There is a BOD meeting on June 25. I'm guessing RA would like to be able to announce at least having a T/A at that meeting.

He knows any T/A brought to the pilots is going to pass memory rat, so he's only got to have the MEC vote YES by then, not the entire pilot group.

I'll bet we see a T/A from the NC by mid June, if not sooner, followed by a week of MEC meetings for eye wash, much yelling and screaming about trading PS for a 'raise' more 76 seat RJ's and more productivity gives, then a 10-9 yes vote for the T/A by the BOD meeting.

I just hope I'm wrong about our MEC, for once.

Time value of Concessions and all that.

If the pilots receive a TA by June 1, we'll know someone was lying about Section 3 having not been discussed yet.

Either that, or someone outside the NC was negotiating pay rates.

Actually according to the reps pay had not been discussed over 10 days ago. It's possible that since then they may have exchanged numbers. I have no idea what Purples comment is about. Pay is often the last section done and is very strait foward. There is no costing or manning issues to try and sort out which is time consuming and often involves subsets of negotiations to agree on costing. Pay rates are simple and you could exchange proposals every 5 minutes if you wanted. It took months to work out the costing on FAR 117 changes. Pay is instant.

Nicely put.

While true, a super speedy deal with 9/9/4/4 (best case rumor) which is also rumored to be laced with embedded concessions at all levels including scope and PS reduction makes no sense in that model. In order for that to be the case, we would have to agree to the concessions first without seeing the pay. Its bad enough if we sell back our contract for pay rates, but to agree to the concessions first without even seeing the pay rates would just be unbelievable.

This would make sense if Negotiations consisted of a buffet table of concessions. If it's cost neutral contract, we simply create our own pay raise buy picking our concessions to tally up to a price/raise. Choose zero concession would equal zero pay raise. I guess in a sense negotiations would not be about getting what we want or what they want. Negotiations would simply be about the actual cost/savings to the comapany to put a Price/percentage on each item before putting it on the buffet bar. Once the buffet is complete. We, the pilots/alpa, choosing how to create our pay raise buy stepping up to the buffet bar. Seems to make sense with all the publications that talk about cost analysis. Then that way pay really does not have to be discussed. Thus, leaving it the last item, or better yet, the pay is more of a result than a particular negotiated item. Tally the total at the end, maybe ask for a couple points, who knows.

That being said, I don't know, but it is a good explanation!!

Instant? You are talking about negotiations for a CBA of a very large pilot group. I spend more time negotiating a car purchase than that.

10 days to cut a deal on pay rates 7 months prior to the amendable date? You have got to get out of the fixed size of the pie mentality. The size of the pie IS what we are negotiating, and it is anything but fixed. After that, ALPA sets apportionment and the company cares a lot less about that. THE PIE IS AS BIG AS IT HAS BEEN IN 20 YEARS!

this one better be pretty good if we are moving that fast.

Time value of concessions. :D

You could replace any word in a pitch with concessions, such as:

• a concession your hand is worth two pay raises in the bush. :D
• What pay raise are you willing to give up for that concession?
• Guaranteed concessions are better than at risk concessions.
• That's your Captains concession you're giving up... just saying.

Like you I hope I'm pleasantly surprised by the NC and MEC.

I both agree and disagree.

This one better be good. Absolutely!

But I don't understand the "if we are moving this fast," or the consternation by some that we might get a deal early.

Because I know how to operate a financial calculator and because I've seen too many groups harmed by holding out for too long (i.e. AMR in 2001), I am absolutely in favor of getting money in my pocket early.

I'm not suggesting that we accept an inferior deal in the interest of expediency. I am simply stating that the right deal early should be hoped for and welcomed, not derided.

What some fail to realize is that in conventional negotiations you meet once or twice a month and the company rarely sends decision makers to the meetings. We are meeting 4 to 5 days a week with the principles in the room. We have probably already done the equivalent of two years negotiations at the normal pace.