+1

I hate being told that rejecting a TA and taking the "traditional" route of past contract negotiations could, cumulatively, mean less money in the long run. I think most of us are smart enough to figure that out on our own.

Just one pilot's opinion.....a scope sale is a NO vote from me, regardless of the anything else.

I don't try to convince you tsquare. You don't care about scope. You're one of those that doesn't want to spend "one red cent" on anything that doesn't immediately put more money in your pocket. I get that. Others of us think a little more long term.

Carl

Strike over? Easy.

1. Scope, scope and scope.

2. Work rules

3. Compensation/DC

4. Sick leave/ Medical.

However, wouldn't walk for post retirement medical incentives.

Ditto!

Carl

That's one of the great unsolved mysteries. Historically, almost every lousy T/A has contained enough deal-breakers to prevent it from ever flying, but like a bumblebee, it flew anyway. :confused:

It all has to do with the packaging from your bargaining agent Tom. Nobody has the time or legal background to scour the actual language of the proposed new contract before they vote on it. We all depend on an accurate summary from our bargaining agent. When that summary and the follow-on sales pitch is designed for a slim majority to vote YES, that's what happens. A real union has the power to do just the opposite. I've seen it. We don't currently have such a union.

Carl

Carl, LEC Reps just vote to pass the TA on to the pilots. The pilots are the ones that "ratify".

Bingo. Granted, waiting 3 weeks from publishing time to getting DALPA info in my v-file is ridiculous...but having DALPA's counterproductive spin hardwired into my email is out of the question.

I can't believe DALPA didn't even pay lip service to recapturing 76-seat flying. I mean, the DALPA guys on here wax condescendingly about the company's "throwaway" items--but even if DALPA views 76-seat flying as "throwaway," at least put it in the opener...now we can't even negotiate with it.

C'mon, man.

I wonder what our "throwaway" items are, then? I didn't see too much in there to back away from...other than an extra week of vacation, maybe (provided the remaining weeks are paid what they should be).

Any scope sellout will get a no from me....and a "no" from all but 2 of the guys I've flown with in the last 8 months.

This contract talk is fun and all but... Now for something completely different

http://static.allbackgrounds.com/bg/marisa-miller.jpg

DAL88 Driver, sorry for not responding sooner. I'd love a 43% pay raise.

I can't figure out how you arrive at that value. I've read your explanations in the past, so no need to repeat. Anecdotal, or something from a friend, or back of the napkin calculations are not backed up by Form 41 data. Carl already explained how the 2010 data is bad. I ran it again with 2009 data. Obviously it was a greater differential, but taking DC into account it still appears the Roger 11% is in the ballpark. That is a fact based value based on Form 41 data, their 2006-2011 contract, and our PWA.