Members of Council 22,
When I wrote to you on June 19 to give you an explanation of my vote in opposition to endorsement of the Tentative Agreement, I had no intention of publishing another communication before the TA voting closes. I was under the impression that all of the other members of the MEC would be communicating with their constituents to explain their votes, also. I was under the impression that the Negotiating Committee would be conducting Roadshows to educate pilots on the contents of the TA. I was under the impression that we would trust each pilot to evaluate the TA on their own and let each pilot cast their informed vote. I was under the impression that there would be no hard sales pitch or fear mongering. I was under the impression that we were all committed to let the TA sell itself.
Boy, was I wrong.
As many times as I have been asked to write again, I have been reluctant to do so. As much as I find the campaign to vote IN FAVOR to be distasteful, I don’t want to be guilty of campaigning for votes AGAINST. I trust you to read the TA, absorb the educational materials on your own, ask questions if you have them, and make your own choice without me telling you how to vote.
Still, I feel the need to revisit a few of the points I made in my original Council 22 Message and address some claims that have been made about them. I also have received many requests to address the path forward should we reject this TA.
SCOPE
I stated then what is stated in educational materials prepared by the Negotiating Committee. In the Section 1 FAQs and in the “Highlights” document (where Sections 28 and 3 come before Section 1), we are told that the new TA language “[p]rovides Company with more flexibility to utilize wet lease BHs throughout year,” “In some circumstances, increases allowable wet lease BHs before penalty payment required,” and results in “[l]ower penalty payments.” The cheaper and easier language was not incorporated for our benefit; The Company asked for it, and there has to be a reason.
The Negotiating Committee has told us now in numerous educational venues that the wet lease penalty is like a sales tax. We might want to reduce the sales tax by half, but even the full tax rate does not constitute a deterrent from purchasing goods. Likewise, wet lease penalties do not deter The Company from wet leasing. The sales tax analogy seems to be forgotten, though, when it comes to the “real protection” that is claimed during a period of furlough. If the wet lease penalty does not deter The Company from wet leasing outside of furlough, why would it deter The Company from wet leasing DURING furlough, especially in the case where the Scope Penalty Rate (SPR) is already at 2.0, when the additional penalty for furloughing would indeed be half the “tax rate” known as the wet lease penalty?
PAY
Last month, I discussed the TA pay rates from several different angles. Since then, we have seen American Airlines and United Airlines reach agreements with pay rates in the same range as the Delta Air Lines’ AIP that we watched turn into a TA and then a CBA. I don’t think I need to repeat my discussion of industry comparisons, but my observations about inflation have been disputed, so I will address that aspect.
Much has been said lately about inflation. “It’s a personal thing.” “You can choose where to start calculating inflation.” “If you did not buy a house, inflation probably did not affect you.” Stunning.
We’ve also been told that the ideal amount of back pay is zero dollars, and I agree. The way that happens is we get a pay rate increase on the amendable date. How do we calculate the amount of that increase? If you base the increase on inflation alone, you look at inflation between the last pay rate increase and the amendable date. In our case, the 15-year Wide Body Capt hourly pay rate in November 2020, $335.56, has the same buying power as $358.41 in November 2021. That’s an increase of 6.8%. Carry that to November 2022, and $383.89 has the same buying power. That’s an annual increase of 7.1% from the previous year and an increase of 14.4% from our November 2020 hourly rate. Repeat the process for November 2022 to June 2023 (July data is not yet available), and in order to maintain the same buying power of our November 2020 hourly rates, the hourly rate would need to be $393.43, an increase over 7 months of 2.5%, and an increase since the last CBA pay rate increase of 17.2%.
Now, I realize I haven’t presented a bar graph or even a table, but anyone can check my work by using the Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI Inflation Calculator at Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI Inflation Calculator.
I don’t think anybody needs a calculator or a website to see that our 14% initial hourly rate increase is less than the inflation number provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
QUALITY OF LIFE CONCESSIONS – VACATION
The Negotiating Committee has been asked several times to quantify the cost savings The Company will enjoy from productivity gains. The answers have attempted to ignore or minimize the fact that productivity gains cost jobs. Every day that a pilot would not have worked while on vacation that they will have to work in order to receive the Vacation Buy Back bonus is a day that another pilot will not be needed. Days add up to months, and months add up to fewer pilots required on the seniority list. Fewer pilots required means fewer pilots hired and slower seniority progression. It’s not a tiny concession – its impact is far-reaching.
STUDENT LINES
40% of Non-Pay Only LCAs amounts to only 1 Student Line in Indianapolis is the example that is used to emphasize that the impact is minimal. It only affects First Officers, it's minimal. It gives the First Officer the opportunity to earn a 25% premium. If it only affects 1 pilot, that’s 1 pilot too many. 1 pilot who previously was bumped for training and received 100% pay for sitting at home will now have to work to be paid. That’s one less pilot we’ll need on the seniority list. Fewer pilots hired, and slower seniority progression. In my book, and in the book of any true trade unionist, leaving behind a single pilot is unconscionable.
And as far as that premium goes? The FO bumped from a student line can pick up a trip and be paid 125%, whereas the FO bumped for training from any other line can pick up a trip and be paid 200% or maybe even 250%. Which FO got the better premium?
ADVANCE VOLUNTEER
Another way to require a pilot work more in order to qualify for a premium. Pilots work more, fewer pilots needed to work, fewer pilots hired, slower seniority progression.
R-24 to R-16
I won’t belabor this. It has been described as a way to give pilots a choice. For others, the choice has been taken away. It is still possible for The Company to assign an R 16 a Base Hotel Standby, and if they can, they will.