Agreed. Thankfully, it seems it’s not an either-or question in reality.

Why not just make the G4 retention bonus a term of the protocol agreement? That would lay to rest any questions as to the G4 pilots being paid what they deserve to be paid for being held out of an agreement for so long.

If the deal is no good why should you vote yes!?!

How many others voted no and got a much better deal, just in the previous 5 years? WN, UAL? FDX did and they still haven’t gotten a contract, but they seem to be shrinking. G4 is in a different situation than FDX. G4 needs pilots and if they can’t provide an industry standard contract I would hope your pilots would vote NO. Y’all deserve a great contract.

Because they have no intention of paying it. Any deal made with G4 can't be trusted. Would also mean no new contract for G4 pilots for 15 years (start of last one till JCBA)

I think management will have a tough time not paying it because it has been so public. its in their SEC filings. they just talked about it on the earnings call again. what are they gonna say? "just kidding" that bonus was all a big joke?

its gonna be paid out. will they cry poor and tell us they cannot afford [fill in the blank] because of the retention bonus? absolutely.

I’m sure part of the new CBA will be a reaffirmation of payout just like any signing bonus.

GU to GO?
 

I remember it clearly. In early 2025, GU spoke openly about his desire to “go.” He framed his role as temporary, a necessary but short-lived intervention.

Here we are now.

Nearly two full years after the initiation of an “emergency” trusteeship, and almost six months beyond what the Department of Labor contemplates as lawful duration, nothing of substance has changed.

Were elections held? Yes.

Did those pilots ever exercise real authority? No.

GU remains in control. He directs outcomes, controls messaging, and overrides the will of the pilots those elections were supposedly meant to empower. The structure may have changed on paper, but the power did not change hands.

There is no serious indication that GU intends to relinquish control. Any forthcoming merger will simply become the next justification. It will be sold as “protection for Allegiant pilots.” In practice, it serves as political cover for continued self-preservation.

This is not representation. It is entrenchment.

This is precisely why Allegiant pilots find themselves in desperate need of ALPA.

The problem is not simply one individual. It is a system that allows indefinite control without accountability, leadership without consent, and power without meaningful checks. That system is not fixable through another internal election, another promise, or another rebrand of the same structure.

ALPA offers what this environment has systematically denied: pilot-run governance, constitutional limits on authority, elected leadership that answers to the membership, and a proven record of enforcing contracts rather than managing pilots. It replaces trusteeship and political appointments with accountability and transparency.

The clock is still ticking. The National Mediation Board will eventually grant a representation election. When Allegiant pilots finally end this Teamsters experiment, GU’s utility to the IBT will evaporate. Organizations like the IBT are not sentimental. They discard failed political projects.

What concerns many pilots is the period between now and that day.

A trustee whose authority is eroding is not a stabilizing force. History shows that leaders in that position tend to govern through escalation rather than restraint, through control rather than consensus. Many pilots believe they are already seeing that pattern play out.

The loss of Allegiant at Local 1224 matters. It was a power base, a revenue source, and a social circle. Its collapse was not just political; it was personal. Ignoring that reality requires pretending incentives do not exist.

GU’s legacy is being written now.

Not as a defender of pilots.

Not as a reformer.

But as a cautionary example of what happens when control becomes more important than representation.

Allegiant pilots deserve more than damage control and delay. They deserve a union that is built for pilots, run by pilots, and constrained by rules that prevent exactly this kind of concentration of power.

Allegiant pilots will move on. The industry will move on.

ALPA is how that happens.

GU will be remembered not for leadership, but for the damage done while clinging to authority long after legitimacy had expired

To the pilots who ran the ALPA drive, please don’t stop. We need you now more than ever. It sounded like you all had some real support, it will only grow.

I said no such thing. Feel free to read and re-read my post as many times as you like. If you're concerned about the bonus, I am not the place to direct the angst.

Okay, can you clarify what you meant by:
“Not trying to stir the pot, but I think there's a good argument that even with or without the RT, ALPA is the way to go.”
The way I read it, your hypothetical makes it sound like even if Allegiant pilots lose the retention bonus switching to ALPA, it would be worth it. I’m all for ALPA, but I’d vote IBT in a heartbeat to get my money — luckily, that scenario is probably BS.

Good deal will be in the "eye of the beholder". As someone said before, one's man's trash is another man's treasure. I first have to see what is being offered so I can make a decision. Being told by someone "vote NO bc of XYZ" or vote yes bc of "ABC" is something I'm not interested in. Every voter deserves to see and make up their own mind.

Saying I'm voting YES regardless, is as silly to me as someone saying "I'm gonna vote NO" no matter what is offered.