Vote is open and goes until about Mar 25th I think.

I voted no.

When this TA is ratified, there will not be "open sections," it becomes the complete contract. And if history is our guide a "real" contract would optimistically take about two years to complete after the amendable date. So, we are looking at 3 - 4 (or) more years without any real improvements to our contract. Then we begin again but without the leverage of a company desire for an MD-11 FDA. That means old style RLA negotiations with the threat of a strike.

In my view, the benefits of this TA are few. ALPA national gains 3 - 4 more years of stable dues and no risk. Management gets to "burn out" the pilot group with interminable useless discussions over "pseudo" open sections which are not covered under the RLA (because we have a contract in force.) In other words, no requirement or necessity to bargain. We agreed to changes that allowed management to discipline us and perhaps fire us more easily (bonus!).

The pilots paying the roughly $18,000,000.00 in dues per year gain a 3% raise.

Frankly, the NPRM changes do not justify giving up my right to an improvement in my work-rules during this contract cycle. Nor does it justify eliminating my right to negotiate a return to unilaterally abrogated contractual rights like the ability to deviate with a realistic deadhead bank (not bogus fares even the company can't get).

And yes, I believe our new hires deserve a liveable wage during their initial training. I have not forgotten how it was the junior pilots that gained us our first contract. Unity is our strongest ally and it means fighting for all our pilots with equal vigor. I disagree strongly with those who suggest unity means following blindly behind the recommendations of the NC or the MEC. Calls for unity do not deny you the right to evaluate and decide for yourself. We showed the most unity when we took pay cuts that allowed our junior pilots to stay employed during the economic slowdown. It sucked but it demonstrated real unity to the industry and inspired others to follow us.

We could have done better than this. We certainly deserve better than this.

Folks...I need more than 3% to give the company the bases overseas.

I thought about his today while cutting grass: 15% improvement in pay gets me on board right now. 10%? Marginal. I would probably still vote against the loss of leverage against the company. 7%? I'll not agree AT ALL and I will vote against/work a picket line against ANY company that tries to foist this upon us. I've already stood and walked a picket line- that was against Spirit Airlines last year....and we won. We forced the South African owners to pay their pilots a working wage, and for 5 weeks last summer 100% of our employees stayed away from the building They capitulated during week three, and whe had them placed in custody.

N

This line of argument is timeless...and universally applicable to any TA the NC & MEC would bring forward for ratification.

It pretty much states that members cannot propose any views different than the NC or MEC because they don't have full knowledge of what goes on behind the scenes.

Of course they don't ---- they never will.

But that fact does not dismiss the value of well thought out debate.

Sometimes that debate pays off immediately ---- sometimes it pays off in the future.

How did we get to FDA v3.0 that's on the table?

By all agreeing on this forum that FDA v1.0 was the best we could get?

By accepting FDA v2.0 as sufficient for the FDAs to fill?

Where did the ideas for improving the FDAs germinate?

What debate on this forum is useful?

To dismiss all arguments by an opposing view and claim your side is simply more intelligent is not listening...and learning from other perspectives.

Endless debate on the same topics is probably futile on both ends, but the ability to present opposing views definitely has value.

Because one may not agree with the NC or MEC does not mean their efforts are unappreciated or that there must be regime change.

The outcome of the vote will be what it is --- but trust me, the NC, MEC and Mgmt have been listening to the debate carefully and taking notes.

Now where is Yoda to say this more succintly and more eloquently?

The missing part this is. Assume too much you do.

There you go again ---- couldn't help yourself could you.

Must be hard to always be the smartest guy in the room.

Taken from Wikipedia…

“The Rock Ptarmigan is seasonally camouflaged…”

“The male's "song" is a loud croaking.”


I urge everyone to please read Confessions of a Union Buster. I promise it will enlighten all who read it. It is a very, very quick read, which will undoubtedly make one wonder of both the timeliness and content of forum posts, regarding our TA, especially here at APC.

This TA encapsulates short term gains for long term pains. Three percent a year is hardly worth giving up our leverage. We have leverage at so many angles NOW that will be given up upon this TA ratification. The hard sell is upon us, and it is up to us, via our vote, to help our MEC and NC understand the prospective TA is subpar.

With that logic it sounds as if you believe the majority of pilots that voted for FDA LOA 1 knew the reality of what they were voting for?

Really? I'm not sure I mentioned the last LOA anywhere in that post but if you want to extrapolate that then YES, I think our pilots new exactly what they voted for! At least the ones that took the time to look at it.

Thank you my friend for providing concrete evidence of your lunacy and backing up my previous assertion! You don't really "fly" airplanes, do you?