Originally Posted by acl65pilot

*

Read the reps letters that are coming out. There was a long debate about this, but the reps as a whole felt that there was too much risk with going back. I'm not sure I follow the logic. You say we need this much more here and here to get 100% MEC approval and if they say, but we want this and this, you walk away consult the reps and go from there. You at that point still have a TA. They were in session so direction is very easy to give.*

That said, the reps debated it and chose to send it to MEC vote. The vote is 3:1 in favor of this. Talk to your reps about what they were thinking that week between the announcement of the TA and the vote. If they wanted to send it back, ask why they voted yes. There are a few of them from what I gather.


Now, we have a TA that is subject to MEMRAT. We can turn it down, and it puts pressure of the company to walk away from a comprehensive TA that solves a lot of issues for them, or they can fix about 30 or so line items and this can be a great product that all can be proud of. Its their decision, but it would have to be turned down and no one denies that there is risk with that.

Also, pay is not the only thing causing concern. Pilots have hit on othres:
1) Reserves do not get rotation guarantee nor do they get paid like a line holder

2) The ratio language appears to not guarantee growth but a dual accumulator if we shrink. (Demand to see how many mainline jets we see as growth off of this compared to the amount of RJs being sold) The ratio is based on domestic narrow body jets which have some long stage lengths.*

3) JV language covers profit/loss which includes revenue sharing but is effectively limited to those two types of monetary structures.*

4) RJET cutout on the holding company provisions. Could they fly C-Series for Skyteam and connect to AF flights?*

5) Horizion Q400 cut out. What is the beneift for this? Was it so we could include ALK in the holding company provisions without expempting the entire holding company or something else?

5) RLL recovery flying and the results of them being assigned or forced to pick up flying that would reduce reserve callouts.*

6) Reserves picking up reserve days. If called out does it hit the reserves required forumula? What percentage of GS's and WS's under 12 hrs will be gone because of this and the RLL language?*

7) Reserves being on the hook for ALV+15 if they are one minute under guarantee. What effect does this have on GS?

8) A follow on but what is the the math on what percentage the GS awards will go down now, and going forward?

9) Reroute was not touched. Remember the volcano and international guys being on the hook for 30 hrs past sign out? *Unchanged

10) Pay and how this lack of patterning will hurt UCAL and UPS in section 6 and FDX,and LUV who are going in later this year

11) Reduced profit sharing. Though monitized in pay are we really at a point where we need to shuffle the deck chairs?

12) Higher ALV thus causing many to work more, which requires less bodies in each seat

13) Avg day at 4:30 versus 6 which was what many wanted to see because it is indusrty avg among LUV, FDX, UPS etc. Why not an international breakout if 6 could not be achieved for domestic ops.

14) Low increases to per diem and international override

15)The RJ's were hard limited and now we are upping the large RJ limit to help facilitate the companies needs, but not getting decent/liner returns.*

16) overall concern for the vague language in many parts of the document

The positives I have heard/see are:
1) Better section one provisions. Many see it as a gain to see flying returned to mainline for the cost involved. They see their capt seat or hiring to get them off the bottom.*

2) JV protections are better and spell out the need for a production balance in a few situations.*

3) Holding company protections are better. Makes another republic holdings impossible to have*

4) Furlough protections are better

5) Pay is better though no where near their mins.*

6) Reserves get paid more and can pick up more pay if wanted

7) Better vacation pay

8) Better distance learning pay from 3:1 to 2:1

9) Increased per diem and international over ride

10) growth or at least the possibility of growth with the SNB

11) Downside protections wrt to RJ's*

12) Early Out that nulls the work rule efficencies at least initally.*

13) better sick bank with no more 75% pay

14) 1% increase in DC in 2014

15) Short duration deal with some protections to start talks in early 2015.
**
Its not a total list, but just one that i have complied from posts e-mail and phone calls from the last week.

DYODD. Read the langauage and determine if the language is tight enough for you, your family and the pilot group as a whole.