Route66

Uhhh....not necessarily DOCTOR! The way you guys "fart and belch" here on this forum makes worlds heaviest man look like Charles Atlas!

Here is THE POINT:

THE PILOTS ARE DIVIDED. That is the POINT. There IS no consistency, submitting a three choice offer to the company is schizophrenic in and of itself. Might as well go to arbitration. The RUDDER that you point out that the CLT/PHL reps supposedly have right now is really meaningless...as if its on another BOAT.

I know why the large MINORITY of the BOD didn't vote to send it. Could it be a schizophrenic offer in and of itself??

Why don't you ASK them????

Route66

That's not saying a whole lot. Read my post to EF.

Route66

Let me just say that the, shall we say, "threesome" of a JCBA proposal will be a hard sell to the Company. I fully expect rejection after reading what was asked. While I agree the Company would like a few more items changed then we would be willing to give and while I think a closer agreement could be had with more of a "direct" and open exchange of information I don not believe for one second the Company is afraid of arbitration.

In theory they COULD do what the did for the AMFA but I don't really see it. Of course if the Company just out of the goodness of their hearts after the arbitration increase the hourly pay rates of the pilots I would imagine the APA would say any extra money paid to the pilots is over and above the JCBA and file a grievance telling them that pilots can't take it.

justjack

I think you are wrong. Do not misconstrue a difference of opinion as divided. As far as the contract goes we are all still trying to decide what is best. I have been on the fence about the most advantageous way to go but as far as being "divided" when it comes to the stance towards the company - we are not divided. We all agree that management is the problem. We have differing opinions as to what we can do ABOUT management, but we all agree that management is trying to get more for less money.

PurpleTurtle

The company cannot get HBT and INT/DOM in arbitration.

Route66

A difference of opinion on C&R as well as this web board may get you at least a blanket party. But NORMALLY I would agree with you. But we don't have differences of opinion here. It's differences of CULTURES and background. Sure we are still deciding what is best for us. Reasonable and prudent people will do that....EXCEPT FOR THE PILOTS HERE. If everyone would simply QUIT the blame game we might have SOME leverage. YOU AND I CANNOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT MANAGEMENT. THEY ARE WHO THEY ARE. Everyone implies we are underpaid (below industry) but really who are we to BLAME in that corner? We still, on average, make about 4.5 times MORE than the national average of $50,000 so I don't think your going to get much sympathy from the customers, your fellow employees or the general population including Congress. We're better than JetBlue, Spirit, Hawaiian and Alaska for sure. Only Delta, United and SWA pay better, but we STILL (and we still will) beat out SWA for the international because SWA CAN'T GET ANY BIG AIRCRAFT ORDERS IN.

So,what and where does that leave US and what can WE do with ourselves? Can WE improve? Can We CHANGE and ADAPT?

I vehemently disagree that management is the problem. What you fail to address is that Management is management and blaming them for the contract we have now is not their fault. It was what the MAJORITY wanted and that is the simple fact.

We have to live with that. OR......if we want a contract IMPROVEMENT (which the Company is NOT obligated to give because we have a SIGNED agreement already) then they are willing to pay up but they want SOMETHING in return. I do not find that unusual. That's management.

When I came ON here and said that their initial offer was a great offer, that was in comparison to what they agreed to pay us under the original MOU. The 5 seat addition to AIRFRAMES and not an increase in AIRCRAFT was not going to be a SCOPE issue because adding 5 seats without an increase in airframes means no gain or loss of jobs. Others disagree (you don't have to try and prove it because it's off the table anyway) and that is fine.

So after getting shouted down by SCOPE fanatics (who BTW set the sails for SCOPE in prior years in any case) the company finally dropped it. But they still felt there were other give and takes. There were those here that, with little or no information (which, BTW, the BOD is STILL withholding from the rank and file that information) were saying "go to arbitration and take our chances". I BELIEVED (and STILL BELIEVE) that the junior pilots needed and deserved better pay. Say what you want, the junior guys could use the money. Some junior pilots may have their reasons for NOT wanting the money but I think that reasoning wasn't prudent.

Arbitration, HISTORICALLY, has ALMOST ALWAYS FAVORED.....YOU GUESSED IT.....THE COMPANY. Labor somehow seems to think arbitration under the RLA gives the UNION magical powers when the history does NOT bear that relationship. The AMFA arbitration just proved that here recently.

Which brings us to the present. First, I am accepting of the MOU as it stands today. I can live with it. I THOUGHT there could have been MAJOR improvements to it when it was proffered but both the APA BOD (being in BK) and the USAPA (being left out of the process by the APA and the Company) but that ship sailed. The major differences between East/West/LAA/LUS/TWA, etc. are still present and the bad blood continues to fester with PAB and SLI. You can see it in the split votes of the BOD. It's no secret. The Company doesn't live in a vacuum.

Having a JCBA instead of arbitration would at least have put that issue to rest and given more time to the rank and file to homogenize, if you will, and let some of the dust settle.

There is not ONE OF YOU here that has ever knowingly met me and for the few who try to bust my balls (I definitely don't loose sleep over it) I don't ever CARE to meet. They are the closed minded, unyielding, and antiquated. The industry is CHANGING. It has always been changing and if you cannot accept change then you simply don't accept the reality of life and are DEFINITELY IN THE WRONG BUSINESS.

Know this, RLA and NLRA changes are in the air and when that actually takes place I know not when, but I DO KNOW that it WON'T FAVOR LABOR. I've seen this industry go through deregulation, consolidation, 9/11, bankruptcy, fuel crisis, the great recession (I'm sure you could add more) and through all that, only the STRONG in the aviation industry survived. And now they (the airlines, for one) are reaping the results of the seeds that were sown....EXCEPT FOR LABOR.

It is time for Labor and Management to make better peace for everyones future. The future, NOT the present because that damage is still occurring. Labor is the ONLY group in the US that has NOT come to terms with the NEW economy. Europe's labor unions are grappling with the economic issues as we speak. Not to mention everywhere else.

You may NOT like management but from what I've seen so far they seem to be making conservative, intelligent decisions about the future of this airline and I for one am willing to support them in that effort. That DOESN'T make me management. I still have disagreements with what they may decide in the future but it's still a new day as of now.

Got to go to work, which is why I'm up early.

I hope you and yours have a great holiday.

Route66

No, they can't. You are right. Exactly. We agree.

BUT....they CAN ask the FAA for exemptions (and are getting them, BTW) under the regulations if they can show good cause. They DO have POI here you know. Now for how long I do not know but I DO know (and I am not privy to this) that the FAA is very reasonable with companies under the new regs and they do give conditional regulation exemptions if the Company can demonstrate comparable protections.

So, I don NOT believe the HBT issue will be too much of an impediment other than an economic hit for the short term until 2019 occurs.

I guess for the company where there is a will, there is a way.

Gotta go fly. Happy Holidays.

R57 relay

From what I gather, the folks that support the NO voters on the BOD don't believe that.

justjack

Where to begin- Of course we have different cultures. I have been through four mergers now and I worked for another puddlejumper before that- before that the military- so I knew that I should never become anything more than a hybrid of my past. I understand that we are at a disadvantage in many ways as a union but we have to understand that we will never improve our situation except through collective bargaining. Perhaps this is the point that you are making as well. I understand that it was naive to believe that Parker would treat us the way that Richard Anderson treated his pilots. This is and has always been our fatal flaw.
The biggest issue that I have with your post and the reason that I am sitting down to write this on such a busy day is my shock and disappointment that one of our own would EVER write, " Everyone implies we are underpaid (below industry) but really who are we to BLAME in that corner? We still, on average, make about 4.5 times MORE than the national average of $50,000"
I have no idea what you did to get here or what opportunities you turned down or what your income ability is outside of the aviation industry. I do know, however, that I did more, have been and still am worth more than "average" anything.
Happy holidays.

Route66

I have been on the outside. I am not BLIND to the worlds industries.

I see it every day. But again, you miss my point and to that I may not be making as well as I should. Yes, you are worth more than $50,000 national average. Everyone can draw their comparisons from a varity of professions, classes, groups, whatever. My point is that if you explain to a Spirit pilot that you are underpaid compared to your peers you may get a different answer than one from a Delta pilot. It holds true that you will get a different answer from a regional pilot than a corporate pilot. And so on. If you ask your fellow American pilots the answer you get will probably be what you want and expect to hear in most cases.

Then you explain to a Wall Street investor that your underpaid and they may have a different opinion. Ask management and I'm sure you'll tell me how they feel.

And it is to THAT point I am speaking of. It's hard to tell management to pay you MORE when you already AGREED to work for LESS. YOU PROVED YOU ARE WORTH WHAT YOU ARE WHAT YOU ARE BEING PAID NOW.

What I think helps explain what is just ONE of the groups necessary to determine YOUR value was the UCC in the AMR BK. You can read about the APA attorney James explain it that to make the merger work the employees were going to give them MEASURABLE costs that they could do the math with. It was below industry average for two years to make it sell to the UCC.

Read APA James' opening statement for the PAB. You can read it at pages 25-28. He didn't really do that good of it on his opening statement but he said to make it work you get a JCBA FIRST then a SLI. The pilots/employees AGREED to work for LESS than market to make the merger happen. Ergo the MOU. Because Judge Lane imposed statutory timelines on the labor groups to come up with a workable solution, they had to work quick and get assurances from all the labor groups.

So while the pay may be below Delta/United pay scales our other employee groups, who make a whole LOT less than us still look at our pay as a whole LOT more. Next time on the line ask THEM if they think we're overpaid. Now I don't agree with them myself but the answer you get you probably won't like.

Selling our pilot pay increases to management comes with baggage that the management may NOT be able to "sell" to their BOD. It isn't my job to sell it to the BOD its managements. But management has to have a GOOD MEASURABLE, OBJECTIVE reason to sell these increases to the BOD or its a "no go".

The BOD has a fiduciary duty to the investors to justify the change. But so far I think that is a difficult sell.