HKFlyr

I agree with almost everything, but I think if we ink this deal now, we won't see a thing till way down the road...and 4.a.2.b isn't done yet, I think it will be a tool in cost cutting during the 727 shutdown while we have people sitting around waiting for training..but otherwise all good points.

CloudSailor

How do you see it playing out if we turn down the LOA?

HKFlyr

We won't. It will pass. Too much fear of what the company will do of we don't. I voted no.

It isn't all bad. BUT, I think it was leverage and could have been useful to get other things rolling. I could be wrong, but this will pass and no TA till mid summer next year.

But wait to see what cost saving measures are implemented later this summer with the early shutdown of the 727. Again My 2 cents.

CloudSailor

HKFlyr,

I agree that the LOA will likely pass, and probably by a large margin.

My question though, was that since you voted No, I would assume you'd prefer that the LOA is voted down. Supposing it were voted down, how would you see the introduction of the 767 playing out? Just curious.

FDXLAG

Here is how I would see it playing out:

There would be a single bid pack.

Some regular and reserve lines would be 767 lines. Not enough reserve lines so we would grieve it. Some regular lines would have a mix.

Vacation would be paid for the trip you dropped. Secondary lines would be paid for the trips you held.

The company would try some shenanigans with training pay, we would grieve it and eventually if you held a 767 line that month you would get training pay based on the line you held.

10 years from now a when we are strictly a Boeing 7X7 fleet; a vastily more intelligent pilot group will negotiate a 777 and a 7x7 pay rates along with a cap on monthly flying during 4A2b.

Or the company will implement 2 bid packs with a combined reserve list. We grieve and win and there are 2 completely separate bid packs. We get a contract 6 months later that incorporates the current LOA.

The question you have to ask yourself are we going to have a contract before or after we have enough 767s to make this worth worrying about.

USMCFDX

We have no leverage here. We had leverage with the opening of the German domicile when many voted yes for a crappy LOA again.

This is a decent deal for us and that is why I voted yes.

viperdriver

4A2b wouldnt affect a plane with no bidpack, ie the 727 guys will get average BLG. And they cant keep a ghost bidpack because they would have to pay 65 over 65 year old FE's What am I missing?

RedeyeAV8r

The Company's original offer on the 767 was it would have been a Single Bid Pack. 767 Pay was offered as only an override, i.e no credit guarantee unless flown, so Vacation, Training , Sick etc was not 767 paid.


4 years ago the Union tried to negotiate a separate 777 category pay rate. Even tried the a 777 intl Override. It didn't work out in our favor. Ironic you want the 777 in it's own Category (10 years from now ) to pay more but don't want the 767 in it's on WB Bidpack with Pay guarantees.

I agree with you, there will be Shenanigans no matter how this plays out. Just look how Seniority is honored in our VTO and reserve assignment process. Can't imagine watching the shenanigans in a Combined Bid pack.

If this LOA is not ratified, in your opinion, how many 767's will we have before we get CBA TA or a second LOA or a losing 26K arbitration?
Will we get a better Deal or will we get hammered in 26K? No one knows the answer, least of all me. What are the Vegas odds: in our favor or not? Look at history and how our own support the negotiation process.

BTW, have you looked at the DPs in Open time? I don't see many

LAG, You do make some valid points. Win lose or Draw life will go on. It was fun debating with you.
Have a Happy Easter! Am I allowed to still say that?

TonyC

Of course not. I didn't say that, nor did I imply that. I guess it can get a little confusing with all the conversations going on in a single thread, but the subject has been discussed in this thread.




As I mentioned previously (http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ca...ml#post1378420), I have several questions. Three of my questions were addressed, but only one was answered. The question about "wide body pay attached" was answered, and 2cylinderdriver had it correct:

He also encouraged me to ask the questions and share the answers:
Yesterday's Live Webcast was my first opportunity to ask "from the horse's mouth."

I had composed several questions in a text file and was able to Copy & Paste them to the dialogue box in the webcast. I therefore have an exact copy of what I asked, and could compare that with what was read "On Air." What I found interesting is that they were not addressed in the order that they were submitted. It appeared that questions were chosen to create the desired dialogue. Unfortunately, much of that dialogue was filled with questions that a college graduate who had read the LOA should have been able to answer by reading. "Can a B-757 pilot pick up a B-767 trip out of open time?" NO, the LOA is pretty clear about that, but let's talk about it for a few minutes.

Another question I asked was edited. I asked,
The first three sentences are statments forming the background for the question, which is the last sentence. The "Moderator" read the statements, but not the question, at which point the Negotiating Committee Chairman said, "That's right, ..." and repeated the rules for compensating B-757 Flex Instructors. The question, "why would The Company ever want to hire a B-767 Flex Instructor, if they can meet all the training needs with a narrow-body pilot?" was not asked or answered.

The third question which he addressed was this:

"What criteria will the Scheduling Committee Chairman use to allow B-767 flying in the B-757 bid period package?"

The response began with an explanation that the Scheduling Committee Chairman is an ALPA position, he told us who presently holds that position, told us about his experience in the job, his expertise and so on, but he never even tried to explain a single criteria or circumstance when the choice might be made to include B-767 flying in the B-757 bid period package.

Apparently, seniority is now just another Soft Parameter.






.

TonyC

No, that wasn't the point. You mentioned the issue of delayed pay as a question to my post, and I responded by agreeing that delayed pay is indeed an issue. It's not the biggest issue, but it is a real issue. I gave simplistic, extreme examples (all B-767 flying vs. no B-767 flying) to make the explanation easier, but in all likelihood there won't be a single B-757 pilot getting an entire month of B-767 trips, but several B-757 pilots getting a morsel of B-767 flying here and there. The fact that their pay is delayed is only one issue; the CORE issue is that they are paid DIFFERENTLY even if they do the SAME work. If they fly less than a full bid period of B-767 flights, they get paid LESS than their B-767 peers who fly less than a full bid period of B-767 flights

That puts those "B-767 pilots" on a scale that is below that of other B-767 pilots. That's what I mean by "Purple B-scale."






.