Allegiant Air
06-27-2016, 05:43 PM
#3142
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Position: A320
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by GordoCooper
Let's think about this. Mr Smooth and a few others have mentioned that we should vote yes, just because its a contract. This completely defeats the purpose of negotiations. If we are willing to vote yes; with the hope of LOA's to correct things, we have voted in error. AAY management has a history of dragging their feet, and terrible schedules and work rules. We NEED a GOOD work rules contract.
In the event we vote NO, it doesn't end anything. We vote NO until the negotiation produces a proper contract. After reading the proposed TA, if you see a need to make LOA's before the scheduled amendment round; you should vote NO and let our negotiators know why.
The other remarks regarding us not being able to predict future work rules and pay is questionable as well. AAY has predicted it's future costs without doubt. Pilot's can demand a pay and work condition contract based on what we know now, and what we believe to be the direction the industry is going. As we all know, in the event of a downturn, we can guarantee airlines to expect concessions from the pilots. Therefore, we can expect a very good contract based on projections.
Pay should be acceptable for the next 5 year+ cycle. Work scheduled (i.e NO SINGLE DAYS OFF; vacations actually being available to use; being able to utilize PTO regardless of how many reserves are listed for that day; etc) should also be expected for the 5+ year cycle or my vote is NO.
If AAY offered a ridiculous low pay, but said don't worry, we'll get you an LOA for that next year, would you vote yes? We should take every section, and ignore the possibility of change. It's either good now,(and we aren't just talking about pay) and we vote yes; or it isn't good and we vote NO.
In the event we vote NO, it doesn't end anything. We vote NO until the negotiation produces a proper contract. After reading the proposed TA, if you see a need to make LOA's before the scheduled amendment round; you should vote NO and let our negotiators know why.
The other remarks regarding us not being able to predict future work rules and pay is questionable as well. AAY has predicted it's future costs without doubt. Pilot's can demand a pay and work condition contract based on what we know now, and what we believe to be the direction the industry is going. As we all know, in the event of a downturn, we can guarantee airlines to expect concessions from the pilots. Therefore, we can expect a very good contract based on projections.
Pay should be acceptable for the next 5 year+ cycle. Work scheduled (i.e NO SINGLE DAYS OFF; vacations actually being available to use; being able to utilize PTO regardless of how many reserves are listed for that day; etc) should also be expected for the 5+ year cycle or my vote is NO.
If AAY offered a ridiculous low pay, but said don't worry, we'll get you an LOA for that next year, would you vote yes? We should take every section, and ignore the possibility of change. It's either good now,(and we aren't just talking about pay) and we vote yes; or it isn't good and we vote NO.
Gordo if I'm "Mr. Smooth"... you are incorrect on what I'm saying. I don't know what I will vote yet as I have not seen the contract. I am HOPING it is a contract I can vote yes on. As you can see from very many others who have information from the TA, it looks like many people think the contract is lacking in several areas save for pay. It is quite possible I will vote no. I certainly am not afraid to vote no, but it is a very big decision, and could jeapardize a lot for us all for the reasons mentioned.
I am hoping I can vote yes for it. Everyone should be hoping that. But there is a limit to what we should be accepting for what a lot of people are wanting to tout as "a first contract." It probably should be looked at that if it passes, it will be the first of two contracts you will ever see in your career, here. It is a BIG deal. Probably not if someone is planning on moving on regardless of the contract and have their sights set on the big 3 or 4. I for one would hope this is a good enough contract to not want to leave. I chose Allegiant, but at the same time I want better than what we have now, not just in pay, but in some comfortable work rules that allow someone to get a better QOL as their seniority increases. It's not fair at all, in my mind, that a person who is a senior Captain has to deal with single days off. That's ludicrous. The fact that it should just be "accepted" is very hard for me to swallow, regardless of "the business model".
Anyway, no, I am not going to tell anyone how to vote. And no, I have not decided yet how I will vote as I obviously have yet to see the darn thing. I certainly hope it's something I can vote yes on, but I certainly will not say I will definitely, no matter what, vote yes. The pay is not enough to make me ignore the rest of the contract.
My fear is, both parties at the table thought the bad could be ignored if the pay was high enough. This is based on what others are posting here which is at this point speculative and conjecture. But it has certainly exposed many peoples' opinions and I think it's apparent that many here will not ignore the rest of the contract and the work rules will have a very big influence in how they vote.
Pay will not be enough to make this thing pass, I think.
06-28-2016, 06:27 AM
#3145
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Position: Who cares?
Posts: 178
Originally Posted by fishforfun
Where are you hearing this?
06-28-2016, 06:34 AM
#3146
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A320
Posts: 1,347
Have fun in Ogdensburg! AirNav: KOGS - Ogdensburg International Airport
One runway... 5200'
Safety is our primary goal?
Between the obvious diverts and cancellations going to a 5200' runway with no ILS and choosing to do carry through flights to Newark it seems our primary goal is to see how much the flying public can endure.
One runway... 5200'
Safety is our primary goal?
Between the obvious diverts and cancellations going to a 5200' runway with no ILS and choosing to do carry through flights to Newark it seems our primary goal is to see how much the flying public can endure.
06-28-2016, 06:46 AM
#3147
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by labbats
Have fun in Ogdensburg! AirNav: KOGS - Ogdensburg International Airport
One runway... 5200'
Safety is our primary goal?
Between the obvious diverts and cancellations going to a 5200' runway with no ILS and choosing to do carry through flights to Newark it seems our primary goal is to see how much the flying public can endure.
One runway... 5200'
Safety is our primary goal?
Between the obvious diverts and cancellations going to a 5200' runway with no ILS and choosing to do carry through flights to Newark it seems our primary goal is to see how much the flying public can endure.
06-28-2016, 07:12 AM
#3149
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 64
Originally Posted by labbats
Have fun in Ogdensburg! AirNav: KOGS - Ogdensburg International Airport
One runway... 5200'
Safety is our primary goal?
Between the obvious diverts and cancellations going to a 5200' runway with no ILS and choosing to do carry through flights to Newark it seems our primary goal is to see how much the flying public can endure.
One runway... 5200'
Safety is our primary goal?
Between the obvious diverts and cancellations going to a 5200' runway with no ILS and choosing to do carry through flights to Newark it seems our primary goal is to see how much the flying public can endure.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
