|
Originally Posted by All 5 Stages
(Post 3984643)
The financial incentives to implement Quick Slips will dictate how fast the company wants to create them. Right now, the company has to pay 3x to cover a trip. Once algorithms for Quick Slips are created, tested, and implemented, the company will pay ... wait for it ... 3x to cover a trip.
They don't care which pilot gets paid -- we do. They don't care about deal making -- we do. They don't care about CS hold times. Maybe they care about sick calls, but that data won't be available for probably another bid period or two. Even then, the data will show that those trips will get covered by deal makers. Prove me wrong. A5S |
Originally Posted by Nantonaku
(Post 3984688)
We shouldn’t have made a deal. This is the most leverage we have ever had going into contract negotiations. Paying 3X pay for 20% of trips would have lit a fire under the company. I get people are angry but a little patience here would have worked in our favor long term. Fix it in contract negotiations not via an MOU. We could have leveraged this for a massive long term win. Now the company already has the fix.
|
Originally Posted by Nantonaku
(Post 3984688)
Now the company already has the fix.
If QS increases their usage of 3x pay, great, even more cost leverage. We have increased leverage because now we can patiently sit and wait through excessive 3x payouts without pilots being harmed. Did you really want to go into section 6 with pilots infighting and blaming each other? The facebook posts, and some here, were getting ridiculous (and desperately concessionary). |
Originally Posted by GutterGuard
(Post 3984703)
An MOU which altered the PWA AND bypassed MEMRAT, nonetheless.
|
Originally Posted by Nantonaku
(Post 3984688)
We shouldn’t have made a deal. This is the most leverage we have ever had going into contract negotiations. Paying 3X pay for 20% of trips would have lit a fire under the company. I get people are angry but a little patience here would have worked in our favor long term. Fix it in contract negotiations not via an MOU. We could have leveraged this for a massive long term win. Now the company already has the fix.
Should it have gone to MEMRAT? Absolutely. Additionally, there should be no more LOAs or MOUs, for any reason, between now and our next contract signing. |
Originally Posted by Nantonaku
(Post 3984688)
We shouldn’t have made a deal. This is the most leverage we have ever had going into contract negotiations. Paying 3X pay for 20% of trips would have lit a fire under the company. I get people are angry but a little patience here would have worked in our favor long term. Fix it in contract negotiations not via an MOU. We could have leveraged this for a massive long term win. Now the company already has the fix.
|
Originally Posted by GutterGuard
(Post 3984439)
Beats your suggestion of auctioning flying to the lowest bidder.
I don’t want to auction bid flying. |
Originally Posted by ancman
(Post 3984480)
3500 is junior in a lot of categories. For the first two weeks of the month, every IA in my category was awarded junior to the median seniority pilot..
Now that it’s later in the month and the junior pilots have had their fill, there have been a handful awarded just barely above the median. |
Originally Posted by Planetrain
(Post 3984761)
What are you talking about?
I don’t want to auction bid flying. |
Originally Posted by Gunfighter
(Post 3984765)
Could you give an example? It's either top 20% WBB or top half NBA in the dozen I've looked at.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:37 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands