Al Czervik

“Mr Glass, we’re here FOR ALL YOUR BOOTY ARRRRRRRR.”

450knotOffice

So, instead of nitpicking a typo (which all of us are guilty of), and mentioning TLDR, which is ridiculous for supposedly educated grownups, how about addressing the valid concerns and numerous very red flags he and the DFW Rep raise?

I, for one, would love improvements to our rigs, but not at the expense of giving away the entire farm for it.

jcountry

Seriously?

Anyone pulling that nonsesnse needs to be recalled. That’s amazing.

jcountry

TLDR, Bro.

sumwherelse

It is abhorant to me that anyone would even consider this deal. I understand the LOS argument but at what cost?? Why are we even considering allowing the company to continue practices that are a direct violation of the contract. We should have gotten LOS AND compliance! Instead we are ok with LOS and complete capitulation on our QOL issues, WHY? Explain to me again why taking one step forward and two steps back is ok??

I have volunteered over and over again in this union and as a third lister have repeatedly been ignored. I can not stand by and watch this surrender now to fight later mentality dominate my career. This has to stop!

Dolphinflyer

Too long to read?

It's only your career Skippy.

There is a lot of subject material and scheduling landmines in the agreement that can't be covered in two sentence bullet points for a Powerpoint Slide.

Let the adults comprehend the material while you catch up with the Kardashians.

And yes, I had to look up what TLDR meant. Some of the abbreviations are good descriptions for todays world. This one just highlights how stupid one can be and it's amazing someone here would embrace it and criticize the APA about a summary.

Carlsbad

Why do we give up min duty day to get min calendar day? We should have both. We have red eye three days that have four duty periods and pay over 20 hrs.

Cheddar

I know many on here don’t like TW for good reason, but like him or not - he’s well thought out and doesn’t shoot from the hip. I’ve had a surprisingly long email exchange with him about the AIP, in which at first I wasn’t happy because we were ‘giving away’ stuff to help the company, but then came around to Andy W’s position of test running everything before section 6. Tom was very analytical, but held his cards. He said he’d not been privy to all the info from the NC (how are BOD members kept in the dark???) and liked many things about the AIP, but he had ‘concerns’ about the CS gives.

After hearing (and getting confirmation) that EVERY NC (except the chairman) and National CCC was AGAINST the AIP, I now throw up my hands. I have met a few of our new NC members, and I trust one implicitly - the fact that he is a H-E double hockeysticks no (on the CS gives) has swung me again!

There is a lot of political posturing, and many reputations are on the line. After reading the available language, listening to people I trust both for and against, I think we are about to make a catastrophic decision with the CS gives. I desperately want better rigs, LOS for many of my squadron mates and all of the benefits - but as others have said, this is a turd.

What does baffle me though is that apparently our President agreed in principle to the AIP language and gave away all our leverage for... more vague and un-enforceable company promises? 🤯

mainlineAF

Where were all the negotiators and BOD members who are a no on this AIP back during the JCBA???

jcountry

Double TLDR.....

Ohh, look! A fidget spinner!!