I am equally outraged that Pinnacle, in a news release dated today, charged that ALPA negotiators had not 'told the truth' to pilot members regarding offers Pinnacle had made. Pilots have been fully informed on all details of negotiations throughout the process.

"How dare this management accuse us of lying to our pilots? No pilot group is more unified, well led, and serious about negotiations than our Pinnacle pilots.

"Even though many contract issues have been resolved, this management refuses to make any serious improvements in pilots' job security protection, pay rates, and work rules that would appreciably improve pilots’ quality of life."

Pinnacle MEC chairman Erickson added, "Filing this baseless lawsuit can only be a delaying tactic in retaliation for our request to the NMB. It's the latest in a long line of attempts to put off the inevitable and to misrepresent where the real blame lies—with Pinnacle management—for the failure to achieve a fair contract after three very difficult years."

The next move may be in the hands of the NMB. If the NMB denies ALPA's request for binding arbitration, negotiations will supposedly continue, although given the current climate, that seems a grim prospect. If either side rejects arbitration, a strike may ensue after a compulsory 30-day 'cooling off' period. Last November, Pinnacle pilots voted overwhelmingly in favor of a strike, so the stage is set.

NTSB update on Pinnacle CRJ runway overrun at Traverse City

Today the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued an advisory regarding its investigation of a runway overrun earlier this month by a regional jet at Traverse City, Michigan (TVC). The Pinnacle Airlines CL-600 aircraft, operating as Northwest Airlink Flight 4712, slid off the runway after landing. No injuries were reported, but the FAA's preliminary report for the event listed damage to the aircraft as "substantial."

The accident occurred shortly after midnight on April 12, 2007. According to today's NTSB report, the aircraft had departed from Minneapolis and was cleared for an ILS approach to runway 28 at TVC. The NTSB report says:

Weather was reported as snowing. Automatic weather observation data indicated at 12:30 am, the visibility was one-half mile in snow, with indefinite ceiling and vertical visibility of 200 feet. Snow removal operations were in progress at the airport, and the flight crew communicated directly with airport operations regarding the runway conditions.

After landing, the airplane overran the departure end of runway 28, which is 6,501 feet long, with an additional 200 feet of pavement. Initial examination indicates that the airplane exited the paved surface onto a grassy snow- covered field, the nose gear separated from the fuselage, and the airplane came to rest about 100 feet beyond the pavement. The passengers and crew exited the airplane via the main cabin door.

There were 46 passengers -- including three lap-held infants -- and three crew on board.

The NTSB reports that the flight data and cockpit voice recorders were recovered from the airplane and read out at the NTSB laboratory in Washington, DC. Both were in good condition and include the accident flight. A CVR transcript is in preparation.

A news report about the accident on TV station WZZM-13 quotes an airline spokesperson who said the plane couldn't brake when it landed. At the time snow was falling heavily and the temperature was right at the freezing point. That news report includes a brief video clip shot at the scene of the accident.

Another news report, on the website of station TV7&4, has several photos of the aircraft which show it leaning on its nose in the snow. The airstairs at the 1L door appear to be almost horizontal.

The NTSB report mentioned that the nose gear separated from the fuselage. The TV7&4 news report quoted a passenger from the flight who claimed to have seen "the landing gear rolling down the runway beside the plane as it swerved off to the side."

According to the NTSB, the aircraft was piloted by the captain, a company check airman who had a total time of about 5,600 hours, with 4,390 flight hours in the CRJ-200. The F/O was a new-hire who had been working for Pinnacle since January of this year. The F/O had 2,500 total flight hours, with 15 flight hours in the CRJ-200. But get this: One news report about the accident in the Traverse City Record-Eagle mentioned that the flight was part of the F/O's IOE. You have to feel particularly sorry for that poor guy!

[Photo Source]

Pinnacle misses crucial pilot contract deadline

Regional carrier Pinnacle Airlines missed a March 31, 2007 deadline for completing a contract agreement with its pilots. While the company says that it plans to continue negotiating with the pilots, the missed deadline has potential consequences beyond the labor contract -- specifically, the loss of 17 of its aircraft.

According to a news release on MarketWire, Pinnacle was awarded 17 CRJ 200 aircraft in December 2006 by Northwest, its former parent. As a part of a service agreement with Northwest, Pinnacle was required to have reached an agreement with its pilots by March 31, 2007, else these aircraft could revert to Northwest. Fifteen of those17 aircraft were added into service during first quarter 2007.

The news release goes on to explain that, as a result of Northwest obtaining the right to remove the 17 aircraft, the size of Pinnacle's unsecured claim against Northwest will increase by $42.5 million. Receipt of this claim partially off-sets the loss of income associated with these 17 aircraft.

"Although I am extremely disappointed we have not reached an agreement, tremendous progress has been made and I appreciate the hard work of the Pilot's negotiating committee to move these discussions forward," said Philip H. Trenary, Pinnacle's President and Chief Executive Officer. "Reaching an agreement is important to all our stakeholders -- Pilots, other employee groups, investors -- and we will continue to work diligently to reach an agreement."

Pinnacle's flight attendants ratified a four-year contract with the airline in early March of this year.

[Photo Source]

Three-plane incident at MEM

A report from Memphis newspaper, The Commercial Appeal, republished on Airport Business, tells of a series of errors that caused three planes to land too close together in rapid succession last Tuesday. The separation rules that air-traffic controllers are charged with maintaining apparently were compromised.

According to the news article, this is what happened:

The string of events started shortly after noon when FedEx flight 881 approached for a landing on the center runway.

While still in the air, the pilot reported an auto throttle problem to the tower, which required the plane to slow faster than usual.

When that happened, the plane coming in behind it, a regional jet operated by Pinnacle Airlines, broke the 5 miles of separation the FAA mandates between heavy and small jets.

The FedEx pilot aborted the landing and flew around to try again. As it approached the runway for the second time, the separation between it and another FedEx plane at an adjacent runway was compromised.

"The diagonal separation between those planes should have been 1.5 miles. But because flight 881 again reduced its speed, the separation was reduced to 1.38 miles," [FAA spokeswoman Kathleen] Bergen said.

As both FedEx planes were preparing to land, another regional jet operated by Pinnacle was approaching for landing.

Its 5-mile separation was reduced to 4.86 miles.

"In all three of the operational errors, we had more than 95 percent of the required separation. But our job is not to have loss of any," said Peter Suflaw, head of the air-traffic control union at the tower.