This TA will pass. Past votes, the unwillingness for the majority to critically analyze a proposal, and benefits disproportionately distributed to certain demographics, insures ratification. If a simple 3 percent for two years got the company an extension on the previous contract and a European domicile, what will prevent this TA from passing?
According to the seniority "crystal ball" and looking at recent retirements prior to age 65, it would be safe to project a minimum of 1300 retirements under the provisions of this contract. Based on a 60k average retirement bonus that is 78 million dollars. Makes the 43 million dollar VEBA HSRA given to only the senior members of the 2006 contract look reasonable. This is in addition to retiree healthcare benefits (pre and post Medicare) being improved for all members, a good thing. But, what was the costing on that provision? We as a pilot group are doubling are contributions into the VEBA system. And according to statements made by representatives of the company the average age of retirement is over 64 1/2 years of age. So while on paper that appears generous, very little money is actually put forth by the company for pre Medicare enhancements, unless the average retirement age substantially changes.
The fatigue mitigating 6 week bid month? A recent message sent from the Union states that the company will not use this provision unless we approve. RIGHT. Care to take that into arbitration. Let me explain the exploitability of this provision. Without hard and fast rules on this provision, strategically placing 6 week bid periods during high demand vacation slot windows could undermine the ability keep the quality of life now afforded with the 4 and 5 week bid periods. Example, two 6 week and ten 4 week bid periods, one 6 week bid period placed in the summer and one placed at the end of the bid year (late Nov and Dec). Do you think if will be as easy to schedule to have the holidays off if that is your priority? Will you be able to knock out the large blocks of time? Possibly, but could the company build pairing to take advantage of this new provision? In addition, what scheduling technique is being adopted currently, fatigue mitigation or pay maximization. Take a look at the 757, 767, Airbus, and MD 11 bidpacks, sure doesn't look like fatigue mitigation is a priority.
Healthcare. The Union has a video explaining the CDHP, overall it is an informative video, but, the explanation of the worst case scenario and the reality of healthcare cost are inaccurate, one major provision of the CDHP is the substantial out of network costs, not discussed at all in the video, this may or may not be significant, depending on the rules governing out of network services not available "in network". Do you want to just "wait and see". Healthcare cost are due to double for those currently on the buy up plan and we have agreed to pay 20% shared cost for eternity. Who bought off on that? Our shared cost should be the same duration as our pay raises, not an hour longer. The company is once again rewarded for stalling in future contract talks...
Discussed in other post are examples of provisions with excessively loose language, deadhead policy, bidding, training, deviation banks, etc, we have all seen what the company will do when an item in the contract is exploitable.
For those sitting in their final seat and able to retire under this contract it is a "no brainier". For the rest of the crew force it's Groundhog Day, continued degradation of quality of life for minimal pay gains.