Originally Posted by
sailingfun
Thats not actually how RLA negotiations generally go. The positions of both sides are not usually that far apart. In the two prior instances I am aware of where the union side opened for the moon they settled for less than they could have had with a reasonable opener. In the case of American it was 5 years later and with the Delta 777 3B6 talks half the aircraft were sold before a settlement was reached.
Based on past history, you are probably right. However, I think you and Trip are living too far in the past because I would posit that the zone of reasonableness has expanded/shifted based on corporate/industry performance over the last 5-10 years. What might have seemed unreasonable 3, 5 or 10 years ago may be with the zone now. Don't know enough about the AA ask that you referenced but I do know the B777 thing occurred because DALPA tried to leverage the former 3.B.6 provision regarding new equipment. Can you refresh me how that came out when the backdoor agreement was made between Leo the CEO and CG? What was the B777 pay rate? Didn't the same issue arise over the B73NGs too? And how did that impact pay rates for C2K? And, as I asked Trip, what was the company's counter to our ask? Were they solidly within the zone of reasonableness? I'm not so sure this thing is one-sided.