|
Originally Posted by Nitefrater
(Post 253075)
My proposal would mean that the only ones who HAVE to fly disputed pairings are management...
|
Originally Posted by FLMD11CAPT
(Post 253078)
OK, I'll go for that. Now we need to figure out how much negotiating capitol will be required to get it (methinks that "managment" won't go quietly into the night), and where this would fall on the overall priority list. It represents a gain whom all would benefit from in terms of scheduling and QOL. How this would stack up against pay raises and better MED/Retirment I don't know
For a company that basically prints its own money, we should give up nothing and try to choke the golden goose. If not now, when? You cannot believe for one second that the company would pause before coming to us for concessions and furloughs when the income statement gets bad. Why should we then give the same consideration when times are good? No negotiating capital (I hate that term) should be given up to a company that makes money. Our slice of the pie should be bigger; simply because it is available. Now here is the problem. We, the group of guys in the funny costumes, don't possess enough intestinal fortitiude to force the issue. Sadly, I believe we never will. We have the power, we just will not use it. |
When money grows on trees
Originally Posted by Nitefrater
(Post 253075)
Since we're talking about "priority openers" we're not restricted to what our current CBA says.
My proposal would mean that the only ones who HAVE to fly disputed pairings are management... and THAT will provide the company a far stronger incentive to fix them... partially through realizing how onerous they are, and partially by driving the office drones out of bed to fly when the rest of us do. |
Originally Posted by hamfisted
(Post 253142)
It'll be hard for mgmt to accomplish this since they typically only fly ONE pm out-and-back per month, if that. Think there's a reason OR blocks his calendar? Check out your ACP's calendar. They feel our pain....not.
|
Originally Posted by MEMFO4Ever
(Post 253087)
Your post highlights previous realities of airline negotiation, but I have a different view. How about we start off by leaving this hat-in-hand style of negotiations where it belongs; in the past.
For a company that basically prints its own money, we should give up nothing and try to choke the golden goose. If not now, when? You cannot believe for one second that the company would pause before coming to us for concessions and furloughs when the income statement gets bad. Why should we then give the same consideration when times are good? No negotiating capital (I hate that term) should be given up to a company that makes money. Our slice of the pie should be bigger; simply because it is available. Now here is the problem. We, the group of guys in the funny costumes, don't possess enough intestinal fortitiude to force the issue. Sadly, I believe we never will. We have the power, we just will not use it. |
Originally Posted by MEMFO4Ever
(Post 253087)
Your post highlights previous realities of airline negotiation, but I have a different view. How about we start off by leaving this hat-in-hand style of negotiations where it belongs; in the past.
For a company that basically prints its own money, we should give up nothing and try to choke the golden goose. If not now, when? You cannot believe for one second that the company would pause before coming to us for concessions and furloughs when the income statement gets bad. Why should we then give the same consideration when times are good? No negotiating capital (I hate that term) should be given up to a company that makes money. Our slice of the pie should be bigger; simply because it is available. Now here is the problem. We, the group of guys in the funny costumes, don't possess enough intestinal fortitiude to force the issue. Sadly, I believe we never will. We have the power, we just will not use it. Burning down the house does nothing but leave everyone out in the cold. Contract negotiations are a study in brinkmanship. The object is to obtain all you can w/o striking (that does no one any good) while creating a nagging suspicion in managments mind that we just might pull the trigger. Secondly, negotiations are almost never totally 1 sided (except our first contract; total capitulation). I agree with you that our piece of the pie should be bigger, but no matter how you look at it our desires must be prioritized and weighed for merit (how far will we go to get this item). Deal breakers are always that....deal brealers and are generally know for what they are before anyone sits down at a table (vacation, retirement, PBS). We and the company are still evolving in terms of labor relations. In many was both sides are still infantile, but enormous progress has been made in the last decade here. I think it will continue. Will it meet all of our expectations.....probably not.....as always in life it will be somewhere in the middle. |
Wasn't there supposed to be another practice bid today? Not sure if I missed the boat on this one or just got the wrong day...:rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by gcsass
(Post 254675)
Wasn't there supposed to be another practice bid today? Not sure if I missed the boat on this one or just got the wrong day...:rolleyes:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:48 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands