Originally Posted by Erdude32 (Post 1780912)

Looks like the 757 fleet will stabilize at 90: 16 757-200E's with Lay flat seats, 56 757-200's reconfigured to 199 seats, 18 757-300's with new interiors.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1780678)

Just to add to your point ... the beauty of a Global Production Balance is that it codifies a minimum we must GROW with growth within the JV and in a worst case scenario it forces them to pull down the JV flying.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1780678)

Further, if someone really wants to do a deep dive they will learn that in a downturn the ratio ratchets up forcing them to pull down the JV faster.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1780678)

I really like that we must be participants when the Company grows (even if it is some opportunity management has not dreamed up yet ... growth is ours at a roughly 3 to 1 ratio).

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1781124)

If (HUGE IF) section 2.a of this new TA really means what we think it means and really is a global production balance, then it is indeed something we don't have now. But we are paying a price for that. The price we are paying is agreeing to a new floor of international block hours that appears to be about 100,000 hours per year less than what we currently fly. We won't know this number for certain until after the MEC passes the TA because the MEC administration is refusing to release that data until after it passes.

So yes we APPEAR to be gaining something we didn't have before, but we're paying for that by reducing our minimum floor significantly BELOW what we're flying now. That's a pattern. We did the exact same thing when we gave up our minimum required departures in NRT. We agree to lowering our minimums, in exchange for new minimums we didn't have before...that represent a lower minimum than what we have now.

In reality, the company is extracting concessions from us. And our union is trying to spin it as win-win.



Don't see where you're getting that...no matter how deep you dive.



That appears to be correct, but we paid the price of agreeing to a lower guaranteed floor...if growth doesn't happen.

Carl

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 1781129)

Carl

What is our "guaranteed" floor right now?

Originally Posted by RockyBoy (Post 1781094)

Is there anywhere to listen to the investor presentation outside of work? All the links say you have to be on a company computer to listen.

Originally Posted by JungleBus (Post 1781138)

Well, I recently passed 400 hours on the Mad Dog, and am off probation. I'll probably start to post here again occasionally now that I don't have to take immature a-holes seriously when they threaten my livelihood because I posted something they disagreed with.

I wrote my rep today about the Virgin JV TA. I told him that the TA itself appears to be weaker than the AF/KL/AZ language that the company has repeatedly run roughshod over, but I'm not an expert on contract language by any means & am willing to hear what the NC/MEC has to say about it. The bigger problem, I said, is the blackout on information (I got the TA language from this board, sheesh) and the MEC appearing to want to make a decision free of input from the membership. I suggested that they table the TA for now, put out the actual language along with their explanation of the various provisions, and vote on it in a few weeks once the membership has had a chance to examine the provisions and provide input to their reps. This would be a more democratic process befitting something that has such a huge potential impact on our future careers.

We'll see whether I hear back. He's been pretty responsive in the past.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1781143)