The west claim the fabled kirby proposal would pay the same or close to the mou. Decide for yourself.
http://www.unbiasedfacts.org/AAASect...any-5-8-07.pdf
Proposed May '07 So say it went into effect '08. Grp II f/o in '12 would pay 100/hr. doubtful a new contract would be had in 2 yrs and doubtful there would be a 20% raise to match mou '14 pay.
In exchange for a 15/hr pay raise over 4 years, scope would have been gutted, snap back pay provisions would have been lost etc etc
I think the mou was a better deal in the long run.
These millions the west speaks of sounds like our old Davey Dollars.
Under the Kirby we would have seen the following raises by year.
08 11k
09 11k
11 12k
12 13k
13 15k
A total of 62k by end of '12. Then another 60k by end of '16
Total of 122k.
MOU on the other hand:
'13 30k
'14 40k
'15 41k
'16 52k
So 163k by end of '16 an extra 40k. (Oh and the 40million signing bonus)
Not to mention, we actually got something for the Change of Control provisions, scope etc etc.
And biggest of all.....the NIC is not in effect, so those long time downgraded f/o's are capturing their Capt seats, from the EAST retirements that are occuring. And the West gets to keep their retirements.....
Seems fair.