Originally Posted by
Excargodog
I’m equally puzzled why you and others like you can’t even address the question of whether or not this supposed tactic is effective. AS has a new contract. I don’t particularly like some of their QOL issues, but their management certainly came to the table and their payscales are far superior to NK. B6 has an attrition problem and their payscales are superior to ours - again without screwing over their newbies. The Big Four all have payscales above ours and are in active negotiations - all without screwing over their newbies. So what evidence is there that we wouldn’t be at the negotiating table if we weren’t screwing over our newbies?
As I have repeated, “How long does this have to not work before you’ll concede it’s not going to work?”
Even more puzzling is this; if you and the others actually believe the path to success in negotiations is screwing over our junior troops, why do you get so upset when I say we are screwing over our junior troops? If indeed the intention is to deter people from coming to NK or to increase first year attrition by treating them like cr@p, I would think you would want someone pointing out to potential new hires on a continuing basis that they will be making sort of minimum wage training pay, have no insurance, and pointing out to new hires how much better newbies are treated elsewhere to deter people from being recruited and to increase first year attrition. If all of you are so damn sure you are doing the right thing, why do you get so upset when I point out exactly what you ARE doing?
If you really believe that’s the way to go, it seems like my efforts could only assist you.
Did you read my post? I never said any of this. I’ve never made the argument that we should “screw over 1st year guys” as a negotiating tactic. I’m just asking you to acknowledge reality here. I literally said in my post that I think we should negotiate industry standard compensation for 1st year guys going forward. That does not change the fact that we are currently sitting at the table with an unprecedented amount of bargaining dates and the main driver behind that is the fact that management is unable to get enough bodies in the door. Alaska got a deal after 3+ years at the table and requesting mediation. We are meeting with a hostile management group multiple times per month in early openers. If they are able to drag this out for 3+ years like Alaska did then you’ll have a point. But I’m betting they won’t, and if so one of the major pressure points here is 1st year pay. I’m not arguing that it’s morally right or a “tactic” that should be implemented going forward or anything of the sort.