It is hard to tell how TA2.0 will turn out. I do not want a TA1.1 (increase pay rates, tidy scope and keep TA1.0).
We have work to do on retirement package, pay rates, retro, scope language and those efficiencies that are really qol givebacks.
You said NO for splitting the pension with the pancake plan.
We said NO for a substandard deal during the most profitable time in our history.
We said NO for the first time ever under ALPA
It is time we gear up for NO for leaving a single member behind for retirement since amenable date.
I believe if our Union Leadership make the hard choice (with our input) to pursue no one left behind it would be truly industry leading and a first. It would also get more senior MSL members on board with a strategy for a TA2.0 vs 1.1. Lastly, it will start to address the penalty free zone we reward the company with for lengthy section 6.
This a long game not just for the near retiree, but to set a precedent for the junior MSL force (50%+ hired in the last ~6 years). You have your list, I have mine.
But, until the new surveys arrive save some room on it for true no one left behind since amenable date for retirement bump and true retro that appropriately rewards what we consistently bring to the table.
Add: the 300 retirees grow to over 500 by end of 2024. Let us not be willing to give the company a pass on ~10% of our current MSL.
Email your reps!