|
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1912129)
Would it have been less or more juvenile if he just started punching the first rep he came in contact with?
We are talking ATL reps here. |
Originally Posted by GivemeVSP
(Post 1911885)
Bender,
The Atlanta reps just sent out a letter where they acknowledge 3.B.4. They say that TA compensation rates in 2018 will be higher. This is true. I did the 3.B.4 math and only came up a percent or two below the TA with total compensation in 2018. Have you asked your reps to show the union's math with 3.B.4 in play? I think they are reluctant to release it because the difference is soo small |
Originally Posted by nohat
(Post 1912020)
The company is very smart and our association plays along. The company already did its home work and knows how the vote will go. Pilots care about one thing and that is themselves, so the company uses that.
*About to retire in 3-4 years most likely a yes *possible junior capt e190(offer them 20 only if yes vote)=yes * those who are scared to ever vote no on anything=yes *smoke screen of 8% now forget the mine field of poor language=yes They will get their 60%. Then we will get the famous ALPA line we did not think they would do that. Did the company wait to displace 747 guys until after this mess on purpose, how come it takes 18months to put extra 1% in my 401k but sick leave can be implemented now. why only 3% raises when the reduction in profit sharing occurs, and hats optional did not even make the TA my vote is NO |
Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez
(Post 1912207)
Who ya got in the World Series while you're at it Nostradamus?
Can you remind us which items make you a soft no? I'm just trying to understand where your certainty/uncertainty threshold lies. The real reason I ask is because I'm not following your debate clearly. What you write is instead cloudy and argumentative, but not clear. What is your take on your own council rep letters? |
Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez
(Post 1912207)
Who ya got in the World Series while you're at it Nostradamus?
|
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1912214)
T,
Can you remind us which items make you a soft no? I'm just trying to understand where your certainty/uncertainty threshold lies. The real reason I ask is because I'm not following your debate clearly. What you write is instead cloudy and argumentative, but not clear. What is your take on your own council rep letters? The pay is OK, not great, but considering that the company is making 4 times the profit we made in C12, and ths entire industry is healthier than then I think it should be higher. iow. this is not anywhere near as good as C12 was in terms of dinero. Also, it is ridiculous that the 1% in the 401k doesn't happen until 2017. And then there's profit sharing. They should have moved the cheese to $10B. /sarcasm I don't know enough about sick leave either, but the lack of protection from a third party outside verification group has me worried. I don't GAS about the RJs. Sorry. They are unimportant in the big scheme of things and will affect no one on the property now or anybody hired in the next 5 years. A total waste of negotiating capital. Let it go. Top end scope is far more important to all of us, and all they seem to be concerned with is the next downturn. Better? |
Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez
(Post 1912236)
I don't like the block hour conversion because of the immediate giveback on percentage. That in and of itself is almost a deal breaker for me. I am actually not sure that I like the global "protection" at all as a component either. That needs more study though. Like Carl was saying, it appears to me that they could simply shift percentages around the world to remain compliant with the 49%.
The pay is OK, not great, but considering that the company is making 4 times the profit we made in C12, and ths entire industry is healthier than then I think it should be higher. iow. this is not anywhere near as good as C12 was in terms of dinero. Also, it is ridiculous that the 1% in the 401k doesn't happen until 2017. And then there's profit sharing. They should have moved the cheese to $10B. /sarcasm I don't know enough about sick leave either, but the lack of protection from a third party outside verification group has me worried. I don't GAS about the RJs. Sorry. They are unimportant in the big scheme of things and will affect no one on the property now or anybody hired in the next 5 years. A total waste of negotiating capital. Let it go. Top end scope is far more important to all of us, and all they seem to be concerned with is the next downturn. Better? Better. |
Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez
(Post 1912198)
Show me your work.
See your e-mail from dalmec-fastread dated April, 1, 2015 and titled 'CA Bulletin 15-05'. It gives a great explanation of where our .55% pay raise came from. With UA and AA getting pay raises each year, we will get one to match their blended 757 Capt average, as long as 30% of our non-union work force does too. Where is DALPAs work on this? The ATL reps just said it exists and they have the numbers because they say it is less than the TA, but where are their numbers? |
Originally Posted by GivemeVSP
(Post 1912255)
Bender,
See your e-mail from dalmec-fastread dated April, 1, 2015 and titled 'CA Bulletin 15-05'. It gives a great explanation of where our .55% pay raise came from. With UA and AA getting pay raises each year, we will get one to match their blended 757 Capt average, as long as 30% of our non-union work force does too. Where is DALPAs work on this? The ATL reps just said it exists and they have the numbers because they say it is less than the TA, but where are their numbers? Are we guaranteed that we will see those raises that the non-union work force must have before we will get these increases ourselves? Inquiring minds. It is an honest question. I have no idea. |
Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez
(Post 1912270)
Fair question. Too bad the Professor got run off, he might have been able to find that. :o
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:27 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands