Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1619664)

if Newk says vote no, I am voting no.

Originally Posted by Alan Shore (Post 1619574)

I quite agree. We should provide an ability for those who wish to fly (and earn) more and provide more paid time off (e.g., vacation) so that those who do wish to fly more are not compelled to do so.

Are we sniping again?

Originally Posted by index (Post 1619577)

True story. I don't know any details of how it went down but the pilot who early retired was a great guy.

Originally Posted by Gearjerk (Post 1619704)

Hoping it wasn't TIMBO or FINIS?!?!:eek::eek:

Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1619717)

Not me, not yet anyway...

You'll know when I go, because I'm going to sell my seat on EBAY!

Bidding starts at my lost DB money; $1.5 Million.:D

Originally Posted by GunshipGuy (Post 1619634)

A mil friend of mine who went through this in 2010 said it resulted in holding him up for at least two or three classes. Upon review he was one of the lucky ones who got the go ahead; the others (~50%?) did not fair as well. One of the unlucky ones had a recommendation letter from his dad (a current captain with the company).:eek: Don't test defensively (i.e. IMO, applicants should be honest on those MMPI tests and not try to look like a saint. Probably a lot more to it than that, though).

Originally Posted by iaflyer (Post 1619721)

if all 11,999 pilots remaining kick in $125 each, we can all move up a number huh? ;)

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1619655)

I think this is probably a. "Which came first: the chicken or egg?" conversation, but I'll answer anyway. From my perspective at the time, which was a freshly bumped DC-9 captain back in the right seat of the 757; our lower pay rates had everything to do with our frozen pension. If I remember correctly, our frozen pension vote came in the fall, while the concessionary contract vote came the next year.

I can tell you that I argued until I was blue in the face with guys with multiple reasons as to why they shouldn't vote for that contract. Almost everyone fell back on the same excuse as to why they would vote for it: they wanted to protect their pensions. IMO, it's the main reason why "we" voted in those lower rates.

So, it's all in how you look at it. I didn't take his statement to imply that we kept the pension because we had lower rates, while it appears that you did. Rather, I thought he was just including the frozen pension as evidence to compare our overall compensation as compared to yours.

I guess we would have to ask him what he meant.

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 1619526)

Which had absolutely nothing to do with your lower rates...
You kept your pension because it didn't meet the high threshold required to terminate.