are you junior on that equipment?

 

Never heard this. Besides, that is outside the scope of arbitration. Any "trades" would have to be negotiated between the parties and not the arbitrators and then YES, the arbitrators could allow that between the parties (even with a mediator), but arbitrators cannot themselves go outside the scope of the MOU provisions.

You are enmeshed in misguided fantasy and rationalizing your position with what you want the arbitration to be as opposed to what it is. This makes it easier to convince yourself voting for this TA is the best option.

Again, this is all erroneous. You are confusing THIS arbitration (which is not like most due to the specific provisions of the MOU) with NEGOTIATION. Even IF an opportunity to negotiate should occur during the arbitral process, it just means we have MORE leverage because the arbitrators hands are tied from unilaterally crafting tit-for-tat valuation trades. That's actually a BETTER place to negotiate then what has occurs so far.

Might I suggest you contact the source, that being APA legal and talk to EJ yourself for a better understanding of the arbitration situation ?

 

No, just have spent time perusing various bid statuses from time to time to examine different lifestyles for potential bid considerations in the future. I've done that periodically with every bid status at legacy AA.

 

Not sure if they're still that bad, but they were. I haven't done a bid status tour in awhile. C & R has plenty of whining about various schedules and reserve treatment though. Not too many picnics out there right now.

 

Yeah, they giveth and they taketh away. That's just it, a lot of guys are saying "Well, look at how much this trip would pay with the 5:15 calendar day!" without considering that the pairing optimizer will not just run the same trip and pay us more. It puts a penalty on soft time and will try to build the most efficient trips. You won't have a CLT-LAX-CLT red eye now paying 15:45, those legs will be incorporated into other trips. I think the 5:15 calendar day would be better, but not millions of dollars better.

A couple of other things to think about. The MOU had a 1:-3.25 trip rig for trips with a greater than 24 hour overnight. Not great, but would have added over 5% to my line this month. The APA gave it away! What did that tell the company?

And finally, I got an answer to my question of why the 10 reps voted against sending the last offer to the company, from one of the 10. He said that the APA and company were close to closing out the contract and he felt we could have gotten, at a minimum, the 5:15 calendar day had we not asked for too much. Hmmm. They were about to give it to us last week before the ask, but after they wouldn't with the BOD offering to pass it without a vote, and no other asks, on the 3rd. Doesn't add up, so that leads me to believe the company is not scared of arbitration.

The kicker to al

 

I'm not sure if you're intentionally missing the gist of what I'm trying to get through to you or not.

I disagree that it's a BETTER place to be. At this point, my gut says we are getting a contract VALUE that is overall higher than the present one.

If we go to arbitration we lose the overall higher value and end up with status quo. Regardless of what we trade, it's going to end up being cost neutral which as an overall value is much lower than what is currently on the table, IMO.

We need the APA to provide relevant details and costs involved with everything as well as the language...

 

I don't want to give anything up and can live with what the MTA offers... I think they will come back and offer more negotiating over the next few years... if i am wrong, so what; Delta will have a stronger negotiating position with us going to arbitration ( we are willingly offering a lower total compensation and lower QOL issues then Delta through 2020 if this is voted in )

we vote this down, see what the company offers and then make a better deal in 4-5 years with Delta and United making more than if we undercut them with this deal.

 

We will be undercutting them regardless of what we do.

Has there been a fact checked document showing the value of the MTA contract and this proposed JCBA? Without it no one can make a firm statement one way or the other.

 

I will concede I have no firm numbers more than you or anybody else... I know I don't need the extra money and don't want to fly to Europe with 2 pilots for a 50 hour layover 16 days a month for 76 hours like what the company is offering.

The guys I work with in the military have shared what they have at Delta and United and it is much better than this offer from the company minus an hourly pay rate...

 

Saying we will be undercutting no mAtter what we do is a flat out distortion of reality.
Second you say you need numbers and arguing valuations. No one is arguing that the company offer isn't worth more. Majority of us are looking down the road rather than to next month. This is detrimental to your "dollar valuations" taking into account the big picture for the future. Ie. state of industry, future negotiations, precedents, and not to mention that we get a raises with our current agreement without giving anything up.