Originally Posted by
GunshipGuy
Heiko is a smart and experienced negotiator who is obviously a leading candidate. However, if I were in a position to put together and vote for a NC I would have to have assurances from Heiko and any other candidates they would be committed to and adhere to a strategy and commitment to achieve a TA without sacrificing additional concessions other than those agreed to by the MEC beforehand. And the only one that I think would pass muster at this point is a seat lock of 2 years for new hires. Other than that--nada. When asked for more just show the benefits gained from massive concessions given in the past and the failure of the company to get our inflation adjusted pay rates back to where they were over a decade ago. Include the loss of the DB plan.
During C2012 we were making record profits and still we made concessions. Why would a leopard change his spots? Yes, we're in a better position this time around, but without an assurance that would convince us of his not repeating history why and how could we trust Heiko to not make major concessions?
When I spoke to Heiko prior to the C12 TA vote I asked him why 88/90 pay was not brought up to A320 pay he answered with, "No one asked for it in the survey." I'm not saying he told me an untruth (I didn't put that in my survey response), but I spoke to about five MD88 captains who said they did. And when I asked how much giving up ALV+15 was worth in dollars I got a non-answer. Still he's capable, but obviously not overly impressive, IMHO.
Barring the hiring of professional negotiators which would deliver the best results, I'd say we could do a lot worse than Heiko, but hopefully we can do a lot better.
Glad Heiko voted no for POS2015. Beyond that I'm really not enamored with his record. Btw, he penned the survey questions which I thought were slanted. He claims he was just doing the best he could. I think we could have done much better than those questions.
ALPA talks about unity but most of what they do is geared toward apathy so they can do what they do behind closed doors. NO reason meetings shouldn't be video webcast with chat input. That's a game changer for getting the membership involved.
Of course you don't speak to sensitive info just like RA defers during earnings calls. For most info regarding where we need to go, live online is where it should be. Would save a ton of money and be more effective. Broadcast from ATL offices. Put guys up in the training hotel on Virginia ave. Don't blow wads of cash on Chris Ruth and Alcohol. Membership dues money is sacred in my book.
Could also open live polling for major items. If any (including a new MEC) avoid live conferencing in 2015/16 then beware of business as usual that dissuades pilot involvement and encourages everything being decided by a handful of "smartest guys in the room".
Lastly, the notion everything regarding what we want needs to be kept secret is a joke. We've done that these last few passes and it's been a disaster. I think we would be better served talking publicly about the whole lot....what was lost during BK, what is required to get back with interest and be very public about our goals...get everybody on board.