Originally Posted by
TED74
It's very easy to make anonymous demands and hold the line on theoretical improvements. It's another thing entirely to vote no on a contract that contains numerous goodies for yourself even if it has other bennies that won't help you one bit.
I'm not worried...I think a TA that offers something for everyone will ratify just fine if it correlates properly to our spot atop the industry.
^^^^^^^This!
Denny your concern is unnecessary.
Plenty of bluster on the inter-webs. The collective wisdom of the Pilot group was demonstrated by the sound defeat of TA-1 and the overwhelming approval of TA-2.
We all have our primary issues but in the end most, not all but most, will view any proposal as a whole, and vote accordingly.
My bigger concern is that a very vocal minority has the ear of the MEC and they have set the bar so high -
"TA-2 was a disaster and the 82% of Pilots who approved it are idiots" that the MEC will be hesitant to think any deal is good enough.
Almost everyone on SM claims they care more about QOL than pay. The funny thing is that if you drag out negotiations for years, there is no "Retro" for QOL.
Every year you fly without QOL improvements is a year you can never get back. So to drag out a contract for say 4 years in a quest for better QOL seems counter intuitive and will deny many Pilots (those with less than 4 years left) that which many claim is their primary goal.
The other wild-card is the current UAL negotiations. If memory serves this might be the first time a passenger airline other than DAL raises then bar Post 9-11.
Go UAL Pilots!!!!
Scoop