![]() |
Originally Posted by Jetdriver7
(Post 1797355)
You are wrong. The play book used at eagle/envoy is exactly the same play book here. Same deal pushed across and everytime saying this is the final offer. I left eagle just after bankruptcy and have watched this mess go down on both sides. It's amazing people do. It educate themselves with this management team when it's done right in front of them. The strategy was completely transparent.
|
Originally Posted by texaspilot76
(Post 1796607)
Slightly better? $25k this year alone is slight?
Even if we went with the MOU rate, and gave up the pay for this year, the proposed company rate would still be worth around $10k a year more than the MOU rate in 2016. Sorry, but the miniscule items that the company wants is worth the pay to me. |
In min day is so important, and the company values it at $85 mil over the course of the contract, reduce the pay rates by $85 mil and ask for min day.
Done. $85 mil over 5 years over 15,000 pilots is around $1100 a year net wage loss, or roughly $1.25/hr. The senior CAs would bear the brunt of the wage reduction anyway. APA should've done that when they did their LBFO, because they knew how much min day was important to the pilot group. |
Originally Posted by CanoePilot
(Post 1797249)
The difference between Texas and I is that he's popping a boner like this is the best contract ever. I just don't want to turn down the money and go to arbitration and then not get ****. The thinking that we'll bring the company to their knees and come out ahead in pay with arbitration is flawed. Why hasn't APA put out detailed information comparing each proposal (mou or company offer)?
The biggest mistakes in this whole situation can be placed on APA for doing the backroom deal with doug and not even including the US air pilots in anything. In the typical AAroggance they thought parker was some small time ceo who would be desperate. They were so gung-ho about getting rid of Horton at all costs they didn't think ahead. Well now we know the cost. |
Sorry to interrupt, but I don't have time to go back through 12 pages. Does this offer have Preferential Bidding in it? I'm a Delta guy who was very much against it when PBS came to us. It did cost us a lot of jobs. Exactly how many is up for debate, but the range is anywhere from 8% to more than 15%, depending on what you want to use for parameters, because when we went to PBS, we also raised our monthly caps.
We now have a whole lot of guys who are flying right up to the FAR's, every month. That's 25 more hours, per month, than under our old 75hr. cap system. i.e. they are flying 33% MORE! How many jobs do you think that eliminates when you multiply it out by the thousands or guys who are doing it? For every 3 guys flying 33% more, that's one less body you need. I know that PBS was one of the sticking points in your earlier negotiations, but I haven't heard if it's still alive in this agreement, or is it fully dead? |
PBS is being implemented as we type. First roll-out on the smaller fleets around fall-ish of 2015. The larger fleets will see it in early 2016.
|
Originally Posted by inline five
(Post 1797369)
In min day is so important, and the company values it at $85 mil over the course of the contract, reduce the pay rates by $85 mil and ask for min day.
Done. $85 mil over 5 years over 15,000 pilots is around $1100 a year net wage loss, or roughly $1.25/hr. The senior CAs would bear the brunt of the wage reduction anyway. APA should've done that when they did their LBFO, because they knew how much min day was important to the pilot group. |
Originally Posted by ghilis101
(Post 1797374)
That was an overinflated estimate of the value of min calendar day, probably based on every single lineholder working 20 days a month making 103 hours pay per month. The APA ask of min calendar day for the current proposal is beyond fair, to be viewed as a greedy proposal is shocking to me. Deltas pilot group is 2000 less pilots and their package is currently worth $2.5 billion, according to recent company quotes. That contract was signed in 2012. You're being offered a $1.7 Billion deal, and you have to spread that among 2000 more pilots. To ask for 85 million more (I bet it's not even half that) is beyond fair.
So with that reality, giving up $1/hr to get the rig in there seems like a smart choice. We are hindered by the cost neutral MTA. That is what we are fighting against. |
Originally Posted by inline five
(Post 1797369)
In min day is so important, and the company values it at $85 mil over the course of the contract, reduce the pay rates by $85 mil and ask for min day.
Done. $85 mil over 5 years over 15,000 pilots is around $1100 a year net wage loss, or roughly $1.25/hr. The senior CAs would bear the brunt of the wage reduction anyway. APA should've done that when they did their LBFO, because they knew how much min day was important to the pilot group. |
Originally Posted by Hueypilot
(Post 1797373)
PBS is being implemented as we type. First roll-out on the smaller fleets around fall-ish of 2015. The larger fleets will see it in early 2016.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:05 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands