![]() |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1892851)
Here's what you and your team don't understand: The reps control this process. The unelected MEC admins can squeal all they want, but they work at the behest of the reps. If the reps decide something in closed session needs to be communicated to those they represent, they get to decide. They're the bosses. Surely you get that?
You join APC this month and with nearly all of your 15 posts, you sing the same hymn that Sink r8, Professor, slowplay, sailingfun, shiznit, etc. are all singing. As you say, I'm just keeping you honest. You all have the right to your opinions, but your attempt to stifle communication is failing. Whatever agenda you're trying to push is suffering as a result. Just sayin. Carl "They're the bosses" is as non sequitur as it gets. They also signed non-disclosure agreements. Leaking confidential information is an abuse of trust, could get you investigated by the SEC, and only results in diminished transparency, low-ball proposals by the company, and getting parked at the NMB. But you like it. |
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 1892914)
That's one weird athlete you got there. Did he suffer a head injury?
Carl |
Originally Posted by dalad
(Post 1892734)
Exactly right Carl. Returning money to the investors is pure BS. RA and his minions are becoming quite wealthy with all this. The luster has completely worn off and we have an MEC with Stockholm Syndrome. The problem WE as pilots have is membership apathy. Nobody bothers to show up at LEC meetings, or even bother to vote in their LEC elections.
Be careful next time he shows up at the crash pad Dalad, check his pockets before turning your back on him. I'm kidding, of course. I know he's harmless. Just likes a good debate. |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1892885)
Undoubtedly management has re crunched their own numbers.
I agree. Management has crunched and dissected their own numbers, and our DALPA experts have crunched and dissected management's numbers. Sure would be great if our union had independent economic and financial analysts. Oh wait. Carl I do agree their numbers would be different then yours. Perhaps since you recently posted that not only was contract 2012 cost neutral but it funded all the other employees raises you might back that up with a few facts. Please feel free to explain the following. 1. Pay raises of 20% for 80% of the pilot group and and around 27% for reserves. Cost in direct dollars close to 500 million a year. 2. Indirect raises in training and vacation. 3. When all the work rules were averaged together the jobs to block hour ratio remained the same so no real job loss to work rules. 4. Increase in retirement 5. Profit sharing hitting 16.8% last year for another 300 million to the pilots. Expected to be 19% to 20% this year for another 380 million to the pilot group. Now Carl please feel free to post where the concessions are that added up to the 800 million additional pay dollars received in 2014 with substantially more due in 2015 and another 300 million to pay for the other employees improvements. Don't just post BS. Put some numbers out there and attach those numbers to contract changes. If your going to try and claim manning as some have post the block hours and number of pilots. |
Originally Posted by rube
(Post 1892917)
Again with the association argument?
Originally Posted by rube
(Post 1892917)
"They're the bosses" is as non sequitur as it gets. They also signed non-disclosure agreements.
Originally Posted by rube
(Post 1892917)
Leaking confidential information is an abuse of trust, could get you investigated by the SEC,
Originally Posted by rube
(Post 1892917)
and only results in diminished transparency, low-ball proposals by the company, and getting parked at the NMB.
Carl |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1892951)
I guess the fact that ALPA's economic and financial analysts are considered the best there is for looking at the books in the airline industry has escaped you. They are so good they often get hired out as subcontractors for other accounting firms that dont have their expertise.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1892951)
I do agree their numbers would be different then yours.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1892951)
Perhaps since you recently posted that not only was contract 2012 cost neutral but it funded all the other employees raises you might back that up with a few facts.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1892951)
Please feel free to explain the following.
1. Pay raises of 20% for 80% of the pilot group and and around 27% for reserves. Cost in direct dollars close to 500 million a year. 2. Indirect raises in training and vacation. 3. When all the work rules were averaged together the jobs to block hour ratio remained the same so no real job loss to work rules. 4. Increase in retirement 5. Profit sharing hitting 16.8% last year for another 300 million to the pilots. Expected to be 19% to 20% this year for another 380 million to the pilot group. Now Carl please feel free to post where the concessions are that added up to the 800 million additional pay dollars received in 2014 with substantially more due in 2015 and another 300 million to pay for the other employees improvements. Don't just post BS. Put some numbers out there and attach those numbers to contract changes. If your going to try and claim manning as some have post the block hours and number of pilots. Carl |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1892821)
Do you honestly think those numbers have not been crunched again? I would bet they have not only been crunched but dissected by both sides!
Would you want CRJ900s and E175s here? |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1892976)
Idk, sure seems like there are some on our side who would never want to recapture that scope and its convenient to hide behind numbers you'll never get to check.
Would you want CRJ900s and E175s here? Doesn't Skywest have an order for 100 90-100 seat Mitsubishi or Canadair Jets? Doesn't our scope clause prohibit Delta from code sharing with a company that operates aircraft larger than our size limit, even if it's for a different airline? Based on what I understand about our Section 1, the minute Skywest takes delivery of their first 76+ seat aircraft! we no longer do business with them...unless the language changes. My guess is there will be a subtle rewording of that provision in our contract, if it hasn't already been re-written. There was that Republic buying Frontier and owning Shuttle America (our code-share partner) debacle a few years ago. |
Originally Posted by DeadHead
(Post 1892632)
Let me guess......Long time lurker upset with all the disinformation coming out and felt compelled to post. :rolleyes:
|
Any bets on a TA coming from the meeting this week?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:03 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands