MOU 25-05
#501
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,363
Likes: 904
Minimum wage for you! That's the state law, that's all you get.... respectfully, NotEnuf
#502
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 158
Likes: 22
That’s why we need a contractual provision that anything any state we have a domicile in gets, we all get. The vast majority of people in states that pass those laws get a tiny tiny fraction of the sick allotment we do. Ours is a completely different system by design. To give some bases 270 hours for relatives while others get none isn’t ok since we all negotiated and paid for that cost item.
Anything those bases get, we all get. Put it in the PWA and make everyone share its cost equally for equal benefit.
Anything those bases get, we all get. Put it in the PWA and make everyone share its cost equally for equal benefit.
#503
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,821
Likes: 153
From: window seat
I’m not against the laws. I’m just adamant that we all get to use our collectively negotiated benefit the same way.
#504
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,821
Likes: 153
From: window seat
we already did when we voted for C19. The benefits were equally paid for and are now unequally used.
therefore it requires a correction in C25 to stipulate that what one base gets all bases get from our collectively negotiated benefit.
if you want special and extra benefits in your state then vote for extra taxes to fund those benefits. CBA cost items equally shared by us all shouldn’t give you extra benefits.
therefore it requires a correction in C25 to stipulate that what one base gets all bases get from our collectively negotiated benefit.
if you want special and extra benefits in your state then vote for extra taxes to fund those benefits. CBA cost items equally shared by us all shouldn’t give you extra benefits.
#505
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,821
Likes: 153
From: window seat
#506
#507
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,821
Likes: 153
From: window seat
If we are using a socialist philosophy to spread the wealth what about the rest of it? Silver slips, 23M7, single universal pay scale etc.? How about childcare and eldercare? Where are we drawing the line? I just hate when people attack my state for social safety nets and taxes and then claim they should be entitled to it. I think we all eventually will get it but Delta has to figure out how to spin it as a company idea and win for management.
I’m also not “attacking your state” for this. I don’t know what state it even is nor do I care other than insofar as this narrow topic goes, I assume it’s a state that has decreed that you get superior monetary value from an equally negotiated benefit for us all.
While I do personally favor lower taxes, I have nothing against localities or states that want sky high taxes. It doesn’t bother me one bit if your state passes a 100% income tax rate with no deductions to fund all your hopes and dreams. You do you. If your state wants to tax to fund generous family care programs I wouldn’t lift a finger to stop it.
But that’s not what THIS is.
A state decreeing that your 240-270 annual sick hours can be used for that is a cost item that we ALL carry at contract time that you get to use MUCH differently than the rest of us. I’m also not saying I want your benefit to be eliminated. All I AM saying is that every domicile should be able to use our EQUALLY NEGOTIATED CBA/PWA benefits…EQUALLY.
Why would you possibly be against that?
Also, doesn’t UAL have some kind of provision to dress that? While compelling if true, even if it’s not, we should put that in C25. Why would you possibly take issue with that?
Your state’s taxes have nothing to do with that because that benefit is not being funded from those taxes, it’s merely an edict that ALPA negotiated benefits apply more to you than to others.
Why would you possibly be against what I’m advocating for?
#508
Thats quite the extrapolation. Socialism? Trying to compare anything and everything in a PWA to top down national or global absolute authority government is an interesting exercise but well beyond the scope of this topic.
I’m also not “attacking your state” for this. I don’t know what state it even is nor do I care other than insofar as this narrow topic goes, I assume it’s a state that has decreed that you get superior monetary value from an equally negotiated benefit for us all.
While I do personally favor lower taxes, I have nothing against localities or states that want sky high taxes. It doesn’t bother me one bit if your state passes a 100% income tax rate with no deductions to fund all your hopes and dreams. You do you. If your state wants to tax to fund generous family care programs I wouldn’t lift a finger to stop it.
But that’s not what THIS is.
A state decreeing that your 240-270 annual sick hours can be used for that is a cost item that we ALL carry at contract time that you get to use MUCH differently than the rest of us. I’m also not saying I want your benefit to be eliminated. All I AM saying is that every domicile should be able to use our EQUALLY NEGOTIATED CBA/PWA benefits…EQUALLY.
Why would you possibly be against that?
Also, doesn’t UAL have some kind of provision to dress that? While compelling if true, even if it’s not, we should put that in C25. Why would you possibly take issue with that?
Your state’s taxes have nothing to do with that because that benefit is not being funded from those taxes, it’s merely an edict that ALPA negotiated benefits apply more to you than to others.
Why would you possibly be against what I’m advocating for?
I’m also not “attacking your state” for this. I don’t know what state it even is nor do I care other than insofar as this narrow topic goes, I assume it’s a state that has decreed that you get superior monetary value from an equally negotiated benefit for us all.
While I do personally favor lower taxes, I have nothing against localities or states that want sky high taxes. It doesn’t bother me one bit if your state passes a 100% income tax rate with no deductions to fund all your hopes and dreams. You do you. If your state wants to tax to fund generous family care programs I wouldn’t lift a finger to stop it.
But that’s not what THIS is.
A state decreeing that your 240-270 annual sick hours can be used for that is a cost item that we ALL carry at contract time that you get to use MUCH differently than the rest of us. I’m also not saying I want your benefit to be eliminated. All I AM saying is that every domicile should be able to use our EQUALLY NEGOTIATED CBA/PWA benefits…EQUALLY.
Why would you possibly be against that?
Also, doesn’t UAL have some kind of provision to dress that? While compelling if true, even if it’s not, we should put that in C25. Why would you possibly take issue with that?
Your state’s taxes have nothing to do with that because that benefit is not being funded from those taxes, it’s merely an edict that ALPA negotiated benefits apply more to you than to others.
Why would you possibly be against what I’m advocating for?
#509
I'm really not but the argument would be misuse of negotiating capital. If you want the benefit afforded by a particular locale, state in this case, you could move there if it's that important. I don't live in FL but if I wanted 0 state income tax, then I can move there. I'm not advocating anything except self reliance and determination. Like I said, we will get this eventually. We need to let the courts hash it out and corporate america to realize this is happening.
#510
Banned
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



