chrisreedrules

Your correct. The bottom 500, the ones who will feel the long-lasting affects of this TA, can't even vote. And I know that's just how it is, but it is incredibly frustrating to have the ones who stand to benefit the most get to vote, while those who stand to lose the most don't.

Biggz

All the baphoons voting yes are probably all worried that they won't negotiate anything else if it gets voted down. Even if they decided not to then what is the difference? 4 to 5 a month. oh boy, Better pack the bags you will be at American 6 months earlier. Either have a reasonable flow or no flow.

Biggz

I'm in the top 500 and I already voted no to it. It's a joke. You're. probably right though. The majority probably will.

chrisreedrules

They will have to come back to the table of it gets voted down. How else will they staff this place? A bonus won't work. Look at the airlines offering bonuses, they are still having issues staffing. Increased first year FO pay might work, but AAG doesn't want it's wholly owneds paying too well. Rather, they plan on using a flow to American mainline to secure their cheap feed. And as it is, the flow in this TA is atrocious compared to the other wholly owneds. It will NEVER get above 6 /month the way it is written.

When asked how he plans on staffing PSA into the future, and making sure we have enough pilots staff all the airplanes we have coming, Dion said, "we have to". That was his response. So if he "has to" staff the flying, then he will have to return to the table.

I can't believe how many are willing to bite at the first crumb that falls from management's table.

PilotJ3

And that's how the last TA passed.

Sniper66

PSA will pass whatever management wants
The trend began when they sold down the other 2 wholly ones
PDT and ALG back at 90s

People never forget that fiasco with the RJs

Centra

The hold over language is IDENTICAL to our current SSP LOA. Go read it.

All required pilots must flow by the end of the calendar year. If 60 pilots are required to flow, and they held everybody until December, they would be required to flow 60 in December or they would be in violation of the agreement.

pagey

Here is the language in the new TA regarding the 12 months:

PSA may delay a pilot’s start of initial training at American as necessary to train and staff the PSA operation, provided that the number of PSA pilots who have commenced initial training at American by the end of the calendar year is no less than the number of offers of New Pilot Positions required under paragraph 5.c and 5.d, above.


So you're incorrect in that the language is removed.

Ironic here that you are calling your coworkers "buffoons" but yet don't even know how to spell your own insult.
Full Definition of BUFFOON
1
: a ludicrous figure : clown
2
: a gross and usually ill-educated or stupid person.

.......hmmmmmmmmmm

All this being said please explain to me the negatives in this TA.....Give backs. The only reason I've heard from you no voters is "F them we deserve better." We are getting a flow, and an increase of 1 pilot a month. We give nothing to get it. Why vote no?

What "long-lasting EFFECTs" are you talking about? What are you losing?

pagey

Management will most certainly play games with the number. They willfully violate our contract with the excuse of "interpretation" daily. I'm sure they will come up with some garbage for this one too.

However, let me ask you this:

We currently have about 500 active captains. So to reach 8/month we'd need to have 666 active captains. Explain to me how we could have a 150 acft airline with less than 666 active captains? I'm assuming a final number would be around 750-800. If they decide to park 200s? We lose 35 acft but also won't need as many pilots. The percentage flowing per year goes up, AND we have an excuse to get a higher number being as mgmts only reasoning for not giving us more right now is staffing.

1stCivDivPilot

They are working on it but LOA 6 potentially screws over every line holding FO with getting locked into LCR 6 days out even though the contract says you can trade in open time up to 48 hours out. I know there is no protection in the current contract but practice has been that they stick with 48ish hours notice on displacements. I know the LOA was an assist for LCA but why not fix the ambiguity for FO displacement windows too? The current contract has a conflict of clauses in chapter 25 that no one even tried to fix. Again, I realize that wasn't the goal of LOA 6 but the whole picture should have been looked at.

If they are going to displace us 6 days out, but allow us to trade, will we be pay protected?

Are they just going to drop the trip from our schedule when an IOE student is assigned and the LCA is locked into the trip? Will we lose our pay protection and have to pick up low time, short overnight garbage on open time?

Are they going to continue to interpret the "or" in the displacement language as an "and?"