Originally Posted by Denny Crane

Not sure I'd call that a defeatist attitude.

Doesn't a pilot look at a situation and then try to anticipate all possible outcomes so he can devise a plan to succeed and come out on top? Is his outcome not possible?

Denny

Originally Posted by newKnow

GS,

You notice how out of your entire post, you only have one sentence that really addresses the issue? That should tell you that you probably have more of a beef with the network she works for and/or the occupants of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave than you have with what she did, or didn't do.

What you and the others are criticizing her for is something that I assume we all do. I don't know about you, but people say stupid, inappropriate, crass stuff to me all the time -- at work, in the cockpit, in the gate area -- passengers and fellow employees alike.

As much as it happens, I'm still usually caught off guard. But, I try to move on and continue the conversation. I give them the benefit of the doubt and a second chance. Just like Mrs. Ball did. Ninety-five percent of the time, I find out that I misunderstood what they were saying, or they misspoke and didn't mean for it to come out the way it did.

Do you really think that people should jump conclusions based on first impressions? Do you really fault her for trying to push on? My experience has taught me that that's not smart. I push on all the time.

For a pilot, it's good CRM. For a cable news personality conducting an interview, it's probably part of the job.

Originally Posted by sailingfun

Honestly I don't know what is achievable. When you look at the 2013 pilot cost numbers they don't help us a bit. Not one other airline has stepped up since 2002 and done anything. There are also a lot of varibles yet to be determined. The obvious big one is the political landscape. That is why we have a lot of smart people working for us. I already put a post up on how the process works. We will have to feel out the NMB and then make a judgement on how much political pressure we can bring upon them when needed. We will have to look at future projected earnings. Perhaps most important of all will be providing a road map of how we anticipate a new contract forcing other airlines to our level.
Asking for a minimum of 20% up front would end talks at that point. Management will simply ride the process. It will be a long and bumpy ride for us and we won't be allowed off the wagon until the NMB views us as being reasonable. RA is a smart man and understands costs as well as anyone. He would never allow his costs in any area to get that far out of control.
What I want in the end is somewhat irrelevant. I can tell you this however. A 3 year contract that provides a 20% increase in compensation over the 3 years without any degradation in work rules along with a 2% bump in retirement will ratify easily if it's done by the amendable date. Flame away!

Originally Posted by UGBSM

You are kind of coming across as spoiled. If you don't live in ATL of course you have to commute in, probably the day prior for a short call that early. YOU made that choice when YOU decided not to live in base.

You know it wasn't that long ago when commuting to reserve at all was impossible. Before we had jumpseat and short call was twice a day "windows". Be more grateful. You have more options than I ever did.

Originally Posted by Fly4hire

Alpha,

I'm not talking changing rules after the fact, I'm talking following the ones we have. I think I addressed the dynamics of turning a deal back - the PK of that is it just isn't going to happen, which was intentionally exploited.

It makes the seeking and following of redirection if the box drawn by the MEC for the negotiators to work within is unattainable that much more important. They were outside the box, and did not seek redirection, and it can be argued deliberately so.

As far as condescension, I don't characterize those who make a choice I disagree with as too stupid, lazy or weak. And I'd say you are far more skilled than me in framing and manipulating the discussion to suit your point of view and perspective.

Originally Posted by Sounds

Sad state of affairs when RT.com has better information regarding our government than we can ever get stateside.

Originally Posted by Scoop

I think we might be in good shape here. I think UCAL pay-rates go to 2016 and 2017 and lag us by about a year, so their current contract will eventually surpasses our 2015 pay-rates

Originally Posted by sailingfun

All of that helps. The snap up is a incentive to our management to get it done quickly and perhaps front load the raises to bump the snap up to a higher level. Still UAL won't exceed our rates until 1 Jan 2018. 2 years past our amenable date.
The wild card is pilot sentiment once we reach the amendable date. Delta is running a very efficient operation at the present. Any reduction in the efficiency of the operation could snowball. Historically over the last 15 years unhappy pilots have had little impact on operations. That might be a different story at Delta given the reliance on min staffing. They could however mitigate that with increased hiring or a block hour reduction or both.

Originally Posted by Fly4hire

Alpha,

I'm not talking changing rules after the fact, I'm talking following the ones we have. I think I addressed the dynamics of turning a deal back - the PK of that is it just isn't going to happen, which was intentionally exploited.

It makes the seeking and following of redirection if the box drawn by the MEC for the negotiators to work within is unattainable that much more important. They were outside the box, and did not seek redirection, and it can be argued deliberately so.

As far as condescension, I don't characterize those who make a choice I disagree with as too stupid, lazy or weak. And I'd say you are far more skilled than me in framing and manipulating the discussion to suit your point of view and perspective.