JCBA timeline extension
11-18-2014 | 12:47 PM
#371
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
2 hour call out for short call is extremely reasonable IMO. It's 1:30 right now on the LUS east side and I worked under a CBA with a 2 hour callout as well. It had a clause in there about circumstances like an accident or weather impacting that time as well which I believe is what the (generally) clause is about but that would have to be written more concisely.
Combining domestic and international I have no idea, I'd be for it personally. I don't really see an issue with it. Honestly outside of scope the companies proposals are reasonable and hardly would be considered concessions. Also remember the things we have already agreed to that we will be getting as well.
Combining domestic and international I have no idea, I'd be for it personally. I don't really see an issue with it. Honestly outside of scope the companies proposals are reasonable and hardly would be considered concessions. Also remember the things we have already agreed to that we will be getting as well.
11-18-2014 | 12:51 PM
#372
Banned
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
From: A320 F/O
Glad you're coming out of the closet. You're TRUE colors are typical of the minority rabble rousers! I PM'ed you because I didn't know what C&R was and with the likes of STICK IT TO EM, SON I'm glad I'm not.
I saw the DFW road show with Parker a few minutes ago and according to that "traitor" 30 year 777 Captain who said HE THOUGHT HE SPOKE for everyone in the room that a reasonable approach to some reconciliation between the APA and the Company was in EVERYONES BEST INTEREST. I agree with HIM!
I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE LIKES OF YOU, YOU'RE ILK AND YOUR BURN THE HOUSE DOWN MENTALITY! NEVER.
And if ANY OF YOU agrees with AA73 in toto then you simply DIDN'T WATCH THE TAPE. I mean, Parker and Kirby explained their position VERY WELL.
SCOPE IS OFF THE TABLE. That was you're BIGGEST ISSUE CHUMP.
So what is your staunch UNIONIST CLOSED MINDED SOLUTION NOW?
I saw the DFW road show with Parker a few minutes ago and according to that "traitor" 30 year 777 Captain who said HE THOUGHT HE SPOKE for everyone in the room that a reasonable approach to some reconciliation between the APA and the Company was in EVERYONES BEST INTEREST. I agree with HIM!
I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE LIKES OF YOU, YOU'RE ILK AND YOUR BURN THE HOUSE DOWN MENTALITY! NEVER.
And if ANY OF YOU agrees with AA73 in toto then you simply DIDN'T WATCH THE TAPE. I mean, Parker and Kirby explained their position VERY WELL.
SCOPE IS OFF THE TABLE. That was you're BIGGEST ISSUE CHUMP.
So what is your staunch UNIONIST CLOSED MINDED SOLUTION NOW?
Let the company have their feel good 'win'.
IMO Parker should have made no mention of scope now but then he'd have nothing to pull off the table I suppose. That was a mistake, and got everyone riled up. At least we know their strategy moving forward.
11-18-2014 | 12:54 PM
#373
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 2
From: B737
I ran the numbers after the company apparently lined through nearly everything. Personally I think we'd be better of taking 3% now, and getting the company to remove the 2 hour callout language and keeping the 2018 amenable date.
Why?
Because too many people seem to have the idea that we are getting "Delta parity" in 2016. But we're not. We are getting the average between Delta and United. Plus there are two assumptions that we don't know yet regarding Delta's potential raise:
1. That their rates will be set by January 2016, which is when the pay rate snap-shot takes place. If they aren't in place by then, we're screwed.
2. That Delta would have to receive a substantial pay rate increase to overcome the lower United pay rates in order to substantially get our pay above the current proposed DAL+3%. They might get that big raise, but they might get a smaller raise that's phased in over the life of the contract. DAL getting a 4-5% raise in 2016 still won't do us any favors.
I don't like it as much as the rest of you, but the MOU cost neutral arbitration language really handicaps us. If we go to arbitration, we get zero economic improvements. We get minor (if any) QOL improvements, mostly just a shuffling of contractual language from the current three contracts.
I personally regarded the arbitration as a fail-safe for any attempted scope grab, and we seem to be able to avoid that at this point. With scope off the table, I personally think that arbitration will net us a worse financial position with no QOL improvements.
Keep in mind, us getting a 3% raise now will help DAL get an improved contract, and help United get an improved contract...so down the road, when it's our turn for real contract negotiations, we're all in a better position. Take that for what it's worth.
Why?
Because too many people seem to have the idea that we are getting "Delta parity" in 2016. But we're not. We are getting the average between Delta and United. Plus there are two assumptions that we don't know yet regarding Delta's potential raise:
1. That their rates will be set by January 2016, which is when the pay rate snap-shot takes place. If they aren't in place by then, we're screwed.
2. That Delta would have to receive a substantial pay rate increase to overcome the lower United pay rates in order to substantially get our pay above the current proposed DAL+3%. They might get that big raise, but they might get a smaller raise that's phased in over the life of the contract. DAL getting a 4-5% raise in 2016 still won't do us any favors.
I don't like it as much as the rest of you, but the MOU cost neutral arbitration language really handicaps us. If we go to arbitration, we get zero economic improvements. We get minor (if any) QOL improvements, mostly just a shuffling of contractual language from the current three contracts.
I personally regarded the arbitration as a fail-safe for any attempted scope grab, and we seem to be able to avoid that at this point. With scope off the table, I personally think that arbitration will net us a worse financial position with no QOL improvements.
Keep in mind, us getting a 3% raise now will help DAL get an improved contract, and help United get an improved contract...so down the road, when it's our turn for real contract negotiations, we're all in a better position. Take that for what it's worth.
11-18-2014 | 12:58 PM
#375
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
APA BOD will have to take a risk; Either reject with the expectation of arbitration and the possibility of Parker making a last ditch effort at partially saving this situation (which maintains their credibility), or accept and face a significant chance of rejection at the line pilot level putting us all right where we'd be had they rejected, but with them losing credibility in the process. I can't see the APA maintain their credibility by punting this to the pilots, because whatever they send to us, they'd really have to stand behind it.
Personally, I think the APA should reject the unsweetened offer as the COMPENSATION as a whole is little better then what arbitration would provide and quite frankly, likely worse. Now, Doug (and Route 66) want you JUST to be dazzled by pay rates (and quick increases too
), but Jet Blue and Spirit have pay rates too. As a whole, arbitration will mean a little delay for a significant pay increase that will still trail Delta and be an average of them and United and NONE of the concessions they're demanding in return UNLESS they are valued out in arbitration and we are compensated elsewhere for that valuation. Even SOME of those additional concessions are likely to drive our rates ABOVE the rates in the Parker/Glass proposal. I don't think they can have everything cost neutral. APA should announce that they regret that they are unable to stand behind what management is demanding and it's NOT a competitive package and that expecting a longer duration with no options treats it like a section 6 negotiations only in their benefit and not ours. Those pay rates are being financed by concessions elsewhere.
Additionally, just like the rest of the world, at least you will know exactly who the new management team is at the "new" AA (same as the old) and likely where this airline is headed (forward to the past). There's another reason IMHO to prefer arbitration and that is that it has a higher probability of route 66 coming apart at the seams and being led away via straight-jacket.
Personally, I think the APA should reject the unsweetened offer as the COMPENSATION as a whole is little better then what arbitration would provide and quite frankly, likely worse. Now, Doug (and Route 66) want you JUST to be dazzled by pay rates (and quick increases too
), but Jet Blue and Spirit have pay rates too. As a whole, arbitration will mean a little delay for a significant pay increase that will still trail Delta and be an average of them and United and NONE of the concessions they're demanding in return UNLESS they are valued out in arbitration and we are compensated elsewhere for that valuation. Even SOME of those additional concessions are likely to drive our rates ABOVE the rates in the Parker/Glass proposal. I don't think they can have everything cost neutral. APA should announce that they regret that they are unable to stand behind what management is demanding and it's NOT a competitive package and that expecting a longer duration with no options treats it like a section 6 negotiations only in their benefit and not ours. Those pay rates are being financed by concessions elsewhere.Additionally, just like the rest of the world, at least you will know exactly who the new management team is at the "new" AA (same as the old) and likely where this airline is headed (forward to the past). There's another reason IMHO to prefer arbitration and that is that it has a higher probability of route 66 coming apart at the seams and being led away via straight-jacket.
But the numbers in PAY that the company offered are VERY GOOD. But he is also saying "HEY, THE NUMBERS IN ARBITRATION ARE ALOT LESS" but hey, even though we are NOT is Section 6 %17 on signing, Delta +3 1st 2015, 2016, 2017 is VERY GOOD!
Did you even listen to Parker? They KNOW what you are going to get 01 January (%3 above now), they KNOW what you're going to get 2016 (DELTA AND UNITED CONTRACTS don't become amenable until AFTER that).
Don't look at ME coming unglued. You guys are the ones who come unglued when if and when you ever do the numbers.....which you won't because all you can say is F--K MANAGEMENT AND F--K THE AIRPLANE YOU RODE IN ON!
11-18-2014 | 12:59 PM
#376
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
2 hour call out for short call is extremely reasonable IMO. It's 1:30 right now on the LUS east side and I worked under a CBA with a 2 hour callout as well. It had a clause in there about circumstances like an accident or weather impacting that time as well which I believe is what the (generally) clause is about but that would have to be written more concisely.
Combining domestic and international I have no idea, I'd be for it personally. I don't really see an issue with it. Honestly outside of scope the companies proposals are reasonable and hardly would be considered concessions. Also remember the things we have already agreed to that we will be getting as well.
I'm sorry, but clearly this is still the old AMR. The old AMR was mired in dysfunctionality whereby management expended most of their energy conning and fleecing pilots and treating them poorly, so what did they get in return ?
Well, you get the idea.
I think it's simply an inevitable by-product that occurs when people feel they aren't respected or treated well. It's why Delta will pummel this outfit in the future and both Delta management and the employees will be happy. Like it or not, they ALREADY have a competitive advantage that just isn't visable yet. I think in time, it will pay off handsomely.
11-18-2014 | 01:08 PM
#377
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 2
From: B737
There's no guarantee that an arbitrated award wouldn't allow the company to use the current West standard, or allow other things like midnight sims, etc. But I see no real opportunity to gain from arbitration. We'll get the MOU with some minor tweaks...some mediocre and some bad. And although Route66 is pretty abrasive, I agree with him that it will be tough for us to include any future Delta contracts by the time our parity review comes up. Not saying it's impossible, but the sun, moon and planets need to align for that to happen in order to exceed the monetary value of the current 3% offer.
11-18-2014 | 01:08 PM
#378
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
I ran the numbers after the company apparently lined through nearly everything. Personally I think we'd be better of taking 3% now, and getting the company to remove the 2 hour callout language and keeping the 2018 amenable date.
Why?
Because too many people seem to have the idea that we are getting "Delta parity" in 2016. But we're not. We are getting the average between Delta and United. Plus there are two assumptions that we don't know yet regarding Delta's potential raise:
1. That their rates will be set by January 2016, which is when the pay rate snap-shot takes place. If they aren't in place by then, we're screwed.
2. That Delta would have to receive a substantial pay rate increase to overcome the lower United pay rates in order to substantially get our pay above the current proposed DAL+3%. They might get that big raise, but they might get a smaller raise that's phased in over the life of the contract. DAL getting a 4-5% raise in 2016 still won't do us any favors.
I don't like it as much as the rest of you, but the MOU cost neutral arbitration language really handicaps us. If we go to arbitration, we get zero economic improvements. We get minor (if any) QOL improvements, mostly just a shuffling of contractual language from the current three contracts.
I personally regarded the arbitration as a fail-safe for any attempted scope grab, and we seem to be able to avoid that at this point. With scope off the table, I personally think that arbitration will net us a worse financial position with no QOL improvements.
Keep in mind, us getting a 3% raise now will help DAL get an improved contract, and help United get an improved contract...so down the road, when it's our turn for real contract negotiations, we're all in a better position. Take that for what it's worth.
Why?
Because too many people seem to have the idea that we are getting "Delta parity" in 2016. But we're not. We are getting the average between Delta and United. Plus there are two assumptions that we don't know yet regarding Delta's potential raise:
1. That their rates will be set by January 2016, which is when the pay rate snap-shot takes place. If they aren't in place by then, we're screwed.
2. That Delta would have to receive a substantial pay rate increase to overcome the lower United pay rates in order to substantially get our pay above the current proposed DAL+3%. They might get that big raise, but they might get a smaller raise that's phased in over the life of the contract. DAL getting a 4-5% raise in 2016 still won't do us any favors.
I don't like it as much as the rest of you, but the MOU cost neutral arbitration language really handicaps us. If we go to arbitration, we get zero economic improvements. We get minor (if any) QOL improvements, mostly just a shuffling of contractual language from the current three contracts.
I personally regarded the arbitration as a fail-safe for any attempted scope grab, and we seem to be able to avoid that at this point. With scope off the table, I personally think that arbitration will net us a worse financial position with no QOL improvements.
Keep in mind, us getting a 3% raise now will help DAL get an improved contract, and help United get an improved contract...so down the road, when it's our turn for real contract negotiations, we're all in a better position. Take that for what it's worth.
I'm the opposite of you, most I talk to know that arbitration provides smaller pay rate steps, but also know that the concessions demanded in return negate much of the value of most of those pat step increases. If I can get 85% of Delta by waiting just a little and keep what I DO have in regard to work rules, that's not so bad. Again, like those you say mistake arbitration for giving us Delta rates, you seem to mistake that arbitration also must pay us ABOVE MOU/MTA rates or compensate us elsewhere (which I really don't think there IS anywhere else to do that) if management wants ANY further changes that provide value.
Just as RIGHT NOW we aren't in section 6 (although management is attempting to treat it that way by asking for longer duration and vilifying us for looking at it like they do), JCBA arbitration isn't traditional arbitration where management can just ask for changes without paying for them.
No.......I'm ready to arbitrate, if it comes to that. I'd prefer a FAIR deal outside of that though.
11-18-2014 | 01:11 PM
#380
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
Dude, I have BEEN out on the line asking the same questions with our line and "Route66" isn't the only one talking about the company proposal. Maybe that "FAT" 777 Captain who speaks for everyone in the room should get the APA blanket party.
But the numbers in PAY that the company offered are VERY GOOD. But he is also saying "HEY, THE NUMBERS IN ARBITRATION ARE ALOT LESS" but hey, even though we are NOT is Section 6 %17 on signing, Delta +3 1st 2015, 2016, 2017 is VERY GOOD!
Did you even listen to Parker? They KNOW what you are going to get 01 January (%3 above now), they KNOW what you're going to get 2016 (DELTA AND UNITED CONTRACTS don't become amenable until AFTER that).
Don't look at ME coming unglued. You guys are the ones who come unglued when if and when you ever do the numbers.....which you won't because all you can say is F--K MANAGEMENT AND F--K THE AIRPLANE YOU RODE IN ON!
But the numbers in PAY that the company offered are VERY GOOD. But he is also saying "HEY, THE NUMBERS IN ARBITRATION ARE ALOT LESS" but hey, even though we are NOT is Section 6 %17 on signing, Delta +3 1st 2015, 2016, 2017 is VERY GOOD!
Did you even listen to Parker? They KNOW what you are going to get 01 January (%3 above now), they KNOW what you're going to get 2016 (DELTA AND UNITED CONTRACTS don't become amenable until AFTER that).
Don't look at ME coming unglued. You guys are the ones who come unglued when if and when you ever do the numbers.....which you won't because all you can say is F--K MANAGEMENT AND F--K THE AIRPLANE YOU RODE IN ON!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
