Hearing a lot of No
01-09-2015 | 02:54 PM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
. Doug wins. APA wins. West is rejoicing.. They have hooked "Moby Dick" (my apologies if you never read it).
01-09-2015 | 04:01 PM
#63
Line Holder
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,556
Likes: 30
From: B777/CA retired
By the time this offer gets put out for vote the negotiations are over. In fact, they were over last Saturday. Kirby has unfortunately decided that we are not getting any of our asks and he has placed a large pay rate in front of us to make up for that fact.
Delta parity only comes via pay rates and it only comes close when you figure in profit sharing for Delta. And, this 'parity plus' that management parrots only comes through the company proposal. If it is turned down then the MTA rates only call for a review of the average of UAL and Delta, not parity with the higher of the two.
Here's the kicker. We only get the reto and the 1.6 billion extra over the MTA rates if we accept the offer. The company wants to get this JCBA done, they want to get on with the rest of the process. Single certificate comes in 4 months and they want the SLI done promptly. It either gets done via the vote or it gets done in arbitration. They will not waste any more time negotiating.
You will send no message to management by voting No. If you really want to vote that way based on what you value HBT, midnight sims for currency, and international/domestic combination then go for it. But realize your union has only valued those items at 150 million and the company proposal is 1.6 billion over the life of the contract.
Green book is what our contract will be. We have already lost QOL items. We cannot recover them in arbitration. Thus the choice to me is simple. Of the two bad options I pick the option that pays me more.
Delta parity only comes via pay rates and it only comes close when you figure in profit sharing for Delta. And, this 'parity plus' that management parrots only comes through the company proposal. If it is turned down then the MTA rates only call for a review of the average of UAL and Delta, not parity with the higher of the two.
Here's the kicker. We only get the reto and the 1.6 billion extra over the MTA rates if we accept the offer. The company wants to get this JCBA done, they want to get on with the rest of the process. Single certificate comes in 4 months and they want the SLI done promptly. It either gets done via the vote or it gets done in arbitration. They will not waste any more time negotiating.
You will send no message to management by voting No. If you really want to vote that way based on what you value HBT, midnight sims for currency, and international/domestic combination then go for it. But realize your union has only valued those items at 150 million and the company proposal is 1.6 billion over the life of the contract.
Green book is what our contract will be. We have already lost QOL items. We cannot recover them in arbitration. Thus the choice to me is simple. Of the two bad options I pick the option that pays me more.
01-09-2015 | 06:08 PM
#64
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
By the time this offer gets put out for vote the negotiations are over. In fact, they were over last Saturday. Kirby has unfortunately decided that we are not getting any of our asks and he has placed a large pay rate in front of us to make up for that fact.
Delta parity only comes via pay rates and it only comes close when you figure in profit sharing for Delta. And, this 'parity plus' that management parrots only comes through the company proposal. If it is turned down then the MTA rates only call for a review of the average of UAL and Delta, not parity with the higher of the two.
Here's the kicker. We only get the reto and the 1.6 billion extra over the MTA rates if we accept the offer. The company wants to get this JCBA done, they want to get on with the rest of the process. Single certificate comes in 4 months and they want the SLI done promptly. It either gets done via the vote or it gets done in arbitration. They will not waste any more time negotiating.
You will send no message to management by voting No. If you really want to vote that way based on what you value HBT, midnight sims for currency, and international/domestic combination then go for it. But realize your union has only valued those items at 150 million and the company proposal is 1.6 billion over the life of the contract.
Green book is what our contract will be. We have already lost QOL items. We cannot recover them in arbitration. Thus the choice to me is simple. Of the two bad options I pick the option that pays me more.
Delta parity only comes via pay rates and it only comes close when you figure in profit sharing for Delta. And, this 'parity plus' that management parrots only comes through the company proposal. If it is turned down then the MTA rates only call for a review of the average of UAL and Delta, not parity with the higher of the two.
Here's the kicker. We only get the reto and the 1.6 billion extra over the MTA rates if we accept the offer. The company wants to get this JCBA done, they want to get on with the rest of the process. Single certificate comes in 4 months and they want the SLI done promptly. It either gets done via the vote or it gets done in arbitration. They will not waste any more time negotiating.
You will send no message to management by voting No. If you really want to vote that way based on what you value HBT, midnight sims for currency, and international/domestic combination then go for it. But realize your union has only valued those items at 150 million and the company proposal is 1.6 billion over the life of the contract.
Green book is what our contract will be. We have already lost QOL items. We cannot recover them in arbitration. Thus the choice to me is simple. Of the two bad options I pick the option that pays me more.
01-09-2015 | 07:42 PM
#66
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: A320 Right Seat
I disagree EF...I concur with the analyses that this was lost last year with the MTA--when a cost neutral backstop to arbitration was put in place. When Section 6 opens up in 2017 (No Vote) or 2018 (Yes Vote), hopefully by that point we will at least start seeing how the ISL is shaking out, the workgroup starting to stitch together better, and still solid profits and profit margins--IF (big if--I know) that is the landscape in which we open the negotiations for the next contract--This is the point where APA first slides over the Balance sheets showing how much money we are making--then slides over the Delta Contract and says "We want that--+8% because they are going to negotiate a new one in a cupla years"...That is the point where we better stand firm...IF we roll over then--and don't get Industry Standard Work rules and Industry Standard Pay--I'll agree with you...
01-09-2015 | 08:06 PM
#69
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
I disagree EF...I concur with the analyses that this was lost last year with the MTA--when a cost neutral backstop to arbitration was put in place. When Section 6 opens up in 2017 (No Vote) or 2018 (Yes Vote), hopefully by that point we will at least start seeing how the ISL is shaking out, the workgroup starting to stitch together better, and still solid profits and profit margins--IF (big if--I know) that is the landscape in which we open the negotiations for the next contract--This is the point where APA first slides over the Balance sheets showing how much money we are making--then slides over the Delta Contract and says "We want that--+8% because they are going to negotiate a new one in a cupla years"...That is the point where we better stand firm...IF we roll over then--and don't get Industry Standard Work rules and Industry Standard Pay--I'll agree with you...
It's 2019 and 2020.
Now that we've corrected your basic errors, let's proceed with the foundational ones. The next step is for you to describe what we will have for leverage in 2020 that we can bargain with. Then we can begin to determine where were are.
My contention is that with a yes vote, well have nothing of value as we will at that point be the cheapest pilot group of the big three perhaps by at least 15% in total costs. Parker in fact, will have no real reason to bargain with us for years with that reality.
So, could you explain in detail what our leverage will be and just how we will somehow pull together from the hideously fragmented group of independent contractors we are presenting ourselves to Parker as right now ?
I'm all ears.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
