This right here... Jerry throwing crap against the wall about profit sharing (trying to get people angry at ALPA) seems to be the genesis for that.

The only thing I've heard about from the people that matter (re: senior management) is the sick leave thing. That's going to be the thing to watch in this next contract.

IMO negative changes in sick leave will be received just as CDO s were. Longer freezes as well. I think pay banding can be sold if the pilots wanted.it in the survey. As long as job loss.is offset by vacation etc.

The PS is one (massive) tree in the forest. What we're doing it here is discussing it a lot more than any other, because Jerry and/or someone on the MEC wanted to pre-empt whatever discussions are/will be taking place on this topic. The reps have not yet given direction, so it stands to reason that whatever has been said has been preliminary, and I would also assume that many other items have come up for discussion. The reps I spoke with were pretty conversant on the PS, and a range of other issues, as well they should be. The idea that some guys see opportunities WRT the PS is not far-fetched, so Jerry is not completely off-base, IMO. At the same time, I think they see opportunities everywhere. It's just that Jerry's elected to make the conversation exclusively about the PS, because he has a specific idea about it (wants it taken completely off the table).

I happen to agree with placing this as a very high priority, but I would note that an interesting consequence of trying to argue that the PS is sacred, is to actually bring novel arguments on why it might not be so sacred.

Oops.. we al posted at the same time.

Talked to my rep about sick time and he said, the current sick policy is what the company wanted and got. He didn't think it would be an issue in C15.

Have you ever asked a rep? If so, please name them and tell us PS is not on the table.

We will be holding our breath.

Burying your head in the sand will not.change the outcome.

Yup- they had no direction because WE AREN'T IN NEGOTIATIONS YET. OPENERS HAVE NOT BEEN EXCHANGED. I gave them my price should it be sold: 20% plus normal contractual increases.

All of this crap you're throwing around is really ruining what little credibility you hold.

I'm not sure exactly what issues the company has with sick time but I'm guessing a spike in sick time right before it resets raises eyebrows. I haven't seen any stats on this but human nature you know...

If sick leave was left unchanged except it reset on our date of hire instead of June 1 would that be palatable? In theory that would spread sick leave more evenly throughout the year and maybe the company would be less interested in cracking down on sick leave abuse. A potential downside is less required staffing but I'm guessing May isn't the month they staff for anyway.

Except you're making the standard impossible. A rep tells you that something is not "on the table" is lying. Everything is "on the table" in Section 6. The question is who puts it on the table, the company or us?

I spoke to two reps, and I will not name them because I didn't tell them I would discuss our conversation here, one specifically said we're not putting it on the table. Both said we haven't even held the meetings to give directions in either case.

There is no rep that can tell you that, in the future, the company won't put it on the table, or even whether we might or might not decide to put in on the table. Those discussions, as I understood, are yet to come.




Edit: ...I see 80 already addressed this.

I for one think it's smart to be discussing the threats before they become emergencies with only a short time to make a big decision as has been the history with TA's of the past.

Regarding your 20% on top of "normal contractual increases"....what if they said something like 7,3,3,3 was all they were going to give and all that was budgeted? What is your total increase required to vote yes when including normal contractual raises and PS? For the record I think doing anything with PS on this round would be very foolish.