It will be clear early on whether the company is serious about an early contract. I'm not too concerned about specifics but if we get an email every week saying "sections x, y, and z are finished,progress is being made on sections a, b, and c and there are three negotiating sessions scheduled over the weekend", I'd take that as a good sign that the company is interested in what they have stated they are interested in.

There's an argument to be made that releasing detailed openers would increase unity. I supposed the alternative argument is you don't want to see how the sausage is made but I tend to favor transparency. I won't get wrapped around the axle either way.

 

You say "strategic thought and pragmatic critical thinking" and I say speculation, which is fine but that's not how it is being presented by you or a host of others here.

I'm not dismissing the idea that the company might want to drop profit sharing; it's possible. The company has stated it wants an early contract, that is fact (that they stated it, not that they actually want it). Some here have said the company wants to drop profit sharing, that is speculation. You have put these two things together to come up with...

That's quite a leap. We don't actually know that the company wants to get rid of profit sharing. They have publicly extolled the virtues of profit sharing; it's an automatic pay cut when times are bad and helps motivate people when times are good. Wall St. might not like it but they aren't going to like monetizing it either so there isn't much benefit to dropping it. Your statement assumes pilots think profit sharing has an equal worth to an early contract. We know profit sharing is worth about 15% this year and has unlimited upside with known downside (0%). I doubt you'll find many pilots who think that is worth an early contract.

You have dismissed the idea of an early contract for what purpose? Are you an automatic "no" to any first TA? Do you think the only way we can get what you want is a drawn out process?

 

This is the speculation presented as fact I'm talking about. Gzsg is a major source of rumor on this forum and some appear to take his information as fact even though, as far as I can tell, he has given no indication that he knows anything more than anyone else.

What evidence do you have that DALPA is "afraid of RA"?

 

Oberon, my man...you may be the only guy anywhere on this forum that won't acknowlege that an early contract will require PS concessions by us.

Have you talked to your reps and asked them?

 

What possible reason would DALPA have for not releasing management's opener and positions? All it can do is strengthen our position. Management will have to be very careful not to offend the line pilots if their demands are.made public.

By keeping these things secret it allows management to ask for much more and by the time we see the concessions it will be too late like C2012. I knew we would make major.scope concessions but never thought we would make other concessions too.

I'm not sure why but our leaders seem to have.no.problem following management's path.

One penny of profit sharing reduction will ensure another cost neutral. The new Strategic Planning Chairman will ensure management gets the concessions they desire and a reduction in profit sharing.

Unacceptable.

 

No. Is that what they are saying? Do you have something to add to the conversation?

It takes two parties to come to an agreement and I don't see a reason to give up profit sharing for and early contract, which is worth basically inflation.

I would like a new Corvette Z06 with the Z07 aero package and carbon brakes in exchange for my 2007 F150. I'll draw up a contract and forward it to my local Chevrolet dealership and we should have this deal done by this afternoon. I'll just wait for the phone call...

 

I tend to agree with you. Have you heard from a reputable source that the union is planning on keeping openers secret?

What was the process in 2011? Was the first thing you saw the TA?

 

You're not grasping what has happened around here over the last several years.
Moak has successfully altered the game.

I don't think DALPA is afraid of RA. I think they trust him.
Negotiations are not the traditional adversarial relationship anymore.

DALPA will work with RA to come up with something that can pass.

That's our new labor relations philosophy. Its not union vs. management these days. Its union and management working together to craft a deal that 1) meets the corporation's needs and 2) that the rank and file pilots will still ratify.

We're not getting one penny more than what RA thinks is necessary for DALPA to sell it to the line pilots.

Moak's idea is that pilots end up with more in the long run by negotiating contracts that ensure corporate profitability. Then we rely on those profits and the goodwill and gratitude of management to provide our "leverage" for future gradual improvements.

It didn't work too well in C2012 but it might actually have a chance this time because the company is so clearly printing massive amounts of money.
We'll see.

 

Good summation. I guess the philosophical divide is whether you think this new strategy will work. If you thought the old way worked fine I can understand why you wouldn't want to adjust course. If you think the old way contributed to the downturn of the profession you are probably more willing to try it out.

Can a union really trust management? I guess we'll find out.

 

The remaining 0-2.5B of PTIX amount of 10% is a fixed dollar amount:

2.5B x 10% = $250,000,000

The "pilot share" is roughly 1/3. So say the pilot share is $82,350,000.

The cost of 1% on the pilot pay tables is about $23,000,000.

So AFTER we negotiate new acceptable pay raises, would the membership be willing to convert the rest of the 0-2.5B into additional numbers on the pay chart?

$82.35M / 23M = 3.58%

So, AFTER the negotiated (and past due) increases, add ANOTHER 3.58% in pay table bumps and a new PS plan of 0% of 0-2.5B and 20% of everything above 2.5B?

With NO changes, theoretically we get 15% as of day one and 4% for the next three years in regular negotiations, that portion of the PS is worth:
$82.35 mil (for pilots) in 2016
$82.35 mil (for pilots) in 2017
$82.35 mil (for pilots) in 2018
$82.35 mil (for pilots) in 2019
Total of $329.4 million.

If it is converted into the rate tables, it is worth:

$94.70 mil (for pilots) in 2016
$98.49 mil (for pilots) in 2017
$102.43 mil(for pilots) in 2018
$106.53 mil(for pilots) in 2019
Total of $402.15 million

Difference of $72.75 Million dollars in 4 years, and more each year thereafter.

What would you vote to do as an MEC member?

I don't think we should ever cede the "20% of infinity" number, that can't be costed, but below infinity it is a fixed number. That is math.

We need to decide what is more valuable, and where that line is.