AA Pilots Unite Or Fold Forever
01-05-2015 | 10:04 AM
#71
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 2
From: B737
I do understand all of those things you wrote. But I have my position on this particular situation because it's not really true "negotiations". That occurred when the MTA was penned. APA had a chance to make that happen then, because it was at that point that various people (including Parker and Kirby) wanted the MTA signed so they could proceed with the merger. This is just the mopping-up phase. They already cleaned APA's clock. HBT and the other issues have value to them, but not enough value to drive them to cave into any of APA's more costly requirements. The only "out" we have is an arbitrated result, and I'm pretty certain the company is willing to live through an arbitrated contract if that's the way we want to go.
01-05-2015 | 10:15 AM
#72
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
I do understand all of those things you wrote. But I have my position on this particular situation because it's not really true "negotiations". That occurred when the MTA was penned. APA had a chance to make that happen then, because it was at that point that various people (including Parker and Kirby) wanted the MTA signed so they could proceed with the merger. This is just the mopping-up phase. They already cleaned APA's clock. HBT and the other issues have value to them, but not enough value to drive them to cave into any of APA's more costly requirements. The only "out" we have is an arbitrated result, and I'm pretty certain the company is willing to live through an arbitrated contract if that's the way we want to go.
With this TA, we get a quicker and slightly better payoff that will likely cost us more in the long run and a death sentence as a cohesive union and group capable of correcting the present imbalance.
01-05-2015 | 10:36 AM
#73
Banned
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,655
Likes: 0
From: Narrow/Left Wide/Right
I do understand all of those things you wrote. But I have my position on this particular situation because it's not really true "negotiations". That occurred when the MTA was penned. APA had a chance to make that happen then, because it was at that point that various people (including Parker and Kirby) wanted the MTA signed so they could proceed with the merger. This is just the mopping-up phase. They already cleaned APA's clock. HBT and the other issues have value to them, but not enough value to drive them to cave into any of APA's more costly requirements. The only "out" we have is an arbitrated result, and I'm pretty certain the company is willing to live through an arbitrated contract if that's the way we want to go.
If your already happy and satisfied with the job, why the rush to accept more money for QOL and pilot group concessions for a slight bit more? Let it run to arbitration, let the QOL stand with more pay. If those concessions are worth it to MGMT, they will come back to the table even after arbitration.
01-05-2015 | 10:44 AM
#74
La Familia Delta
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,467
Likes: 0
From: B-717 FO / C-17 AC
I do understand all of those things you wrote. But I have my position on this particular situation because it's not really true "negotiations". That occurred when the MTA was penned. APA had a chance to make that happen then, because it was at that point that various people (including Parker and Kirby) wanted the MTA signed so they could proceed with the merger. This is just the mopping-up phase. They already cleaned APA's clock. HBT and the other issues have value to them, but not enough value to drive them to cave into any of APA's more costly requirements. The only "out" we have is an arbitrated result, and I'm pretty certain the company is willing to live through an arbitrated contract if that's the way we want to go.
01-05-2015 | 10:58 AM
#75
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat
Huey, the prevailing argument from people wanting to vote yes is that arbitration would yield worse results. However this won't be the case because you won't go to arbitration. If you vote no, the company will come to the BOD and accept the min calendar day proposal. It's the next logical step in the chess match
01-05-2015 | 11:30 AM
#76
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
Huey, the prevailing argument from people wanting to vote yes is that arbitration would yield worse results. However this won't be the case because you won't go to arbitration. If you vote no, the company will come to the BOD and accept the min calendar day proposal. It's the next logical step in the chess match
Now THAT is a gamble.
01-05-2015 | 11:39 AM
#77
Banned
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
From: A330
01-05-2015 | 11:44 AM
#78
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat
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.
01-05-2015 | 11:44 AM
#79
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,624
Likes: 0
From: AA A320
Has anyone talked to their union reps regarding the possible effects of the 2018 Cadillac Healthcare plan review?
What does this provision allow the company to do? Can they act unilaterally?
This issue alone could all but nullify the shiny pay raises.
What does this provision allow the company to do? Can they act unilaterally?
This issue alone could all but nullify the shiny pay raises.
01-05-2015 | 11:46 AM
#80
Unfaithfully yours, Hank
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
From: All
Destroying future? I think thats just a little bit dramatic...
I am in the NO column right now (if I was able to vote) based on some QOL items, but if it passes, it certainly doesn't destroy my future.
I don't know why APA didn't slide the Delta contract across the table from the very beginning, but I expect nothing less when section 6 negotiations start.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
