Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Originally Posted by AFW_MD11
I am saying, however, that I might be willing to "pay the cost" of the possiblity of a non-vol STV assignment (since that's all I can see that it possibly might cost me) so that others who might want to volunteer to live in a 600 square foot apartment in Paris (or HKG) for two years can get a little extra "help" than our current CBA offers them to do it.......might be willing to......possiblity of.....
OPINION: I personally agree with the folks who say it probably will never come to non-vol'ing people - so I believe that even further reduces the risk/cost to me to support this. For the record I HATE being away from my wife and kids for even a week or more. I just don't see it happening, but I might be willing to roll the dice to get the gains (yes, gains) that the LOA offers.
Every SIBA bid we have had resorted to inversing pilots initially.
Not a risk I am willing to take!!
I'm right 97% of the time, who cares about the other 4%!
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
I doubt if Non-voluntary STV will occur. Talking to a few senior MD drivers(first page), they are drooling about the MD in HKG in a couple of years and GETTING to bid STVs. I will probably not be able to hold it. IF it would get to the non-voluntary situation I believe JL's letter to limit it to 30 days makes sense.... Why would the company try to schedule a 90 day stv when a sick call would screw up the works? AFW - Good on ya for trying to bring some rational thought to this discussion.
Don't confuse being a team player for someone willing to take a crappy deal. Both FDAs are ultra expensive and if the company wants to place pilots there, they need to spend some extra money. It really is that simple.
If you want to be a team player, then think about voting NO.
Here is why:
I think we can get a better deal if we work together. Renegotiate the LOA, improve the money involved and clear up the details. This is the most vague LOA I believe I have ever seen. Contracts should be clean, this one is absolutely not.
If the company elects to fill the FDAs under the current CBA, we all have an opportunity to bid it. If people choose to be "team players," then we won't bid it. Of course this won't happen, so those folks choosing to go under the current CBA get what they deserve. If they want to be team players, then a better deal will happen.
Give the union some "leverage" and vote down this turd....
I was using the term "team player" in the context of helping a person who WANTS to bid these FDA get MORE than our current CBA offers by voting for the LOA (not intending to bid the FDAs myself).
"Team player" in the sense that I appear to be making a huge sacrifice so that those who are willing to bid the FDAs under the LOA package can benefit from it's provisions - all the while not really costing ME (the "team player") anything but the (what I consider to be remote) possiblity of a one-bid-period non-vol STV.....yes, I actually BELIEVE the company when they say 1 not 3 - blasphemy, I know.
and...don't get me started on how much more "leverage" the union will have if we vote this down - (IMO) zero.
I'm convinced there will be no more offers - some are convinced otherwise....either could be correct...only time will tell......my crystal ball broke a long time ago.
You're right, they win b/c the company has gotten you to actually believe that a smart business decision on their part not to pay more in taxes and more in infrastructure costs for a compound in CAN is the result of a negotiating win on your/our behalf.
AFW here's a thought for you, the company can inverse me to siba right now. I can handle 14-17 days away from home for three months. I get to come home, I get to ride 1st class over and back. The STV, I don't get to come home. I don't get to see my wife and kids, and obtw, I have children that can't come oversea's to visit due to special needs. For me, and anyone else at this company that is junior in a seat, vote no. Don't give the company the power to send someone away for up to 100 days. That's a work rule that we fought hard in the contract to get rid of, junior manning. If you choose to go, fine, but don't get me involuntarily sent.
Please vote no for that reason, amidst the many other reasons that are out there.
AFW, I too would like to bid this FDA but because it is so low with no help for education I will be unable. This LOA was written for 1/4 of our crew force, The empty nesters and the single people, it wasn't written for the whole crew force. Are we a union for only 25% or are we a union for all 4800 of us.