Originally Posted by EA CO AS (Post 2460796)

Hogwash. If the union were not representing the interests of the membership, that's legally actionable and puts the union at risk of decertification; no union will avoid presenting the asks of the membership in a negotiation unless they're illegal, immoral, unethical, compromise safety, or if they're beyond what is reasonable in a good-faith negotiation.

Obviously, "reasonable" is a relative term, but if the IAM acknowledges that asking for pay matching the Big Four is unreasonable, you have to wonder why ALPA went there while simultaneously asking for additional benefits and protections, including a scope clause.

Originally Posted by EA CO AS (Post 2460691)

Not only did the conversation happen, it was on Friday night in SEA at a company event, and I was pleasantly surprised at his candor in terms of not only his perspective on the arbitration award, but also that he was willing to openly share the IAM's opening position for payscales in the upcoming negotiations and why they felt they could only ask for so much. This led into another healthy discussion about the merits of increasing the wages in that existing CBA, the details of which aren't important here.

But sure, stick your head in the sand and say "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALA" if you want, but if you have other union leadership members, who are also part of the negotiating team for an upcoming contract negotiation, saying they believe 5% under the average of the Big Four is fair compensation for the COPS contract, it's hard to understand why ALPA members would insist on being compensated at the top of the industry, especially if it renders the company unable to continue with growth that equals better job protection, better lines, and perhaps even larger equipment (yes, you heard me correctly) in the coming decade.

Originally Posted by busbusbaby (Post 2460931)

.....devide and concor

Originally Posted by busbusbaby (Post 2460934)

Found your problem, your at a company event.

Originally Posted by EA CO AS (Post 2460648)

After speaking with one of the negotiators for the IAM, representing the CSAs and Res Agents among others (COPS contract), I'd asked what his thoughts were on the arbitration award, knowing they're going into openers with the company in April.

He said, "I don't see what the fuss is about; it's a fair deal. We were prepared to go into negotiations asking for the average of the Big Four, minus 5%, because we know we can't ask the company for industry-best pay - it's just not feasible."

So if a union negotiator understands why coming in under the Big Four is a reasonable ask, why is this deal somehow unfair? I'd like to hear some well thought-out reasons.

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop (Post 2461067)

Your, you're, and yore...not the same.

Originally Posted by OCCP (Post 2461167)

I’ll always remember this statement from BM and will read it every time before I go to work:

“That's why we believe we're here and that's why we — we even had to go through the strain of this relationship for everything we've built and have, you know, unfortunately our pilots not happy with the company. We're willing to jeopardize that because we believe we'd be jeopardizing the business model and that's why we're here today."

Originally Posted by OCCP (Post 2461167)

I’ll always remember this statement from BM and will read it every time before I go to work:

“That's why we believe we're here and that's why we — we even had to go through the strain of this relationship for everything we've built and have, you know, unfortunately our pilots not happy with the company. We're willing to jeopardize that because we believe we'd be jeopardizing the business model and that's why we're here today."