![]() |
Originally Posted by CptGSXR
(Post 4022879)
Wait! The Toonster goons said anything less than Delta +10 was a concession and that taking less made you a scab! Plus, more surveys!!!! Only company plants don't want a new survey every two weeks! Facts! In fact remove the entire NC and Exco because surveys were promised. They PROMISED guys!
|
Originally Posted by SloNLow
(Post 4022671)
Does a stupid “bridge agreement “ count as a new contract between the company & IBT? This could get ugly fast regarding the RB.
Do you wake up in the morning and actively remind yourself how to breathe? This pilot group man… |
Originally Posted by BroncoFtbl
(Post 4022941)
Do you wake up in the morning and actively remind yourself how to breathe? This pilot group man…
|
Originally Posted by SloNLow
(Post 4022985)
Well this is the first time in my career (over 30 years 121 flying) that I’m going to vote on a “bridge agreement”. I don’t just trust that ULCCs pay up when it comes to retention bonuses - another concept I’ve never observed. Guess we’ll see how this all plays out.
1. Pilots and G4 agree to a side letter pertaining to the accrual and payout of a retention bonus as negotiated by their bargaining representative, the IBT. 2. Pilots and G4 sign side letter via the bargaining representative IBT. Side letter now becomes a piece of the status quo, no different than any existing language of the CBA. 3. Retention bonus must be paid out in accordance with the agreed upon terms unless otherwise negotiated by the bargaining representative. 3.A. Trigger for payout of retention bonus is “an amended CBA”. 3.B. G4 Pilots and G4 agree to a shorter duration CBA, otherwise known as a “bridge agreement”. (Note: the top of the d*mn page isn’t going to say BrIdGE AgREemENT in bold letters.) 3.C. Once “bridge agreement” is ratified, Retention Bonus must be paid out in accordance with agreed upon terms. 3.D. Any deviation from the agreed upon payout mechanism constitutes a status quo violation which then the pilot group would hold the right to seek a job action. 30 years of 121 and you’re just now trying to grasp basic RLA principles? Come on man. |
I can’t wait to see 1300+ pilots for 3+ years of pay gets “trued-up” by Allegiants overworked payroll department in under 60 days. I’m sure Allegiant, the Union, and each individual pilot are all on the same page for what counts over 85+ hours. Should be very entertaining! 🍿
|
Originally Posted by BroncoFtbl
(Post 4023007)
Let’s simplify it:
1. Pilots and G4 agree to a side letter pertaining to the accrual and payout of a retention bonus as negotiated by their bargaining representative, the IBT. 2. Pilots and G4 sign side letter via the bargaining representative IBT. Side letter now becomes a piece of the status quo, no different than any existing language of the CBA. 3. Retention bonus must be paid out in accordance with the agreed upon terms unless otherwise negotiated by the bargaining representative. 3.A. Trigger for payout of retention bonus is “an amended CBA”. 3.B. G4 Pilots and G4 agree to a shorter duration CBA, otherwise known as a “bridge agreement”. (Note: the top of the d*mn page isn’t going to say BrIdGE AgREemENT in bold letters.) 3.C. Once “bridge agreement” is ratified, Retention Bonus must be paid out in accordance with agreed upon terms. 3.D. Any deviation from the agreed upon payout mechanism constitutes a status quo violation which then the pilot group would hold the right to seek a job action. 30 years of 121 and you’re just now trying to grasp basic RLA principles? Come on man. |
Originally Posted by SloNLow
(Post 4023048)
Thanks for all that you frickin’ retention bonus expert. Tool.
|
Originally Posted by Jim Rockford
(Post 4023034)
I can’t wait to see 1300+ pilots for 3+ years of pay gets “trued-up” by Allegiants overworked payroll department in under 60 days. I’m sure Allegiant, the Union, and each individual pilot are all on the same page for what counts over 85+ hours. Should be very entertaining! 🍿
|
Originally Posted by Humblepielot
(Post 4023052)
And is he certain that a bridge agreement actually qualifies as an amended CBA? From a quick review of the MOU using a few AI tools, it seems a “bridge agreement” might not constitute a full amendment to the CBA required to trigger the payout. AI knows law better than I do or any of us on here other than an actual lawyer. That’s why it would be nice if the union would clarify this for us. At the same time I can’t imagine the company wanting to continue accruing 35% of our post bridge agreement pay rate.
|
This really isn’t rocket science folks. The term “bridge agreement” is simply being used to imply this is a short term contract that’s meant to put us in a better position until the JCBA is reached. I’m sure it’s another way of tempering expectations as well. If a TA is reached, and it goes out for vote, and it is passed…the RB payout will be triggered. Period.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:13 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands