Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : What's the Plan?


WutFace
11-16-2017, 03:09 PM
Right now, ALK seems like a ship without a rudder. They're getting pressured in the north by Delta. They're getting pressured in the South and Hawaii by Southwest.

Every other airline is making big steps in growth. Southwest wants 25% in 3 years. Frontier just ordered 130+ airframes.

What is Angle Lake's plan? I'm not seeing it. All they've hinted at is a mild restructuring and retreating from markets. They're walking away from the premium transcon market. They want to "reinforce" the destination network from SF and LA, but they're way too slow to market and Southwest is going to eat their lunch.

The airline industry is and has been feast and famine. Right now, it's feast time. And Alaska seems dead set on missing this window, losing market share, and squandering the benefits of the acquisition.

Help me feel better about this. Where's the big order?


ForeverJunior
11-16-2017, 03:17 PM
Right now, ALK seems like a ship without a rudder. They're getting pressured in the north by Delta. They're getting pressured in the South and Hawaii by Southwest.

Every other airline is making big steps in growth. Southwest wants 25% in 3 years. Frontier just ordered 130+ airframes.

What is Angle Lake's plan? I'm not seeing it. All they've hinted at is a mild restructuring and retreating from markets. They're walking away from the premium transcon market. They want to "reinforce" the destination network from SF and LA, but they're way too slow to market and Southwest is going to eat their lunch.

The airline industry is and has been feast and famine. Right now, it's feast time. And Alaska seems dead set on missing this window, losing market share, and squandering the benefits of the acquisition.

Help me feel better about this. Where's the big order?

I'm not holding my breath for any order, much less a big one. Angle Lake is who we thought they were. There is a definite lack of vision on their part. They have bungled up the buyout/merger to boot.

There is no leadership in our management. They are just CPAs and are good with spreadsheets and pinching pennies. That's all they know.

I'm seeing it too. We're getting our butts kicked. Our operation sucks and we are alienating our customers.

Nothing much we can do about it, since they don't value us or our opinions. Just watch this place fall apart. If we're lucky, someone will buy us out and put us out of our misery. That's they only way we can be rid of our ineffectual management team and our BOD, which seems to be out to lunch.

OCCP
11-16-2017, 03:44 PM
Itís mind boggling how out of touch they are. Everyone else is growing like crazy and we are reducing and losing customers. Yay!


Saltlife85
11-16-2017, 06:19 PM
The plan? Simple. Stay as low cost and lean as possible. Mild growth for the next 12-18mo and then... BAM! Another merger, acquisition, buyout, etc. (JB, SW, AA, DL, hell who knows) Point is there's no way we stay competitive in this industry at our current pace without being bought or merging. Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride. Go to work, do your job, nothing more, and go back to our families. Stay informed and unified and maybe we can knock out a great CBA in 2020. Or as I mentioned previously, were bought or merge.

Ronin47
11-16-2017, 06:52 PM
The plan? Simple. Stay as low cost and lean as possible. Mild growth for the next 12-18mo and then... BAM! Another merger, acquisition, buyout, etc. (JB, SW, AA, DL, hell who knows) Point is there's no way we stay competitive in this industry at our current pace without being bought or merging. Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride. Go to work, do your job, nothing more, and go back to our families. Stay informed and unified and maybe we can knock out a great CBA in 2020. Or as I mentioned previously, were bought or merge.


Well said.

Packrat
11-17-2017, 07:01 AM
I'm seeing it too. We're getting our butts kicked. Our operation sucks and we are alienating our customers.

Just as an observation, Delta appears to be doing REALLY well in ANC. That should scare the Bejesus out of the Anglers.

Bwipilot
11-17-2017, 08:36 AM
Itís mind boggling how out of touch they are. Everyone else is growing like crazy and we are reducing and losing customers. Yay!

So who's out of touch? US airline growth is about 4% for 2017 (http://www.iata.org/whatwedo/Documents/economics/passenger-analysis-jun-2017.pdf)

Most of that is airlines just flying bigger airplanes (Southwest and United). (https://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/274466/what-are-the-fastest-growing-major-airlines-in-the-world/)

Delta and United might be moving seats on to Alaska's routes--but not much growth in the US.

Slim6890
11-17-2017, 01:48 PM
The plan? Simple. Stay as low cost and lean as possible. Mild growth for the next 12-18mo and then... BAM! Another merger, acquisition, buyout, etc. (JB, SW, AA, DL, hell who knows) Point is there's no way we stay competitive in this industry at our current pace without being bought or merging. Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride. Go to work, do your job, nothing more, and go back to our families. Stay informed and unified and maybe we can knock out a great CBA in 2020. Or as I mentioned previously, were bought or merge.

Sit back and relax. Worry about the things you can control.

EA CO AS
11-18-2017, 12:20 AM
Right now, ALK seems like a ship without a rudder. They're getting pressured in the north by Delta. They're getting pressured in the South and Hawaii by Southwest.

Every other airline is making big steps in growth. Southwest wants 25% in 3 years. Frontier just ordered 130+ airframes.

What is Angle Lake's plan? I'm not seeing it. All they've hinted at is a mild restructuring and retreating from markets. They're walking away from the premium transcon market. They want to "reinforce" the destination network from SF and LA, but they're way too slow to market and Southwest is going to eat their lunch.

The airline industry is and has been feast and famine. Right now, it's feast time. And Alaska seems dead set on missing this window, losing market share, and squandering the benefits of the acquisition.

Help me feel better about this. Where's the big order?


I'm unsure how nearly 8% growth annual projected is a "ship without a rudder." And why get into the costly "arms race" of a maintaining dedicated sub-fleet chasing after premium transcons against companies like AA, UA, and DL that benefit from huge corporate agreements? The course AS is plotting isn't as high-yield on a per-customer basis, but it's a MUCH bigger market segment they're going after in transcons.

But part of that is keeping costs low to remain competitive when AA/DL/UA/B6 try to fight with fares that trash yields for everyone.

AS took a knee this past quarter due to the QX fiasco, definitely - but barring that, I doubt there'd be anywhere near the hand-wringing that appears to be going on right now. And lest we forget, PBP is STILL projecting a payout in the 7.5 to 8% range; it may seem low since we've been spoiled by record payouts of over 9% for the past 5 years, but it's still healthy.

Take this one milestone at a time and you'll see things improving. QX is already righting their ship. 12/31 is the last day for Elevate. Then SOC in January, and single PSS on 4/25/18. Along the way, you see the first Airbus leave the paint shop in AS livery, followed by everything in the fleet getting retrofitted into the new interiors.

It's going to be an interesting ride, and I think, a very rewarding one.

Speed Pilot
11-18-2017, 05:56 AM
Management Troll.

Klsytakesit
11-18-2017, 07:05 AM
It is not a rudderless ship...none of us are on their ship(excluding the troll). Their ship has nothing to do with being in the airline business. Their ship is a boutique investment firm. It has been sailing the same course for at least 20 years. Straight and true. Itís purpose is to deliver signifigant returns to those aboard...Make no mistake....No one that actually produces the profits is invited aboard. The Firm spends more on marketing/employee mis-information and lawyers then they do on critical operational items.
In doing so they have created a very loyal work force with significantly depressed expectations....That is the ďSecret SauceĒ of Alaska Airlines. If you bother to scratch the surface, the only ďcultureĒ you will find will be similar to the fine coating of mold that grows on everything in King County....Certainly come here for a job...But dont make a comparison between this job and a job at an airline company...It will help if you depress your expectations before you apply.......If you are already here and overly vested in the myth of the PNW and staying then relax. Nothing has changed in the last 25 years and it certainly wont change in the next 25 years...

WutFace
11-18-2017, 01:26 PM
I'm unsure how nearly 8% growth annual projected is a "ship without a rudder."

8%?? Where is the number coming from? The delivery schedule sure doesn't correlate with this number.

So unless you're being funny with the numbers by including Horizon in those figures, 8% is just a fantasy.

And if you start parking Airbuses, then you're just plain lying.

4andCounting
11-18-2017, 03:59 PM
I'm unsure how nearly 8% growth annual projected is a "ship without a rudder." And why get into the costly "arms race" of a maintaining dedicated sub-fleet chasing after premium transcons against companies like AA, UA, and DL that benefit from huge corporate agreements? The course AS is plotting isn't as high-yield on a per-customer basis, but it's a MUCH bigger market segment they're going after in transcons.

But part of that is keeping costs low to remain competitive when AA/DL/UA/B6 try to fight with fares that trash yields for everyone.

AS took a knee this past quarter due to the QX fiasco, definitely - but barring that, I doubt there'd be anywhere near the hand-wringing that appears to be going on right now. And lest we forget, PBP is STILL projecting a payout in the 7.5 to 8% range; it may seem low since we've been spoiled by record payouts of over 9% for the past 5 years, but it's still healthy.

Take this one milestone at a time and you'll see things improving. QX is already righting their ship. 12/31 is the last day for Elevate. Then SOC in January, and single PSS on 4/25/18. Along the way, you see the first Airbus leave the paint shop in AS livery, followed by everything in the fleet getting retrofitted into the new interiors.

It's going to be an interesting ride, and I think, a very rewarding one.

OMG. You are too funny. If you want to try and send marketing folks out to mitigate the bad press your pilots are putting out there and hurting your recruiting efforts, you should start with not quoting company email talking points. Perhaps report back to your overlords how unhappy we are and how dissapointed we are our managment group. No-one takes you seriously. Please stop embarrassing yourself and frankly the rest of us that are actually Air Group Pilots.

For God's sake, if you are going to pretend to be a pilot, at least try and talk like one.

EA CO AS
11-18-2017, 05:08 PM
For God's sake, if you are going to pretend to be a pilot, at least try and talk like one.

Who said I was a pilot, or even pretending to be one? This is a public forum and anyone can join. I'm simply sharing my opinion. If it differs from yours, great - tell me why you believe I'm wrong and we can discuss it.

Or, you and others can go back to saying LALALALAICANTHEARYOULALALALA and calling me "troll," but that doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong merely because you happen to not want to hear it.

Pogey Bait
11-19-2017, 03:14 AM
Who said I was a pilot, or even pretending to be one? This is a public forum and anyone can join. I'm simply sharing my opinion. If it differs from yours, great - tell me why you believe I'm wrong and we can discuss it.

Or, you and others can go back to saying LALALALAICANTHEARYOULALALALA and calling me "troll," but that doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong merely because you happen to not want to hear it.

Well there is your answer............this is actually quite pathetic.

4andCounting
11-19-2017, 05:09 AM
Who said I was a pilot, or even pretending to be one? This is a public forum and anyone can join. I'm simply sharing my opinion. If it differs from yours, great - tell me why you believe I'm wrong and we can discuss it.

Or, you and others can go back to saying LALALALAICANTHEARYOULALALALA and calling me "troll," but that doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong merely because you happen to not want to hear it.

Gas Lamping is not an opinion. Giving your B.S. a forum of response is allowing you a path to continue the spread of crafted lies and misinformation. The Alaska management group made this bed. Your own fearless leader testified in the arbitration that you were willing to threaten the relationship with your pilots to maintain your cost advantage. Enjoy the results. We will be out in the world, in every airport, in every hotel, on every van, on this site and at job fairs telling the truth of what it is actually like working for this company. We don't have to tell them to not apply here, they will see the strife you have caused. They will see the God awful schedules, the below standard living and pay conditions, the lack of job protections and the absence of commitment to the employees that enrich them and their share holders. They will hear of the operational collapses, the lack of proper staffing and resources, the safety programs that are disgarded for the sake of ontime, the plan that is spoken of but never revealed and obviously is not working.

The quality applicants will flee, the left overs will only fuel the collapse of the crafted persona you wish to maintain to the outside world.

I will not engage you, and I encourage other to do the same.

IFlyNFish
11-19-2017, 09:42 AM
Greedy Bastages. 😂

rickair7777
11-19-2017, 10:18 AM
Who said I was a pilot, or even pretending to be one? This is a public forum and anyone can join. I'm simply sharing my opinion. If it differs from yours, great - tell me why you believe I'm wrong and we can discuss it.

Or, you and others can go back to saying LALALALAICANTHEARYOULALALALA and calling me "troll," but that doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong merely because you happen to not want to hear it.

MODERATOR INPUT: Anyone can participate, but if you're injecting yourself into pilot business you need to conduct yourself like the guest that you are and be clear about what exactly you are.

ForeverJunior
11-19-2017, 10:35 AM
moderator input: Anyone can participate, but if you're injecting yourself into pilot business you need to conduct yourself like the guest that you are and be clear about what exactly you are.

Thank you!!

IFlyNFish
11-19-2017, 12:55 PM
EA CO AS, at least identify your roll.

Why don't most share your "facts"?....... because history hasn't been good to this pilot group with the way B squared has treated labor groups, and as BM stated, they are happy to have bad relations. Hope is all speculative and forward looking in a very competitive market, with management more concerned about satisfying Wall St than being aggressive in an unprecedented growth market. Reading the arbitration hearings tells a much different story than yours, it's not all rainbows and butterflies, and the demise of QX is an example of how things are going and how much their egos can hurt AG.

If our speculative "growth" is tied to our regional feed, it's not looking promising. More likely, future growth will be tied to the next merger.

As one person has said... lay off the "Hope-ium".

pete2800
11-19-2017, 02:09 PM
And lest we forget, PBP is STILL projecting a payout in the 7.5 to 8% range; it may seem low since we've been spoiled by record payouts of over 9% for the past 5 years, but it's still healthy.

I didn't know it was possible to be "spoiled" by a sub-standard profit sharing plan.

What was Delta's percentage again?

cmrflyer
11-19-2017, 04:30 PM
Even virgins was 14+%

EA CO AS
11-19-2017, 05:02 PM
MODERATOR INPUT: Anyone can participate, but if you're injecting yourself into pilot business you need to conduct yourself like the guest that you are and be clear about what exactly you are.


As a co-worker, Iíd suggest that whether or not we maintain a cost advantage or have a cost structure that renders us unable to compete is my business, pilot or not. And unlike others here, Iíve not resorted to ad-hominem attacks because my opinion differs from that of others. Also, with due respect, Iíve not seen anywhere in the rules of this forum where identifying yourself is a requirement to exchange ideas. If it is, please show me where, and Iíll be on my way. If itís not, also with respect, Iíd ask that the moderators only interject as a mod when or if forum rules are violated.

Ispeakjive
11-19-2017, 10:20 PM
Who said I was a pilot, or even pretending to be one? This is a public forum and anyone can join. I'm simply sharing my opinion. If it differs from yours, great - tell me why you believe I'm wrong and we can discuss it.

Or, you and others can go back to saying LALALALAICANTHEARYOULALALALA and calling me "troll," but that doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong merely because you happen to not want to hear it.

Change name to EA CO AS POS

rickair7777
11-20-2017, 06:19 AM
As a co-worker, I’d suggest that whether or not we maintain a cost advantage or have a cost structure that renders us unable to compete is my business, pilot or not. And unlike others here, I’ve not resorted to ad-hominem attacks because my opinion differs from that of others. Also, with due respect, I’ve not seen anywhere in the rules of this forum where identifying yourself is a requirement to exchange ideas. If it is, please show me where, and I’ll be on my way. If it’s not, also with respect, I’d ask that the moderators only interject as a mod when or if forum rules are violated.

Rules include no flamebait, non-pilots interjecting into airline pilot business very quickly reaches that threshold. Your interests are not our interests in every case. You're welcome to identify yourself (by what you are, not necessarily who you are) and address shared areas of interest. But in this conversation you are a guest, and that's the way it is and always has been (hence Airline Pilot Central, vice Airline Employee Central). I'm sure you have your own forums to engage in heated debates with your own peers. Same for 15-year old pilot wannabes, tolerated but only a little bit.

We're all pilots. What are you, a FA? MX? DX?

BiloxiJack
11-20-2017, 06:31 AM
-We are cutting routes and frequency while other airlines are rapidly increasing out put.

-we have a management team who believes the right course of action is to provide a far inferior product while other airlines race to provide better amenities

-we have a management team who is too short sighted to see what's on the horizon (no pun intended) in terms of pilot recruitment and detainment (auto corrected from retention but detainment is actually more suitable.)

-most new flying is being given away hand over foot to regional carriers while we have nothing in place to protect our jobs and trust our product to be flown largely by an external non controllable entity

-a far inferior profit sharing plan.. and a joke of a monthly incentive plan that in order to trigger a payout would have to hit unattainable metrics in the airports that are our hubs

-a management team who somehow does not see that they are losing the California battle and quickly. Virgin customer numbers are down and will
continue to plummet because our product has gone belly up since as took over. Nothing is ever fixed, catering has been slashed, and metics are so important that we strive for on time more than getting people onboard... alaska will not "bear the fruits of this merger" if it does not change course quickly, all of our customers are going to JetBlue, not AS. That's because alaska is a boring old regional airline that killed off virgin, people do not know Alaska airlines exists, or now that virgin is going away are going back to Expedia and becoming fare shoppers again.


EA CO AS, maybe you're right about this not being a rudderless ship... I think this ship very much has a rudder... a rudder being steered by a blind skipper that's too stupid to admit he can no longer see and is driving the ship right into a rock jagged shore. Hope you have a life raft, because a much larger percentage of this pilot group than you think has applications out to other (much better) legacy carriers in attempts to secure our own life rafts. The sooner that you and management realize that without us, the company will crumble (faster than it already is), then the sooner you can steer the ship away from shore.
-

ecam
11-20-2017, 06:56 AM
Who said I was a pilot, or even pretending to be one? This is a public forum and anyone can join. I'm simply sharing my opinion. If it differs from yours, great - tell me why you believe I'm wrong and we can discuss it.

Or, you and others can go back to saying LALALALAICANTHEARYOULALALALA and calling me "troll," but that doesn't mean what I'm saying is wrong merely because you happen to not want to hear it.

This has got to be the first time in APC history that a shill management troll unashamedly admitted to being such!

You guys have a very bold management group over there! I hope you all continue to stand strong, and eventually prevail for all of us in the industry.

Sad to see VX killed off. Probably their biggest mistake. Should have gone the other way. VX was a national brand. AS has a long way to go.

Reactivity
11-20-2017, 08:34 AM
But in this conversation you are a guest, and that's the way it is and always has been (hence Airline Pilot Central, vice Airline Employee Central). I'm sure you have your own forums to engage in heated debates with your own peers. Same for 15-year old pilot wannabes, tolerated but only a little bit.

We're all pilots. What are you, a FA? MX? DX?

Didja ever wonder why people hate airline pilots? Yeah...that's why.

rickair7777
11-20-2017, 08:44 AM
Didja ever wonder why people hate airline pilots? Yeah...that's why.

This thread is not a popularity contest, it's a business discussion.

Reggie Dunlop
11-20-2017, 09:22 AM
This thread is not a popularity contest, it's a business discussion.

A business discussion...you can't be serious Rick.

Let's be honest, this is a pilot ***** board...nothing more. It is a place where the angry elves and malcontents at each airline come to vent about their unhappy lives when they are done beating off to midget porn in the hotel room, wannabe airline CEOs who barely made it thru Riddle with degree in "Aeronautics" or Chico State with "Business" degree come to tell everyone how to run an airline, the poor military guys come to get a clue, a few witty souls come to crack jokes, the creative guys come to troll the jackwagons who are too f'ing stupid to know they are being trolled, and the rest of us drop by from time to time to eat some popcorn and watch the circus.

A business discussion...please. Don't make me laugh. You guys do a fine and thankless job moderating this sh1tsh0w but let's accept it for what it is, eh?

NoPWOWs2020
11-20-2017, 09:28 AM
The plan.

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/alaska/109444-what-pwow.html

Reggie Dunlop
11-20-2017, 09:31 AM
The plan.

https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/alaska/109444-what-pwow.html


Rickair,

If it please the court, in support of my previous post I submit people's Exhibit 1 listed above.

Packrat
11-20-2017, 09:43 AM
Rickair,

If it please the court, in support of my previous post I submit people Exhibit 1 listed above.

+1.

"Fly the contract."

rickair7777
11-20-2017, 10:05 AM
A business discussion...you can't be serious Rick.

Let's be honest, this is a pilot ***** board...nothing more. It is a place where the angry elves and malcontents at each airline come to vent about their unhappy lives when they are done beating off to midget porn in the hotel room, wannabe airline CEOs who barely made it thru Riddle with degree in "Aeronautics" or Chico State with "Business" degree come to tell everyone how to run an airline, the poor military guys come to get a clue, a few witty souls come to crack jokes, the creative guys come to troll the jackwagons who are too f'ing stupid to know they are being trolled, and the rest of us drop by from time to time to eat some popcorn and watch the circus.

A business discussion...please. Don't make me laugh. You guys do a fine and thankless job moderating this sh1tsh0w but let's accept it for what it is, eh?

I didn't say it was a great business discussion. But there's a lot of info get's tossed out on APC, once you learn to read between the lines and adjust the gain on the signal strength. The large majority of APC visitors lurk, but don't post.

Work2much
11-20-2017, 10:26 AM
A business discussion...you can't be serious Rick.

Let's be honest, this is a pilot ***** board...nothing more. It is a place where the angry elves and malcontents at each airline come to vent about their unhappy lives when they are done beating off to midget porn in the hotel room, wannabe airline CEOs who barely made it thru Riddle with degree in "Aeronautics" or Chico State with "Business" degree come to tell everyone how to run an airline, the poor military guys come to get a clue, a few witty souls come to crack jokes, the creative guys come to troll the jackwagons who are too f'ing stupid to know they are being trolled, and the rest of us drop by from time to time to eat some popcorn and watch the circus.

A business discussion...please. Don't make me laugh. You guys do a fine and thankless job moderating this sh1tsh0w but let's accept it for what it is, eh?

++++1 Good response. It's disingenuous to say that there's anything "businessy" being discussed. It's not like a board meeting making serious decisions. It's a B*****ing board, lets be honest. Anyone who says otherwise takes himself/herself too seriously.

Reggie Dunlop
11-20-2017, 11:09 AM
I didn't say it was a great business discussion.

:D Well played, sir.

Reggie Dunlop
11-20-2017, 11:16 AM
+1.

"Fly the contract."

Just to be clear I was in no way supporting the idiotic post of that PWOW silliness. I was using that post as an example of why a pilot b1tch board can't be taken seriously. Nor can it ever be confused with anything remotely related to a "business discussion" when you have morons that write anonymous little rants and manifestos.

A boob like that is the airline industry's equivalent of Ted Kaczynski.

Whoever penned the PWOW thread is an imbecile.

EA CO AS
11-20-2017, 12:35 PM
This thread is not a popularity contest, it's a business discussion.

I couldn't agree more, and based on that, I'd propose we keep it in that realm, rather than condescendingly referring to someone with a different opinion as merely a "guest" and implying they have no right to discuss issues impacting pilots.

Speaking of business decisions, it occurs to me that management's decision to seek pay rates that were less than the Big Four was actually in the best interest of the business, and also the pilots. Assume for a moment the pilot group were offered industry-best pay; that results in costs potentially being higher than the other carriers, making competition difficult, if not impossible.

This results in stagnant growth, meaning fewer upgrade opportunities or even poor job security if the company had to resort to cutbacks. While those at the top of the seniority list would still be ok, particularly those nearing retirement, the rest of the membership would be in jeopardy. And lest we forget, there are thousands of other non-pilot employees whose careers would be in jeopardy as well if the company agreed to a contract that was so generous it made competition impossible.

So while BM could have possibly chosen his words more carefully, the fact remains that simply saying, "Sure, here you go," and handing an industry-best contract to the pilot group would have made them all happy, there'd be no point in doing so if it means the long-term survival of the company was placed in jeopardy by doing so. In fact, it would have been irresponsible to do that.

Again, I know my opinion won't be popular here, but these are called "collective bargaining agreements" for a reason; neither side gets 100% of what they want, and that's a good thing. Management getting all their asks could potentially result in every member of the pilot group being unhappy, and no one wants that. ALPA getting all their asks could potentially result in the company having to shrink, being sold, or going under entirely, and no one wants that either.

At least I hope not!

Packrat
11-20-2017, 01:10 PM
A boob like that is the airline industry's equivalent of Ted Kaczynski.

Whoever penned the PWOW thread is an imbecile.

I'm with you. As a clarification, you can't pick and choose the sections of the contract you approve of. As long as any pilot operates legally within the scope of the contract (as opposed to making individual deals with crew schedulers) he/she must be allowed to do so.

Don't like certain sections? Get in touch with your LEC rep and have him bring it up at the next MEC meeting. Until then....

"Fly the contract."

Pogey Bait
11-20-2017, 01:21 PM
I couldn't agree more, and based on that, I'd propose we keep it in that realm, rather than condescendingly referring to someone with a different opinion as merely a "guest" and implying they have no right to discuss issues impacting pilots.

Speaking of business decisions, it occurs to me that management's decision to seek pay rates that were less than the Big Four was actually in the best interest of the business, and also the pilots. Assume for a moment the pilot group were offered industry-best pay; that results in costs potentially being higher than the other carriers, making competition difficult, if not impossible.

This results in stagnant growth, meaning fewer upgrade opportunities or even poor job security if the company had to resort to cutbacks. While those at the top of the seniority list would still be ok, particularly those nearing retirement, the rest of the membership would be in jeopardy. And lest we forget, there are thousands of other non-pilot employees whose careers would be in jeopardy as well if the company agreed to a contract that was so generous it made competition impossible.

So while BM could have possibly chosen his words more carefully, the fact remains that simply saying, "Sure, here you go," and handing an industry-best contract to the pilot group would have made them all happy, there'd be no point in doing so if it means the long-term survival of the company was placed in jeopardy by doing so. In fact, it would have been irresponsible to do that.

Again, I know my opinion won't be popular here, but these are called "collective bargaining agreements" for a reason; neither side gets 100% of what they want, and that's a good thing. Management getting all their asks could potentially result in every member of the pilot group being unhappy, and no one wants that. ALPA getting all their asks could potentially result in the company having to shrink, being sold, or going under entirely, and no one wants that either.

At least I hope not!


You are completely out to lunch. You have zero idea what you are talking about, none of it makes any sense. We all have the facts on the entire arbitration. You are attempting to spew management based propaganda.

BiloxiJack
11-20-2017, 01:36 PM
You're impossibly stupid.

I pray that we get sold.

I couldn't agree more, and based on that, I'd propose we keep it in that realm, rather than condescendingly referring to someone with a different opinion as merely a "guest" and implying they have no right to discuss issues impacting pilots.

Speaking of business decisions, it occurs to me that management's decision to seek pay rates that were less than the Big Four was actually in the best interest of the business, and also the pilots. Assume for a moment the pilot group were offered industry-best pay; that results in costs potentially being higher than the other carriers, making competition difficult, if not impossible.

This results in stagnant growth, meaning fewer upgrade opportunities or even poor job security if the company had to resort to cutbacks. While those at the top of the seniority list would still be ok, particularly those nearing retirement, the rest of the membership would be in jeopardy. And lest we forget, there are thousands of other non-pilot employees whose careers would be in jeopardy as well if the company agreed to a contract that was so generous it made competition impossible.

So while BM could have possibly chosen his words more carefully, the fact remains that simply saying, "Sure, here you go," and handing an industry-best contract to the pilot group would have made them all happy, there'd be no point in doing so if it means the long-term survival of the company was placed in jeopardy by doing so. In fact, it would have been irresponsible to do that.

Again, I know my opinion won't be popular here, but these are called "collective bargaining agreements" for a reason; neither side gets 100% of what they want, and that's a good thing. Management getting all their asks could potentially result in every member of the pilot group being unhappy, and no one wants that. ALPA getting all their asks could potentially result in the company having to shrink, being sold, or going under entirely, and no one wants that either.

At least I hope not!

Arctichicken
11-20-2017, 01:44 PM
I couldn't agree more, and based on that, I'd propose we keep it in that realm, rather than condescendingly referring to someone with a different opinion as merely a "guest" and implying they have no right to discuss issues impacting pilots.

Speaking of business decisions, it occurs to me that management's decision to seek pay rates that were less than the Big Four was actually in the best interest of the business, and also the pilots. Assume for a moment the pilot group were offered industry-best pay; that results in costs potentially being higher than the other carriers, making competition difficult, if not impossible.

This results in stagnant growth, meaning fewer upgrade opportunities or even poor job security if the company had to resort to cutbacks. While those at the top of the seniority list would still be ok, particularly those nearing retirement, the rest of the membership would be in jeopardy. And lest we forget, there are thousands of other non-pilot employees whose careers would be in jeopardy as well if the company agreed to a contract that was so generous it made competition impossible.

So while BM could have possibly chosen his words more carefully, the fact remains that simply saying, "Sure, here you go," and handing an industry-best contract to the pilot group would have made them all happy, there'd be no point in doing so if it means the long-term survival of the company was placed in jeopardy by doing so. In fact, it would have been irresponsible to do that.

Again, I know my opinion won't be popular here, but these are called "collective bargaining agreements" for a reason; neither side gets 100% of what they want, and that's a good thing. Management getting all their asks could potentially result in every member of the pilot group being unhappy, and no one wants that. ALPA getting all their asks could potentially result in the company having to shrink, being sold, or going under entirely, and no one wants that either.

At least I hope not!

Bottom line: The company can afford to pay us top dollar, put a solid scope clause in place, and match Delta's 401k contribution but they simply won't. They've been making 20%+ record profits for years. Tell me genius, name one airline that went out of business due to high employee wages? Ask AAL, DAL, UAL, USAir, et al employees if their countless concessions saved their beloved company from bankruptcy and/or liquidation. Large corporations exercise creative accounting that you and I are not privy to. It is the greedy and evil society that we live in. Success and failure solely rests on management, period. Sadly, this management has used up most of its nine lives by choosing to let their greed and ego run its course. Instead of leading by team building, they chose the antagonistic approach in an effort to beat down the very workforce that brought them success. They are walking on thin ice and we are in dire need of leadership at the helm to steer this runaway vessel. Management needs to step up or move out.

SmoothLanderJ
11-20-2017, 01:54 PM
Bottom line: The company can afford to pay us top dollar, put a solid scope clause in place, and match Delta's 401k contribution but they simply won't. They've been making 20%+ record profits for years. Tell me genius, name one airline that went out of business due to high employee wages? Ask AAL, DAL, UAL, USAir, et al employees if their countless concessions saved their beloved company from bankruptcy and/or liquidation. Large corporations exercise creative accounting that you and I are not privy to. It is the greedy and evil society that we live in. Success and failure solely rests on management, period. Sadly, this management has used up most of its nine lives by choosing to let their greed and ego run its course. Instead of leading by team building, they chose the antagonistic approach in an effort to beat down the very workforce that brought them success. They are walking on thin ice and we are in dire need of leadership at the helm to steer this runaway vessel. Management needs to step up or move out.

100% agree

Arctichicken
11-20-2017, 02:09 PM
EA CO AS, may I suggest in the future, that you display some intelligence, if you posses any, and put up some facts instead of speaking from your sphincter. Here are some facts for all of us to ponder:
The wealthiest 1 percent of the world's population now owns more than half of the world's wealth. The total wealth in the world grew by 6 percent over the past 12 months to $280 trillion. That was the fastest wealth creation since 2012.
Remember, BT and his homies are in the top 1%. They may be in the bottom of that 1% bracket but they are still in there. Greed and ego has no end.

jumppilot
11-20-2017, 02:40 PM
EA CO AS, may I suggest in the future, that you display some intelligence, if you posses any, and put up some facts instead of speaking from your sphincter. Here are some facts for all of us to ponder:
The wealthiest 1 percent of the world's population now owns more than half of the world's wealth. The total wealth in the world grew by 6 percent over the past 12 months to $280 trillion. That was the fastest wealth creation since 2012.
Remember, BT and his homies are in the top 1%. They may be in the bottom of that 1% bracket but they are still in there. Greed and ego has no end.


Agreed.

It's interesting seeing how "the common man" always puts the company first. The company being able to make a dollar trumps all other causes, including the worker who makes those dollars. We've seen this for years with the decline of unions and the population going along with it willingly.

Corporate profits are at a record high and *gasp* a union is trying to grab a piece of that pie. But instead, the top just gets richer (bonuses, stock options etc) and the common worker is happy settling for less because their boss told them it's best for the company's ability to compete.

It's laughable.

But I do believe as income and wealth inequality continues to build we will see a tipping point where the common worker starts to get it and demands, through organization, their fair share of the profits they produce. It may take time, but people are indeed getting the shaft and will someday wakeup.

pete2800
11-20-2017, 03:46 PM
I'm unsure how nearly 8% growth annual projected is a "ship without a rudder." And why get into the costly "arms race" of a maintaining dedicated sub-fleet chasing after premium transcons against companies like AA, UA, and DL that benefit from huge corporate agreements? The course AS is plotting isn't as high-yield on a per-customer basis, but it's a MUCH bigger market segment they're going after in transcons.

But part of that is keeping costs low to remain competitive when AA/DL/UA/B6 try to fight with fares that trash yields for everyone.

AS took a knee this past quarter due to the QX fiasco, definitely - but barring that, I doubt there'd be anywhere near the hand-wringing that appears to be going on right now. And lest we forget, PBP is STILL projecting a payout in the 7.5 to 8% range; it may seem low since we've been spoiled by record payouts of over 9% for the past 5 years, but it's still healthy.

Take this one milestone at a time and you'll see things improving. QX is already righting their ship. 12/31 is the last day for Elevate. Then SOC in January, and single PSS on 4/25/18. Along the way, you see the first Airbus leave the paint shop in AS livery, followed by everything in the fleet getting retrofitted into the new interiors.

It's going to be an interesting ride, and I think, a very rewarding one.

I couldn't agree more, and based on that, I'd propose we keep it in that realm, rather than condescendingly referring to someone with a different opinion as merely a "guest" and implying they have no right to discuss issues impacting pilots.

Speaking of business decisions, it occurs to me that management's decision to seek pay rates that were less than the Big Four was actually in the best interest of the business, and also the pilots. Assume for a moment the pilot group were offered industry-best pay; that results in costs potentially being higher than the other carriers, making competition difficult, if not impossible.

This results in stagnant growth, meaning fewer upgrade opportunities or even poor job security if the company had to resort to cutbacks. While those at the top of the seniority list would still be ok, particularly those nearing retirement, the rest of the membership would be in jeopardy. And lest we forget, there are thousands of other non-pilot employees whose careers would be in jeopardy as well if the company agreed to a contract that was so generous it made competition impossible.

So while BM could have possibly chosen his words more carefully, the fact remains that simply saying, "Sure, here you go," and handing an industry-best contract to the pilot group would have made them all happy, there'd be no point in doing so if it means the long-term survival of the company was placed in jeopardy by doing so. In fact, it would have been irresponsible to do that.

Again, I know my opinion won't be popular here, but these are called "collective bargaining agreements" for a reason; neither side gets 100% of what they want, and that's a good thing. Management getting all their asks could potentially result in every member of the pilot group being unhappy, and no one wants that. ALPA getting all their asks could potentially result in the company having to shrink, being sold, or going under entirely, and no one wants that either.

At least I hope not!

That's a nice strawman argument you have there.

You realize that the union didn't even ask for industry leading rates or scope right?

The union position was the average of the top 4 in pay and substandard scope protection.

Even if the arbitrators had given the pilots everything the union asked for, our pay would have been less than Delta, American, and United. Our scope would still have been worse than those three plus Southwest.

Explain to me how Southwest manages to pay more than we do while still guaranteeing their pilots job security via ZERO outsourcing?

Boeing314
11-20-2017, 04:03 PM
That's a nice strawman argument you have there.

You realize that the union didn't even ask for industry leading rates or scope right?

The union position was the average of the top 4 in pay and substandard scope protection.

Even if the arbitrators had given the pilots everything the union asked for, our pay would have been less than Delta, American, and United. Our scope would still have been worse than those three plus Southwest.

Explain to me how Southwest manages to pay more than we do while still guaranteeing their pilots job security via ZERO outsourcing?

Alaska pilots need scope or you risk seeing more of your capacity outsourcedóthis should be priority number one and 86k lbs and 76-seat Scope limits are also industry standard! Get with the program!

pete2800
11-20-2017, 04:23 PM
Alaska pilots need scope or you risk seeing more of your capacity outsourcedóthis should be priority number one and 86k lbs and 76-seat Scope limits are also industry standard! Get with the program!

Dude, most of us get it. We're trying. We're still suffering from the effects of incompetence in the past, which is why we have ended up working under contracts that have been impacted by arbitration in a significant way. I recently flew with a guy who didn't have a problem with the idea of the company outsourcing E190's or similar sized airplanes. Every time we have a mandatory retirement, our pilot group's stance on scope becomes more united. The more regional pilots they hire, and the more retirements we have, the more things will improve. Things take time, though. The mistakes of negotiations past are still very present.

zerozero
11-20-2017, 06:38 PM
I couldn't agree more, and based on that, I'd propose we keep it in that realm, rather than condescendingly referring to someone with a different opinion as merely a "guest" and implying they have no right to discuss issues impacting pilots.

Speaking of business decisions, it occurs to me that management's decision to seek pay rates that were less than the Big Four was actually in the best interest of the business, and also the pilots..........

......and I stopped reading right there.

lmao
:D

beancounter
11-21-2017, 12:24 AM
I couldn't agree more, and based on that, I'd propose we keep it in that realm, rather than condescendingly referring to someone with a different opinion as merely a "guest" and implying they have no right to discuss issues impacting pilots.

Speaking of business decisions, it occurs to me that management's decision to seek pay rates that were less than the Big Four was actually in the best interest of the business, and also the pilots. Assume for a moment the pilot group were offered industry-best pay; that results in costs potentially being higher than the other carriers, making competition difficult, if not impossible.

This results in stagnant growth, meaning fewer upgrade opportunities or even poor job security if the company had to resort to cutbacks. While those at the top of the seniority list would still be ok, particularly those nearing retirement, the rest of the membership would be in jeopardy. And lest we forget, there are thousands of other non-pilot employees whose careers would be in jeopardy as well if the company agreed to a contract that was so generous it made competition impossible.

So while BM could have possibly chosen his words more carefully, the fact remains that simply saying, "Sure, here you go," and handing an industry-best contract to the pilot group would have made them all happy, there'd be no point in doing so if it means the long-term survival of the company was placed in jeopardy by doing so. In fact, it would have been irresponsible to do that.

Again, I know my opinion won't be popular here, but these are called "collective bargaining agreements" for a reason; neither side gets 100% of what they want, and that's a good thing. Management getting all their asks could potentially result in every member of the pilot group being unhappy, and no one wants that. ALPA getting all their asks could potentially result in the company having to shrink, being sold, or going under entirely, and no one wants that either.

At least I hope not!

If Alaska can't afford to pay it's pilots industry standard pay then it's already game over. I don't think you grasp the situation Alaska is in with the start of the biggest hiring boom we've ever seen. Let's say hypothetically that in a year or two Delta decides it's taking too long to kill Alaska in Seattle and they want to quicken the pace. They simply offer jobs to any Alaska pilots that want them, no interviews. Alaska would lose so many pilots they wouldn't be able to train them fast enough, the operation would meltdown, and the cash would start getting burned through. It already happened on a small scale at Horizon. AA alone is hiring 900 pilots next year and the year after and the year after.......Delta will probably hire more than that with their higher level of expansion. How many total pilots does Alaska have? How many with only a couple years invested in the Air Group? Are you grasping any of this?

WutFace
11-21-2017, 12:50 AM
Speaking of business decisions, it occurs to me that management's decision to seek pay rates that were less than the Big Four was actually in the best interest of the business, and also the pilots....

This results in stagnant growth, meaning fewer upgrade opportunities or even poor job security if the company had to resort to cutbacks. ...


This is some Grade A Stockholm Syndrome propaganda you're pushing right here.

"I only beat you because it's good for you, baby."

PAH-LEEEZE. You're not offering any guarantees that low costs and sacrificed pay will translate into growth. After all, ALK management loves to beat their chests about that industry leading profit margin, and growth plans will surely cut into that bar graph. Crew pay constitutes less than 8% of total operational costs, but yet you pretend that the entire airline hinges on the cost of the pilots. By the way, this has been a spectacular diversion from the original point of "What's the plan?" With the projected 737 deliveries and the anticipated loss of the Airbus fleet, ALK is looking at a net loss of aircraft over the next decade.

You don't have to be a business major to use addition.

EskimoJoe
11-21-2017, 12:57 AM
If Alaska can't afford to pay it's pilots industry standard pay then it's already game over. I don't think you grasp the situation Alaska is in with the start of the biggest hiring boom we've ever seen. Let's say hypothetically that in a year or two Delta decides it's taking too long to kill Alaska in Seattle and they want to quicken the pace. They simply offer jobs to any Alaska pilots that want them, no interviews. Alaska would lose so many pilots they wouldn't be able to train them fast enough, the operation would meltdown, and the cash would start getting burned through. It already happened on a small scale at Horizon. AA alone is hiring 900 pilots next year and the year after and the year after.......Delta will probably hire more than that with their higher level of expansion. How many total pilots does Alaska have? How many with only a couple years invested in the Air Group? Are you grasping any of this?

Thatís the gamble Brad and Ben made...and?... What are you going to do about it? If they want to risk the future of Alaska Airlines, thatís their perogative I guess. Iíd be far more worried about the effects of spending 4 Billion on VX than I would be about Deltaís hiring practices BTW.

GearBoy
11-21-2017, 06:12 AM
I was riding the hotel van, the other day, on the way to the airport. I struck up a conversation with a Spirit captain. I asked about their negotiations. He told me that Spirit recently offered their pilots:

~$264 AND PBS.

Of course, I do not know if this is true and even if so it is an over-simplification of their negotiations. But, if the pay number is correct and comes to fruition, Alaska could soon be number 6.

If Spirit gets $264, what does JetBlue get? Who's next?

I believe the Alaska Mechanics have a clause that keeps them at, I believe, the third highest in their peer group. If someone else gets a raise, knocking them down from 3rd, there's some kind of adjustment. The rub is in who is included in that peer group.

When Doug Parker addressed the American pilot's initial request to re-open pay negotiations in light of gains at Delta and United, he responded that the American pilots were among the first in the negotiation cycle and that they raised the bar for everyone who followed and that they would lead the way again with their next negotiations. The point being, even Doug Parker, Mr. East vs. West, knows that successive negotiations are going to raise the bar, unless of course you are someplace like Alaska where you start off at 5th, only to finish lower.

You guys keep talking only hourly pay. What a pilot makes is not his hourly pay. What a pilot makes is what his W-2 says at the end of the year. That W-2 is a more valid comparison. That W-2 is a function of hourly pay AND work rules.

Bottom, line even if you Alaska guys were paid Delta wages, you'd still be cheaper because of your inferior work rules. You are more productive and Alaska gets by with fewer pilots, working more for straight time. Every new-hire or upgrade you prevent by working so productively, saves Alaska hundreds of thousands of dollar$ each.

While you guys work more for less, WN can still drop to 0, pick up all Premium, or take the month off, still has trips touching, and the best scope in the industry. Delta has Green slips and profit sharing out the wazoo, All the while, Alaska can't drop below 75 and is working on their days off and vacation for straight time to make less with little or no quality of life, and BM & BT continue buy back billion$ in stock, offer themselves others countless $tock option$, pay dividend$ and spend billion$ on another airline, all on the back of your front-line employees.

So, my question is this. Since you are seemingly happy with no. 5. what happens if and when you guys and gals become number 6 or number 7?

just curious-

Will the on-time and completions still be in the 90's?

My Magic 8 Ball says yes.

Speaking of no. 8, that can't be far behind. It comes after 7, which comes after 6, which comes after 5.....

good luck and be safe out there. take care of one another; because, if you don't no one else will. the cooch is not on your side.


.

GearBoy
11-21-2017, 06:25 AM
Dude, most of us get it. We're trying. We're still suffering from the effects of incompetence in the past, which is why we have ended up working under contracts that have been impacted by arbitration in a significant way. I recently flew with a guy who didn't have a problem with the idea of the company outsourcing E190's or similar sized airplanes. Every time we have a mandatory retirement, our pilot group's stance on scope becomes more united. The more regional pilots they hire, and the more retirements we have, the more things will improve. Things take time, though. The mistakes of negotiations past are still very present.

By saying past negotiations, one seems to blame only the Union. They are copiable, especially for being too conciliatory. But, I say again:

The Union is not the Negotiating Committee, the MEC or even National. The Union is the pilot in the seat next to you.

If during negotiations, that pilot is flying Premium, selling back vacation or picking-up Open Time, you are doomed to fail.

ARBITRATION OR NOT

The only thing your company understands is canceled & delayed flights.

End of story-

GearBoy
11-21-2017, 06:31 AM
Dude, most of us get it. We're trying. We're still suffering from the effects of incompetence in the past, which is why we have ended up working under contracts that have been impacted by arbitration in a significant way. I recently flew with a guy who didn't have a problem with the idea of the company outsourcing E190's or similar sized airplanes. Every time we have a mandatory retirement, our pilot group's stance on scope becomes more united. The more regional pilots they hire, and the more retirements we have, the more things will improve. Things take time, though. The mistakes of negotiations past are still very present.

By saying past negotiations, one seems to blame only the Union. They are copiable, especially for being too conciliatory. But, I say again:

The Union is not the Negotiating Committee, The MEC or even National. The Union is the pilot in the seat next to you.

If during negotiations, that pilot is flying Premium, selling back vacation or picking-up Open Time, you are doomed to fail.

ARBITRATION OR NOT

End of story-

beancounter
11-21-2017, 09:56 AM
Thatís the gamble Brad and Ben made...and?... What are you going to do about it? If they want to risk the future of Alaska Airlines, thatís their perogative I guess. Iíd be far more worried about the effects of spending 4 Billion on VX than I would be about Deltaís hiring practices BTW.

It's all interlinked. Why do you think Alaska Air Group would obscenely over pay for VX? It's to make Alaska less vulnerable to Delta's long term Seattle plans.

pete2800
11-21-2017, 12:01 PM
By saying past negotiations, one seems to blame only the Union. They are copiable, especially for being too conciliatory. But, I say again:

The Union is not the Negotiating Committee, The MEC or even National. The Union is the pilot in the seat next to you.

If during negotiations, that pilot is flying Premium, selling back vacation or picking-up Open Time, you are doomed to fail.

ARBITRATION OR NOT

End of story-

I don't think we're disagreeing.

Weak pilots make a weak pilot group which makes for weak negotiations and a weak contract.

Packrat
11-21-2017, 12:54 PM
BM & BT continue buy back billion$ in stock, offer themselves others countless $tock option$, pay dividend$ and spend billion$ on another airline, all on the back of your front-line employees.

You hit the nail on the head there, Gear Boy. Too bad it was stuck in the middle of your post. All anyone has to do is look back over the years and see how much money AS has spent on stock buybacks.

Then ask yourself, "Who are the largest individual holders of Alaska stocks." It doesn't take much research to find out how many stock options the senior managers get as part of their compensation packages.

And you're still are buying the Alaska "We are family" B.S.?

I, for one, am glad to see the radicalization of the new generation of AS pilots. The 92% mentality should have gone away long ago.

OCCP
11-21-2017, 02:58 PM
Weak pilots make a weak pilot group which makes for weak negotiations and a weak contract.




Iím glad most Alaska pilots get this now

full of luv
11-21-2017, 11:40 PM
It's all interlinked. Why do you think Alaska Air Group would obscenely over pay for VX? It's to make Alaska less vulnerable to Delta's long term Seattle plans.

Ironically if Alaska Air Group would have just agreed to guarantee Delta the feed it needed via code share to build a Far East hub out of Seattle, they'd probably have grown by 30% over the last few years as Delta became increasingly reliant on AK's feed. Instead they said shove off and the race is on to build a hub suitable to feed international from SEA. Probably works for mgmt's interest, but the pilots.... time will tell.

Nick1984
11-22-2017, 11:22 AM
Ironically if Alaska Air Group would have just agreed to guarantee Delta the feed it needed via code share to build a Far East hub out of Seattle, they'd probably have grown by 30% over the last few years as Delta became increasingly reliant on AK's feed. Instead they said shove off and the race is on to build a hub suitable to feed international from SEA. Probably works for mgmt's interest, but the pilots.... time will tell.

Neat speculation. Does not matter moving forward.

full of luv
11-22-2017, 12:43 PM
Neat speculation. Does not matter moving forward.

Ture dat.....

Best of luck in 2020 and I hope that AK pilots become the best paid 737 pilots in the world!

EA CO AS
11-22-2017, 03:24 PM
Ironically if Alaska Air Group would have just agreed to guarantee Delta the feed it needed via code share to build a Far East hub out of Seattle, they'd probably have grown by 30% over the last few years as Delta became increasingly reliant on AK's feed. Instead they said shove off and the race is on to build a hub suitable to feed international from SEA. Probably works for mgmt's interest, but the pilots.... time will tell.

Given the amount of revenue coming in via codeshares and partnerships at that time (keep in mind, DL demanded AS sever ALL their codeshare and partner relationships and remain solely wedded to DL) the ask from DL was one that only benefited them, and would have made AS far more vulnerable to no longer being a standalone entity long-term.

While the DL relationship is now over, the organic growth alone at AS since DL entered the SEA market as a full-fledged hub operation has more than offset the loss of the DL revenue, and AS has added other partners since then, making Mileage Plan more attractive, not less.

I'd suggest that all that growth is in the best interest of everyone, pilots included. But that's just me...

pete2800
11-22-2017, 03:33 PM
Given the amount of revenue coming in via codeshares and partnerships at that time (keep in mind, DL demanded AS sever ALL their codeshare and partner relationships and remain solely wedded to DL) the ask from DL was one that only benefited them, and would have made AS far more vulnerable to no longer being a standalone entity long-term.

While the DL relationship is now over, the organic growth alone at AS since DL entered the SEA market as a full-fledged hub operation has more than offset the loss of the DL revenue, and AS has added other partners since then, making Mileage Plan more attractive, not less.

I'd suggest that all that growth is in the best interest of everyone, pilots included. But that's just me...
Yeah, you'd be right except for that most of the growth has been with sub-contracted regional jets operated by Skywest, because the company has fought tooth-and-nail against any contractual language oriented around job security for pilots.

N19906
11-22-2017, 07:00 PM
But that helps AAGís bottom line, doesnít it? And not us.

When we get to that point, just remember one thing: he who dares, wins.
And if youíre not willing to burn the place to the ground, you lose.

Because management is willing, and they assume weíre chumps.

EA CO AS
11-22-2017, 07:15 PM
if youíre not willing to burn the place to the ground, you lose.

So does every one of your non-pilot co-workers as well; are you saying you're ok with putting thousands of people out of work in the name of saying, "Ha! I sure showed you guys!" to Brad and Ben?

EA CO AS
11-22-2017, 07:28 PM
But that helps AAGís bottom line, doesnít it? And not us.

I always thought that anything that helped AAG ultimately helped the employees as well, especially considering how many employees 401(k) plans involve AAG stock.

As much as I love working for AS, I'd also like to retire someday, and an "I'll burn this place down!" mentality doesn't help advance career stability for our co-workers. Or our customers, for that matter.

NotTellin
11-22-2017, 07:55 PM
Why do you guys continue to engage a non pilot management shill? One that created there APC account less than a month ago! If you ignore them they will go away.

beancounter
11-22-2017, 08:40 PM
Ironically if Alaska Air Group would have just agreed to guarantee Delta the feed it needed via code share to build a Far East hub out of Seattle, they'd probably have grown by 30% over the last few years as Delta became increasingly reliant on AK's feed. Instead they said shove off and the race is on to build a hub suitable to feed international from SEA. Probably works for mgmt's interest, but the pilots.... time will tell.

That wasn't Delta's only request. They also wanted Alaska to drop the codeshare with American.

pete2800
11-22-2017, 10:20 PM
So does every one of your non-pilot co-workers as well; are you saying you're ok with putting thousands of people out of work in the name of saying, "Ha! I sure showed you guys!" to Brad and Ben?

The capacity will be flown. If not by one carrier, then by another. There will be jobs, and if the company that was paying less than the average is the one that suffers, then those jobs will be better as a result.

If the lower-paying companies are eliminated, the average compensation goes up. This is good for labor.

EA CO AS
11-22-2017, 10:52 PM
The capacity will be flown. If not by one carrier, then by another. There will be jobs, and if the company that was paying less than the average is the one that suffers, then those jobs will be better as a result.

If the lower-paying companies are eliminated, the average compensation goes up. This is good for labor.

So, "Hey, there will still be jobs; granted, it's likely they won't still be concentrated in the same places, so people will have to uproot their families, they'll be starting over in seniority, so they'll be taking huge paycuts, and in some cases they just won't have a job because someone else at a competitor already does what they do. But I got mine, so that's all that matters."

Right?

pete2800
11-22-2017, 11:35 PM
So, "Hey, there will still be jobs; granted, it's likely they won't still be concentrated in the same places, so people will have to uproot their families, they'll be starting over in seniority, so they'll be taking huge paycuts, and in some cases they just won't have a job because someone else at a competitor already does what they do. But I got mine, so that's all that matters."

Right?

"So sorry to inconvenience you with a loss of seniority in order to go work for a better company with more stability and better compensation."

You have to break some eggs to make an omelette. "It's just business." Isn't that what we were told with regards to our contract? It applies to other situations as well. If a weak company can't find a way to treat its employees in a way that maintains enough morale to keep from imploding... Well, that's just business.

It stands to reason the the companies that can pay well for pilots should pay well for other workers as well. It's for this reason that every time a regional airline dies, it's a net gain for the industry and its workers.

FlyAK
11-22-2017, 11:37 PM
So, "Hey, there will still be jobs; granted, it's likely they won't still be concentrated in the same places, so people will have to uproot their families, they'll be starting over in seniority, so they'll be taking huge paycuts, and in some cases they just won't have a job because someone else at a competitor already does what they do. But I got mine, so that's all that matters."

Right?

Do you work at a significant discount? Are you able to take a day off when you need it? Are you working through the night on thanksgiving or Christmas? Can you start over without beginning again at entry level pay and vacations? Are you backstabbed by your middle management on a regular basis? Are you subject to checkrides and a medical exam every year? Give me a break...

EA CO AS
11-23-2017, 12:57 AM
Are you subject to checkrides and a medical exam every year?

Nope, but then again, not everyone chose to pursue a career that requires that.

Everything else you listed?

This may come as quite a shock to you, but those are things that JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER CO-WORKER OF YOURS DEALS WITH.

Look, I'm not here to argue; I know pilots are damned important, and aren't easily replaced. But using that excuse as rationale to say things like "No waivers! No favors! Fly the contract!" which really means, "I'm willing to screw over my customers and co-workers so I can show management I'm ticked that I didn't get everything I wanted!" isn't a great way to exhibit the value you bring to the table.

full of luv
11-23-2017, 04:58 AM
That wasn't Delta's only request. They also wanted Alaska to drop the codeshare with American.

Yep, probably also with Emirates and some of the other 15 airlines that AK codeshares with.

FlyAK
11-23-2017, 08:29 AM
Nope, but then again, not everyone chose to pursue a career that requires that.

Everything else you listed?

This may come as quite a shock to you, but those are things that JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER CO-WORKER OF YOURS DEALS WITH.

Look, I'm not here to argue; I know pilots are damned important, and aren't easily replaced. But using that excuse as rationale to say things like "No waivers! No favors! Fly the contract!" which really means, "I'm willing to screw over my customers and co-workers so I can show management I'm ticked that I didn't get everything I wanted!" isn't a great way to exhibit the value you bring to the table.

The problem is weíve tried it your way for decades and it hasnít brought any improvement to our 92% contract. Even though weíve helped the airline become wildly successful weíve suffered huge paycuts (Kasher, 2005), Furloughs for profits (2009-2011), and management has used the success weíve helped create to threaten our airline by grossly over-paying for a start up airline which not only threatens the balance sheet of our airline with debt and integration issues, but also our very careers with a potentially unfair seniority integration. So pardon me if we are done with the status quo. The status quo has gotten us nowhere and now we are going to rock the boat a little bit... maybe if the water starts to come over the side a little bit, management will be forced to build a better boat.

PotatoChip
11-23-2017, 09:18 AM
"No waivers! No favors! Fly the contract!" which really means, "I'm willing to screw over my customers and co-workers so I can show management I'm ticked that I didn't get everything I wanted!" isn't a great way to exhibit the value you bring to the table.

Incorrect. It sounds that way, but every single pilot, and every single union member in every industry should follow that advice. To do otherwise completely undermines the entire process, and in our industry it undermines the RLA and the blood which has been shed in order to achieve much of what has been gained.

It isn't "screw the company". The company already agreed to the terms. It's the company that continually violates the contract, not the other way around. Companies can also file grievances... but they never do, because the pilot group doesn't violate the contract, and if they do, it's to "help the company".

This is all union 101...

pete2800
11-23-2017, 09:20 AM
Nope, but then again, not everyone chose to pursue a career that requires that.

Everything else you listed?

This may come as quite a shock to you, but those are things that JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER CO-WORKER OF YOURS DEALS WITH.

Look, I'm not here to argue; I know pilots are damned important, and aren't easily replaced. But using that excuse as rationale to say things like "No waivers! No favors! Fly the contract!" which really means, "I'm willing to screw over my customers and co-workers so I can show management I'm ticked that I didn't get everything I wanted!" isn't a great way to exhibit the value you bring to the table.
It's just business. The market always reacts. This is the market reaction to the actions that were taken. It's very similar to the shortage the regionals are feeling. When you make a job not worth having, people quit showing up to do it. When you insist on paying well below the competition, you get a product that reflects that. The best doesn't come at a discount. When you pay for a Hyundai, you don't get to drive a Porsche.

There was a plate of 10 cookies in the room. B&B took 9 of them. When I try to pick up mine, they look at you and scream "he's trying to take all of the cookies! You're not going to get one because of him!" Nope. I'm not here to subsidize my coworkers with my labor. I'd like to be paid fairly for what I do, and a company with a profit margin like ours can afford to do that.

FlyAK
11-23-2017, 09:29 AM
Nope, but then again, not everyone chose to pursue a career that requires that.

Everything else you listed?

This may come as quite a shock to you, but those are things that JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER CO-WORKER OF YOURS DEALS WITH.

Look, I'm not here to argue; I know pilots are damned important, and aren't easily replaced. But using that excuse as rationale to say things like "No waivers! No favors! Fly the contract!" which really means, "I'm willing to screw over my customers and co-workers so I can show management I'm ticked that I didn't get everything I wanted!" isn't a great way to exhibit the value you bring to the table.

You never answered my questions. Do YOU work at a significant discount? Will YOU work through the night on Christmas and Thanksgiving?

Also you are being very disrespectful of this community here by not identifying what type of employee you are. If you told me you are a new CSA I might understand, but I donít think you are...

2loud
11-23-2017, 09:30 AM
But using that excuse as rationale to say things like "No waivers! No favors! Fly the contract!" which really means, "I'm willing to screw over my customers and co-workers so I can show management I'm ticked that I didn't get everything I wanted!" isn't a great way to exhibit the value you bring to the table.

You obviously have no clue about the daily grind of a pilot. Youíre drunk on Koolaid and blinded by the rosy glasses supplied by the company.
The contract is a document agreed by both sides-signed and sealed. Youíre implying that ďflying the contractĒ is a job action. Be careful what you say on here because your boss is watching. Flying the contract means abiding by the rules set forth by both sides. I can only hope the company abides the contract but we all know they donít. The company violates multiple sections of the contract each and everyday. So you are implying that companyís actions are justified while the pilotís actions are wreckless. Once again, you have no valid argument.

OCCP
11-23-2017, 10:30 AM
I love the email from yesterday from bt recognizing theyíve taken a step backwards then asking us to work together to fix it. Iím afraid itís too late for that. They created this mess and itís clear they gave no plan going forward.

ForeverJunior
11-23-2017, 11:14 AM
I love the email from yesterday from bt recognizing theyíve taken a step backwards then asking us to work together to fix it. Iím afraid itís too late for that. They created this mess and itís clear they gave no plan going forward.

Too little, too late. It was all empty words. He shouldn't have even written it. I think it's an attempt to get us to help them through the holidays.

Actions speak louder than words. They could have come to the table and negotiated, but they chose to stall.

They showed what they think of this pilot group. They were quick to make videos, mainly to show other employee groups that we are nothing more than "greedy bastages".

They continue to have the utmost contempt for us and they foster a pilot-hating culture among other employee groups.

Pilots are no longer tripping over themselves to work here. But, Angle Lake refuses to believe this.

They also refuse to believe that the Kool-Aid is running low with its pilots.

It's going to be too late by the time they wake up. Empty E-Mails won't save the day. They won't help a disenchanted employee group become engaged again.

Come back to the table and undue damage from the arbitration. Until then, BT is better off not writing any more missives.

ImperialxRat
11-23-2017, 11:20 AM
ďOne thing I want to say to you now is that the rest of the leadership team and I personally are going to do everything we can to get this airline back to operating in its normal rhythm. ď. -Brad

Everything except give you job protection and scope.

Arctichicken
11-23-2017, 11:44 AM
Nothing new here folks. As always without missing a beat, they kick us in the nuts when we are down and then encourage team work. Their arrogance, greed, and blindness will never be cured. That’s right, never! Our naive union thought that BT was our friend and savior but once again, they were wrong. There are enough double agents in this pilot group. Always remember who the audience is across the table from you. Only thing that matters to the company are $$$. That’s it! They could careless how anyone feels. Accept this fact, leave your emotions at the door and just maybe, this pilot group can get their act together by 2020.

EA CO AS
11-23-2017, 12:27 PM
Do you work at a significant discount?

I'd love to be paid more, who wouldn't?

Are you able to take a day off when you need it?

Not always, no.

Are you working through the night on thanksgiving or Christmas?

Yes, in fact I'm working both days.

Can you start over without beginning again at entry level pay and vacations?

Nope.


Are you backstabbed by your middle management on a regular basis?

I wouldn't say "backstabbed," but I'll be the first to admit that AS has always looked at two things when it comes to people or systems; what it costs to do it "the right way" and "what did we budget for?" and invariably ends up somewhere in the middle, sometimes regretting not having paying the extra to get it done right the first time.

But I'd also say that while it's frustrating, because believe me, pilots are not the only ones who feel the budget constraints chafe, it's hard to not look at a history where we haven't had to go through the bankruptcy courts to achieve a low cost structure, or look at huge growth in the past 5, 10, 15, 20 years and imagine what we'd look like without it.

It's a balancing act, and it's not an exact science; you try to offer decent pay and benefits while allowing enough of a profit margin to re-invest in the business and grow, while also providing a return to shareholders. That last piece has gotten perhaps a bit more of an emphasis over the past 5-6 years than normal, but that was to drive up share prices to keep us expensive enough to ward off a takeover.

Having been around as long as I have, I remember the dark times of losses, wondering if we'd be bought out and dismembered, and unlike pilots who can just get taken on and are legally guaranteed a somewhat "fair" integration if acquired by a competitor, not all of your co-workers enjoy the same protections.

Again, I'm not here to argue; I value every one of my co-workers and simply want to provide an alternative perspective, that's all.

Just remember that it's easy to choose to rock that boat if you're among the only ones aboard with a life vest on.

GreatBigSea
11-23-2017, 01:14 PM
I'd love to be paid more, who wouldn't?

Thats not answering the question. You sure you aren't BM?

Are you paid at a rate lower than your peers? If not, why don't you take a pay cut to help the company succeed?


Not always, no.

Hey, me too! Maybe we do have more in common than I originally thought.


Yes, in fact I'm working both days.

Another thing we share! What hotel are you staying in tonight while you FaceTime your family?

Oh, you actually get to go home after you finish work for the day? Must be nice. Next you're going to tell me you get to see your family every night after work, too :rolleyes:.



Nope.



Sucks, doesn't it?



I wouldn't say "backstabbed," but I'll be the first to admit that AS has always looked at two things when it comes to people or systems; what it costs to do it "the right way" and "what did we budget for?" and invariably ends up somewhere in the middle, sometimes regretting not having paying the extra to get it done right the first time.

But I'd also say that while it's frustrating, because believe me, pilots are not the only ones who feel the budget constraints chafe, it's hard to not look at a history where we haven't had to go through the bankruptcy courts to achieve a low cost structure, or look at huge growth in the past 5, 10, 15, 20 years and imagine what we'd look like without it.

It's a balancing act, and it's not an exact science; you try to offer decent pay and benefits while allowing enough of a profit margin to re-invest in the business and grow, while also providing a return to shareholders. That last piece has gotten perhaps a bit more of an emphasis over the past 5-6 years than normal, but that was to drive up share prices to keep us expensive enough to ward off a takeover.

Having been around as long as I have, I remember the dark times of losses, wondering if we'd be bought out and dismembered, and unlike pilots who can just get taken on and are legally guaranteed a somewhat "fair" integration if acquired by a competitor, not all of your co-workers enjoy the same protections.

Again, I'm not here to argue; I value every one of my co-workers and simply want to provide an alternative perspective, that's all.

Just remember that it's easy to choose to rock that boat if you're among the only ones aboard with a life vest on.



Again, thats all just business, and if flying my contract is rocking the boat, well...

https://media0.giphy.com/media/pv6U9a3yd3vOM/giphy.gif

EA CO AS
11-23-2017, 01:25 PM
Again, thats all just business

So why is taking actions (or a lack thereof) specifically to disrupt the operation and negatively impact customers somehow "just business" but the company negotiating wages and benefits that would allow it to be more competitive is somehow cause for outrage?

I FaceTime with my family most nights, as I work evenings. I do get to sleep in my own bed just about every night, but then again, as a pilot, you knew what the gig entailed when you signed up for it. That's also one of the reasons you're (justly) compensated at a rate far, far higher than my own.

(I'm not BT, BM, or any of the C-suite people, I promise you that)

Why not just say, "Ok, we got better than what was offered thanks to arbitration, but we're not all the way there, and in the next contract, we'll ask for the rest of what we're looking for," while not taking potshots at the company and undermining the operation until then?

Go to your union meetings, that's what they're for. Express your concerns. Talk to your negotiating committee. Become a shop steward or even ask to be part of the negotiating committee next time around, and rally your co-workers to determine what's important to them in the next contract, then come out swinging for the fences when openers come around sometime in late 2019.

But come on, don't jeopardize everyone else's jobs just because you feel you didn't get all you wanted this time around.

pete2800
11-23-2017, 01:41 PM
It's a balancing act, and it's not an exact science; you try to offer decent pay and benefits while allowing enough of a profit margin to re-invest in the business and grow, while also providing a return to shareholders. That last piece has gotten perhaps a bit more of an emphasis over the past 5-6 years than normal, but that was to drive up share prices to keep us expensive enough to ward off a takeover.
I have yet to get an answer to this. Maybe you can help.

How is it possible that a company with a significantly higher profit margin than its competitors can't afford to pay average wages?

Just remember that it's easy to choose to rock that boat if you're among the only ones aboard with a life vest on.
How did you phrase it earlier? "Not Every one chose to pursue a career that requires that?"

Same thing. If you don't have a life jacket, maybe you should have invested in a career that came with one.

Don't get it twisted. I will never advocate or participate in an illegal job action. I'm not sabotaging anything.

FlyAK
11-23-2017, 02:01 PM
So why is taking actions (or a lack thereof) specifically to disrupt the operation and negatively impact customers somehow "just business" but the company negotiating wages and benefits that would allow it to be more competitive is somehow cause for outrage?




I donít think any pilot here is taking any action to disrupt the operation... Many just have better places to be than here. The ones that are here are simply interested in doing their own jobs and nobody elseís. Itís hard to get people to do extra for you when youíve told them they are at most 5th Best and only worth 92% of their peers.

Perhaps they shouldnít have laid people off to increase their ROIC... Itís different if itís a furlough because youíre losing money, but to lay people off simply to increase your profit margin is ruthless. Hard to get those boys and girls to do extra for you now isnít it?

GreatBigSea
11-23-2017, 02:21 PM
So why is taking actions (or a lack thereof) specifically to disrupt the operation and negatively impact customers somehow "just business" but the company negotiating wages and benefits that would allow it to be more competitive is somehow cause for outrage?

I FaceTime with my family most nights, as I work evenings. I do get to sleep in my own bed just about every night, but then again, as a pilot, you knew what the gig entailed when you signed up for it. That's also one of the reasons you're (justly) compensated at a rate far, far higher than my own.

(I'm not BT, BM, or any of the C-suite people, I promise you that)

Why not just say, "Ok, we got better than what was offered thanks to arbitration, but we're not all the way there, and in the next contract, we'll ask for the rest of what we're looking for," while not taking potshots at the company and undermining the operation until then?

Go to your union meetings, that's what they're for. Express your concerns. Talk to your negotiating committee. Become a shop steward or even ask to be part of the negotiating committee next time around, and rally your co-workers to determine what's important to them in the next contract, then come out swinging for the fences when openers come around sometime in late 2019.

But come on, don't jeopardize everyone else's jobs just because you feel you didn't get all you wanted this time around.

Why are pilots always the ones accused of jeopardizing everyone else's jobs? How does pilots performing their contractually agreed to job equate to putting other employees jobs at risk? If that the case its not a pilot problem, its a management problem.

I never make an attempt to willingly disrupt operations. I do my job and I do it well. However, most of us are done picking up the slack caused by mismanagement.

n9810f
11-23-2017, 06:56 PM
That wasn't Delta's only request. They also wanted Alaska to drop the codeshare with American.

1) AS drop code share with Emirates
2) AS drop code share with British
3) AS drop code share with Qantas

N19906
11-23-2017, 07:34 PM
Ok, Iím glad everybody chimed in to point out that Iím not the crazy to EA AS CO whatever. (Sorry.)

Look man, nobody here wants the company to fail. The problem is that subtlety doesnít work on forum message boards, so what we could work through over a friendly beer just wonít translate to this format.
Iím just ****ed off to be told Iím fifth-rate, and to expect relative compensation, while the numbers given to Wallstreet say weíre #1 in margins. Pay me what we earn you, and Iíll be fine. Cry poverty while you rake in way-above returns, and Iíll try to **** in your Cheeriosģ
If the fantasy they sell us were true, Wall-Mart would be the highest paying company in the U.S., because theyíre the largest one, right? (Thatís obvious, isnít it? FAIL.)
You should talk to my co-workers. Iím restrained, level-headed. Timid even.
The guy Iím with at the moment contrasted his career with his buddyís who is Purpleģ. Itís nor even close. Laughable even.
You can be too cheap, and I think B&B have found that sweet spot.
Theyíll own the consequences.

Packrat
11-24-2017, 10:06 AM
That wasn't Delta's only request. They also wanted Alaska to drop the codeshare with American.

Didn't AS drop the AA codeshare as of January 1?

FlyAK
11-24-2017, 10:22 AM
Didn't AS drop the AA codeshare as of January 1?

I canít remember the date exactly but yes, reducing the American codeshare was one of the DOJ conditions to approve the merger...

Packrat
11-24-2017, 10:25 AM
I canít remember the date exactly but yes, reducing the American codeshare was one of the DOJ conditions to approve the merger...

Lately, I've noticed more AA metal in ANC. I'm wondering if they're going to pick up ANC-ORD as well as ANC-DFW.

FlyAK
11-24-2017, 10:29 AM
Lately, I've noticed more AA metal in ANC. I'm wondering if they're going to pick up ANC-ORD as well as ANC-DFW.

Who knows? I wonder if anyone in management here is even thinking about that. They are generally busy doing momentum sessions and whatever they can to deny trip trades, and donít really have the extra capacity to think about specific plans...

ImperialxRat
11-24-2017, 10:45 AM
Who knows? I wonder if anyone in management here is even thinking about that. They are generally busy doing momentum sessions and whatever they can to deny trip trades, and donít really have the extra capacity to think about specific plans...

I still donít understand why we havenít cancelled those MOUís, specifically the 4 hour one. I understand what the intent was and the way it used to work with eMaestro, but itís not working that way now and is not getting fixed. 30 days notice is all we need to give to cancel that piece of junk.

And I recall the union email saying that the 4 hour MOU is not the reason the trade is denied, even though the reason it lists is the 4 hour MOU. The fact is after months of having crew access on property, if a trip starts more than 4 hours from your start time on the same day you can be guaranteed it will be denied.

pete2800
11-25-2017, 03:23 AM
I still donít understand why we havenít cancelled those MOUís, specifically the 4 hour one. I understand what the intent was and the way it used to work with eMaestro, but itís not working that way now and is not getting fixed. 30 days notice is all we need to give to cancel that piece of junk.

And I recall the union email saying that the 4 hour MOU is not the reason the trade is denied, even though the reason it lists is the 4 hour MOU. The fact is after months of having crew access on property, if a trip starts more than 4 hours from your start time on the same day you can be guaranteed it will be denied.

Fun story: I mentioned to someone how much I disliked that MOU, and I got the lecture about how that's not why trades are denied, and its really about reserve coverage, blah blah. I then wondered allowed why I was able to trade through 3 trips over a 10 hour period as long as each one was 4 hours or less, while the original trade was denied for just that reason. Huh, strange.

ImperialxRat
11-25-2017, 01:37 PM
Fun story: I mentioned to someone how much I disliked that MOU, and I got the lecture about how that's not why trades are denied, and its really about reserve coverage, blah blah. I then wondered allowed why I was able to trade through 3 trips over a 10 hour period as long as each one was 4 hours or less, while the original trade was denied for just that reason. Huh, strange.

Did you check reserve coverage for the ones that got denied? If reserve coverage was negative then they'll tell you that it's working as intended.

Work2much
11-25-2017, 02:13 PM
Anyone heard when the next vacancy bid is going to come out?

IFlyNFish
11-25-2017, 03:41 PM
Fun story: I mentioned to someone how much I disliked that MOU, and I got the lecture about how that's not why trades are denied, and its really about reserve coverage, blah blah. I then wondered allowed why I was able to trade through 3 trips over a 10 hour period as long as each one was 4 hours or less, while the original trade was denied for just that reason. Huh, strange.



I hate the MOU's, but it sounds like they worked in this example?

Inadequate reserve coverage, and trips MORE than 4 hours= denied.

Inadequate reserve coverage, and trips LESS than 4 hours= MOU helped?

I hate the MOU's, should just be same day for same day= approved... or I still wish they'd say trip is denied for inadequate reserve coverage, that's the programming flaw.

SmoothLanderJ
11-25-2017, 05:41 PM
Anyone heard when the next vacancy bid is going to come out?

Heard it was supposed to come out last week, so you know how that goes.

miker1
11-25-2017, 05:46 PM
What is MOU?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Work2much
11-25-2017, 06:08 PM
What is MOU?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

A memorandum of understanding is an agreement between two or more parties. It expresses a convergence of will between the parties, indicating an intended common line of action.

Work2much
11-25-2017, 06:09 PM
Heard it was supposed to come out last week, so you know how that goes.

That's what I heard too. Hm...Maybe they'll get around to it before too long.

WHACKMASTER
11-30-2017, 11:34 PM
Nope, but then again, not everyone chose to pursue a career that requires that.

Everything else you listed?

This may come as quite a shock to you, but those are things that JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER CO-WORKER OF YOURS DEALS WITH.

Look, I'm not here to argue; I know pilots are damned important, and aren't easily replaced. But using that excuse as rationale to say things like "No waivers! No favors! Fly the contract!" which really means, "I'm willing to screw over my customers and co-workers so I can show management I'm ticked that I didn't get everything I wanted!" isn't a great way to exhibit the value you bring to the table.

Yeah well we as a profession have this thing called the Railway Labor Act thatís been tying our hands for decades. Ya dig?

EA CO AS
12-03-2017, 11:02 AM
Yeah well we as a profession have this thing called the Railway Labor Act thatís been tying our hands for decades. Ya dig?

Erm....you may not be aware of this, but the RLA applies to every one of your co-workers who work under union contracts as well, from flight attendants, to CSAs, to Res Agents, etc.

So it's not just pilots who deal with working nights, weekends, holidays, etc.

WHACKMASTER
12-03-2017, 12:15 PM
Erm....you may not be aware of this, but the RLA applies to every one of your co-workers who work under union contracts as well, from flight attendants, to CSAs, to Res Agents, etc.

So it's not just pilots who deal with working nights, weekends, holidays, etc.

Iím not talking about working nights, weekends, holidays, etc. Iím talking about how the RLA ties our hands with regard to contract negotiations.

Nick1984
02-01-2018, 01:20 AM
Erm....you may not be aware of this, but the RLA applies to every one of your co-workers who work under union contracts as well, from flight attendants, to CSAs, to Res Agents, etc.

So it's not just pilots who deal with working nights, weekends, holidays, etc.



Youíre a giant C**t.

Nick1984
02-01-2018, 01:32 AM
Erm....you may not be aware of this, but the RLA applies to every one of your co-workers who work under union contracts as well, from flight attendants, to CSAs, to Res Agents, etc.

So it's not just pilots who deal with working nights, weekends, holidays, etc.

Unless youíre c-level or higher, you are delusional about how and why this company funds and invests how they do.

Just ******* off. Youíre obviosuly a scheduler or some retarded management troll (but...why?).

TripleCrank
02-03-2018, 06:15 PM
The plan? Simple. Stay as low cost and lean as possible. Mild growth for the next 12-18mo and then... BAM! Another merger, acquisition, buyout, etc. (JB, SW, AA, DL, hell who knows) Point is there's no way we stay competitive in this industry at our current pace without being bought or merging. Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride. Go to work, do your job, nothing more, and go back to our families. Stay informed and unified and maybe we can knock out a great CBA in 2020. Or as I mentioned previously, were bought or merge.

This........

RollTide67
02-06-2018, 07:28 AM
This........

Yes...That.

ShyGuy
02-22-2018, 09:47 AM
Unintended irony:

Our merger website www.differentworks.com no longer works :D

Foodstamps
02-27-2018, 11:18 AM
This........

Excellent post, I agree 100%. Looking forward to working with you guys!

Ispeakjive
02-27-2018, 12:14 PM
Unintended irony:

Our merger website www.differentworks.com no longer works :D

Check out alaskaNair.com See where that takes you.

GUFN
02-27-2018, 04:11 PM
Check out alaskaNair.com See where that takes you.

The name ďIcy StraitĒ (at the bottom of the list) has nice ring to it, eh?

Lewbronski
03-01-2018, 12:27 AM
Yeah well we as a profession have this thing called the Railway Labor Act that’s been tying our hands for decades. Ya dig?

The RLA does not tie your hands anywhere near as much as you think it does. In fact, it hands you a metric ton of leverage if only you and your union knew how to use it.

What is the only real leverage any airline union truly has year in and year out regardless of any other circumstances? The answer is the credible threat to one day in the future pose the threat of legally resorting to self help under the framework of the RLA.

The steps to self help are:

A. Enter into federal mediation with the NMB. This is the longest and most drawn-out part of the process. There is not set time limit for mediation. However, the courts have made pretty clear in their rulings that if your union plays the game right (bargaining in good faith and being willing and available to meet regularly), at around the 2 to 2.5 year point is where you might feasibly get released from mediation if the two sides are at an impasse. If your union does not play the game right, then you can expect a much longer stay in mediation. There's no getting around the fact that mediation is the really torturous part about the RLA but it is not as one-sided as is commonly reported.

B. Turn down arbitration

C. Enter into a 30-day cooling off period

D. Depending on the size of your airline and the potential impact upon interstate commerce, expect a 60 day Presidential Emergency Board to be convened. Effectively, this acts as an additional 60 days of cooling off for a total of a 90 day cooling off period.

E. If, after the 90 days, either side does not agree to a settlement, the union is free to resort to self help and the company is free to lock you out.

The President has no power under the law to stop you from striking. He/she can only delay a strike by 60 days.

It's worth mentioning that Congress, after a PEB, has the power to intervene and impose a settlement. However, this has NEVER happened in the history of the RLA in the case of an airline. That doesn't mean it wouldn't happen. It just never has happened. The last time Congress intervened in the case of a railroad was 1994 when they simply extended the status quo period (which is effectively extending the cooling off period). Of 250 PEB's convened in the history of the RLA, Congress has intervened 18 times, all railroad cases.

Assuming a union has its stuff together, at some point during mediation or even earlier, it will take a strike authorization vote. How much leverage your union will have against your company will hinge on the outcome of your vote. If it's close to 100%, you have a tremendous amount of leverage. If not, the company will not see you as posing a credible threat of ever striking and you might as well pack it in. Give up and sign a mediocre new contract because you will get tooled by your company without a very high strike vote.

A strike authorization vote does not mean you are striking any time soon. If the vote is taken at the beginning of mediation, for example, you guys have a minimum (if everything goes perfectly) of 2 years, 3 months until you would ever possibly be on strike. It will likely be closer to 3 or 4 years if it ever goes that far.

The cool thing is the closer the strike vote is to 100%, the less likely it is the company will ever let your negotiation get anywhere near a strike. If they truly believe you guys will really strike, they will be very interested in wrapping things up sooner than later, especially if you ever enter into a cooling off period. The opposite is true if you have a weak strike vote.

Once the cooling off period begins, that's when the company starts to really feel the heat Why? Because as soon as the media starts reporting that Alaska Airlines might go on strike in 30 days, customers are going to book away from Alaska Airlines so that their travel plans are not disrupted by a possible work stoppage. Why buy a ticket on Alaska next month when that ticket might be no good when you can just as easily buy a ticket on Delta or Southwest? The company starts losing money. Important caveat! They may be willing to suffer through that to break your will if they perceive you are not credible in your threat of going all the way.

How long will they be willing to let that go if they really believe you guys are committed to really striking and they believe the number of scabs will be minimal as evidenced by a near-100% strike vote? Who do you think is going to blink first?

In that sense, it's almost better if a PEB is established because it extends the period during which customers are booking away from Alaska. It increases the pressure on the company.

All of this can be likened to deterrence, or peace through strength. What happened in 1979 when the Iranians perceived that we had a weak President? They acted on what they saw as weakness and won a major propaganda victory for themselves. Think of a mediocre strike authorization vote as identifying yourself as a weak Jimmy Carter to your company.

Why did Khrushchev pull his missiles out of Cuba? From all accounts, it's because he realized we were serious about going nuclear if our demands weren't met. Think of that as similar to the effect a near-100% strike authorization vote has on the company.

Why has Kim Jong Un not launched any missiles at us yet? Why have we not yet attacked North Korea despite all of their violations? The examples could continue on all day.

The point is the RLA does not tie your hands the way people seem to think it does.

Baradium
03-01-2018, 03:58 AM
The RLA does not tie your hands anywhere near as much as you think it does. In fact, it hands you a metric ton of leverage if only you and your union knew how to use it.

What is the only real leverage any airline union truly has year in and year out regardless of any other circumstances? The answer is the credible threat to one day in the future pose the threat of legally resorting to self help under the framework of the RLA.

The steps to self help are:

A. Enter into federal mediation with the NMB. This is the longest and most drawn-out part of the process. There is not set time limit for mediation. However, the courts have made pretty clear in their rulings that if your union plays the game right (bargaining in good faith and being willing and available to meet regularly), at around the 2 to 2.5 year point is where you might feasibly get released from mediation if the two sides are at an impasse. If your union does not play the game right, then you can expect a much longer stay in mediation. There's no getting around the fact that mediation is the really torturous part about the RLA but it is not as one-sided as is commonly reported.

B. Turn down arbitration

C. Enter into a 30-day cooling off period

D. Depending on the size of your airline and the potential impact upon interstate commerce, expect a 60 day Presidential Emergency Board to be convened. Effectively, this acts as an additional 60 days of cooling off for a total of a 90 day cooling off period.

E. If, after the 90 days, either side does not agree to a settlement, the union is free to resort to self help and the company is free to lock you out.

The President has no power under the law to stop you from striking. He/she can only delay a strike by 60 days.



You lost the whole rest of your argument at bullet point A.

The national mediation board has to declare an impasse before anything else can happen. All they have to do is not declare an impasse and you will never get to a cooling off period. In recent history this has been their response to prevent strikes. Spirit wasn't released until they started to charge for carry on bags and given a strike as a punishment for it.

Riverside
03-01-2018, 05:13 AM
All this union talk brings back memories of watching the ALPA initiation training videos.

Lewbronski
03-01-2018, 09:27 AM
You lost the whole rest of your argument at bullet point A.

The national mediation board has to declare an impasse before anything else can happen. All they have to do is not declare an impasse and you will never get to a cooling off period. In recent history this has been their response to prevent strikes. Spirit wasn't released until they started to charge for carry on bags and given a strike as a punishment for it.

Yes, an impasse has to be declared before you can move on to further stages of the RLA process. That is a fact.

However, the NMB does not have an unlimited to ability to simply avoid declaring an impasse forever before a union can file a motion in federal court petitioning for a release from mediation. The bar for overcoming the NMB's position that two parties are not at an impasse in federal court is very high. That is why the union has to play the game right during mediation.

The RLA's charter is to avoid an interruption of interstate commerce. That charter, though, is balanced with labor's right to self-determination. Congress never intended the RLA to completely strip labor of that right. But don't believe me, believe what federal judges have said in previous cases involving the RLA (from IAMAW, AFL-CIO vs NMB 425-F.2d-527 (1970)):
The rights of self-help owned by both union and management have been deliberately preserved by Congress, albeit held in temporary abeyance. They survive, available for use when the statutory procedures to promote agreement are exhausted.

They are indeed in a sense symbols of freedom, reminders that even though their occasional exercise and the disorder of industrial warfare may be vexing to the point of distress the underlying freedom is more productive of a healthy 537*537 and vigorous economy and nation than a structure of economic regimentation and dictated order. That at least is the premise of the Railway Labor Act, as Justice Harlan recently pointed out in Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 394 U.S. 369, 378, 89 S.Ct. 1109, 115, 22 L.Ed.2d 344 (1969):

Implicit in the statutory scheme [of the Railway Labor Act] is the ultimate right of the disputants to resort to self-help — `the inevitable alternative in a statutory scheme which deliberately denies the final power to compel arbitration.' We have consistently so held in a long line of decisions.

Even if the NMB fails to recognize the above, the federal courts do recognize the ultimate rights of workers to EVENTUALLY strike under the RLA. But your union has to be willing to play the RLA game correctly. The courts can compel the NMB to declare an impasse.

In other cases, the courts have hinted at approximately a minimum 2-2.5 year timeframe for being released from mediation if still at an impasse. However, as I said, that requires that your union's conduct be impeccable during mediation. "Impeccable" conduct means bargaining in absolutely good faith, and never stalling or appearing to stall.

It is also a fact, that like it or not, playing the RLA game correctly is the only consistently strong leverage that pilot unions have. If, like an-already defeated Eeyore, you insist on resignedly believing the myth that the NMB can put you on ice forever with no recourse available, you will get results that go along with that belief system.

There are loads of complaints on the Alaska threads about how they don't like this or that about their situation. Unfortunately, your management is unlikely to seriously address any of your concerns without your union having some significant leverage. You dismantle your own leverage before you even begin by holding onto a largely false belief that the NMB is all-powerful.

Baradium
03-01-2018, 01:16 PM
<snip>

There are loads of complaints on the Alaska threads about how they don't like this or that about their situation. Unfortunately, your management is unlikely to seriously address any of your concerns without your union having some significant leverage. You dismantle your own leverage before you even begin by holding onto a largely false belief that the NMB is all-powerful.

I'm not an Alaska pilot, I simply chimed in because your information seems so contradictory to what happens in the industry. So what you're saying is that every carrier simply has a union which does not know how to negotiate with the railway labor act?

Lewbronski
03-01-2018, 01:37 PM
I'm not an Alaska pilot, I simply chimed in because your information seems so contradictory to what happens in the industry. So what you're saying is that every carrier simply has a union which does not know how to negotiate with the railway labor act?

Not at all.

In the very recent past, both Frontier and Spirit pilots voted 100% for a strike authorization. This sent a very strong signal to their respective managements making the possibility of a strike ever occurring that much more miniscule. The goal is to attain your goals WITHOUT having to strike by sending a message that you are willing to strike if you absolutely have to. Again, peace through strength.

Note that Spirit pilots also struck in 2010 reinforcing the message that they are willing to take it all the way. Spirit pilots just approved a contract giving them an average of approximately a 40% pay raise. That is not too shabby.

In 2015, UPS pilots voted 99.9% to authorize a strike. They ended up with a 40% increase to their pension plan.

All of the above unions have done at least some things right. I would argue, though, that collectively as a profession, we could increase our own fortunes by playing the mediation game impeccably and pressing the federal courts for release (after 2 to 2.5 years) if the NMB is applying a patently arbitrary and unreasonable rationale to their case for not releasing us (that, by the way, is the legal test the federal courts have created for us if the NMB is not releasing us).

And, you do know that when a mediator says they will "put you on ice forever", they are lying? You do know mediators use lying as a way to spur on negotiations, right?

Baradium
03-01-2018, 03:41 PM
Not at all.

In the very recent past, both Frontier and Spirit pilots voted 100% for a strike authorization. This sent a very strong signal to their respective managements making the possibility of a strike ever occurring that much more miniscule. The goal is to attain your goals WITHOUT having to strike by sending a message that you are willing to strike if you absolutely have to. Again, peace through strength.

Note that Spirit pilots also struck in 2010 reinforcing the message that they are willing to take it all the way. Spirit pilots just approved a contract giving them an average of approximately a 40% pay raise. That is not too shabby.

In 2015, UPS pilots voted 99.9% to authorize a strike. They ended up with a 40% increase to their pension plan.

All of the above unions have done at least some things right. I would argue, though, that collectively as a profession, we could increase our own fortunes by playing the mediation game impeccably and pressing the federal courts for release (after 2 to 2.5 years) if the NMB is applying a patently arbitrary and unreasonable rationale to their case for not releasing us (that, by the way, is the legal test the federal courts have created for us if the NMB is not releasing us).

And, you do know that when a mediator says they will "put you on ice forever", they are lying? You do know mediators use lying as a way to spur on negotiations, right?

So which one of those groups was released? And there is much debate about the Spirit contract about whether it was a good deal or not. I'm not a Spirit pilot so I'm not going to judge it, but I overheard one today talking about work rules changes.

At the time of their vote, Pinnacle had the higher strike authorization vote in ALPA history. They also had the longest ongoing contract negotiation afterwards too.

I'm not decrying giving a good showing for the strike authorization vote, just saying that doesn't prove anything with regards to "they have to release you."

Lewbronski
03-01-2018, 04:45 PM
So which one of those groups was released? And there is much debate about the Spirit contract about whether it was a good deal or not. I'm not a Spirit pilot so I'm not going to judge it, but I overheard one today talking about work rules changes.

At the time of their vote, Pinnacle had the higher strike authorization vote in ALPA history. They also had the longest ongoing contract negotiation afterwards too.

I'm not decrying giving a good showing for the strike authorization vote, just saying that doesn't prove anything with regards to "they have to release you."

Dude, bro, man...

I think you're missing the point. The idea is you demonstrate a resolve to your respective company that you will strike if need be. No one wants to strike. The fact that Spirit got a 40% pay raise without having to go further in the RLA process suggests that perhaps their company knew that their pilots would take it all the way if they had to.

Notice that their company wrapped up their agreement at about the two-year point in mediation. After two years in mediation, assuming their union had bargained in good faith and been available and willing to meet, they would have begun to met the minimum time requirement that the federal courts would maybe begin to consider taking action if petitioned to do so and if they found the NMB was acting in a patently arbitrary and unreasonable manner.

And nobody said the federal courts "have to release you". Where did you get that idea? Why did you put that in quotes? Who were you quoting? The courts don't ever have to do anything. There are no guarantees in court.

No, the courts do not have to release you. However, they do have the power to do so if they determine the NMB is acting in bad faith. Again, read the opinion of the judge in the case I cited. The RLA was not meant to completely strip labor of its right to ever strike. It was meant to slow the drive toward a strike down so that the chance of an interruption of interstate commerce is minimized.

Please read what I wrote and don't put words in my mouth.

Baradium
03-01-2018, 05:12 PM
Dude, bro, man...

I think you're missing the point. The idea is you demonstrate a resolve to your respective company that you will strike if need be. No one wants to strike. The fact that Spirit got a 40% pay raise without having to go further in the RLA process suggests that perhaps their company knew that their pilots would take it all the way if they had to.

Notice that their company wrapped up their agreement at about the two-year point in mediation. After two years in mediation, assuming their union had bargained in good faith and been available and willing to meet, they would have begun to met the minimum time requirement that the federal courts would maybe begin to consider taking action if petitioned to do so and if they found the NMB was acting in a patently arbitrary and unreasonable manner.

And nobody said the federal courts "have to release you". Where did you get that idea? Why did you put that in quotes? Who were you quoting? The courts don't ever have to do anything. There are no guarantees in court.

No, the courts do not have to release you. However, they do have the power to do so if they determine the NMB is acting in bad faith. Again, read the opinion of the judge in the case I cited. The RLA was not meant to completely strip labor of its right to ever strike. It was meant to slow the drive toward a strike down so that the chance of an interruption of interstate commerce is minimized.

Please read what I wrote and don't put words in my mouth.

You said multiple times in the previous posts that if you "play the game right" you'll get released.

You also like bringing up that 40% pay raise. Great, high percentage. Still keeps their pay around the bottom of the industry. And they had to GIVE UP work rules to get that. If their pilots were doing so well, they wouldn't have had to give up anything, especially in this environment.

And just to be clear, under the RLA the union does not have a "right" to strike. It has to be given permission. Rights aren't something you only accomplish by authorization. There may be an ability there somewhere, but it's not a right.

You use examples of unions that were not released and where union leadership (in the case of Spirit) went on record saying "this is all we'll get because they won't release us" as examples of where the company thinking they'd be released got them a contract.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to accomplish, but you came across to me as being demeaning to the Alaska pilot group while at the same time making this process into a sure thing for labor.

Lewbronski
03-01-2018, 05:30 PM
At the time of their vote, Pinnacle had the higher strike authorization vote in ALPA history. They also had the longest ongoing contract negotiation afterwards too.

Pinnacle also had a clause in their contract saying "if a strike at Pinnacle leads to a certain percentage of Pinnacle planes not flying for seven days or more, Northwest can terminate the agreement." Why on earth any airline pilot union would agree to language like that, I do not know. However, it eviscerates any leverage you might have had at Pinnacle regardless of a strike vote. No leverage therefore leads to long, drawn-out negotiations.

Pinnacle's union also requested binding arbitration from the NMB which is a sign to me that they knew they had very little leverage given the above contractual clause. Binding arbitration is the last thing I'd want as a union. However, given the above contractual clause, it was probably their best option.

Chuckie
03-01-2018, 05:36 PM
I think (and correct me if Iím wrong) Lewbronskiís overarching point is that the Alaska pilot group needs to grow a pair and show the company that they arenít afraid to strike if need be. Peace through strength, as he succinctly put it. Is there a valid argument against that?

Lewbronski
03-01-2018, 05:50 PM
You said multiple times in the previous posts that if you "play the game right" you'll get released.

You also like bringing up that 40% pay raise. Great, high percentage. Still keeps their pay around the bottom of the industry. And they had to GIVE UP work rules to get that. If their pilots were doing so well, they wouldn't have had to give up anything, especially in this environment.

And just to be clear, under the RLA the union does not have a "right" to strike. It has to be given permission. Rights aren't something you only accomplish by authorization. There may be an ability there somewhere, but it's not a right.

You use examples of unions that were not released and where union leadership (in the case of Spirit) went on record saying "this is all we'll get because they won't release us" as examples of where the company thinking they'd be released got them a contract.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to accomplish, but you came across to me as being demeaning to the Alaska pilot group while at the same time making this process into a sure thing for labor.

Baradium, bro, are you a native English speaker?

Okay, this time, I never said, "if you 'play the game right' you'll get released." Your claim is I said that in multiple posts. So I went back and reread what I wrote to make sure that I wasn't "misremembering" what I wrote ala Brian Williams.

Here are the relevant statements I made that you might have misunderstood:

...where you might feasibly get released from mediation if the two sides are at an impasse.
...a union can file a motion in federal court petitioning for a release from mediation. The bar for overcoming the NMB's position that two parties are not at an impasse in federal court is very high. That is why the union has to play the game right during mediation.
In other cases, the courts have hinted at approximately a minimum 2-2.5 year timeframe for being released from mediation if still at an impasse. However, as I said, that requires that your union's conduct be impeccable during mediation. "Impeccable" conduct means bargaining in absolutely good faith, and never stalling or appearing to stall.

Note the emphasized portions of the above text. None of that sounds to me like it implies a certainty of being released. Maybe it did to you but words and phrases like "can", "hint at", and "might" are not commonly used to suggest a "sure thing". Maybe where you come from that's how people talk. I dunno.

And, just to be clear with you, you may not think there's a right to self-help (strike), but at least one federal judge has said there is a right to self-help under the RLA. I already quoted that case, but I'll put it here again:

The rights of self-help owned by both union and management have been deliberately preserved by Congress, albeit held in temporary abeyance.

In a matter like this, given the choice between your opinion and what the federal judge has written out in a matter of case law, I'll go with the federal judge.

And yes, I think most pilot unions have resigned themselves to thinking the RLA handcuffs them rather than trying to play the game and use the RLA to our own advantage.

And btw, Spirit did not play the game perfectly. Their illegal job action last year that required the intervention of the federal courts did not help their case in the least bit. That was a major error on their part regardless of whether or not the union was officially involved or not. That hurt them.

Baradium
03-01-2018, 06:04 PM
Pinnacle also had a clause in their contract saying "if a strike at Pinnacle leads to a certain percentage of Pinnacle planes not flying for seven days or more, Northwest can terminate the agreement." Why on earth any airline pilot union would agree to language like that, I do not know. However, it eviscerates any leverage you might have had at Pinnacle regardless of a strike vote. No leverage therefore leads to long, drawn-out negotiations.

Pinnacle's union also requested binding arbitration from the NMB which is a sign to me that they knew they had very little leverage given the above contractual clause. Binding arbitration is the last thing I'd want as a union. However, given the above contractual clause, it was probably their best option.

I don't think it's standard policy for the pilot union to get to negotiate the ASA with the mainline partner. That clause wasn't part of the pilot contract, it was in the NWA contract with Pinnacle corporate.

Binding arbitration was requested because the company had already made it clear that they saw no reason to negotiate. They even put out memos stating such. The union's position was that being accepting of arbitration was at least showing the pilot group was trying to possibly increase the chances of the moderators releasing us. Not that it ever happened though.

Baradium
03-01-2018, 06:25 PM
Baradium, bro, are you a native English speaker?


Note the emphasized portions of the above text. None of that sounds to me like it implies a certainty of being released. Maybe it did to you but words and phrases like "can", "hint at", and "might" are not commonly used to suggest a "sure thing". Maybe where you come from that's how people talk. I dunno.

And, just to be clear with you, you may not think there's a right to self-help (strike), but at least one federal judge has said there is a right to self-help under the RLA. I already quoted that case, but I'll put it here again:



In a matter like this, given the choice between your opinion and what the federal judge has written out in a matter of case law, I'll go with the federal judge.


I get it, you like to be condescending.

As far as the judge goes, using the word "right" in the same statement that you say it can be restricted is my point. Never mind the recent history of the NMB and their tendency to not release pilots.

I'm going to point out some parts that I think are germane to this that you didn't emphasize. I removed entire sections for length.

The RLA does not tie your hands anywhere near as much as you think it does. In fact, it hands you a metric ton of leverage if only you and your union knew how to use it.

What is the only real leverage any airline union truly has year in and year out regardless of any other circumstances? The answer is the credible threat to one day in the future pose the threat of legally resorting to self help under the framework of the RLA.

The steps to self help are:
<snip>

E. If, after the 90 days, either side does not agree to a settlement, the union is free to resort to self help and the company is free to lock you out.

The President has no power under the law to stop you from striking. He/she can only delay a strike by 60 days.


The point is the RLA does not tie your hands the way people seem to think it does.


A lot of talk about how straightforward and powerful it is to use if only the poor Alaska pilots only knew how! And then examples later on of cases where the system did not work to benefit the pilot groups but touted as successes.

My point is that for whatever "success" a union can achieve with the RLA, they are only through actions that would be carried out much easier without it. The RLA does not benefit the union at all, what it does do is prevent job actions and disruptions as intended.

I already worked at a company where management would say to your face that we were lucky they were offering anything and we were just hurting ourselves by not agreeing to it since we weren't going to get released anyway. I guess that just means our union was made up of fools though.

If you would like to have a conversation as an adult I am willing to continue, but if you insist on continuing with insults then you can simply have the last word and I'm done.

cornbeef007
03-02-2018, 08:56 AM
Binding arbitration was requested because the company had already made it clear that they saw no reason to negotiate. They even put out memos stating such. The union's position was that being accepting of arbitration was at least showing the pilot group was trying to possibly increase the chances of the moderators releasing us. Not that it ever happened though.

The mediators were never going to release you because you agreed to binding arbitration.

Do you think any company wants to negotiate with its labor groups In a good economy..... it leads to higher labor costs. The main reasons they do is because they want avoid labor discord and quantify labor cost going forward. This keeps the shareholders happy.

You may as well agree to binding arbitration for 2020 now because the company wonít want to negotiate then either. I honestly feel bad for you guys because your MEC members are a bunch of yes man b*%ches. The problem is that the pilot group accepts it.

At Delta we cleaned house after our initial TA failure. We recalled multiple reps and as a result our union leaders actually listened to the pilot group (mostly).

Baradium
03-02-2018, 10:55 AM
The mediators were never going to release you because you agreed to binding arbitration.

Do you think any company wants to negotiate with its labor groups In a good economy..... it leads to higher labor costs. The main reasons they do is because they want avoid labor discord and quantify labor cost going forward. This keeps the shareholders happy.

You may as well agree to binding arbitration for 2020 now because the company wonít want to negotiate then either. I honestly feel bad for you guys because your MEC members are a bunch of yes man b*%ches. The problem is that the pilot group accepts it.

At Delta we cleaned house after our initial TA failure. We recalled multiple reps and as a result our union leaders actually listened to the pilot group (mostly).

I'm not there anymore, but the company refused binding arbitration. Otherwise... there would have been binding arbitration. The union's official position was that it showed how eager we were to work to get a deal done and how little the company was.

The pilot group was far from a bunch of yes men though. And the second TA was very much better. Of course bankruptcy took care of that.

Regardless, during that period there was no one getting released. It didn't happen until Spirit instituted carry on bag fees and got released as a punishment. When a union is released just to mess with management, I think that should show pretty good proof that the RLA is not beneficial.

You do seem to have very little idea of what is going around in the industry though. Right now most regionals are approaching the unions to give money just to attract pilots. Of course, the 9E management now is all Delta management too. It works a lot better when management is at least trying to keep people somewhat happy.

barondrvr
03-02-2018, 12:19 PM
Amazing how teachers can shut down an entire state but we are held hostage by a law written 100 years ago. I remember a few years ago the subway system in San Francisco went on strike also. Ironic because they actually work on rails. But yea, it's the Union's fault I guess...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/us/west-virginia-teachers-strike.html

cornbeef007
03-02-2018, 02:01 PM
I'm not there anymore, but the company refused binding arbitration. Otherwise... there would have been binding arbitration. The union's official position was that it showed how eager we were to work to get a deal done and how little the company was.


They didn't refuse binding arbitration. A panel of arbitrators dictated many of the current contract provisions. The three Judges said, this is what you get on October 31st 2017....this is arbitration, which is binding.

The union agreed to this resolution, which I understand to a point. If they didn't agree to binding arbitration, the company could have dragged things out forever, in theory. This is what happened to Republic Airways, which took 9 years to come to an agreement because the company wasn't negotiating. The union also wanted to avoid a US Airways and America West ***tshow.

Three reasons this approach was a fail for Alaska and why an arbitration approach should not have been used (By the unions choice).

1) The Alaska pilot group got burned by arbitration with Kasher. History repeats itself.

2) Both of the examples above and Kasher episode took place when the economy was in the dumps, so the relative compensation bar was low and dropping. This gave companies the incentive to agree to binding arbitration, because it would likely lead to reduced compensation for the workgroup.

3) Alaska is the darling of Seattle and one thing the company hates is bad press. Picketing at the Seattle headquarters and SeaTac would make the shareholders nervous. Do you know why it didn't make a difference for the outcome of the 10/31/17 award? Because a panel of Judges awarded the contract, so it bought you absolutely no leverage. The picketing events and the orange lanyards didn't mean a thing, because once again a group of judges awarded the big provisions of the new contract (binding arbitration).

I really hope things go differently in 2020 because I will support you guys all the way, with picketing or whatever. Just don't agree to eventual binding arbitration again.

Listen to Lewbronski....he has a better idea of what is going on in the industry then you do. Learn from others man.

GearBoy
03-02-2018, 03:05 PM
Why did you guys end up in Arbitration? Because negotiations failed.

Why did negotiations fail? Because Alaska management did not have to negotiate in good faith.

Why didn't management negotiate in good faith? There was no need to.

With operational metrics as high as they were, there was no need for management to do anything.

If during negotiations your pilots are feeding at the trough, building their line to 117 limits, flying time-and-a-half, and selling back vacations, you guys are [email protected] at the negotiating table. Talk about sending a message. Benito the doochebag heard your message loud and clear, all the way to the bank.

Good luck finding the unity and solidarity necessary to make it all the way to self-help.

.

Baradium
03-02-2018, 06:21 PM
They didn't refuse binding arbitration. A panel of arbitrators dictated many of the current contract provisions. The three Judges said, this is what you get on October 31st 2017....this is arbitration, which is binding.

The union agreed to this resolution, which I understand to a point. If they didn't agree to binding arbitration, the company could have dragged things out forever, in theory. This is what happened to Republic Airways, which took 9 years to come to an agreement because the company wasn't negotiating. The union also wanted to avoid a US Airways and America West ***tshow.

Three reasons this approach was a fail for Alaska and why an arbitration approach should not have been used (By the unions choice).

1) The Alaska pilot group got burned by arbitration with Kasher. History repeats itself.

2) Both of the examples above and Kasher episode took place when the economy was in the dumps, so the relative compensation bar was low and dropping. This gave companies the incentive to agree to binding arbitration, because it would likely lead to reduced compensation for the workgroup.

3) Alaska is the darling of Seattle and one thing the company hates is bad press. Picketing at the Seattle headquarters and SeaTac would make the shareholders nervous. Do you know why it didn't make a difference for the outcome of the 10/31/17 award? Because a panel of Judges awarded the contract, so it bought you absolutely no leverage. The picketing events and the orange lanyards didn't mean a thing, because once again a group of judges awarded the big provisions of the new contract (binding arbitration).

I really hope things go differently in 2020 because I will support you guys all the way, with picketing or whatever. Just don't agree to eventual binding arbitration again.

Listen to Lewbronski....he has a better idea of what is going on in the industry then you do. Learn from others man.

I don't work for Alaska, and I don't work for Endeavor (formerly Pinnacle), but I did previously. I thought you were referencing Endeavor before but it must be Alaska because Endeavor wasn't in Section 6 contract negotiations last year, they did vote in an LOA to their contract at that time, but it was pudding on top of the contract. Additional benefits to attract more pilots and the pilots voted on it. If it had been arbitrated it sure would have been a coup for the pilots to get that in arbitration, but it wasn't.

Can you please clarify? Your dates are right on so it kind of sounds like you just have no idea what actually is happening in these scenarios. The contract that 9E agreed to arbitration for was never arbitrated because the company would not agree to it. It was negotiated in the regular manner (after which time there was a bankruptcy but that is another story). Fortunately the work rules stayed which really saved the day at the time, and now LOAs have increased pay and other items to much benefit to the pilot group... none of it through arbitration and big items were voted on by the pilot group.

Bugaboo
03-02-2018, 07:03 PM
Why did you guys end up in Arbitration? Because negotiations failed.

Why did negotiations fail? Because Alaska management did not have to negotiate in good faith.

Why didn't management negotiate in good faith? There was no need to.

With operational metrics as high as they were, there was no need for management to do anything.

If during negotiations your pilots are feeding at the trough, building their line to 117 limits, flying time-and-a-half, and selling back vacations, you guys are [email protected] at the negotiating table. Talk about sending a message. Benito the doochebag heard your message loud and clear, all the way to the bank.

Good luck finding the unity and solidarity necessary to make it all the way to self-help.

.
Bullseye^^^

cornbeef007
03-03-2018, 07:40 AM
I don't work for Alaska, and I don't work for Endeavor (formerly Pinnacle), but I did previously. I thought you were referencing Endeavor before but it must be Alaska because Endeavor wasn't in Section 6 contract negotiations last year, they did vote in an LOA to their contract at that time, but it was pudding on top of the contract. Additional benefits to attract more pilots and the pilots voted on it. If it had been arbitrated it sure would have been a coup for the pilots to get that in arbitration, but it wasn't.

Can you please clarify? Your dates are right on so it kind of sounds like you just have no idea what actually is happening in these scenarios. The contract that 9E agreed to arbitration for was never arbitrated because the company would not agree to it. It was negotiated in the regular manner (after which time there was a bankruptcy but that is another story). Fortunately the work rules stayed which really saved the day at the time, and now LOAs have increased pay and other items to much benefit to the pilot group... none of it through arbitration and big items were voted on by the pilot group.

Iím talking Alaska.