couldn't agree more that the Company should unilaterally raise training pay.

Why would they do that if they can get us to pay for it instead?

FDX should pony that up without a ta!

Yeah ... right!

 

You need to be educated about what your counsel is telling you. You cannot follow them blindly. Bad Lawyers are worse than no lawyers. There are so many holes in our contract that could have been addressed in this thing. Maybe we could have saved all of that money on polling and spent it on PROFESSIONAL NEGOTIATORS.

P.S. I'm not saying we have bad lawyers, I'm just saying that following blindly is dangerous as we saw with the original FDA LOA.

 

While I agree we should not file them blindly, we have good lawyers, and, as everyone here seems to have forgotten, we also have PROFESSIONAL NEGOTIATORS working closely with our NC. They are hardly operating blindly. They have been fully immersed, they have the advice of counsel and professional negotiators, plus accountants, business analysts, political consultants, etc. That is the reason we went back to ALPA, remember?

With all of that, 10 of the 12 on the MEC and the NC all believe this is the direction we should go. Based on everything I know, I believe they are correct. There has been NO information presented here that would point to something else. There has been a lot of wishful thinking and emotional rhetoric. That does not equate to making a decision based on facts and data. It is my opinion that the NC and the majority of the MEC made their decisions based on the facts, not a sense of fear or helplessness, but with a realistic, fact based analysis of our situation.

 

Thanks ptarmigan, we got it. For the 35th time.

 

ptarmigan,

These guys know better than the negotiating team. They think those who interviewed and were hired by the MEC are just not as smart as they are. They also think they know more about what's going on in the world.

Telling them they are wrong is just not going to do any good.

 

Gunter, Personal Attacks really have no place here.

 

Some folks here have it all figured out. They just know what it's like to walk into a room and negotiate with a company's negotiators. They know what it's like to work on contract details month after month. They don't have to walk the walk to get a true feel of it.

Sorry you're taking that personally but that's what some are saying.

I know that I don't what it's like. I also don't have full knowledge or the background on what has come to us in this TA.

 

hen do you guys vote on this TA?

TIA

 

Gunter,

Take a look at the "non-scientific"poll on here. The 179 "NO" votes you see will be about all of them, at best double. The remainder of our pilots understand the importance of and the benefits of this TA for us and, (GASP) the Company. Thankfully the majority understand the reality of this TA and can deal with the limited scope. Take a look at the majority of the negative comments that ooze from this board and you will find that its the same people ALL THE TIME. They love the sidelines and throwing stones. It's just a lot easier and more provocative to set an argumentative tone. That sells much better to the few that take this road and is usually an oversimplified view of the issues, such as the importance of our companies international growth when compared to SIBA v.s. FDA or latching on to minor deficiencies in our contract like accepted fares.

I appreciate the work that has happened to present us with this TA and the ongoing effort to educate all our pilots to the details that went into the process.

-Just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions!

 

Smarter than dudes who negotiated LOA 1 anyways.

But I would like a piece of the 380 no votes bet.