...from who's persepctive?

 

Things I would like in next contract:

- 3 hour call out for the bottom half of reserves or r-lines that you bid for 3 hour call out.
- if we cant get full retirement after 25 yos then how about at least full credit for all my yos.
- another option is to allow after 25 yos a reduced retirement until the normal retirement age.
- if your scheduled layover is less than 12 hours then you get higher perdiem rate or some kind of money bump to allow you to order a room service meal and not make you go hunting for affordable food. And by meal I mean something other than soup and salad or a chicken quesadilla or the marriot burger.
-something other than a 3% cola that just washes out with the optimizer.

 

I definitely agree that we should be able to retire after 25 years of service without any penalty. If not that, then we should be credited for every year of service we perform! (ie. 35 years of service equals 70% of your high five for retirement)

 

I don't want to see trading R days for trips.

 

No retirement penalty for 25 yos service or more.

Massive B-plan bump or massive 401k match bump to mitigate imminent loss of pension and/or B-plan.

No more flying to PEK. Sorry, just got the run around there again.

Wait, I almost forgot! What about the improvements to the FDAs that all the YES voters are talking about?! "Get the language in now, we'll fix it on the next contract." Yeah, right.

 

1. Option for a ROTH 401(k) would be wise.
2. Maintain combined A Plan and B Plan.
3. Raise the uniform allowance to at least $250.
4. Have more transparency with the Scheduling Optimizer with Union oversight.
5. Have a stronger recourse with Disputed Pairings. These pairings aren't just "tough," they compromise safety and we need to limit those flights where crews say "that pairing was not safe."
6. Profit sharing/stock purchase. This was something we lost several years ago, but it is good business and motivates all employees to maximize profits.
7. Clear "meet and greet" guidelines for hiring/recruiting fairness.
8. If the retirement age is changed to 65, there needs to be a process established to report deficiencies to protect those under 60 forced to fly with them.
9. Quarterly deviation banks. Yearly would be great, but monthly is just not manageable.
10. Create gateways in addition to domiciles. As we go international combined with the number of commuters, domiciles should still exist with the option of claiming a gateway: places like Newark, Chicago (or Indy), Seattle, etc. Those places to where we send most deadheads would qualify and it would work like staging requests.
11. Family travel benefits on airlines.

 

I'm pretty sure this is already in the benefit book? 3 percent hit per year from what you would have gotten. ie if you already have 25 yos and age 57, the reduction is 9 percent?

 

A cadre of small, professional inflight security specialists to help us cope with the growing terror threat. They can ride the jumpseats on every flight and can be armed ala the FFDO program.

To allow max fuel savings and min w/b disruption, they need to have a maximum weight--I'm thinking around 135-140 pounds. They should be VERY fit for the rigorous job, and as such should probably be young...say 18-40 max. Additional duties during flight might include helping with the catering and providing fatigue reducing massage therapy during cruise flight. Also to prevent fatigue, some enroute entertainment--perhaps some exotic dancing--could help keep everyone awake and alert during those critical period arrivals.

To improve crew compatibility issues, crews will be able to swing by "security" offices to select a security officer for flight. These offices will be managed like Jumpseats---there will be a pool of security officers standing by to join crews. Although F/Os will have input, captains will maintain final authority for selection. Non-selected Security officers will remain as reserves for stand-by crews and ad-hoc pairings.

Due to the size, weight, and temperment requirements the logical source for the pool of new security officers will be SFS, VCP, any Scandanavian country, Singapore, and a few other well known hotspots for locating similar talent.

A small cadre of larger Security officers will be available for those captains who do not feel "safe" with a 135 pound or less Security officer. As our mantra is "no one left behind", a few larger security officers (over 200 pounds, six feet tall or better, etc) will be available for our female crewmembers. Duties remain the same, but these candidates will be recruited mostly from Australia or (again) Scandanavian countries.

Who says our flights cannot be safer, more secure, and more enjoyable? I think a unified crew force could certainly make a strong case. Remember--security is in everyone's best interests.

 

Now that's funny, I don't care who you are!!

 

That's more than funny; it's hilarious!