Originally Posted by
Regularguy
EWR737FO
"As I find myself wanting this to be completed, I also see the negatives in this being "rushed" together in two weeks."
From your comments I get the feeling you are a novice when it comes to these kinds of negotiations for your pay and benefits. If I am wrong about the novice part I apologize. But the reason I write this is because the time has run out and given more time the contract will never be completed. There has to be a deadline.
Now as far as your concerns about what we might or might not accomplish in this contract, given the deadline, it really doesn't matter at this point. I can assure you should we go to a strike you will not be happy with the contract we achieve post strike. It's the nature of the beast.
As Roger Hall said to me the week before the 1985 strike, "If the Company wants a two-tiered pay scale then they will have to pay for it."
You see a strike is not about getting what "we" want it is about making the Company pay for what they want. It simply comes down to this, should we strike it will cost UAL Holdings Billions$$$, all of which they could have saved if they had settled prior. You know what they are fully aware of this risk and that is why they keep draggin the negotiations out.
In 1985 the two-tiered pay scale cost UAL over $1.2 billion directly because of the strike and much more over the years of repair and lost good will with the customers and pilots.
In the summer of "love" (2000) the Company failed to come to a timely contract after guaranteeing in the ESOP a seamless contract. While no strike occurred UAL lost both dollars and good will with the customers, not to mention the fact that today's contract struggles point directly back to the previous management's poor decisions in 2000.
This is about economics, pure and simple, how much are they willing to risk by not getting a contract? Will you get all you want? Not a chance, but a healthy pay raise, improved work conditions, "signing bonus" and restrictive RJ rules, yes!
Imposed deadline or not, I simply don't think we will get what we are looking for here. I have no qualm about striking and will do so if and when asked. I know from past contracts, CAL has never said no to a contract since 1995, that what is put in front of us is what we tend to vote yes for. Therein lies my concern that we wont get the "healthy pay raise, the signing bonus, or the scope we want" but rather a watered down version of all of that.
I had my expectations before the DAL TA and all the DAL TA did was reaffirm that what we are asking for is not only available and there but more is available as well. I still stand by the quote, " we don't want to kill the golden goose, just strangle it to get every last egg". I hope and pray that our deadline gives us the intended results we are looking and for and not the unintended consequences that so often come with it. MY2C.