Originally Posted by
BeatNavy
Agree, except for the bolded part. The vote was 7-5, no matter how you spin it. The 2 LGB Reps could have voted yes and still said they don’t like the implementation. I know what their email said. But they voted no. 7-5. As Pat just said in his email, it’s a binary vote. Yes or no. Not a “No, but...”
Let's see... what are all the other excuses I claimed months ago would be said.
- "due diligence: thoroughly reading, evaluating and deliberating over the TA prior to their vote"
- I guess they didn't print out every page then. The Dependability Policy is now made contractual! The company doctor can screw you over. If these guys claim "due diligence", then these guys are grossly negligent.
- Hiding behind a survey to accept less in a contract ("we had record participation in our surveys").
- They tell you to inform yourself with roadshows, watch videos, and attend infosessions.
- Ok... but you need to also tell people about the RLA... I placed a convenient link below. We can Vote NO now, fix all the problems, then vote Yes to TA 2.0.
- "The MEC and Negotiating Committee are confident that this TA achieves the vast majority of goals identified by our pilots."
- What a politician... "vast majority" huh? Dependability policy is still in there. We still wear blue gloves and clean. Doctor can be weaponized by the company. Arbitration is alive in well in the contract. Our pay rates are still below Southwest.
- " our goal was to achieve a market rate agreement as quickly as possible."
- Fail and Fail. 3+ years to get a TA and still below Southwest. We're only looked up to by Cubana and Great Lakes Airlines.
- "This TA isn't perfect but neither is any other pilot agreement."
- Good job lowering expectations after the fact and softening the blow. Great use of the "race to the bottom" to justify the failure of TA 1.0. I have hopes for TA 2.0.
- "It was a long hard fight to achieve this agreement with management, and no one knows how much longer it would take to make any substantial improvements."
- No one stood in front of a tank in Tiennemen Square. First world sacrifices of attending air conditioned meetings are hardly sacrifices.
- Right... no one knows. We do know that we plenty of leverage to affect the timeline in our favor. There's a reason BJ allowed TA 1.0, causing us to cancel the investor meeting protest.
- " this is our first CBA and we had to bargain over and develop full language on all 31 sections."
- This is our first CBA... didn't I call this month ago? This whole affair can be read like a book. It doesn't matter if it's our first CBA. This contract is not rocket science. It's essentially a drag-and-drop contract from hundreds of airlines as a template. I've read the entire thing and I find it overly simplistic and deficient in key logical constructs (e.g. it doesn't really limit BJ from inventing new policies that effectively nullify aspects of the contract).
- "Even still the MEC rightfully insisted that every section of this agreement be on par with, or better than, our peers."
- "Our unity and professionalism were our best weapons in our fight to reach this agreement and regardless the outcome of the ratification, we will still need these effective weapons."
- Yes. Unity will be demonstrated by fighting for a better TA 2.0. We have many weapons in our arsenal. Let's not let the company apologists, defeatists, and the ignorant scare us into accepting a second-tier regional level contract.
The Railway Labor Act Simplified
This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.