Originally Posted by
gloopy
I'm not saying hold out to "swing for the fences" or whatever. I'm talking about not falling for numerous, embedded and DEEP concessions all through the potential TA like the ones that are rumored. I would rather be parked instead of that ANY DAY.
If you're saying you're in range of retirement and will take anything as long as its a raise to you even if it guts scope and QOL for everyone else, have fun with that stratedgy. But unless we sign 10 year deals the demographics will never support that, even during the big retirement wave, which isn't until the next contract most likely.
This isn't a matter of hey we can get a 30% raise today but that's not a Cadillac per month or C2K+ full inflation (and retro!) so lets hold out until we get the motherload! I get the time value of money argument, and while I don't think that means we should roll over too easy, there is some level of value in TVM. I get it. But this is about us not falling for numerous, DEEP concessions in the most critical section of the contract (scope, at ALL levels) and inheriting a pathetic sick/harassment program that will harm far more pilots for far more years than those who will get a few bucks prior to punching out (not to mention, its that same demographic that uses the most sick time in the first place).
I want positive gains form everyone, including the "dead zoners" and every other group all the way down to new hires. And I understand time value of money to a certain extent. But we should not sell management deep and permanent concessions for slightly more money sooner. That's just dumb. More importantly, the demographics simply don't support it anyway, even if we embrace a stratedgy of selling the majority down the river to get a few extra pieces of silver today.
Well I don't disagree with any of that really, gloopy. I don't give credence to any rumors are out there, so if they include deep concessions that puzzles me.
I think it is reasonable to expect a good contract ahead, with plenty of gains all around. I don't see the rationale at all for going backwards on any part of our contract considering the current economic and pattern bargaining environment.
Im just saying I'd take double and triples rather than holding out for the dubious home run. That seems reasonable. RBIs score the same as homers.