|
Originally Posted by SharpestTool
(Post 1904200)
You should be worried. Most of the captains have been around the block. They understand timely money in the pocket. They also understand that going back to RA for more is a silly thing to believe in. They understand that the next stop is the NMB and what happens down that road. Please see SWA, UPS, Fedex, Former US Airways, former AA.
Funny, my FO on my trip thinks it is a slam dunk Yes. Also, our jumpseating 767ER FO said it was a no brainer Yes as well. Both cited that history is littered with examples of not getting materially superior agreements after failed ratification or rejected TAs. Both also thought the NMB would laugh in DALPA's face when we demand more. Besides, looking at fixed pay plus PS, who could argue with AA + 20% or more? Must admit, I wasn't going to argue against them. Smart FOs.
Originally Posted by SharpestTool
(Post 1854878)
It's contract time! That means it's time for The Sharpest Tool!
........... That's enough for now. Lets see how much airborne Poo this generates. This is going to fun! Carl |
Originally Posted by georgetg
(Post 1904204)
l'll play, George was wrong on his fear all Reserves would fly to ALV +15....
I was wrong. What about my prediction of hiring? What about my prediction on the Pinnacle CRJ200s What about my slides about our JV? were those wrong? I'm happy to hear, but facts only please. Cheers George
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1904208)
But reserves now could fly to alv +15. The barn door was opened. Many have done it.
Carl |
Originally Posted by Bananie
(Post 1904149)
George was grossly wrong on 2012 so his predictive record does not impress me.
Georgetg's take on the Transatlantic JV 2012 Georgetg's take on C2012 <-- Danger very wrong stuff here! Cheers George |
Originally Posted by Bananie
(Post 1903818)
Okay, yes, I work for money. What do you get paid in, bananas? I admit that being a capt. I don't get any OE trips so that doesn't affect me, but it doesn't seem too far a reach to expect someone to actually come to work to get paid when they are making 150 to 200k per year. The rest of the agreement is positive. Sick leave, I call in sick once every three or four years so who gives a crap. If you are sick 200 hours a year you probably need to get a doctors note or go to a hospital or something.
We don't need our union calling it's membership lazy and pushing to change work rules to increase productivity. It costs pilot jobs, progression, pay and flexibility. Example: If a pilot elects to bid reserve making less money to spend more time with family that is OK. He is not stealing from the company. No doubt he has been and will be hammered on his schedule later during re-routes and exhausting trips where the company fails to build decent schedules. A good contract allows pilots to work smarter, not harder. Pushing pilots with more productivity (there has been an onslaught from management for many years now) leads to more sick calls. Now management wants to use fear to get guys to fly sick. This is moving in the wrong direction. ALPA needs to pull their head out of their ass and fix these things, not make them worse. Our union should not be pushing for more productivity. We have given enough. We don't need shills like you promoting more time at work. |
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 1904211)
I certainly won't disagree with you after this debacle.
Denny Denny Cranes Dozen Reasons To Vote No |
Been working the last few days.
Do we have a consensus yet on plan B? I hear a lot saying their voting no. What is the prevailing opinion? 1. We go back to RA and he capitulates. 2. RA says pound sand and see you at the NMB in March 3. NMB says, "Damn DALPA we agree with your position and we release you for self help." Timeline? 4. NMB says "Damn DALPA, can I have some of that crack you're smoking? Here's an iceberg for you to sit on for awhile." Timeline? 5. Vote in DPA and start over. Voting No is half the equation. The other half is what happens next and when it happens. Seems if people are going to plead that everyone should vote no, they should then tell us what to expect if successful. |
So it's true. Another Easter egg in this TA. Now we're giving the MEC Chairman discretion to facilitate more outsourced flying cleverly disguised as Delta. And with MEC chairmen like we've had from Lee Moak to present, I think we all know how that's going to go. More proactive engagement at any cost.
|
Originally Posted by SharpestTool
(Post 1904221)
Been working the last few days.
Do we have a consensus yet on plan B? I hear a lot saying their voting no. What is the prevailing opinion? 1. We go back to RA and he capitulates. 2. RA says pound sand and see you at the NMB in March 3. NMB says, "Damn DALPA we agree with your position and we release you for self help." Timeline? 4. NMB says "Damn DALPA, can I have some of that crack you're smoking? Here's an iceberg for you to sit on for awhile." Timeline? 5. Vote in DPA and start over. Voting No is half the equation. The other half is what happens next and when it happens. Seems if people are going to plead that everyone should vote no, they should then tell us what to expect if successful. The key to understanding all that is understanding why RA wants to put this thing to bed so quickly. It is mgmt that is pushing a fast-track deal here, not the pilot group. What is RA's urgency??? |
Originally Posted by SharpestTool
(Post 1904221)
Been working the last few days.
Do we have a consensus yet on plan B? I hear a lot saying their voting no. What is the prevailing opinion? 1. We go back to RA and he capitulates. 2. RA says pound sand and see you at the NMB in March 3. NMB says, "Damn DALPA we agree with your position and we release you for self help." Timeline? 4. NMB says "Damn DALPA, can I have some of that crack you're smoking? Here's an iceberg for you to sit on for awhile." Timeline? 5. Vote in DPA and start over. Voting No is half the equation. The other half is what happens next and when it happens. Seems if people are going to plead that everyone should vote no, they should then tell us what to expect if successful. If you want sunshine and unicorns, vote yes Any questions? Seriously though, if we have constructive engagement the company will be happy to work with the pilots to come up with a plan b, donchathink? Or do you really think if the pilots reject the TA management will burn the place down? Cheers George |
Originally Posted by SharpestTool
(Post 1904221)
Been working the last few days.
Do we have a consensus yet on plan B? I hear a lot saying their voting no. What is the prevailing opinion? 1. We go back to RA and he capitulates. 2. RA says pound sand and see you at the NMB in March 3. NMB says, "Damn DALPA we agree with your position and we release you for self help." Timeline? 4. NMB says "Damn DALPA, can I have some of that crack you're smoking? Here's an iceberg for you to sit on for awhile." Timeline? 5. Vote in DPA and start over. Voting No is half the equation. The other half is what happens next and when it happens. Seems if people are going to plead that everyone should vote no, they should then tell us what to expect if successful. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:40 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands