Old 01-05-2015 | 04:54 PM
  #24  
Hueypilot's Avatar
Hueypilot
Line Holder
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 2
From: B737
Default

I can't speak for other yes voters, but I'm not voting out of fear. I would support a TA like this out of analysis of past and present events, and out of cost/benefit comparisons.

Parker and Kirby have yet to come dragging themselves back to any labor group on their knees in search of something they wanted, particularly when there's already an end-state (cost-neutral arbitration) specified. They never gave an inch when they ran America West. They never gave USAPA anything despite USAPA trying their damnedest to force the company into running one of the most dysfunctional airlines in modern US history. They didn't give in to the APFA after they voted their TA down.

They did give the FAs their money, but only after they manhandled the APFA. At this point, it's about sending a message to the APA BOD that they won't be forced to the table. Kirby is a notorious numbers guy. If you think he hasn't already set a value he's willing to pay to get HBT and combined divisions, I think you underestimate him. Ditto with respect to the fact that I'm certain they already have contingencies set up in case it does go to arbitration and they don't get their requests. They already have a plan to run the airline along the Green Book rules.

Additionally, if they come back to the table now, that won't help them in securing favorable contracts with the other unions. The FAs got the pay, but only on Parker's terms. That's how they operated with US Airways, and that's how they operated with America West. If DFW's theory that they will crawl back to the table over HBT and other requests comes true, that will be a rare exception...and I think some in our union vastly overstate how bad they want those things. They do want those things, but they aren't willing to do anything to get them.

Then there's the basic cost/benefit comparison. No single element of this proposal is enough to sell me on it. It's the total compensation versus what we're giving up. In the end, is it enough? The DAL+3% was borderline. It was enough to barely keep us competitive with Delta pay. The current proposal, plus the LOS and other minor changes, makes it viable (to me...maybe not to you).

My prediction if we vote NO on any future TA?

Best case...we go to arbitration and the arbitrator issues his award. There is no last minute "deal" and we get the MTA. Parker does what he did with the APFA and gives us the pay, and we lose 2 years LOS, the previously agreed to TAs and about 4 months of retro pay.

Worst case: His lawyers pull some skillful legal wrangling and manage to open up aspects of the MTA and they are awarded some of their asks for pennies on the dollar compared to what we were originally offered. We get stuck with the MTA pay and the Green Book as is. Parker, in an effort to send us a "message" as we attempted to send him, decides not to give us the previous proposed pay.

Either way, you and I won't go broke. Life won't end as we know it. But looking at it from my point of view, if we vote no just to send a message and in some hope of getting PK to change their habits, I think we're just p*ssing money away. That's my take.
Reply