Originally Posted by
captnate702
We agree on a lot of this stuff - especially LTD. That is a nonstarter.
As for the staffing model, my source was pretty definitive and i haven't been wrong yet on sharing the stuff i'm hearing. Management proposed a staffing model. i was told it was not United or Jetblue but it guaranteed a minimum number of pilots per aircraft. I don't know what that number was, only that it was put in the last offer from MG. i checked back with my source on the unstack again and it was also in the last offer with the staffing model. The only detail i was given was that it was less than Delta's unstack.
I don't think any pilots care about a TAFB rig - why would you with our current day trips? every pilot i have talked to and common sense is that guaranteeing the day trip model is way more important than a TAFB that is irrelevant to 99% of our trips.
.....
union reps have been adamant that the union busting media blitz is coming, hopefully AR will give us some more details and explanation when the blitz starts.
I talked to my "guy" in management. Looks like your source was semi-correct. The company put together a pass that included an unstack and staffing model. (Assuming it is going to be passed to the union today since they are supposed to be meeting.) Where he was not as accurate is that the unstacking proposed was "more than double" delta's unstacking. My guy wouldn't be more specific than that. For those playing at home, delta can unstack 30% which means the company proposal is somewhere between 61-99%. The staffing model from what I was told was a straight per-aircraft pilot count that would be lower than the number of pilots we are staffing to currently. The point of a staffing model is to account for all of the known absences (and unknown absences). More than 60% is ridiculous, especially if they plan to lower the pilot count per plane. Hopefully, this is the first salvo in working towards a happy medium. We should be fighting over LTD, etc not the last 10% either way on the stack %.
I was not saying that a TAFB was important. I was saying that the company refuses to agree to any percentage of day trips. None. They want the flexibility to do what they want. I was just saying that the company has also balked at TAFB pointing to the fact that we're a "day-trip" airline. Can't have it both ways. Either commit to day trips or stop using it as an excuse to offer less everywhere else.
We can definitely agree in hoping that AR increases the breadth of information shared in the updates. From his videos (until the last one), it looked like scheduling was the major issue remaining and they were close-ish or at least not in different universes on the other stuff. (I've been hearing all along that that wasn't the case, but you'd never know it.) In the last video, he laid it all out there and I think it surprised a lot of people, although it shouldn't have. Anyone who thought that the union and company had agreed on everything but scheduling and AR was holding the contract hostage for his pet project hasn't put on their thinking cap.