Originally Posted by
padre2992
Bucking Bar:
Certainly this contract is about more than pay. From what the Negotiator's Notepad and the Chairman's letter said, this is full Section 6, only expedited. Scope will most likely be part of it. I really don't see us making concessions in the area of scope though. There hasn't been anything from ALPA that makes me think they are considering any concessions. Isn't it hard to make that case when the company is making fairly good profits?
acl65:
You think 5, 5, 5, 5 will pass? I don't see that happening. Most guys I talk with are looking for double digits for the up front pay raise. That was the point of my previous posts regarding the comparison to SWA. As a minimum, shouldn't we get the Roger value of 11% (or close to it) up front?
TheManager:
Thanks for the welcome. Regarding reality, we all have our own ideas on that. Some of us have been through divorces, bankruptcies, foreclosures, etc. I have. And some have had it better. When the time comes for a vote, all I can say is choose what is best for you.
I do not know Tomahawk 58, but have had friends tell me who they think a particular forum name is. One question for you: how is it that you post under the name TheManager, but the post is edited johnso29? Can other people edit our posts?
That I don't know. Always thought only the poster could edit, or perhaps of course, a moderator. Is johnso29 a mod? Disregard the Tomahawk 58 reference as it's insignificant.
Finally, 5% is way to small upfront and Rogers number of 11% seems extremely suspect and an inaccurate figure that "gets us even with SWA."
I definitely want to him to show his work on that.
The above does not matter if there is a scope sale. All becomes a mute point.