Show me the openers!!
07-25-2007, 11:28 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 356
Again...where's the openers? As a dues paying member, I would think I am entitled to have a good understanding how much effort our Union put into this LOA. Nobody else curious how much progress our negotiators made on this LOA from where they started? Only after I know the starting point can I validate our Unions' stance that this is all we can get........no wait, now with the updated STV clause.....THAT'S all we can get! Bluntly, I don't feel we are being fully informed on what our Union did, or didn't do for us in reference to this LOA. HKG w/o COLA, no schooling assistance and no more than $2700 for housing isn't a whole lot to hang any NC hat on IMHO.
07-25-2007, 11:37 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 356
Originally Posted by fdx727pilot
Yeah, it's not like the MEC reps from block 6, 7, and 8 are junior enough to be affected by STV or think about bidding one of the FDAs. Wait a minute!! Yes they are. Gee, look what happens when you making sweeping generalizations. You're proven wrong. Flame off!!!
They don't think it will affect them because they themsleves have said that the STV will go senior......remember....the vacation myth?
07-25-2007, 11:51 AM
#23
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 122
Originally Posted by hamfisted
And hey, anybody want to give me odds on whether DW runs for a National ALPA office soon........
OK gang...flame away!!
OK gang...flame away!!
07-25-2007, 11:56 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: A300 CAP FDX
Posts: 287
Ham,
I don't think you will ever see them show the openers. If EI is truthful in his "99" update, it would only highlight the egg they ALREADY have on their face. Much less the hollandaise sauce of a non-existant Scope protection enhancement!
A negotiator(s) who failed to realize the company WANTED something in addition to current CBA rules has failed. Period. ALL "negotiations" have leverage SOMEWHERE. Being able to see the lever is part of the job.
0.02
I don't think you will ever see them show the openers. If EI is truthful in his "99" update, it would only highlight the egg they ALREADY have on their face. Much less the hollandaise sauce of a non-existant Scope protection enhancement!
A negotiator(s) who failed to realize the company WANTED something in addition to current CBA rules has failed. Period. ALL "negotiations" have leverage SOMEWHERE. Being able to see the lever is part of the job.
0.02
Last edited by a300fr8dog; 07-25-2007 at 11:57 AM. Reason: gramar
07-25-2007, 12:07 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: A300 CAP FDX
Posts: 287
Lip,
We SHOULD all be negotiators. Individually, and collectively, looking out for what's important to us,,,, individually AND collectively.
We each vote singularly though. I will not chastise an individual if he votes "yes" to this. Just make sure he knows ALL the ins & outs of what he is voting on. Be smart first, then vote. AND PLEASE VOTE!
We SHOULD all be negotiators. Individually, and collectively, looking out for what's important to us,,,, individually AND collectively.
We each vote singularly though. I will not chastise an individual if he votes "yes" to this. Just make sure he knows ALL the ins & outs of what he is voting on. Be smart first, then vote. AND PLEASE VOTE!
07-25-2007, 12:09 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: unskilled laborer
Posts: 353
Originally Posted by a300fr8dog
Lip,
We SHOULD all be negotiators. Individually, and collectively, looking out for what's important to us,,,, individually AND collectively.
We each vote singularly though. I will not chastise an individual if he votes "yes" to this. Just make sure he knows ALL the ins & outs of what he is voting on. Be smart first, then vote. AND PLEASE VOTE!
We SHOULD all be negotiators. Individually, and collectively, looking out for what's important to us,,,, individually AND collectively.
We each vote singularly though. I will not chastise an individual if he votes "yes" to this. Just make sure he knows ALL the ins & outs of what he is voting on. Be smart first, then vote. AND PLEASE VOTE!
07-25-2007, 03:27 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: ANC -11 FO
Posts: 189
Originally Posted by hamfisted
Again...where's the openers? As a dues paying member, I would think I am entitled to have a good understanding how much effort our Union put into this LOA. Nobody else curious how much progress our negotiators made on this LOA from where they started? Only after I know the starting point can I validate our Unions' stance that this is all we can get........no wait, now with the updated STV clause.....THAT'S all we can get! Bluntly, I don't feel we are being fully informed on what our Union did, or didn't do for us in reference to this LOA. HKG w/o COLA, no schooling assistance and no more than $2700 for housing isn't a whole lot to hang any NC hat on IMHO.
I am also confused about some of the statements surfacing lately on how we ended up with the enhanced option. We ended up with this package because that is what the company offered and we took it. That’s it. I don’t recall the company starting any lower or the union countering any higher.
07-25-2007, 03:43 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: MD-11/10 Captain
Posts: 533
One thing that bothers me about this relates to the "take it now and we'll fix it with the next contract" approach.
What will we have to give up in order to fix a broken (or seriously flawed) FDA?
What will we have to give up in order to fix a broken (or seriously flawed) FDA?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
