Originally Posted by Surprise

I was just thinking about all of the shortcomings of our contract today. Maybe getting another unpaid 30 hour layover had something to do with it. I vaguely recall some of these issues being discussed leading up to the vote last year, but I really don't remember any union leadership on why we, as a group, should even consider looking beyond pay rates and maybe try to get some work rules fixed. The discussions were out there for those involved enough to read a forum or dial in to a town hall phone call, but it sure seemed like the average line pilot just thought, "hey, these pay rates look pretty good!" I don't know if the union "sold" this to us, but to not make a concerted effort to make sure everyone knew what we were signing up for is to me a failure of leadership.

I don't know if the reality of 11 hour 3 day trips and Group II A321s and worthless contractual language for hotels, among other things, is setting in with everyone. It's easy for the no voters, and the people who say they're no voters to say "I told you so", but this really ought to be a teachable moment for all of us.

We're absolutely not independent contractors. I can't take my skills and get my same pay and position at another carrier. We actually are a union and I believe we can be a better one if someone at the top could articulate why.

Originally Posted by Route66

What's a "cacharel"?

Originally Posted by Route66

What dictionary are you using? I've looked up in several places and the only thing I googled was this:

Cacharel

I think it's a perfume.

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Another "teachable moment" is lost. To the reasonably informed, some things really need not be taught. This is one of those moments.

Originally Posted by Surprise

It's difficult for three people decide where to go to lunch (even if it's Cacharel), much less for 15,000 pilots to come together on a course of action or how to vote on agreement. But maybe with a little direction, 51% or so could learn to identify concessionary work rules when they see them.

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Even if a majority could, my observation is that most here would rationalize capitulation for a quicker, but substantially inferior payoff. One need only review the thread on C & R about MU to see that rationalization. We're now at a point where most can't see past maximizing their monthly paycheck where the true obstacle really lies beyond that and most CERTAINLY won't jeopardize that paycheck altogether.

As long as Parker can kick the can while still having the cheapest pilots out there, there is no effective offense unless and until the corrupt NMB stops surreptitiously assisting big business in their pummeling of labor. The arrival of the pilot shortage at the legacy airline level is likely the next opportunity and that's years away, well beyond our next section 6. Too little to late for many here, unless we agree to settle again for a few dimes on the dollar.

Originally Posted by Saabs

From what I gather MU is picking up straight open time? This is frowned upon at AA?

Originally Posted by eaglefly

By some, yes. The point is, there is no standard the pilot group will adhere to in making short-term sacrifice if it might lead to long-term gain.

It's an example of what already is almost 15,000 independent contractors each with different rationalizations, methods and beliefs or put another way, a herd of cats.