Quote:
As for the post above, about a strike vote, a strike vote (if/when it comes to it) can be very risky. I say that because it could show our unity or show the opposite. The opposite would give management a decided advantage in future negotiations. Just fly our contract and enforce it.
A strike vote in a year or two is just how the game is played. We’ll talk a big game about a 99% strike vote, but both sides know that an actual strike isn’t a remote possibility. We’ll get a few minutes of news coverage saying that the pilots are willing to strike, but that’s about it. I don’t think that this administration has anything to do with our process anymore than the last one. I’m not trying to start the inevitable red/blue argument, I’m saying that in this age that it just doesn’t matter. Originally Posted by DashTrash
A strike is really not even a possibility for any of the Big Four (UAL, DAL, AMR, and SWA), especially under the current Presidential Administration. It would cause too much of a financial impact globally. It is a tool that we technically have in our toolbox, but from a practical standpoint will not happen. None of the Big Four airlines will be released for self help. We’ll just get parked for perpetuity. As for the post above, about a strike vote, a strike vote (if/when it comes to it) can be very risky. I say that because it could show our unity or show the opposite. The opposite would give management a decided advantage in future negotiations. Just fly our contract and enforce it.
Basically we fly our contract and force their hand. Scope is working beautifully. If they want more rj’s like Delta, they can do what Delta did and add another fleet type to mainline to unlock those additional aircraft. If they do decide on that, they will want to nail down the crew cost going forward and we end up with a TA to read and vote on. Until then we fly the current contract and enjoy a pretty good life while expecting that it gets even better when this process is over.