Originally Posted by
AFW_MD11
while all your factoids are nice, the bottom line is the company pulled the ol' "bait & switch" negotiating the A380 payrates all the while knowing they were gonna cancel it and replace it with the 777F.
that's the only fact the arbitrator really should need to hear - IMHO.
(we really ought to be taking the company to court over that maneuver in the first place)
or.......
give 'em the "widebody" argument, but make up for it in workrule changes to be able to use the 777 as an Ultra-Long-Range aircraft - right now, under the current CBA, they can't do that.
either way, the company is gonna have to pony up more than just an "MD-11 equivalent" payrate to utilize the 777 like they intended to utilize the A380.
If you appreciate those "misery enjoys company" moments, we got bait-n-switched with some of our rest work rules over at UPS when they opened the ANC domicile, which the negotiators didn't see coming (or if they did they in effect meant to hose the junior guys going there) but UPS had it all lined up. Virtually all our scheduling improvements revolved around domestic (which is what most of the negotiators do) which is shrinking...nice move.
The whole weight argument seemingly doesn't bode too well, especially considering the knowledgable and fair arbitrators roaming about
, but seems to me the work rules issue regarding long haul is pretty strong in your favor. Play it for all it's worth, because we already gave away heavy crewing although they aren't using it. So...you can always say, look how they blew it over at UPS
.