Originally Posted by TheManager

I'll take an exception to this. My fellow pilots and I want some things that will cost the company $.

* Industry leading duty period average increased from our current 5:15 to 5:42(SWA). Eliminate the back side of the clock carve outs.

* Increasing vacation pay from 3:15 to the industry leading 6 (FDX). Sh!t, I'd even settle for 5 but don't tell them that.

* increasing training pay that is currently 3:45 to the industry leading 4:23 to 4:30 range (SWA & others).

* Oh, and the most important, obtaining a medical plan that is some what affordable. Reference Southwest Airlines PPO plan that comes in way below our plans.

Shiz, your response didn't seem to track with what PD and Check were writing. No one says we should demand they start "unprofitable operations" like that ridiculous 777 service from ATL to MCO.

What they are saying is that we need to negotiate and obtain benefits that will cost the company money. By nature, they will be less profitable. We will have to break some eggs to make this omelette.

They (Pd and check) are taking exception to those who believe that by merely asking and bargaining for such items as listed above, they will cost the company money, and thus they take it upon themselves to try and "tamp down our costs."

In order to have a truly industry leading contract that even gets close to getting our '96 wages back (adjusted for inflation) instead of C2k restoration, it is not going to be one of those "zero cost contracts" that management parrots to Wall Street. It's going to have an impact on their profitability.

Is that wrong?