Originally Posted by Zard

Changing our entire vacancy in reaction to the company’s vacancy process, while borne out of good intentions, is not the solution to pursue, in my opinion.

Does it suck to be displaced? Absolutely.
Is it massively impactful to our quality of life? Yes.

Is the language 93% of us voted for being adhered to? Yes.

Our negotiating committee failed to foresee the company doing what it is going to do and now we bear the brunt of it. Changing the vacancy bid to make it “more fair” right now is the wrong tack.

Negotiating for language closer to AA’s TDY lines, positive space deadheads, paid hotels for the duration of a displacement based on percentage of a base or the pilot group displaced (or more than X% of the list displaced, you’re paying for hotels/positive space until the percentage drops below X%) are all better ways to force the company to think longer about screwing with vacancies.

Diluting our seniority in the attempt to fix something we voted for won’t cost the company enough to do anything differently in the future and we’ll all end up with less flexibility. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and I don’t trust SWAPA not to punt this one into the stands.