BUMP

Didn't hear it, looking on the news sites for anything on it.

Didn't see that one coming.

The point is to make is contractural, if the company wants them to fly under these conditions--so be it.

and...........?

I thnk we agree more than not. I just don't want any kind of fines levied by the union or the company. That is scary. If flying over X hours with guys on furlough is in the contract is not allowed, then scheduling should not be allowed to use a pilot when said limit is reached..

[quote=Scoop;741944]Nope, from a negotiator...I guess we brought it to the company during contract 2000 and they didn't want it.

Longevity pay erases seniority for eqp/pay. All you have left is QOL and QOL in the trips you could get. For instance, if I could stay here in ATL on the 88 and make the same I am right now on the ER in NY, I would do it in a second. Yeah, the trips aren't as great....but the half a day I lose commuting on either end would totally make up for it.

There will still be the ability to downbid for lifestyle too...but it takes MANY dudes out of the equation who are bidding up just to make cash.

[quote=Scoop;741944]I'm not sure it would help anyone. The trend, since Orville's solo, has been towards bigger and bigger aircraft. Airlines tried to go against natural evolution witht the 50-seat RJ's, and we're are still wearing the huge welt on our behinds from that experiment.

As new (and bigger) airfcraft come on property and bring more revenue, I think we should be rewarded accordingly. With longevity pay, you're closing off one avenue for pattern-bargaining.

Furthermore, I agree with Scoop on commuters. Everyone gets to downbid, or bid up, and take advantage of the little intersections between pay and seniority in category. It lets senior people find a pond to swim in where they can be even more senior, and junior people get to choose to be minnows in the big pool, if they so choose.

Count me as "one against" longevity pay.

It just changes which positions go junior. Meanwhile it allows for QOL and pay to go hand in hand. We will be able to fly what we like best and get the best paycheck our seniority allows.

They do. I have their pay chart right here. What is the point? I am not saying there are not issues at ALPA, are you?

My point in the first sentence was that if you can win just give up, de-certify ALPA and just give up is kind of like slapping yourself.

It is hard to stack the deck in our favor, the system is set up that way, and is magnified now that we are well past deregulation. What we can do it not stack it against us.

It was a passing story this AM on the AM radio here in ATL. I have not seen it anywhere else either.

There is a ton of low hanging fruit. There is some higher up in the tree to that we should go after.

Lets not mince what I am trying to say.

Point to my rant is that if you think that JAL is not a good deal for us, then you are mistaken. Securing this deal gets you closer to our goals than doing everything we can to prevent it.
I am still the guy that wants to keep DALPA and the company accountable. I am just siding with the need to make this deal happen. Not at any cost, but more a long the lines that we do not need to work at preventing it.

Our raise costs the company 90 million this year. We have a large multiplier. Our overall costs are exasperated by our size. That is the truth.
I personally feel that we could rework section 23 and help three out right now but like I have said many do not want to open section 6.

People need to realize that we are not going to get what we want if we do not see a modification of this business model. It will not survive till 2015 if changes are not made.

I could get it to our seat pricing modeling etc, but it really does not matter. We need to be able to carry passengers at a set margin with the capacity we have. Until then we will continue to dump seats at the last minute.