|
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1741713)
I'll bet there will be at least one significant giveaway on the TA that wasn't addressed in the survey.
Why is Dalpa even considering concessions? Why are we even discussing them in this negotiating climate? Sadly the admin insiders King fired are all still calling 100% of the shots. They simply don't know how to negotiate without making concessions. I filled out the survey, but it matters not. These guys will do whatever they want. The perfect example is trading profit sharing. 98% of our pilots (DPA survey) want to keep profit sharing as it is or increase it. 92% do not want to trade it for hourly increases like we did in C2012. The insiders will disregard the survey and reduce profit sharing. RA is the MEC chairman. We have no leadership. No goals. They will simply craft more jam down theatening talking points to get the yes votes. |
Originally Posted by Karnak
(Post 1741783)
If you were a Southwest pilot, how would you change what you've written here?
No "great changes" over the years, if you define those as changes akin to C2K. No big givebacks during the "dark years", and certainly no trip to bankruptcy. Is there any chance the two are related? If the pilots who found themselves ahead of us during and after the "dark years" got there with small, methodical increases and improvements, would it be better to wish for a similar trajectory instead of "great changes"? We did in fact take a 42ish % haircut plus a large retirement hit... small, methodical increases/improvements are not going to begin to "restore" our losses. But the sun will more than likely rise tomorrow... so I got that going for me! :) |
Originally Posted by LivingTheDream
(Post 1741951)
Um, I'm not a southwest pilot.
We did in fact take a 42ish % haircut plus a large retirement hit... small, methodical increases/improvements are not going to begin to "restore" our losses. But the sun will more than likely rise tomorrow... so I got that going for me! :) But those "dark years" didn't impact those who chose a path of smaller, methodical improvements, in contrast to the big leap. I'm providing some history. Here's what you posted:
Originally Posted by LivingTheDream
(Post 1741951)
While some of the old heads on here don't believe that history is relevant, I do.
|
Originally Posted by LivingTheDream
(Post 1741747)
I am sure you're not dumb... just a bit amusing to read such strong opinions about our company & contract from some one who has only been on the property for what... 7 months?
During my first year, I was asking a lot more questions than giving opinions/answers ymmv. While some of the old heads on here don't believe that history is relevant, I do. In my 26yrs, we have gone from a profession that provided great money & qol to only pretty good... that is called a negative trend vector. (i.e., great buying power at 75hrs, 7wks vacation, touching trips, power move-ups, etc.) In fact, the top of the ziggurat was 7wks vacay, 3 on 4 off, monday or tuesday, with 60% fae! (My first year, I turned 6dys vacay into 3 weeks off with pay!) While I fully recognize those days are gone forever, I don't think it is too much to expect a date-of-signing pay rate from a contract that existed 12 years in the past! (Not even including inflation.) And without significant concessions (I think we gave plenty during the dark years.) Unfortunately, I am in the minority. During C2012, I repeatedly asked my newish hire FO's why they were voting yes for 3% raises in light of our bankruptcy devastation. (And after only 2 months of section 6 negotiations.) They pretty much all answered "it was more money than they had ever made". I.e., they had no clue what this profession once was. I have stopped believing in/hoping for any great changes in our contract... maybe I'll be proven wrong. :) And no... I don't consider, when I look around a pilot lounge and realize that one in three were not satisfied with the contract, that the vote was a "landslide". P.s. This is not a union problem. You get the contract for which you vote. |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1741926)
Longer freezes.
Loser won't post here for 12 months after MEMRAT yes vote.:cool: |
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
(Post 1742123)
OK, it's a bet. Remind me though, OK? :p
2015 |
Originally Posted by Karnak
(Post 1742056)
Ok. I thought you'd get the point. There was a big leap with C2K. That leap was erased during the era you called the "dark years".
But those "dark years" didn't impact those who chose a path of smaller, methodical improvements, in contrast to the big leap. During the 1990's, we had a concessionary contract (POS96). I don't know what the pay cut percentage was (maybe a single digit percentage) but it was practically nothing compared to the 42% cumulative cut we took in "the dark years." I don't remember what the percentage pay increase was with C2K either, but it was certainly not a "big leap." All C2K really did was to correct us back on track to where we were prior to POS96. And since POS96 wasn't that big of a pay cut, C2K couldn't have been that big of an increase either. "Small, methodical increases" will not restore us. That's the problem you create when you agree to 42% pay cuts. The pilot groups who have done well with "small, methodical" have done well because they didn't take gigantic pay cuts like we did. Different strategy that's not at all appropriate for our situation. |
Originally Posted by Karnak
(Post 1742056)
Ok. I thought you'd get the point. There was a big leap with C2K. That leap was erased during the era you called the "dark years".
But those "dark years" didn't impact those who chose a path of smaller, methodical improvements, in contrast to the big leap. I'm providing some history. Here's what you posted: If the numbers in history are relevant, then how those numbers came to be is also relevant. Actually, if you wrench the numbers a bit, C2000 wasn't a "big leap". Most of the increase was to regain buying power that had been on a steady decline since 1984. Most of what C2000 did was provide "restoration". Nu |
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
(Post 1742123)
OK, it's a bet. Remind me though, OK? :p
|
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 1742183)
Actually, if you wrench the numbers a bit, C2000 wasn't a "big leap". Most of the increase was to regain buying power that had been on a steady decline since 1984.
Most of what C2000 did was provide "restoration". Nu Exactly correct! Now, can we talk about inflation? What were our two 3% "riases" in real terms, vs. inflation over the same two years? You cannot restore anything by only making 'small incremental steps' when you account for inflation over the same time period. What does a car, or a house, or a year of instate college cost today, vs. 1998? We are today making 1998 pay rates, un-adjusted for inflation! :rolleyes: |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:06 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands