And that, my friend, is what the company set out to do by negotiating directly with the pilot group. They knew you'd get on your knees because you bought in to the threat of arbitration. Have the courage to vote no. You will be offered another deal prior to arbitration. They're making you think this is an 11th hour deal when in fact it's still more like 7pm.

 

My point is, if one plans to vote yes now, they better have a plan for 2020. No one does because we have no weapons of leverage and twice the vulnerability. Many yes voters don't care about that, only quick $$$.

 

As stated, the two plans other than the value plan would have to be arbitrated. And according to the company proposal, any outcome would have to be cost-neutral to us (in other words, if we have to pay higher premiums, we would have to be compensated for that somehow).

It's a big IF because the GOP doesn't need to repeal Obamacare to get rid of the tax. They can just amend the law or strip it of funding. And whoever gets into office in 2016 will still have to face Congress, which will likely remain in GOP control until they anger enough voters. Experience shows this flip-flop happens every 6-8 years. So right around 2020 we'll probably see the Congress go back to the Dems.

There's already a legitimate challenge to the law in the form of the Supreme Court case that's hearing the issue regarding how the law was written. From what I've gathered and read, they did a really poor job writing the law and stipulated specifically that state exchanges can receive federal subsidies, but there's no specific spending authorization for subsidies for the federal exchange.

If you go strictly by the law (and precedent), then that means most Americans will lose their subsidies because the law does not specifically authorize that funding. The administration (and the Dems) contend that "the law implies it", but having been a budget authority in the military, if the law doesn't specifically authorize funds, it cannot be funded just because "we meant it but didn't write it in there". The legally correct way is to amend the law to authorize the appropriation of funds for federal subsidies...but do you really think the GOP will pass such legislation? I think not.

Hence why a lot of people feel Obamacare is in trouble regardless of whether Clinton takes office or not.

 

My prediction, for what it's worth (but I think I'm right):

Pilots vote no, probably by a slim margin.
Company and union go to arbitration.
Award is handed out.
Company says they'll live with it, and we'll see ya in 2019.
Then the company will stonewall us for many years.

 

I can live with that and I hope you are right... ( I think there is a chance the company comes back to negotiate for more if there is a no vote, but if not I don't care! )

 

that would be a HUGE win for the pilots. Realistically, you vote no, they'll come back and accept the APA offer with min calendar day for the instant ratification that's been promised if the company accepts. and your 23 percent pay raise just turned into more like a 30-40 percent pay raise depending on how PBS is implemented

 

I do not see them coming back and offering min day. They haven't yet come back with that huge of a sweetener, and I doubt they will anytime soon. It's not a huge win for the pilots.

Everyone loses about $100k in economic terms. Parker will only play this same game in 2019 and it'll be early 2020s before we see any kind of contract...and we'll not only have to make up the QOL ground, we'll have to make up the pay ground as well...since the MTA will have us a very very solid third place by then.

 

you are wrong in that the MTA gives up quality of life, those things are not open to the arbitrator.... I can live with the MTA

 

You misunderstood what I wrote. I didn't say the MTA gives up quality of life (actually, it did...but that's already said and done). I said that if we go with just the MTA, we will not only have to claw back the QOL items that are noticeably missing from the MTA, we'll have to claw back the pay as well. Two big hurdles to jump, instead of one.

 

They will come back. You think Parker can stand in front of the his board on January 20th and say, I still haven't solved our labor issue, and not catch massive flak for it? You think hes gonna say, "don't worry I got this, In the next 3 to 6 months we'll maybe get this handled in arbitration, but I don't know what the end result will be" ?? Its not going to go well for him to not have clear answers. You will get a new offer before arbitration. They don't want unknowns. They want something definitive. They want it now, not 6 months from now.