Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1684932)

A management parrot (sailingfun) has been trying mightily to sandbag our next contract, and the ALPA guys (Ron Rico, Alan Shore, pineapple guy, alfaromero, starcheck102, johnso29, etc) defend him--and even join in.

Madness.

Good news is, I don't think they're fooling any of the swing votes this time.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1684828)

Yes they do sailingfun. ASM's are THE metric used to define an airline's growth. Pilot jobs are almost always directly related to an airline's growth or lack thereof. Gains or concessions in pilot productivity can cause the airline growth/pilot jobs ratio to diverge, but the rates usually mirror each other.

We gave up productivity concessions in C2012 to help fully fund our 4/8/3/3 pay rate increases. This is why our pilot jobs rate of growth is less than the airline's rate of growth.

You and alfaromeo are trying very hard to ignore the airline's growth and just run with the increase in pilot jobs claiming C2012 is the cause. That's incorrect to do so. It would be just as incorrect for me to blame C2012 for a loss of jobs if management had decided to shrink the airline during this time frame. I know why you and alfaromeo are doing it, I just can't imagine why you think people can't see through it.

Carl

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1684858)

I didn't say that. My participation in the survey is where I got the preamble which I posted above. What I was hoping to convey was why the participation rates are so low. The usual suspects like Starcheck102 think it's because pilots spend too much time sitting on their butts. I wanted to provide another possible reason.

Carl

Originally Posted by Check Essential (Post 1684821)

sailing-
Do you read what you type?
Is it really your position that none of the work rule changes we gave up in 2012 have made any difference in our efficiency and productivity? No loss of jobs?

Your continued attempts to spin those concessions are astounding.
You lose any remaining credibility when you post stuff that defies common sense.

Although I guess your analysis is actually excellent news.
If you're right, then the company shouldn't have a problem reversing all those changes since none of them have worked.

Originally Posted by DFW Refugee (Post 1684929)

gzsg/Jerry:

OK. But, this appears to be 2nd, 3rd, etc...-hand opinion-----to me. I doubt the line pilots will see anything from the company's 'Dream Sheet' before openers. A few rumblings, possible leaks and trial balloons, but few facts.

Thanks for responding,

DFW

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1684978)

I doubt the company has even started on a dream sheet. They are in the middle of the VA agreement. When it's done then they will move on to the contract.

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1684978)

I doubt the company has even started on a dream sheet. They are in the middle of the VA agreement. When it's done then they will move on to the contract.

Originally Posted by RockyBoy (Post 1684918)

Nice...finally some West Coast love from an AE. 25 320 FO's in SLC should make a lot of fellas happy.

Originally Posted by HTBH (Post 1684987)

As a new hire A320 guy trying to get to SLC.... How low down on the seniority list do you think those SLC 320s will go? And I'll assume it'll be reserve for a long time to come for those at the bottom of that list?

Originally Posted by HTBH (Post 1684987)

As a new hire A320 guy trying to get to SLC.... How low down on the seniority list do you think those SLC 320s will go? And I'll assume it'll be reserve for a long time to come for those at the bottom of that list?