You are quite a keyboard warrior, aren’t you?

You ducked my PM challenge to verify I'm an Allegiant pilot - but you chickened out. That says a lot about you!

Let me break this down since you're struggling:

- - I know firsthand how the current CBA favors the top dogs. A change towards a fairer balance is inevitable with any new contract.

- - Your fear of independent unions is based on one bad experience (sample size of one). Clinging to Teamsters like a lifeline hasn't exactly worked wonders for us, has it?

- - I've said repeatedly - I won't take any union position. Period. Why is that hard to understand?

- - Yes, PBS, Larry's Limo, and TDYs are major issues. Why? Because our unqualified NC can't move the process forward. In other words, we will continue to have those exact issues for years to come if we don’t step up.

- - You still can't explain why an independent union couldn’t match what the Teamsters NC delivered this year. But hey, if you want to stop engaging, fine by me. Just quit spreading lies.

 

I looked at the original email and the MOU. It’s fuzzy. You can have a payout within 60 days, but the question is if it’s a 100% one time lump sum payout or a payout over some period of time. For this reason that may explain why it’s not on the books, Allegiant has other plans for our misery.

 

This would be another big Failure of AR if true. Too bad we had a Culinary Attorney looking over this agreement. That was always my biggest red flag of AR. Had millions in the bank and would not hire an attorney with aviation experience, just didn’t make any sense. He did have his fan boys who thought he walked on water though, which was his biggest accomplishment. If Tom can pick up that it isn’t iron clad, you would assume that AR and company could have as well before signing it.

 

As someone who was there early on, there's a few things you aren't taking in to consideration. Turning AAPAG in to an independent union was considered. The issue was money, as in: There wouldn't be enough. When you are relying on the pilot group to subsidize everything, and you can't force anyone to join or pay, there isn't a lot of money. Negotiations takes a lot of that, and you can't expect a few people to pay for everything. When not everyone is paying, those that are wonder why they decided to contribute. What do you do when the money runs out becuase you know management there will stonewall until it's gone? You end right back where things are now.

ALPA was considered early on. There were two issues: With all the furloughed ALPA pilots there at the time, it wasn't clear if it would pass, and, more importantly, ALPA wasn't interested at that time. The Teamster's were the only national union that expressed interest. The major problem with the Teamsters, or ALPA for that matter, is the union is only as good as the people that are running it. If the people running it don't care, nothing is going to be accomplished.

However, the biggest issue being faced, and it doesn't matter who the union is, is you have to be negotiating with people that are willing to negotiate. When the company isn't interested in a deal, there's nothing any union can do. You have to go thru the motions until an impasse is declared, and as long as there is ANY progress, no matter how small, that won't happen. The RLA negotiating process is stacked in management's favor, and they know that. They also have no incentive to sign a deal. All the leverage the union had is gone since hiring everywhere has slowed way down.

 

Dear Colleague,

Thank you for your thoughtful message. Your insights are indeed valuable and constructive.

Regarding the financial aspects of funding our own union and NC, I expect that the costs would likely be significantly lower than our current expenditure, particularly given the elimination of inefficiencies. With many contract elements already agreed upon, a part-time NC operating for approximately two months seems like a reasonable approach to bring this to completion.

I share your perspective on the historical context and ALPA. CG made a pragmatic decision given the circumstances at that time, and the yearlong bashing he faced from AR and his fan boys was largely unwarranted. The Teamsters were indeed the most viable option available then.

You make an astute observation about the current power dynamics. Management's strengthened position is largely a consequence of AR and our current NC inability to understand game theory and not realizing that time was never on our side.

Concerning an “impasse” and potential strike authorization, we might disagree. Given that our current NC flat out refuses to present concrete proposals on crucial elements like compensation, it will be impossible to get a strike release. Even a casual observer will recognize that our NC does not negotiate in “good faith”. That's a no-brainer for any lawyer.

Meanwhile, the company can demonstrate their repeated attempts at negotiation, regardless of whether their proposals meet union expectations or not.

 

If you truly believe a non union pilot group there could settle negotiations in two months you are delusional. The only way that happens is if they would accept everything the company offers with no arguments or discussion. You fail to understand that as long as there is any kind of progress, no matter how small, there will never be an impasse declared. Management is in a position now where they have to do very little to keep negotiations going. The union, or any other group, as no power to make them do anything. There is no incentive for the company to move on anything. They have the pilot group locked in to low costs, and the union has no leverage to force a change.

At this point, I think you are just trolling for fun, assuming you're not an F & H lawyer.

 

Yes, that was exactly my point. I want to emphasize again that we must face the reality of the union's weak bargaining position, regardless of what we might prefer the situation to be.

I disagree with the claim that reaching a settlement in two months requires accepting all company demands - that's not logically supported. However, we should acknowledge that a significant compensation gap between us and the majors like AA/UA/DL will persist. Those who can't accept this reality are the ones being delusional.

As I previously mentioned, an impasse declaration is unlikely since our negotiating committee isn't demonstrating good faith bargaining. It's unreasonable to expect strike authorization when we haven't even presented our compensation requirements to the company.

Could you explain the basis for your disagreement? What evidence or reasoning supports your position?

You're making assertions here and in your earlier message, but you haven't provided any supporting reasoning to back them up.

At this stage, your responses seem more focused on trolling rather than contributing to a constructive dialogue. Sorry to say.

 

Rumor floating around is that certain members of the NC are saying that we are going to be released soon. These rumors btw aren't coming from company mouth pieces, they're from pilots that talk with members of the NC. So who know's what would motivate them to share such a thing.

What's more interesting is that according to GU's statement in last weeks membership meeting, we aren't close to what the NC members are claiming. Reality is that having a change to the mediator by the union's request only set us back 2 to 3 months. All bc our side wasn't willing/ready to pass section 1 and 3.

Like many pilots, I (we) can only hope that this hail Mary attempt works out. But if I was a gambling man, i am willing to bet that after a few months of more negotiating, we'll be once AGAIN be asked by the mediator to bring forward the requested sections. What will our side do then? Say no? Refuse? Request to be released bc that would put us in a "corner"?

Like many, I'm not in the room. Nor do I have all the facts to say the least. But as someone that did not agree with AR's negotiating strategy, I do not agree with the current one (as it appears to be). To push things in a certain direction in hopes for an impasse. Not bc I'm against a cooling off period or strike if need be; but beacuse in my humble opinion that strategy will add years to this circus.

I wouldn't say, nor am I saying, nor have I ever said roll over and take ANY deal. But it seems like the strategy is in hope to get everything under the sun while being confident that it won't backfire or even hurt the pilot group in the long run. But only time will tell. My personal priority at this point for me, although a contract is critical for our future and unity; elections for this local are imperative. We need this local up and running next year with proper representation.

Just my 2 cents.

 

we are pretty much in agreement. Best post in a while on this forum.

real problem is GU doesn’t want a deal because he knows he loses all power when we get a contract. He wants to string us along just like management does. His only play to consolidate power and bring us back into 1224 is to get a legacy+ contract so that we won’t vote him out and run to ALPA.

for GU he’s willing to risk another 2-3 years of this on the 3% chance he gets a legacy+ contract. He’s hoping for another generational hiring spree to regain leverage. I don’t like his odds.

No way we get a deal in 2025 with GU running the show.

 

Great posts. I agree with nearly everything shared.It's reassuring to know I'm not alone in seeing that the current strategy will inevitably fail. In fact, calling it a strategy is too generous - it's pure delusion.

As you say, the NC leadership continues to circulate false information through intermediaries, seemingly to keep the pilot group under control for the next couple years. They're essentially treating us with contempt.

Should we take action, or keep marching like lemmings marching off a cliff?

I'm choosing to prefer action. When we've hit rock bottom, the only direction left is up.