View Single Post
Old 05-25-2015 | 10:04 AM
  #183030  
Sink r8
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by flyallnite
Vapor TA thoughts here: I was reading about how our contract was when I started. 7 weeks of vacation, trips touching, cap, authorized leave, 300 hours of annual sick leave, pension, the list goes on.

I've tried to make this point before. They are playing chess. The game is called "slow boil". As in, gently direct us into the pot and slowly increase the heat. Before you know it, it's too hot to do anything about your predicament, you're cooked.

I made the point in C2012 that the sick leave section gave the company too much leeway to abuse us for using sick leave. Way too many loopholes for the company. I was flatly dismissed by my reps, and a lot of folks on here. "no, the company would never do that!" ---now we have an entire department dedicated to doing just that, and it wasn't enough for them. Now they want more.

Our predicament will be this if we continue to sell our protections for pay: You will be beholden to fly a lot more, with less control of your schedule and your life in order to make a living. Verifying your sick leave may become such a hassle that you may just decide to fly sick (or not well) instead of dealing with the paper chase. But it's not just sick leave.

If we are not careful, they'll have us in the trick bag. The last thing they'll come for is the money. Once they get us strapped to the wheel, then they come for the compensation and we can do nothing to stop it because of: Sick leave, Joint Ventures, Scope, Recovery Compacts, Staffing Requirements and so on. In other words, when they come for the money and you decide you want a day off or want to start pursuing other avenues of work, forget it. We Own You.

Don't get Owned. That's the game we need to be playing.

One last thing: The concept that you have to give to get in negotiations is a farce. We aren't negotiating a peace treaty or a divorce. When a Goldman Sachs employee goes into his boss and asks for a raise following a record-breaking year, does his boss ask him what he's going to give up for that raise? We are making billions because of our efforts. Our execs haven't been asked to give up anything for their raises. Our contracts 'matured' because of incremental gains, not from selling contractual protections that are essential to our careers.
I've heard theories as to why the company needs this so fast, but none that have convinced me we need to oblige with trades. I'm probably in the minority in that I prioritize payrate increases lower than advancement or QOL concessions. So, I like your post a lot. Resonates a whole lot more with me than "the company has things they want to see addressed".

But I also respect the process. First, I don't know what the pilot groups actually wants. Do they want to make trades? Do they want to see a TA, and then decide for themselves?

I have serious personal reservations about the sort of deal we might arrive at this far ahead of the amendable date, but overall, I don't think the pilots should be deprived of the opportunity to decide. And what I take special exception to, is screwing with the process in an attempt to sabotage a deal, that actually lowers the value of the deal to the pilots.

In my mind, the pilots get to decide. Lots and lots of input right now. Crazy, over-the-top input regarding potential concessions. Then a heated debate over a deal if a deal is produced. Then a vote.