![]() |
|
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 1813727)
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. Freezes: We already have the most onerous freezes of the legacies. Ask your buddies at other carriers. Pay Banding: We already have a form of it. In speaking with senior management, they don't seem to want more of it either. Profit Sharing: Not a peep about it from senior management. Sick leave is the only thing that I keep hearing pop up over and over. That is the thing to watch for the company coming after in negotiations. |
Originally Posted by Oberon
(Post 1813726)
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. We use twice as much as other airlines. (I have no idea where the company gets that data?) But the point was made, by the CP, that the other airlines "Monetize" unused sick leave, i.e. sell it back or accrue it and pay it out at retirement, where as ours is, 'use it or lose it'. I said, "Well then, why don't WE start doing that?" (monetize it) He said we always have a spike in May, because it resets on June 1. Some guys use every minute....right to the minute. The Capt. rep said he has to represent guys in the CPO all the time, who are 'questionable' high sick leave users, i.e. on every holiday, etc. He also said about 15% abuse it. I said, "So how about the company goes after those guys, and leave 85% of us alone?" :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by EdGrimley
(Post 1813730)
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. We talk about engine failures as a possible outcome and address the threat... we don't fly the engine out profile and declare an emergency preemptively, though. I'd like to pattern up on the new AA rates plus 3 or 4%, with annual increases of around 5% to enter the threshold of what I'd consider "normal." There are a lot more things on my radar, including small/large gauge scope, work rules, and so on. |
Originally Posted by EdGrimley
(Post 1813730)
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.
There is of course a difference between advocating for a given position, and trying to shape opinion based on conspiracies and rumors. |
Is there an echo in here? Are 80 and Sink like AV8 and Treehugger?
|
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 1813748)
Is there an echo in here? Are 80 and Sink like AV8 and Treehugger?
|
According to the pilot contract:
$0 to $2.5 billion 10.0% Over $2.5 billion 20.0% And if I do math right we get $2.5B x 10% = 250M (4.5B - 2.5B) x 20% = 400M 250 + 400 = 650M So why on the press releases does it say that $1.1B was set aside for PS? |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1813750)
Have you two ever been seen in the same room, at the same time?? :eek:
I did fly on Bar's aircraft, once. |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1813750)
Have you two ever been seen in the same room, at the same time?? :eek:
|
Originally Posted by PilotFrog
(Post 1813752)
According to the pilot contract:
$0 to $2.5 billion 10.0% Over $2.5 billion 20.0% And if I do math right we get $2.5B x 10% = 250M (4.5B - 2.5B) x 20% = 400M 250 + 400 = 650M So why on the press releases does it say that $1.1B was set aside for PS? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:38 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands