Originally Posted by Dorfman

If the vote has turned to 11-8 in favor of these concessions then it means the MSP FO rep has gone to the majority. I was told by a MEC insider that the swing votes were ATL FO rep DN, the ATL training rep, one other I have forgotten and that the MSP FO rep was a possibility. Evidently at the previous MEC meeting he would not talk to the MSP Capt rep and was asking the ATL reps for "direction"

Before anyone goes off on me I have been and continue to support ALPA. I think we can still make a difference and I will be at the MSP LEC meeting on June 1. However if these concessions are true and we are sent a concessionary TA I will vote NO. If the TA fails memrat I will be willing to work to recall any rep in my LEC who votes for the concessions. If we reach a TA and it passes well than the majority will have spoken.
These are unprecedented times and we all need to be involved.

Originally Posted by full of luv

Well, I see having the trip off with pay and not having to work with LCA flying as an easter egg in the contract that benefits a few, but not everyone. And yes, I've enjoyed a few of them and would probably in the future.

Not the same as the B scale because that was splitting the group into haves and have nots.

If recovery flying was reinstated, what would happen is that LCA trips would go junior again. Sometimes a junior FO would get a relatively senior trip because he wasn't able to "avoid LCAs". He/she may fly with the LCA or may get bought off and be subject to some sort of reserve commitment for the same time period which we all know means they are getting used.

My only point is that this particular easter egg, no matter how hard fought for, provides for the most identifiable inefficiency that the company could try and negotiate out of the contract again for the next decade.

That has a price, I think that Hockey said 2% across the board pay raise is not enough, but I suppose there is a number that a majority of the pilots would think is fair compensation for removing the easter egg.

I don't agree that comparing this to a B scale is accurate. That would be like saying that A319 pilots should make more than M90 pilots despite the fact that the M90 holds more revenue and commands more attention from it's pilots, that would be divisive!

Originally Posted by Alan Shore

Not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that FO's will no longer be able to bid to fly with LCA's in PBS, thus spreading the LCA trips more evenly throughout each category?

Originally Posted by NERD

How and why does Harwood have so much influence and power?

Originally Posted by Professor

Obviously. Because we all have a TA. In front of us. That has been voted on. And passed on to the membership....

Oh. Waiiiiit.

Originally Posted by Flamer

Who pays Harwood's salary?

Originally Posted by Flamer

Honest question.....don't know who he is or who's side he is supposed to be on.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Lots of people. Before he took this latest job, he was flying for Delta while working as a paid consultant for the United pilots during their seniority list integration with Continental. Now there's a lawsuit alleging a number of things. One of the allegations is that he dropped all his Delta trips and was paid full flight pay loss, while working as a paid consultant for the United pilots.

Many of us here remember when he got fired from his MEC administration position for his actions during C2012, he was here bragging that it was fine because he was making much more money flying the line and working his side business. When we found out what his side business was, he stopped posting here. When the consultation gig ended with United pilots, he won election back to the MEC administration.



He is supposed to be on our side. The truth is that he's on his side.

One thing you have to note is his dogged determination to acquire power. No matter how many times he's fired or blocked, he finds another way to get back in.

Carl

Originally Posted by pilotstats

When referring to profit sharing, please make sure that you are not confusing the term concession with exchange. Whether the pilot group wants more/less/same profitsharing (we can only ASS-u-me since none of use have seen the survey and polling data), it is only a concession if we remain uncompensated for any alteration.

Originally Posted by pilotstats

I, and I presume that you too, will evaluate any proposed alterations to the plan using strictly the math. Every dollar moved to another section of the contract must be accounted for before the remaining amounts can be measured for net gain to the pilot group. Most of us have a minimum this increase must be, regardless where the increases are made. QOL must be evaluated also. I'm not enthused about a PS change just for the sake of changing, but will entertain the concept if my other standards are met first.

Originally Posted by pilotstats

The Reps/NC/MEC are pushing very hard and I do not believe we will see any TA unless they believe it is suitable. We, the line pilots, are the final arbiter of this process. I will vote accordingly and I presume all of the pilots on APC will also. Thus far there has been no indication that they have rushed this process. Working at an increased pace and rushing are distinctly different. I believe the pace has been intense, but not rushed. We will know it was rushed when/if we see a result that is substandard. Until then it is merely fear-mongering.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Try again ace. While we line pukes will never see the survey results, our reps and Donutelli have. Both our reps and Donutelli have publicly stated that the pilot survey was clear in that they said do NOT touch profit sharing.



Interesting that you're still here working as hard as you can to make the case for giving away profit sharing.







You're not only enthused about it, you're working as hard as you can to make the case for it. It's almost all you've talked about since you joined a few weeks ago.







Interesting how we've gone from Donutelli's "World's Greatest Contract" to this operative describing a "suitable" contract. What a surprise.



Carl