Originally Posted by JohnnyViper (Post 938627)

Call me naive or ignorant or whatever you choose, but it blows my mind when some of you guys shout "READ IT!!!" and almost use that phrase as an insult. I read the last one, I read the one before that, I've read the LOAs that come our way, but I'm no dorky lawyer and I don't know what a lot of that stuff means. I especially can't find the hidden loopholes (I can't find the hidden money, either) and I can't find the little nuggets that the management guys hid in there for themselves. That's why, at least in my opinion, we are paying the union guys.

I will read this TA, but I'm not going to see the things that will hang us. If any of you had been told what the company was going to do with 4A2b, would you have voted for the last one with that gem in there? I specifically remember the last one and emailing my rep and asking for "some plain language bullets" put out by the union and they didn't want to do that. "Just read it". It really POs me to think of those guys last time strutting around saying "Read it! Read it!" while the company lawyers were trying to hold there laughter in.

So for you guys that are barking "Read it!", just remember that people are reading it, but that doesn't mean that we understand all the ramifications and details. Saying that repeatedly may stifle some discussion. And before I get both barrels in the face, allow me to repeat, I do read the everything the union sends us. I even try not to use it to wipe the drool off my face.

Originally Posted by MD11HOG (Post 938635)

I would like to point out that getting FDA " improvements " from the company is not that big of a negotiating feat. They can't staff it with the old agreement so they need to improve it. Negotiating a COLA doesn't impress me either. I know our team has worked hard and I hope the bring some real IMPROVEMENTS for all pilots.

Originally Posted by nakazawa (Post 938541)

Excess Bid - B-777 Pay Rate - HKG FDA LOA – 4.A.2.b., with continuous CBA violations and grievances. The Purple Nugget debacle (inability to fill ANC vacancies) occurred because of poor CBA wording, lousy ANC scheduling, poor domicile trip building, lack of a move package, and the inability of the Company to recognize commuting issues (no-harm no foul). The LA domicile was so poorly negotiated that deadheading, ground transportation, scheduling, and even catering was a disaster. We've got some history of trust here that needs to be analyzed. Then add FOQA, ASAP, and the misuse of FSRs, and I’m having some difficulty with the word ‘TRUST’.

Most recently we’ve had crews scheduled as PASSENGERS on FedEx flights because the company would rather violate the contract than pay for a couple days in the hotel while they’re trying to find a ‘legal’ deadhead reservation. I’ve watched violations to CBA 5.B.2.a-e with our long ‘sits’, and 8.A.3.b. - international deadheads ‘SHALL’ be on US FAR Part 121 carriers, or carriers of comparable service (non-English speaking cabin crews isn’t safe, or comparable).

I believe this amazingly quick T/A is exactly what the Company wants to move forward with their plan. Is it exactly what WE want so the Company can move forward? Is this essentially a glorified FDA modification. I’d love to see our FDA crews do better, and I’ll support any improvements for those crews, but I’m good with Chapter 6 in the current CBA, and I really don’t need a new agreement unless it addresses everything. The NPRM should have NO affect on our negotiations. If we negotiate the work rules we [WE] want, and the NPRM changes make it better, we’ve won twice. I think what we’re wanting for work rules will be better than what the FAA comes up with, anyway.

If this agreement is a 1 or 2 year deal, and the NC/MEC opt to unilaterally make this a 1 or 2 year agreement, does that CANCEL the foreign domicile portion? Will we have crews living in HKG or CGN that’ll then be hung out with nothing, preventing the NC or
MEC from really negating this agreement? If part is cancelled – is it all cancelled?

I’m not saying this is going to be the all giving, all solution CBA, but, this is a HUGE DEAL! I hope this time we have 4,600 crew members that take time to read the friggin’ thing. Please, read it. Knowledge is POWER!

Originally Posted by TheBaron (Post 938696)

Some good points, but I have to deduct some as well for your lack of understanding of the RLA. When a contract reaches its amendable date, it doesn't end; it can't be unilaterally changed. We operate status quo until a new agreement is reached.
I hope they considered putting something in the contract that at least guarantees a COLA raise while we negotiate the next contract (1 or 2 years down the road.)

Originally Posted by Busboy (Post 938706)

Trust me, there's not any lack of RLA understanding on Nakazawa's part. But, there does seem to be a major lack of clarity on the NC's part concerning this TA and the 12/24 month options.

I guess we'll just have to wait and find out exactly what they're talking about.