View Single Post
Old 09-01-2019 | 10:00 AM
  #9  
Scoop
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,264
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf
I see we have a 3.B.4. review triggered. Now that we (not me) voted to neuter that clause by adding profit sharing into the equation they seem happy to address this review and state that pilots will get nothing (as if this peer review along with a could have been increase) and is of no consequence. Had we retained the earlier language, where would we be? Ponder that, just for a minute.
I pondered it for more than a minute and the only answer I can come up with is "Who knows?" You are going into an alternate history type of thing. Maybe the company would have just rolled over and agreed to it - or we could still be going toe to toe working under C2012. What did your pondering suggest?

Yep - it would have been awesome to have kept that language but it also would have been awesome to have kept the pre-2012 PS formula.

You are making it almost seem as if it was totally optional and we can just "choose" what we get. It is not optional. We are in negotiations with the company which by the way has a lot of legal and governmental tools on their side. We were also disadvantaged by being up earlier in the cycle than AMR and UAL for seemingly ever.

With all of that said I see no reason why we shouldn't take a much firmer stance this cycle and if it drags on for a few years it may very well be worth it. Then again it could drag on for years and we might end up in the same place.

As a wise man named Yogi once said "Predictions are hard - especially about the future."

Scoop
Reply