C100 VBs
06-25-2017, 01:23 PM
#191
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,642
Do you think the NC from the 1950's was dragged through the mud over the "jet" issue? WHAT A JOB KILLER!!!!!! So much concessionary productivity. Can't believe we ever gave that up. Wish we had props still.... these jets are such a cancer. And the company is making Billions!!!!!! Next they're going to want "jetways". These silly bridges designed to speed up the boarding process. What a concession.
06-25-2017, 01:29 PM
#192
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: I got into this business so I wouldn't have to work.
Posts: 1,034
Originally Posted by sailingfun
They would not be willing to give up more than 20 million. That's all the VB's were costed at and the estimated best case savings. If a Midwest base makes sense for the CS100 they can always open a real base. If the base is needed long term it's cheaper than a VB base.
06-29-2017, 07:18 AM
#193
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by sailingfun
They would not be willing to give up more than 20 million. That's all the VB's were costed at and the estimated best case savings. If a Midwest base makes sense for the CS100 they can always open a real base. If the base is needed long term it's cheaper than a VB base.
Its not about that though. Its about the precedent. Just like they only "needed" a couple dozen large RJ's...at first...once they got that nose under the tent then their true strategy came to light. I bet they will be back later trying to expand the "flexibility" of VB's into something that will cost a lot more jobs down the road.
For us, there is no reason to waste time entertaining it or trying to play cat and mouse with something as high stakes as trying to come out ahead on selling our jobs to them. There is zero chance we will win on that battlefield. Ever.
06-29-2017, 07:21 AM
#194
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by Planetrain
Do you think the NC from the 1950's was dragged through the mud over the "jet" issue? WHAT A JOB KILLER!!!!!! So much concessionary productivity. Can't believe we ever gave that up. Wish we had props still.... these jets are such a cancer. And the company is making Billions!!!!!! Next they're going to want "jetways". These silly bridges designed to speed up the boarding process. What a concession.
Is this a version of the "ALPA fought the 2 pilot cockpits blah blah blah, therefore all job killing scams are fully legit" argument?
If they want a base they can open a base. If they no longer need it they can close the base. We're not standing in the way of that, and we're pretty productive as is. Back out the management mandated and freely chosen inefficiencies of a million fleet types and we're even more productive.
06-29-2017, 11:51 AM
#195
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by gloopy
If its only worth 20 million, then its not even worth the time spent trying to make it work, even if it does work, which it likely won't. That amount is less than 2/10ths of one percent of the wasted buybacks.
Its not about that though. Its about the precedent. Just like they only "needed" a couple dozen large RJ's...at first...once they got that nose under the tent then their true strategy came to light. I bet they will be back later trying to expand the "flexibility" of VB's into something that will cost a lot more jobs down the road.
For us, there is no reason to waste time entertaining it or trying to play cat and mouse with something as high stakes as trying to come out ahead on selling our jobs to them. There is zero chance we will win on that battlefield. Ever.
Its not about that though. Its about the precedent. Just like they only "needed" a couple dozen large RJ's...at first...once they got that nose under the tent then their true strategy came to light. I bet they will be back later trying to expand the "flexibility" of VB's into something that will cost a lot more jobs down the road.
For us, there is no reason to waste time entertaining it or trying to play cat and mouse with something as high stakes as trying to come out ahead on selling our jobs to them. There is zero chance we will win on that battlefield. Ever.
06-29-2017, 01:47 PM
#196
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by sailingfun
There are hundreds of 20 million or less items in our contract. Using your logic the company should just give them all up.
Time to pull them down.
Its not up to the company to "give up" in this case. Its up to us. Our upside is minor and its a job killing provision.
06-29-2017, 02:50 PM
#197
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,642
Originally Posted by gloopy
LOLwut?
....
....
Read back over the VB comments in this thread. This is a mountain out of a mole hill. Whether we get VB or not, who cares? The company will have difficulty staffing. (Hope everyone with an opinion has actually read the PWA language regarding VB). May I emphasize the VOLUNTARY nature of the VB?
I think we have bigger issues. Particularly ME3. Lack of JV PWA progress with regard to Aeromexico and Korean also come to mind. Where is the outcry on this?
Is VB just an issue propagated by a few to distract us from the real issues? And if so, why?
Last edited by Planetrain; 06-29-2017 at 03:23 PM.
06-29-2017, 03:15 PM
#198
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by gloopy
Its not "my logic" that VB's are a concession that (rarely) we are able to singlehandedly pull down. The upside for us is extremely small (around $1400 per pilot?) and the downside is selling jobs.
Time to pull them down.
Its not up to the company to "give up" in this case. Its up to us. Our upside is minor and its a job killing provision.
Time to pull them down.
Its not up to the company to "give up" in this case. Its up to us. Our upside is minor and its a job killing provision.
06-29-2017, 03:47 PM
#199
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Originally Posted by sailingfun
We can't pull it down until after the test period. If you really read the LOA and look at the conditions under which a VB can operate it will end up a non event just like so many other forum boogymans. Those augmented domestic trips are really killing us aren't they!
I don't think VB has much use for the company, personally... but your constant "nothing to see here, you forum whiners" chanting does nothing to add to the discussion over it. There are still a lot of questions to be answered on the subject.
You're one of the biggest contributors here, so when you complain about the forum, most of those fingers are pointed right back at you.
06-29-2017, 04:15 PM
#200
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
The concern augmented domestic trips thing was pulled apart and put to bed in very short order on here in case you don't remember. It's clear you don't, as you just want to feel superior to the "forum."
I don't think VB has much use for the company, personally... but your constant "nothing to see here, you forum whiners" chanting does nothing to add to the discussion over it. There are still a lot of questions to be answered on the subject.
You're one of the biggest contributors here, so when you complain about the forum, most of those fingers are pointed right back at you.
I don't think VB has much use for the company, personally... but your constant "nothing to see here, you forum whiners" chanting does nothing to add to the discussion over it. There are still a lot of questions to be answered on the subject.
You're one of the biggest contributors here, so when you complain about the forum, most of those fingers are pointed right back at you.
Last edited by sailingfun; 06-29-2017 at 04:28 PM.
